Posts
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Saturday, February 21, 2009
The Era Of Responsibility
Remember back in the days when you were expected to be responsible for your own life? What has happened in our society that now you are expected to be responsible for everyone else? I am disgusted by grown men and women who stick their hands out and beg a specific lifestyle from the government. What happened to the stigma tied to such behavior? Where is our shame?
There is nothing wrong with a little shame. It causes you to work harder to avoid it. Recently however, hard work is the thing which is stigmatized and "societal victim" status is worn like a badge of courage. We treat "single-by-choice" mothers like Medal of Honor winners and welfare recipients like a national treasure. Meanwhile, successful CEO's, small business owners, and self-made millionaires are lambasted and vilified. The era of responsibility has gone by the wayside only to be replaced by an overreaching sense of entitlement.
Sure, I feel a sense of entitlement. I feel entitled to the basic freedoms which are outlined in our founding documents. I believe they are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". I don't believe they are "health care, home ownership, free education, and a government handout". In fact, I think these are akin to spraying Roundup on your vegetable garden. It kills all future production.
We have just saddled our children and grandchildren with an unimaginable debt load. That one act of entitlement-mentality greed is analogous to child abuse. We are mortgaging our future generations to satisfy our personal wants. Who is going to support all of them? Who is going to help them get out of the economic nightmare we are creating? We won't have to do it. We can't do it. Were too busy feeling sorry for ourselves and playing the role of victim.
This entitlement-mentality is the culmination of years of granting victim-status to the very people who are perpetrating the crimes. The "single-by-choice" mother who condemns her child to exponentially higher suicide, homelessness, crime, and poverty rates; the "fit but lazy" welfare recipient who lives off the backs of hard working Americans; the "I deserve a home" sub prime borrowers who destroy the equity in everyone home; and the "health care is a right" crowd who, if they are allowed, will saddle doctors and nurses with work while looking at you to pick up the tab.
The era of responsibility is dying the death of a thousand blows. Is there no one to fight back? It is up to you and me to end the entitlement mentality and resurrect responsibility.
There is nothing wrong with a little shame. It causes you to work harder to avoid it. Recently however, hard work is the thing which is stigmatized and "societal victim" status is worn like a badge of courage. We treat "single-by-choice" mothers like Medal of Honor winners and welfare recipients like a national treasure. Meanwhile, successful CEO's, small business owners, and self-made millionaires are lambasted and vilified. The era of responsibility has gone by the wayside only to be replaced by an overreaching sense of entitlement.
Sure, I feel a sense of entitlement. I feel entitled to the basic freedoms which are outlined in our founding documents. I believe they are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". I don't believe they are "health care, home ownership, free education, and a government handout". In fact, I think these are akin to spraying Roundup on your vegetable garden. It kills all future production.
We have just saddled our children and grandchildren with an unimaginable debt load. That one act of entitlement-mentality greed is analogous to child abuse. We are mortgaging our future generations to satisfy our personal wants. Who is going to support all of them? Who is going to help them get out of the economic nightmare we are creating? We won't have to do it. We can't do it. Were too busy feeling sorry for ourselves and playing the role of victim.
This entitlement-mentality is the culmination of years of granting victim-status to the very people who are perpetrating the crimes. The "single-by-choice" mother who condemns her child to exponentially higher suicide, homelessness, crime, and poverty rates; the "fit but lazy" welfare recipient who lives off the backs of hard working Americans; the "I deserve a home" sub prime borrowers who destroy the equity in everyone home; and the "health care is a right" crowd who, if they are allowed, will saddle doctors and nurses with work while looking at you to pick up the tab.
The era of responsibility is dying the death of a thousand blows. Is there no one to fight back? It is up to you and me to end the entitlement mentality and resurrect responsibility.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Is It Over?
We called and emailed. We complained, fretted, moaned, whined, yelled, and screamed. We insisted and demanded. Did they listen? No. They passed that pork-laden stimulus bill (which contains no stimulus) and did so with the help of three RINOs. Senators Collins, Snowe, and Specter have dealt a final blow to our economy and, if I have anything to do about it, their careers. It's too late, we failed. Newsweek proclaims that we are all Socialists now.
Are we Socialists? Are you a Socialist? No, we are not and now is the time to prove it. Did we fail? We lost a major battle here, but this stimulus package is only going to hurt the economy and as a result, Obama's chances at reelection. Are we too late? No, I believe we are just getting started.
I am an optimist. I think this is the perfect setup to prove once and for all that Conservative principles work. Before we do that, we have to win. John McCain showed us that being a moderate is a losing strategy. So, lets go out there and win. Let's adopt a playbook which will destroy the Democrat party for a generation. How do we do this? The same way they did it to us. We will destroy their institutions, like the media; we will demonize their ideology; we will annihilate their kook fringe groups; we will shame the recipients of government money; and we will toss the Socialists out on their collectivists butts. Even when they are in power, they are weak because they are weak-minded. We are strong. We are intelligent. We will not lose this war. We are Conservatives.
Is it over? Most emphatically not! Our reclamation is only just beginning.
Are we Socialists? Are you a Socialist? No, we are not and now is the time to prove it. Did we fail? We lost a major battle here, but this stimulus package is only going to hurt the economy and as a result, Obama's chances at reelection. Are we too late? No, I believe we are just getting started.
I am an optimist. I think this is the perfect setup to prove once and for all that Conservative principles work. Before we do that, we have to win. John McCain showed us that being a moderate is a losing strategy. So, lets go out there and win. Let's adopt a playbook which will destroy the Democrat party for a generation. How do we do this? The same way they did it to us. We will destroy their institutions, like the media; we will demonize their ideology; we will annihilate their kook fringe groups; we will shame the recipients of government money; and we will toss the Socialists out on their collectivists butts. Even when they are in power, they are weak because they are weak-minded. We are strong. We are intelligent. We will not lose this war. We are Conservatives.
Is it over? Most emphatically not! Our reclamation is only just beginning.
Friday, January 30, 2009
The Middle Man
I once saw an advertisement, and you probably have too, which said, "We've cut out the middle man." The advertisement was indicating that whatever widget they happened to be selling could be purchased for an extra low price because there was no one between the manufacturer and the consumer. That is, there was no distributor, thus there was no reason to pay a distributor. The manufacturer was happy for selling to a larger client base and the consumer was happy for getting such a great price. They would then surely take their widget home and show it to their neighbors while bragging about what a great negotiator they are and everyone was full of joy.
What are you talking about Brian? Ok, ok... I'll get to the point. What possible reasoning could the government have for being the middle man in our economic stimulus? We all work and pay taxes. The taxes pay for things like roads, bridges, schools, F-22 fighter attack squadrons, and artificial turf for the National Mall, right?
According to President Obama, on Jan 28 in the White House East Room, "business, not government, is the engine of growth in this country." (More on this in an upcoming article entitled "The Reagan Mask") If business is the engine of growth in this country, why is there a middle man between business and its own money? It doesn't make sense and is in fact detrimental to growth, that government should confiscate money from business via a world record breaking 35% tax, only to return it to them with incentives or keep it via government expansion. Wouldn't the country be better served by allowing businesses to keep more of what they earn to employ people rather than have the government do it? After all, business, not government, is the engine of growth in this country.
It seems wholly illogical to me to allow an economic distributor to come in and reapply that money for transient and low-paying jobs, as directed by the Obama stimulus plan, when we have a host of businesses eager to apply it to permanent and higher-paying jobs.
I asked earlier what reasoning the government could have for this proposal. The only possible reason I could come up with is power. They want to control business. They want to control opportunity. They want to control you. How do I know this? Well, it's the only thing that makes sense. If Obama really wanted to stimulate the economy, he could do so easily by cutting corporate income taxes; this is not only common sense but historical fact. If he wanted to control you, he would take as much of your money as he could get his hand on and then tell you what you must do in order to get it back, which is exactly what this economic pork bill is all about. This bill is about control and the best way to do it is by making themselves the middle man.
The good news is, you don't have to let them do it. You can still retain control, but you have to act. The Obama stimulus bill has passed the House (with zero Republican votes), but it still needs to go through the Senate. You have a louder voice than you think you do. Call the Senate and tell them not to vote for this monstrosity. Tell them instead to cut the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax. This will spur the economy, this will give you control, and this will cut out the middle man.
What are you talking about Brian? Ok, ok... I'll get to the point. What possible reasoning could the government have for being the middle man in our economic stimulus? We all work and pay taxes. The taxes pay for things like roads, bridges, schools, F-22 fighter attack squadrons, and artificial turf for the National Mall, right?
According to President Obama, on Jan 28 in the White House East Room, "business, not government, is the engine of growth in this country." (More on this in an upcoming article entitled "The Reagan Mask") If business is the engine of growth in this country, why is there a middle man between business and its own money? It doesn't make sense and is in fact detrimental to growth, that government should confiscate money from business via a world record breaking 35% tax, only to return it to them with incentives or keep it via government expansion. Wouldn't the country be better served by allowing businesses to keep more of what they earn to employ people rather than have the government do it? After all, business, not government, is the engine of growth in this country.
It seems wholly illogical to me to allow an economic distributor to come in and reapply that money for transient and low-paying jobs, as directed by the Obama stimulus plan, when we have a host of businesses eager to apply it to permanent and higher-paying jobs.
I asked earlier what reasoning the government could have for this proposal. The only possible reason I could come up with is power. They want to control business. They want to control opportunity. They want to control you. How do I know this? Well, it's the only thing that makes sense. If Obama really wanted to stimulate the economy, he could do so easily by cutting corporate income taxes; this is not only common sense but historical fact. If he wanted to control you, he would take as much of your money as he could get his hand on and then tell you what you must do in order to get it back, which is exactly what this economic pork bill is all about. This bill is about control and the best way to do it is by making themselves the middle man.
The good news is, you don't have to let them do it. You can still retain control, but you have to act. The Obama stimulus bill has passed the House (with zero Republican votes), but it still needs to go through the Senate. You have a louder voice than you think you do. Call the Senate and tell them not to vote for this monstrosity. Tell them instead to cut the corporate income tax and the capital gains tax. This will spur the economy, this will give you control, and this will cut out the middle man.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Strong Opposition, It's A Beautiful Thing
I thought it would never happen. I thought I was going to have to watch my country be systematically dismantled by extreme left policies enacted without opposition. Republicans were kow-towing, laying down, and wishing Obama success left and right. But this evening, they voted unanimously against the Obama destroy capitalism bill. Congratulations House Republicans, you are showing signs of hope (and might I add, change).
It is vital that we show strong opposition to Obama's left wing policies. If the right opposes what is going on, the Democrats will have no room to try to blame us for the inevitable failures. They pointed at Reagan for overspending in the '80's even though the President is not responsible for Congressional spending. They took credit for the balanced budget in the '90's even though the President is not responsible for Congressional spending. They blamed Bush for the current recession even though, you guessed it, the President is not responsible for Congressional spending; or in this case, the President is not responsible for forcing banks to loan money to people who don't have the means to pay it back.
But that does not have to happen this time. If Republicans stick together in direct and loud opposition to socialism, the responsible party will be the party that pays. Tonight, House Republicans did just that, saying in a loud, unanimous voice, "We will not own the result of this massive spending bill." Now, lets see what happens next. Do Senate Republicans have what it takes to say the same thing?
It is vital that we show strong opposition to Obama's left wing policies. If the right opposes what is going on, the Democrats will have no room to try to blame us for the inevitable failures. They pointed at Reagan for overspending in the '80's even though the President is not responsible for Congressional spending. They took credit for the balanced budget in the '90's even though the President is not responsible for Congressional spending. They blamed Bush for the current recession even though, you guessed it, the President is not responsible for Congressional spending; or in this case, the President is not responsible for forcing banks to loan money to people who don't have the means to pay it back.
But that does not have to happen this time. If Republicans stick together in direct and loud opposition to socialism, the responsible party will be the party that pays. Tonight, House Republicans did just that, saying in a loud, unanimous voice, "We will not own the result of this massive spending bill." Now, lets see what happens next. Do Senate Republicans have what it takes to say the same thing?
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Obama's "Final Solution"
On Friday, January 23, Reuters reported that President Obama lifted restrictions banning government money to fund abortion groups worldwide saying, "It is right for us to rescind this policy and restore critical efforts to protect and empower women and promote global economic development."
Excuse me Mr. President, but how exactly does providing money to destroy life "empower women and promote global economic development"? Is it because the "burden" of a child is an economic strain? Is it because murder "empowers" people? Tell that to the victims. Oh wait, you can't because they're dead.
The ban, which is called the Mexico City Policy because it was unveiled there at a U.N. conference in 1984, was criticized because it supposedly "reduced health care for some of the world's poorest women." Silly me, I thought health care was employed to eradicate disease. Is pregnancy now a disease? Are children to be thought of as similar to such health woes like cancer, AIDS, and heart disease?
This is sickening and exposes the cold heart of our newly elected President. There are none in our world more innocent, dependent, and helpless than an unborn child and Obama has just opened the floodgates on your tax dollars to destroy them on a global basis.
Since Roe v. Wade was decided on in 1973, almost 50,000,000 abortions have taken place in the United States alone. 11,000,000 of those dead children were black. That sounds a lot like genocide to me. This genocide can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Democrats like Barack Obama.
We condemn Hitler for what we call the "evil" of the Holocaust. He is now the standard bearer for for all that is bad in the world. Rightly so, but abortion is worse than the Holocaust because the victims are helpless; it has been going on for decades longer; and it has killed almost 5 times as many people, all of them children. Women are lured into it by calling it "health care" and saying abortion "empowers" them. If you kill your child, it will make you a more "empowered" and independent woman? Am I the only one who thinks that it cold, evil, and cruel? It looks like Obama and his Democrat minions have a "final solution" of their own.
Well America, you now have the obligation to pay for what you believe to be morally repugnant. That is offensive to me and I simply will not stand for it. I hope you will not stand for it either. Forward this blog to everyone you know. All who read this and are as offended as I am need to call the White House and let them know what you think. He will continue to do this unless we stop him and together, we can.
Hat Tip: AlfonZo Rachel at machosauceproductions.com
Excuse me Mr. President, but how exactly does providing money to destroy life "empower women and promote global economic development"? Is it because the "burden" of a child is an economic strain? Is it because murder "empowers" people? Tell that to the victims. Oh wait, you can't because they're dead.
The ban, which is called the Mexico City Policy because it was unveiled there at a U.N. conference in 1984, was criticized because it supposedly "reduced health care for some of the world's poorest women." Silly me, I thought health care was employed to eradicate disease. Is pregnancy now a disease? Are children to be thought of as similar to such health woes like cancer, AIDS, and heart disease?
This is sickening and exposes the cold heart of our newly elected President. There are none in our world more innocent, dependent, and helpless than an unborn child and Obama has just opened the floodgates on your tax dollars to destroy them on a global basis.
Since Roe v. Wade was decided on in 1973, almost 50,000,000 abortions have taken place in the United States alone. 11,000,000 of those dead children were black. That sounds a lot like genocide to me. This genocide can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Democrats like Barack Obama.
We condemn Hitler for what we call the "evil" of the Holocaust. He is now the standard bearer for for all that is bad in the world. Rightly so, but abortion is worse than the Holocaust because the victims are helpless; it has been going on for decades longer; and it has killed almost 5 times as many people, all of them children. Women are lured into it by calling it "health care" and saying abortion "empowers" them. If you kill your child, it will make you a more "empowered" and independent woman? Am I the only one who thinks that it cold, evil, and cruel? It looks like Obama and his Democrat minions have a "final solution" of their own.
Well America, you now have the obligation to pay for what you believe to be morally repugnant. That is offensive to me and I simply will not stand for it. I hope you will not stand for it either. Forward this blog to everyone you know. All who read this and are as offended as I am need to call the White House and let them know what you think. He will continue to do this unless we stop him and together, we can.
Hat Tip: AlfonZo Rachel at machosauceproductions.com
Friday, January 23, 2009
False Republicans
According to Reuters, the Senate Dems just released their $825 billion dollar spending plan in which they were nice enough to include some tax cuts. This did not come as a surprise to me. They've been talking about spending massive amounts of money for quite some time now.
The "tax cuts" include breaks for low income earners and include people who don't currently pay any income tax. Now, remind me again... what's the difference between that and welfare? Isn't allowing yourself to be purchased by the federal government the same thing as slavery? No need to answer, I'll do it for you - Yes, it is.
The inclusion of welfare into the "stimulus" bill doesn't surprise me either. We have known for some time now that Democrats are keen on creating and maintaining a dependent class of citizens.
The Democrats would rather mail you a check than cut your taxes. You see, cutting taxes might actually stimulate the economy, plus you run the risk of not brainwashing people into thinking of the government as a source of money. No, they can't do that. They would rather hold the power than allow someone like you the opportunity to spend the money you earned the way you see fit. Again, this is no surprise to me, the Dems have always been power-hungry.
What did surprise me was Republican Senator Mitch McConnell's response to it. Was he angry, insulted, or frustrated? No. Was he emboldened to do the right thing, argumentative, or combative? No, he was quite agreeable saying, "Everybody believes that government's action is necessary..."
Well, Mr. Senator, I guess I'm not part of "everybody" because I don't happen to believe that particular brand of nonsense. Rather I believe that government would better serve us by doing nothing. A free market can sort itself out much better left alone. I am in agreement with Ronald Reagan when he said, "Government is not the solution. Government is the problem."
Republicans need to stop sounding like Democrats and start sounding like Republicans again. If this keeps up, Hollywood and the mainstream media are going to go nuts trying to figure out who to hate. I'm not worried though, I do not share their dilemma. I am a Conservative, a Christian, and a patriot. I know the difference between the genuine Republicans and the false ones.
A real Republican stands by his principles, even when the storm is raging around him. A false Republican will go wherever the winds of popularity carry him, even if it means abandoning his so-called principles. Well, I hope they enjoy it while it lasts because the time is going to come when America will no longer tolerate unprincipled leadership. When that time does come, the only ones left will be the strong and unwavering few. Frankly, I'm looking forward to it.
The "tax cuts" include breaks for low income earners and include people who don't currently pay any income tax. Now, remind me again... what's the difference between that and welfare? Isn't allowing yourself to be purchased by the federal government the same thing as slavery? No need to answer, I'll do it for you - Yes, it is.
The inclusion of welfare into the "stimulus" bill doesn't surprise me either. We have known for some time now that Democrats are keen on creating and maintaining a dependent class of citizens.
The Democrats would rather mail you a check than cut your taxes. You see, cutting taxes might actually stimulate the economy, plus you run the risk of not brainwashing people into thinking of the government as a source of money. No, they can't do that. They would rather hold the power than allow someone like you the opportunity to spend the money you earned the way you see fit. Again, this is no surprise to me, the Dems have always been power-hungry.
What did surprise me was Republican Senator Mitch McConnell's response to it. Was he angry, insulted, or frustrated? No. Was he emboldened to do the right thing, argumentative, or combative? No, he was quite agreeable saying, "Everybody believes that government's action is necessary..."
Well, Mr. Senator, I guess I'm not part of "everybody" because I don't happen to believe that particular brand of nonsense. Rather I believe that government would better serve us by doing nothing. A free market can sort itself out much better left alone. I am in agreement with Ronald Reagan when he said, "Government is not the solution. Government is the problem."
Republicans need to stop sounding like Democrats and start sounding like Republicans again. If this keeps up, Hollywood and the mainstream media are going to go nuts trying to figure out who to hate. I'm not worried though, I do not share their dilemma. I am a Conservative, a Christian, and a patriot. I know the difference between the genuine Republicans and the false ones.
A real Republican stands by his principles, even when the storm is raging around him. A false Republican will go wherever the winds of popularity carry him, even if it means abandoning his so-called principles. Well, I hope they enjoy it while it lasts because the time is going to come when America will no longer tolerate unprincipled leadership. When that time does come, the only ones left will be the strong and unwavering few. Frankly, I'm looking forward to it.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Think Before You Speak
The word "success" can mean something different to everyone. It depends on your goals. If my goal is to drive from New York to California, I can claim the trip was a success if I arrive in California, regardless of how long it took and how much it cost to get me there.
There are Republicans left and right who keep saying that they want President Obama to be successful and I have to confess that I don't know what that means. There are two basic reasons for my confusion.
First, I don't know what Obama's goals are. Does he want the war in Iraq to end in victory, or just end? Does he want America's economy to be stronger and healthier, or is it just an excuse to grow the government? Does he want America's health care system to be the envy of the world, or would he be just as happy to see it nationalized even if that exacerbates the problem instead of solving it?
Second, I don't know how Obama measures success. Would he describe the expenditure of a trillion dollars on an economic stimulus plan a success, or does it have to actually stimulate the economy? Will he point at the establishment of a shiny, new government agency and call that a success, or does the agency have to meet its objectives? In four years, will he look back at the actions taken as evidence of success, or will he point to the effects of those actions as evidence of success.
I can't honestly say that I want Obama to succeed until I understand what that means. Judging from what I know of him and his career in Chicago, I can tell you that I will probably never want Obama to succeed because success for Obama is failure for America.
I also don't trust anyone who blindly states that they want someone who campaigned on changing the nation to succeed. Especially considering the fact that we really have no idea what it is that he wants to change. If he wants to nationalize health care; I hope he fails. If he wants to cut taxes; I hope he succeeds. If he wants to throw more money at a failing education system; I hope he fails. If he wants to fundamentally change the system by introducing vouchers and privatizing huge chunks of it; I hope he succeeds.
Judging from his rhetoric, his past, his known ideology, and his political tactics; I am not ashamed to tell you that, for the most part, I hope Obama's presidency is a breathtaking, earth-shattering, history-making failure.
There are Republicans left and right who keep saying that they want President Obama to be successful and I have to confess that I don't know what that means. There are two basic reasons for my confusion.
First, I don't know what Obama's goals are. Does he want the war in Iraq to end in victory, or just end? Does he want America's economy to be stronger and healthier, or is it just an excuse to grow the government? Does he want America's health care system to be the envy of the world, or would he be just as happy to see it nationalized even if that exacerbates the problem instead of solving it?
Second, I don't know how Obama measures success. Would he describe the expenditure of a trillion dollars on an economic stimulus plan a success, or does it have to actually stimulate the economy? Will he point at the establishment of a shiny, new government agency and call that a success, or does the agency have to meet its objectives? In four years, will he look back at the actions taken as evidence of success, or will he point to the effects of those actions as evidence of success.
I can't honestly say that I want Obama to succeed until I understand what that means. Judging from what I know of him and his career in Chicago, I can tell you that I will probably never want Obama to succeed because success for Obama is failure for America.
I also don't trust anyone who blindly states that they want someone who campaigned on changing the nation to succeed. Especially considering the fact that we really have no idea what it is that he wants to change. If he wants to nationalize health care; I hope he fails. If he wants to cut taxes; I hope he succeeds. If he wants to throw more money at a failing education system; I hope he fails. If he wants to fundamentally change the system by introducing vouchers and privatizing huge chunks of it; I hope he succeeds.
Judging from his rhetoric, his past, his known ideology, and his political tactics; I am not ashamed to tell you that, for the most part, I hope Obama's presidency is a breathtaking, earth-shattering, history-making failure.
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Only Thing We Have To Fear...
We are in a recession. This is not news to anyone who does not live in a cave devoid of TV, computer, Blackberry, or that old-fashioned standby, the newspaper. Only a little more newsworthy is the fact that we've been here before.
1920 - The United States entered a recession in the wake of The Great War (WWI). The American economy, being chiefly agricultural at the time, saw an increase in production after the war ended and the troops returned home to resume their pre-war lives. This increase in production caused a dramatic drop in farm prices and an increase in unemployment. President Warren G. Harding, being a free-market conservative, responded with very little government intervention. Within a short period of time, the economy began the natural shift from being predominantly agricultural to industrial. It was able to do this because the government largely stayed out of its way. The result was the almost decade long boom we now refer to as "The Roaring Twenties".
1929 - The stock market crash on October 29, 1929, which brought about the Great Depression, has been blamed on everything from Capitalism run amok to the Federal Reserve System. Since Capitalism run amok tends only to bring prosperity, I believe it was the latter. Regardless of its cause, the Great Depression lasted for (arguably) 17 years. Why so long you ask? Government intervention is the obvious, but seldom reported answer. FDR finished what Hoover started. Following the crash in 1929, Hoover asked business leaders to not cut wages during the impending recession, thus impeding the private sector's ability to correct for falling revenue. In 1930, Hoover decided to ignore the advice of nearly all of the economists of the day and signed the Smoot-Hawley bill into law which raised tariffs an average of 59% on more than 25,000 products. As a result of this highly intelligent plan, the rest of the world practically shut down the American export industry. Hoover went on to establish the Reconstruction Finance Corporation whose job it was to supply troubled businesses with low interest loans and bailout money. (sound familiar?) Predictably, this plan did not succeed and most of the businesses involved either went into bankruptcy or were saddled with enormous debt all throughout the '30's.
Then FDR became President and set up the National Industrial Recovery Act, the government's own central planning agency, which acted to keep wages high while establishing minimum product pricing. This killed the ability of businesses to compete in the marketplace which translated into even higher unemployment. The jobless rate averaged 18% from 1933 to 1940 compared to the 7% we are complaining about now. He then decided to target food. In an effort to raise farm prices, he paid farmers to either limit production or not produce anything at all, theorising that lower supply would increase prices. To complete his plan, he had to do something about the food that was already out there. The administration slaughtered 6 million pigs and destroyed 10 million acres of cotton during a time when people were starving. They did this to bring "balance" to the previously slanted levels of production. He also set up the Public Works Administration which received $3.3 billion for various public works programs (infrastructure), the Civil Works Administration (more infrastructure), the National Youth Administration (government jobs for high school and college students), the Rural Electrification Administration (government money to bring electricity to farms), the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security Act (Madoff-like retirement ponzi scheme), the Tennessee Valley Authority, and many other wasteful government expenditures. The overall effect of these programs was to extend the Great Depression by years and worsen it by billions, if not trillions of dollars.
You may be thinking that all of these programs did the country a lot of good. After all, we did get some bridges, buildings, and dams out of it. But, stop and think of how much more efficient and less expensive private industry would have been. Private industry could have produced all this and more while providing much needed jobs and income to working families. This would not have been an enormous cost to taxpayers, but a boon to investors, businesses, workers, and the economy as a whole. Consider the speed and efficiency of government programs the next time you try to drive on that highway that has been under construction for as long as you can remember, or when you hear about that monster of all government construction projects - "the big dig".
America did eventually get out of the Great Depression, but it was neither FDR nor WWII that did it. What did it was a return to free-market Capitalism in the mid to late 1940's, after the war had ended and the soldiers returned home.
Given the response to these two economic crises and the effects of those responses, what do you think would be the best course of action for the current economic crisis? The government seems to have chosen the Hoover/FDR recession-extension plan of large government and trillions of your dollars. Don't be surprised when the effect of this decision is the same as before.
President Elect Barack Obama is promising the same level of intervention offered by FDR. The result of FDR's intervention was to extend and exacerbate the recession caused by the Stock Market crash of 1929. The old saying goes, "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Eventually we will return to the free-market and the economy will come roaring back, but why wait? We could easily do that now by supporting legislation such as Representative Gohmert's 2-month tax holiday and the much-lauded Fair Tax. We could add good paying American jobs by producing domestic sources of energy and slashing capital gains taxes to encourage investment. Intelligent plans abound, but intelligent plans require proactive leaders to identify and implement them.
If our leaders were interested in our growth more than their personal power, they would be supporting pro-growth legislation instead of no-growth government expansion. It seems to me the only thing we have to fear is... government.
(Many of the statistics in this article were gleaned from the pages of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" by Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Ph.D." Copyright 2004, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, D.C.; many thanks to the P.I.G. series of books, they are an invaluable resource.)
1920 - The United States entered a recession in the wake of The Great War (WWI). The American economy, being chiefly agricultural at the time, saw an increase in production after the war ended and the troops returned home to resume their pre-war lives. This increase in production caused a dramatic drop in farm prices and an increase in unemployment. President Warren G. Harding, being a free-market conservative, responded with very little government intervention. Within a short period of time, the economy began the natural shift from being predominantly agricultural to industrial. It was able to do this because the government largely stayed out of its way. The result was the almost decade long boom we now refer to as "The Roaring Twenties".
1929 - The stock market crash on October 29, 1929, which brought about the Great Depression, has been blamed on everything from Capitalism run amok to the Federal Reserve System. Since Capitalism run amok tends only to bring prosperity, I believe it was the latter. Regardless of its cause, the Great Depression lasted for (arguably) 17 years. Why so long you ask? Government intervention is the obvious, but seldom reported answer. FDR finished what Hoover started. Following the crash in 1929, Hoover asked business leaders to not cut wages during the impending recession, thus impeding the private sector's ability to correct for falling revenue. In 1930, Hoover decided to ignore the advice of nearly all of the economists of the day and signed the Smoot-Hawley bill into law which raised tariffs an average of 59% on more than 25,000 products. As a result of this highly intelligent plan, the rest of the world practically shut down the American export industry. Hoover went on to establish the Reconstruction Finance Corporation whose job it was to supply troubled businesses with low interest loans and bailout money. (sound familiar?) Predictably, this plan did not succeed and most of the businesses involved either went into bankruptcy or were saddled with enormous debt all throughout the '30's.
Then FDR became President and set up the National Industrial Recovery Act, the government's own central planning agency, which acted to keep wages high while establishing minimum product pricing. This killed the ability of businesses to compete in the marketplace which translated into even higher unemployment. The jobless rate averaged 18% from 1933 to 1940 compared to the 7% we are complaining about now. He then decided to target food. In an effort to raise farm prices, he paid farmers to either limit production or not produce anything at all, theorising that lower supply would increase prices. To complete his plan, he had to do something about the food that was already out there. The administration slaughtered 6 million pigs and destroyed 10 million acres of cotton during a time when people were starving. They did this to bring "balance" to the previously slanted levels of production. He also set up the Public Works Administration which received $3.3 billion for various public works programs (infrastructure), the Civil Works Administration (more infrastructure), the National Youth Administration (government jobs for high school and college students), the Rural Electrification Administration (government money to bring electricity to farms), the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security Act (Madoff-like retirement ponzi scheme), the Tennessee Valley Authority, and many other wasteful government expenditures. The overall effect of these programs was to extend the Great Depression by years and worsen it by billions, if not trillions of dollars.
You may be thinking that all of these programs did the country a lot of good. After all, we did get some bridges, buildings, and dams out of it. But, stop and think of how much more efficient and less expensive private industry would have been. Private industry could have produced all this and more while providing much needed jobs and income to working families. This would not have been an enormous cost to taxpayers, but a boon to investors, businesses, workers, and the economy as a whole. Consider the speed and efficiency of government programs the next time you try to drive on that highway that has been under construction for as long as you can remember, or when you hear about that monster of all government construction projects - "the big dig".
America did eventually get out of the Great Depression, but it was neither FDR nor WWII that did it. What did it was a return to free-market Capitalism in the mid to late 1940's, after the war had ended and the soldiers returned home.
Given the response to these two economic crises and the effects of those responses, what do you think would be the best course of action for the current economic crisis? The government seems to have chosen the Hoover/FDR recession-extension plan of large government and trillions of your dollars. Don't be surprised when the effect of this decision is the same as before.
President Elect Barack Obama is promising the same level of intervention offered by FDR. The result of FDR's intervention was to extend and exacerbate the recession caused by the Stock Market crash of 1929. The old saying goes, "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Eventually we will return to the free-market and the economy will come roaring back, but why wait? We could easily do that now by supporting legislation such as Representative Gohmert's 2-month tax holiday and the much-lauded Fair Tax. We could add good paying American jobs by producing domestic sources of energy and slashing capital gains taxes to encourage investment. Intelligent plans abound, but intelligent plans require proactive leaders to identify and implement them.
If our leaders were interested in our growth more than their personal power, they would be supporting pro-growth legislation instead of no-growth government expansion. It seems to me the only thing we have to fear is... government.
(Many of the statistics in this article were gleaned from the pages of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" by Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Ph.D." Copyright 2004, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, D.C.; many thanks to the P.I.G. series of books, they are an invaluable resource.)
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Put On Your Seatbelts, It's Going To Be A Bumpy Ride!
George W. Bush, for all his faults, protected this country for the last seven and a half years. Now, as Barack Obama is preparing himself to move into the Oval Office, he is appointing members of his team; those who would help him out in the very stressful position he has just attained. He reached into his bag of former Clintonistas and pulled out the name Leon Panetta to head the Central Intelligence Agency. Panetta, a former professor, representative, and Chief of Staff for President Clinton; has exactly zero intelligence experience.
We live in a dangerous world. We all found this out on September 11, 2001. Unfortunately, terrorists are not the only ones on the list. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Venezuela, and a host of other nations pose potential threats to the United States in one form or another. To appoint a man with no intelligence experience as the head of the CIA like waving a red flag in front of a bull. He may as well have appointed me to the post. No, scratch that - it would have been better to appoint me; no one knows who I am.
This is a dangerous game and I do not like the prospects of a secure future in America. The recession will weaken us militarily and will only be made worse by this ridiculous "stimulus" package. The proposed head of the CIA is a know-nothing at best. The proposed Secretary of State has never negotiated with a foreign leader in her life. The proposed HHS director is licking his chops at the thought of a bloated, wasteful, fraud-encrusted Universal Health care Plan. The Speaker of the House is as partisan and unfair as a person can get. The Senate Majority Leader is the worst decision maker on earth. On top of all this, add a President who has practically no experience and you get a recipe for disaster.
It is up to you and me to right the nation. Remember, we do have power here, as scant and fading as it may seem. Thomas Jefferson said it best, "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." We must not remain silent. I will speak out... what will you do?
We live in a dangerous world. We all found this out on September 11, 2001. Unfortunately, terrorists are not the only ones on the list. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Venezuela, and a host of other nations pose potential threats to the United States in one form or another. To appoint a man with no intelligence experience as the head of the CIA like waving a red flag in front of a bull. He may as well have appointed me to the post. No, scratch that - it would have been better to appoint me; no one knows who I am.
This is a dangerous game and I do not like the prospects of a secure future in America. The recession will weaken us militarily and will only be made worse by this ridiculous "stimulus" package. The proposed head of the CIA is a know-nothing at best. The proposed Secretary of State has never negotiated with a foreign leader in her life. The proposed HHS director is licking his chops at the thought of a bloated, wasteful, fraud-encrusted Universal Health care Plan. The Speaker of the House is as partisan and unfair as a person can get. The Senate Majority Leader is the worst decision maker on earth. On top of all this, add a President who has practically no experience and you get a recipe for disaster.
It is up to you and me to right the nation. Remember, we do have power here, as scant and fading as it may seem. Thomas Jefferson said it best, "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." We must not remain silent. I will speak out... what will you do?
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
We Reap What We Sow
Our nation was founded as a refuge from religious persecution. The Pilgrims left England to get away from a church which had traded in Christ's forgiveness and grace for cold ceremony, pride, and power. They believed the Bible and fiercely defended their faith. For leaving the church, they were spied upon, threatened, and jailed.
One hundred fifty six years after the Pilgrims arrived, the Framers declared independence from England. The tyranny of a king was a deviation from natural liberty and a violation of their faith. They believed this so deeply that they were willing to sacrifice all to create a new nation built around natural liberty and supported by Judeo-Christian ethics. The freedoms we enjoy today come from their belief in God as evidenced by the very words of the Founders themselves saying, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Our history is one steeped in the Christian faith. To abandon Him is madness as evidenced by the moral decay our country is experiencing. I believe Dr. Benjamin Rush was absolutely correct when he stated, "The only foundation for... a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."
We are kicking God out of the country and look at the results. When He is absent from school, violence ensues; when He is absent from the courtroom, injustice reigns; when he is absent from government, corruption is sovereign. When all the good is gone, there's nothing left but the bad.
In 2006, according to an Internet pornography statistics website, the worldwide porn industry is larger than Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Apple, Netflix, and Earthlink... combined. The number of pornographic movie titles released has grown from 1,300 in 1988 to over 13,000 in 2005. But porn is not the only problem.
Gang violence, school shootings, drug and alcohol dependence, crime, and the general breakdown of the nuclear family can all be attributed, in some way, to the secularization of America.
No matter where you look, what you do, or who you are... There is simply no substitute for God. I need Him, you need Him, and there is no doubt our country needs to rediscover and rekindle its faith-filled history.
One hundred fifty six years after the Pilgrims arrived, the Framers declared independence from England. The tyranny of a king was a deviation from natural liberty and a violation of their faith. They believed this so deeply that they were willing to sacrifice all to create a new nation built around natural liberty and supported by Judeo-Christian ethics. The freedoms we enjoy today come from their belief in God as evidenced by the very words of the Founders themselves saying, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Our history is one steeped in the Christian faith. To abandon Him is madness as evidenced by the moral decay our country is experiencing. I believe Dr. Benjamin Rush was absolutely correct when he stated, "The only foundation for... a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."
We are kicking God out of the country and look at the results. When He is absent from school, violence ensues; when He is absent from the courtroom, injustice reigns; when he is absent from government, corruption is sovereign. When all the good is gone, there's nothing left but the bad.
In 2006, according to an Internet pornography statistics website, the worldwide porn industry is larger than Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Apple, Netflix, and Earthlink... combined. The number of pornographic movie titles released has grown from 1,300 in 1988 to over 13,000 in 2005. But porn is not the only problem.
Gang violence, school shootings, drug and alcohol dependence, crime, and the general breakdown of the nuclear family can all be attributed, in some way, to the secularization of America.
No matter where you look, what you do, or who you are... There is simply no substitute for God. I need Him, you need Him, and there is no doubt our country needs to rediscover and rekindle its faith-filled history.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
What Will You Do?
On July 4, 1776, the men we now refer to collectively as “The Founders”, concluded their debates and signed a most momentous document. It was a Declaration to their tyrant of a king that from this day forth these colonies shall be “free and independent states”. In the vacuum left by the retreating tyrant, a new government was instituted which derived it's “just powers from the consent of the governed”. This government was framed in a new document. A Constitution was written with a specific emphasis placed on the prospect that our God-given liberties will no longer be molested by yet another tyranny. It accomplished this by placing the burden of government where it has always belonged - on the shoulders of the governed; it does so with three simple words...
We the people.
We the people will not allow our liberties to be trampled.
We the people will not allow our Constitution to be undermined.
We the people will have our voices heard.
We the people will reclaim the nation.
But what will you do?
Will you call or email your representatives and demand they do the right thing, or will you sit on the couch and complain when they do the wrong thing?
Will you educate yourself as to the inner workings of our Republic, or will you remain ignorant of how and why you are free?
Will you vote them out of office if they continue to subvert the Constitution, or will you stay at home on election day because you are too tired or busy?
Will you support the candidate with the best ideas for the country, or will you support the one who will bring the most pork to your district?
Will you sacrifice your time and energy and money to guarantee the continued success of this country for your children and grandchildren, or will you selfishly consume all that is offered without recompense?
I will call; I will learn; I will vote; I will sacrifice; and I will carefully select those who would represent me. If you love this country, you will do the same.
I'll tell you what I will not do. I will not sit idly by while my Constitution is blighted, my God is expelled, my speech is censored, my finances are pillaged, my freedom is sold, and my country is destroyed.
Now is not the time for meekness. Now is the time to let your voice be heard. Now is the time to ACT!
We the people.
We the people will not allow our liberties to be trampled.
We the people will not allow our Constitution to be undermined.
We the people will have our voices heard.
We the people will reclaim the nation.
But what will you do?
Will you call or email your representatives and demand they do the right thing, or will you sit on the couch and complain when they do the wrong thing?
Will you educate yourself as to the inner workings of our Republic, or will you remain ignorant of how and why you are free?
Will you vote them out of office if they continue to subvert the Constitution, or will you stay at home on election day because you are too tired or busy?
Will you support the candidate with the best ideas for the country, or will you support the one who will bring the most pork to your district?
Will you sacrifice your time and energy and money to guarantee the continued success of this country for your children and grandchildren, or will you selfishly consume all that is offered without recompense?
I will call; I will learn; I will vote; I will sacrifice; and I will carefully select those who would represent me. If you love this country, you will do the same.
I'll tell you what I will not do. I will not sit idly by while my Constitution is blighted, my God is expelled, my speech is censored, my finances are pillaged, my freedom is sold, and my country is destroyed.
Now is not the time for meekness. Now is the time to let your voice be heard. Now is the time to ACT!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
