Thursday, July 30, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Happy Trails, Sarah Palin
So much success, and Alaska there is much good in store further down the road, but to reach it we must value and live the optimistic pioneering spirit that made this state proud and free, and we can resist enslavement to big central government that crushes hope and opportunity. Be wary of accepting government largess. It doesn't come free and often, accepting it takes away everything that is free, melting into Washington's powerful "care-taking" arms will just suck incentive to work hard and chart our own course right out of us, and that not only contributes to an unstable economy and dizzying national debt, but it does make us less free. -- Sarah Palin
I don't know what she's thinking, but she's getting a lot of advice on what to do next. Here's my suggestion to Sarah: Convince Alaskans to secede from the union, and run for President of the Independent Republic of Alaska.
I don't know what she's thinking, but she's getting a lot of advice on what to do next. Here's my suggestion to Sarah: Convince Alaskans to secede from the union, and run for President of the Independent Republic of Alaska.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
What's the Big Hurry? (reprise)
"This is what the debate in Congress is all about: whether we'll keep talking and tinkering and letting this problem fester as more families and businesses go under and more Americans lose their coverage; Or whether we'll seize this opportunity -- one we might not have again for generations -- and finally pass health insurance reform this year, in 2009." -- Barry H. Obama in his weekly radio and internet speech
"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!" -- Admiral David Glasgow Farragut
I've noticed that Barry's always in a big hurry. It seems like every idea he comes up with is tagged with this high urgency. 2009 or bust. Hurry up and pass it.
In What's the Big Hurry , I pointed out that he exhorted people to vote before election day. It was clear that time would not work in his advantage, as more and more regular people (like Joe the Plumber) uncovered his true intentions.
So, he gets elected, and he needs to rush through a big spending package, take over the banks and car companies, slam the credit card issuers, cap the student loan paybacks, add a massive new energy tax and now take over 1/6th of our economy with Obamacare.
On this latter point, a CBO Report surfaced that shows how this plan will not work. Maybe it's time we read one of these bills.
Never mind the facts. Full speed ahead!
"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!" -- Admiral David Glasgow Farragut
I've noticed that Barry's always in a big hurry. It seems like every idea he comes up with is tagged with this high urgency. 2009 or bust. Hurry up and pass it.
In What's the Big Hurry , I pointed out that he exhorted people to vote before election day. It was clear that time would not work in his advantage, as more and more regular people (like Joe the Plumber) uncovered his true intentions.
So, he gets elected, and he needs to rush through a big spending package, take over the banks and car companies, slam the credit card issuers, cap the student loan paybacks, add a massive new energy tax and now take over 1/6th of our economy with Obamacare.
On this latter point, a CBO Report surfaced that shows how this plan will not work. Maybe it's time we read one of these bills.
Never mind the facts. Full speed ahead!
Monday, July 13, 2009
Watch out for whatever she has for lunch
An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity. --
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. -- Sonia Sotomayor
I'm baffled as to why Sonia Sotomayor is considered a reasonable choice for the Supreme Court. Obviously, Barry H. Obama, the mass media, and the American Bar Associatioinare are all in love with her. I'm having trouble deciding what to do other than break her other leg and send her home. (I know, I know, hardly civil discourse, but this selection is even worse than the Harriet Miers pick).
She is one of many, it's true, who believe the constitution oughta be re-written on a daily basis; and that is bad enough. But here's one who believes that members of her "own race" are more qualified to do it. My goodness, we've come full circle, if we plan to put a racist on the highest court in the land. I thought it was a bad thing to be a racist.
Here's another quote from Sotomayor:
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.
Now, why would that be the case? Is the law so fundamentally fluid that it matters what we had for lunch to reflect what the law really means? Gives a whole new meaning to legislating from the bench.
This lady sure seems unqualified. If she tries to defend any of these positions, she definitely is.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. -- Sonia Sotomayor
I'm baffled as to why Sonia Sotomayor is considered a reasonable choice for the Supreme Court. Obviously, Barry H. Obama, the mass media, and the American Bar Associatioinare are all in love with her. I'm having trouble deciding what to do other than break her other leg and send her home. (I know, I know, hardly civil discourse, but this selection is even worse than the Harriet Miers pick).
She is one of many, it's true, who believe the constitution oughta be re-written on a daily basis; and that is bad enough. But here's one who believes that members of her "own race" are more qualified to do it. My goodness, we've come full circle, if we plan to put a racist on the highest court in the land. I thought it was a bad thing to be a racist.
Here's another quote from Sotomayor:
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.
Now, why would that be the case? Is the law so fundamentally fluid that it matters what we had for lunch to reflect what the law really means? Gives a whole new meaning to legislating from the bench.
This lady sure seems unqualified. If she tries to defend any of these positions, she definitely is.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
A sure-fire solution
The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance. – Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 BC
It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money. – P.J. O’Rourke
Unnecessary laws are not good laws, but traps for money. – Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651
I have come up a fabulous idea, and need to share it with the world as quickly and as often as I can. The more I think about it, the more I am sure it is the last, best hope for freedom. First, I should point out what I've observed in the political landscape. People in the politics business are motivated by the same thing that motivates regular people. Self interest. Sure, they talk a different game, but it really is about their personal best interest.
What motivates regular people and politicians is the idea of "what's in it for me?". And, for the most part, the only incentives we as a people give to our politicians is low pay and high stress. Hence, the need for the pols to moonlight, as it were, and to make their gravy on the side. Further, they and their fellow civil servants have a need to keep the system rolling to maintain their gravy train.
I propose something more in line with an enlightened self interest for each federal employee.
How about a system of incentives to eliminate government spending? Pay them a commission. Yes, pay a percent of every government program eliminated directly to the people who eliminate it. Department of Energy? Gone. Pay each of the employees enough to retire on and pull out. National Endowment of the Arts? Adios. No useful function to that group anyway. Department of Health and Human Services? Retired.
I'm thinking we could get to a right sized government really, really fast. We just have to approach it like a business would, and properly incentivize what is needed. We have to replace the under the table incentives with true above board money. That will turn every politician into an honest representative of the people.
Can anyone tell me why that would not work?
It is a popular delusion that the government wastes vast amounts of money through inefficiency and sloth. Enormous effort and elaborate planning are required to waste this much money. – P.J. O’Rourke
Unnecessary laws are not good laws, but traps for money. – Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651
I have come up a fabulous idea, and need to share it with the world as quickly and as often as I can. The more I think about it, the more I am sure it is the last, best hope for freedom. First, I should point out what I've observed in the political landscape. People in the politics business are motivated by the same thing that motivates regular people. Self interest. Sure, they talk a different game, but it really is about their personal best interest.
What motivates regular people and politicians is the idea of "what's in it for me?". And, for the most part, the only incentives we as a people give to our politicians is low pay and high stress. Hence, the need for the pols to moonlight, as it were, and to make their gravy on the side. Further, they and their fellow civil servants have a need to keep the system rolling to maintain their gravy train.
I propose something more in line with an enlightened self interest for each federal employee.
How about a system of incentives to eliminate government spending? Pay them a commission. Yes, pay a percent of every government program eliminated directly to the people who eliminate it. Department of Energy? Gone. Pay each of the employees enough to retire on and pull out. National Endowment of the Arts? Adios. No useful function to that group anyway. Department of Health and Human Services? Retired.
I'm thinking we could get to a right sized government really, really fast. We just have to approach it like a business would, and properly incentivize what is needed. We have to replace the under the table incentives with true above board money. That will turn every politician into an honest representative of the people.
Can anyone tell me why that would not work?
Friday, June 12, 2009
Fair share
U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 12 Jun 2009 at 05:53:37 PM GMT is:
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 12 Jun 2009 at 05:53:37 PM GMT is:
The estimated population of the United States is 306,355,187
so each citizen's share of this debt is $37,182.29.
The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$3.83 billion per day since September 28, 2007!
Concerned? Then tell Congress and the White House!
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
How would it feel to each citizen of this country if they and each of their children were presented with a bill for $37, 182.29? If everyone in their family took out a credit card and maxed it out to the tune of $37 large plus. Family of four? You just added another house payment. For 30 years.
I believe people want to do their share, and when they see what their share really is, there should be a great deal of discomfort over where this country is going.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Graduation Day
Now, understand -- understand, Class of 2009, I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it -- indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory -- the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature. Barry H Obama, Commencement Exercises at The University of Notre Dame du Lac, May 17, 2009
I wasn't going to blog about this. It should have been a private celebration of our family and friends for the graduation of our daughter, and I really wanted it to stay that way. Instead, it became an event. A memorable one, to be sure, and well covered in the media (so much so, one would think there was little more to say). Still, it calls to be blogged about.
I wanted to have a nice traditional midwest college campus graduation with nothing but fond memories and a beautiful spring day. Not a chance on this day. Not with Air Force One flying in and out of town, and four miles of silent (and not so silent) protesters lining the streets leading to campus. I felt sorry for everybody. The protesters, the parents, the security guards, our daughter and the rest of the students. I'm sure some thought it was good theater, and a thrill to hang with his magnanimousness. My thought was why did this have to happen on our time?
Three weeks have passed, and nothing of any consequence was decided. The quotation above leaves one with a great deal to wonder about. It's the president telling us that there is no right and no wrong in the abortion conflict. There is no leadership in that quote; and none was forthcoming the entire afternoon. One speech after another of politicians and academics trying to outlecture each other.
You see, this was an opportunity to lead, and our leader called it a draw. It's exactly what he's doing in foreign policy (Israel and Palestine are equivalent. They're both right). Same thing over abortion. Yes, it's an electric issue. It's an emotional one, but it's also an issue that people can't navigate around, because of all the bad laws put up in protection of the current legal landscape.
What could he have done? Return the issue to the states where it belongs. What Obama could have done is pledge to unravel the legal mechanisms so that the people could decide. No, he's a big time supporter of Roe v Wade despite it being one of the most poorly and hastily constructed mishaps in the history of the Supreme Court. With that as backdrop we are going to populate the court with more people who have less regard for life than they do for causes.
Your Wizer has long been a pro-life libertarian. What that means is that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should be preserved for everyone, including the unborn. Especially the unborn, since they are the most vulnerable among us.
That is my deepest held belief, and why I must blog today.
So, what of abortion? What are the elements of it that a constitutionalist must follow? Well, for one, he must make no law abridging the rights of the individual. So, for the federal government to even be involved in this issue is unconstitutional. One might make the argument that the mother of the unborn child is an individual, too. Fair enough. It's something that can and should be debated at the state level. The debate is currently precluded by a federal court ruling, and that's why the argument is even still in place 36 years later. It's not for the Federal government to say. But what the federal government should do is stay out of the argument. That's especially true if you believe both sides are right; as apparently Barry H Obama does.
I wasn't going to blog about this. It should have been a private celebration of our family and friends for the graduation of our daughter, and I really wanted it to stay that way. Instead, it became an event. A memorable one, to be sure, and well covered in the media (so much so, one would think there was little more to say). Still, it calls to be blogged about.
I wanted to have a nice traditional midwest college campus graduation with nothing but fond memories and a beautiful spring day. Not a chance on this day. Not with Air Force One flying in and out of town, and four miles of silent (and not so silent) protesters lining the streets leading to campus. I felt sorry for everybody. The protesters, the parents, the security guards, our daughter and the rest of the students. I'm sure some thought it was good theater, and a thrill to hang with his magnanimousness. My thought was why did this have to happen on our time?
Three weeks have passed, and nothing of any consequence was decided. The quotation above leaves one with a great deal to wonder about. It's the president telling us that there is no right and no wrong in the abortion conflict. There is no leadership in that quote; and none was forthcoming the entire afternoon. One speech after another of politicians and academics trying to outlecture each other.
You see, this was an opportunity to lead, and our leader called it a draw. It's exactly what he's doing in foreign policy (Israel and Palestine are equivalent. They're both right). Same thing over abortion. Yes, it's an electric issue. It's an emotional one, but it's also an issue that people can't navigate around, because of all the bad laws put up in protection of the current legal landscape.
What could he have done? Return the issue to the states where it belongs. What Obama could have done is pledge to unravel the legal mechanisms so that the people could decide. No, he's a big time supporter of Roe v Wade despite it being one of the most poorly and hastily constructed mishaps in the history of the Supreme Court. With that as backdrop we are going to populate the court with more people who have less regard for life than they do for causes.
Your Wizer has long been a pro-life libertarian. What that means is that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should be preserved for everyone, including the unborn. Especially the unborn, since they are the most vulnerable among us.
That is my deepest held belief, and why I must blog today.
So, what of abortion? What are the elements of it that a constitutionalist must follow? Well, for one, he must make no law abridging the rights of the individual. So, for the federal government to even be involved in this issue is unconstitutional. One might make the argument that the mother of the unborn child is an individual, too. Fair enough. It's something that can and should be debated at the state level. The debate is currently precluded by a federal court ruling, and that's why the argument is even still in place 36 years later. It's not for the Federal government to say. But what the federal government should do is stay out of the argument. That's especially true if you believe both sides are right; as apparently Barry H Obama does.
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Three Republicans
If there's a Souter legacy, it is that he gave birth to the "stealth nominee" - a person so bland that he inspires no strong reaction from political hacks and interest groups. -- S.M. Oliva
I want to talk about three Republicans today.
David Souter, retiring. David Souder wasn't really a republican. He was a guy apointed by Bush 41, who himself was said to be a republican. Souder came recommended by Warren Rudman as a way to pay back the Rockefeller Republicans for their support in the 88 election. He seemed pretty harmless at the time, but wound up betraying America in countless ways through his many years. There's no price he has to pay for this betrayal, except to know that history has a place for him alongside Earl Warren and Roger Taney.
Next, we have Arlen Specter. Arlen is switching parties from the left to the other left. A guy who voted with the democrats so often, he was often confused for one. The latest polls suggested that republicans were going to get their own guy and let Arlen be a democrat, anyway. The switch did not seem to surprise anyone on either side. Specter's NTU rating never got better than a C+, and that's not good enough, so he will join with the other low-performance kids on the left side of the class.
Finally there's Jack Kemp. It was less a matter of Jack Kemp being a republican, than the republicans being Jack Kemp. Republicans were only doing well when they were following him. Unfortunately for Jack, and for his running mate in the 1996 election, the only tool was evidently the tax cut. And while that would have been a good idea (it always is), the people whose votes they needed to attract weren't paying federal taxes in the first place. So, what did they have to gain by voting for Dole - Kemp? There needed to be more to that message. Like a serious reduction in government. And a serious pro-growth climate. He believed it. I know he did. But we missed his best chance to execute it.
Of our three republicans, Souder and Specter never really were republicans. Kemp was what republicanism meant before the party became more "compassionate". As a result, they became more like the non-republicans, and less like Kemp. Republicans would do well to join the Kemp party once again.
Kites cause wind
Imagination is the highest kite one can fly -- Lauren Bacall
I was mowing the yard yesterday (something us Michiganders only get to do 6 months a year) when the wind kicked up a little and sent my straw hat flying a few feet away. As I retrieved the errant chapeau, I pondered the state of nature, and what causes wind. I also observed that it was the annual kite festival in my town starting about then.
Later, while having lunch with my family, I recounted my observations, and told them that I can only conclude that kites cause wind. There was, after all, a kite festival going on, which required wind to be successful. It was logical to conclude as I did that the kites brought the weather necessary to sustain themselves.
Of course, they looked at me like I just told them that humans cause planetary climate change. (They know of course, that I'm not one to blame humans for things they don't do). Then it hit me. These are exactly the same argument. Saying humans cause climate change is like saying kites cause wind. The reverse of each statement is actually the truth. Wind brings out the kites, and climate change causes human migration.
Later that day, we enjoyed the kite festival. We were all thankful that the kites were able to bring enough wind with them. It would've been good for a laugh if there weren't so many people who believe it.
I was mowing the yard yesterday (something us Michiganders only get to do 6 months a year) when the wind kicked up a little and sent my straw hat flying a few feet away. As I retrieved the errant chapeau, I pondered the state of nature, and what causes wind. I also observed that it was the annual kite festival in my town starting about then.
Later, while having lunch with my family, I recounted my observations, and told them that I can only conclude that kites cause wind. There was, after all, a kite festival going on, which required wind to be successful. It was logical to conclude as I did that the kites brought the weather necessary to sustain themselves.
Of course, they looked at me like I just told them that humans cause planetary climate change. (They know of course, that I'm not one to blame humans for things they don't do). Then it hit me. These are exactly the same argument. Saying humans cause climate change is like saying kites cause wind. The reverse of each statement is actually the truth. Wind brings out the kites, and climate change causes human migration.
Later that day, we enjoyed the kite festival. We were all thankful that the kites were able to bring enough wind with them. It would've been good for a laugh if there weren't so many people who believe it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)