Monday, August 31, 2009
Health Care: "First, do no harm" is never the maxim of Washington politicians. With a public uprising killing ObamaCare, Sen. John McCain wants "to sit down with the president" and resuscitate it.
There seems to be a disconnect in McCain's head, however, between getting good reforms and what he knows the Democrats will do as the majority...
The American people, already spooked at this year's government spending spree, are rightly scared to death at the costs of Obama-Care — another matter on which the administration has been deceptive. Tuesday, new numbers showed that the federal budget deficit will be far higher than expected — nearly $1.6 trillion for the year, amounting to more debt than since the aftermath of World War II.
After a $787 billion politicized stimulus package, and unemployment still headed to double digits, the people are letting their representatives know in person that enough is enough. And their voices are being heard. Even liberal Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., a strong proponent of government-managed reform, pronounced Obama-Care dead for the year before a large Wisconsin crowd last week.
...Key Democrats now admit that a popular uprising has succeeded in derailing the radical health care revolution that Democrats have in mind. Even left-wing politicians now see that Americans prefer standing pat to socialism. Why does Sen. McCain want to get us back on such a dangerous track? (Read at IBD)
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
National Security: Appointing a prosecutor to harass CIA interrogators exposes this administration's priorities: The global war on terror takes a back seat to terrorizing some of America's most selfless warriors.
If you look closely, you can see insidious attempts to weaken Americans' post-9/11 resolve to win against Islamist terrorism, no matter what it cost or how long it took.
Pentagon staff members were informed a mere two months after President Obama's inauguration, for instance, that we were no longer engaged in a "global war on terror"; what America was now waging was an "overseas contingency operation."
Then in April, as the American Spectator's Matthew Vadum pointed out Monday, the president signed a law re-jiggering 9/11 into a "National Day of Service" that will demean the Pearl Harbor Day of the 21st century "into a celebration of ethanol, carbon emission controls, and radical community organizing." (Read the rest if you stomach it at IBD).
Monday, August 24, 2009
George Orwell is alive and writing new fiction about Congress legislating expanded government control of health care. Or at least it seems that way.
A growing and ominous trend lately is the inversion of language to couch further government intervention in the name of liberating "reform."
…For instance, if you want to eliminate the secret ballot in union-organized elections and force workers to vote in clear sight of their employer and a union enforcer, call it "The Employee Freedom of Choice Act."
There are many more flagrant examples of doublethink in the debate on health care. And it becomes increasingly difficult to have a sane discussion when too many words are used as the opposite of their proper meaning. It can even confuse journalists.
President Obama has frequently reassured us that, if we are happy with our present insurance, there is no cause for alarm—our right to keep it will not be denied. Of course, it will no longer exist in a few years, so the right to keep it is pointless…
If you have an individual insurance policy, your right to keep it will be meaningless when it cannot compete with government insurance. Private insurers will be forced out of the game as the public plan draws unlimited credit from a government cashier playing with a stacked deck from a dealer who forces the other players to cover the government's bets. Yet this is the solution offered to head off the so-called "predatory" nature of a free market, in the name of promoting "healthy competition." (Read CapMag.com)
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” — Thomas Jefferson
Our Found Fathers had a very basic premise upon which they based all the worth of the new nation they invented: a man's right to his own life, to his own liberty, to the pursuit of his own happiness. This is so profound an idea that to this day many do not understand it. They did not say for man to sacrifice - no their dictum was for a man to be left alone so he could pursue his values as he sees fit so long as he abides by the law of the land.
What is it about this idea that liberals like Obama and Pelosi find so repelling? What is it in the soul of a liberal that wants to rule over everyone and proscribe his every move and even ideas?
"The basic and crucial political issue of our age is: capitalism versus socialism, or freedom versus statism. For decades, this issue has been silenced, suppressed, evaded, and hidden under the foggy, undefined rubber-terms of "conservatism" and "liberalism" which has lost their original meaning and could be stretched to mean all things to all men.
The goal of the "liberals"-as it emerges from the record of the past decades-was to smuggle this country into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named. Thus statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow rot-by a long process of evasion and epistemological corruption, leading to a fait accompli. (Ayn Rand in " 'Extremism,' or The Art of Smearing" in Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal pg 178)
"To me, this is one of the great Frankenstein experimentations in American history. We've seen that movie before. It was from 1932 to 1940."
..."I grew up in a house with no running water, 16 miles from the closest place that had a post office," he recalls. "I had a very parochial view of the world."
The Wall Street Journal continues the interview:
He became an Air Force pilot and went off to countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Italy, returning to Paint Creek in 1977—only to grow restless on the family farm. He sought a political outlet.
In 1985, Mr. Perry represented a rural West Texas district in the state legislature; in 1990, he was elected state commissioner of agriculture; in 1998, he was elected lieutenant governor under then-Gov. George W. Bush. He became governor when Mr. Bush won the presidency in 2000, and Mr. Perry was chosen by the voters themselves in 2002 and 2006.
Mr. Perry now has the distinction of being the longest-serving governor in Texas history...
When I ask him if Mr. Obama's policies would send this country down the same path as California, Mr. Perry lunges forward, "If you want to know what this guy's policies are doing, it's been written about before."
"Read that book. Read this book," he says, gesturing toward the nearby table. ..."The Road to Serfdom" by Frederick Hayek and "The 5000 Year Leap" by W. Cleon Skousen. "Read Amity Shlaes's 'The Forgotten Man.' Amity's book is very eye-opening—scary—for me."
To the governor, one of the scariest policies is the national health-care bill. "I think it'll die. I think Americans are catching on. That's the reason that Rahm Emanuel and his guys were trying to push it through so fast, because they know [that once] Americans see what this is going to do—limiting their access to health care, costing them more—they're going to oppose it. And interestingly, you know who's against this more than anybody? The elderly. They figured this bill out...(Read at WSJ)
Friday, August 21, 2009
"The basic and crucial political issue of our age is: capitalism versus socialism, or freedom versus statism. For decades, this issue has been silenced, suppressed, evaded and hidden under the foggy, undefined rubber-terms of "conservatism" and liberalism" which has lost their original meaning and could be stretched to mean all things to all men."
"The goal of the "liberals"-as it emerges from the record of the past decades-was to smuggle this country into welfare statism by means of single, concrete, specific measures, enlarging the power of the government a step at a time, never permitting these steps to be summed up into principles, never permitting their direction to be identified or the basic issue to be named. Thus statism was to come, not by vote or by violence, but by slow rot - by a long process of evasion and epistemological corruption, leading to a fait accompli. (The goal of the "conservatives" was only to retard that process). Read " 'Extremism' or The Art of Smearing" in CAPITALISM: THE UNKNOWN IDEAL (1966).
Besides the possible government take over of Health care another leftist/fascist propaganda malarkey - global warming.....is being paraded as fact as the greeners present it but it is actually an anti-fact...is there such a thing? Anti-Fact? A fact is a piece of knowledge based on research and conclusions as to what the data is saying. Therefore, an anti-fact is something parading as fact. Why this big push to downgrade our industrial/information revolution society? Why this desire to dismantle this progress we've struggled to arrive at for the past 3000 years? Gerd Leipold, an outgoing executive of Greenpeace let it slip out recently:
"We will definitely have to move to a different concept of growth. The lifestyle of the rich in the world is not a sustainable model." The Age of Envy is still with us and envy leads to control of your life and my life. IBD has an article: "Consensus Thaws on Global Warming". Malarkey is malarkey and eventually the truth will out.
Global Warming: What's the climate change scare really about? Not what the alarmists want the public to think. Just ask the retiring head of Greenpeace. In an unguarded moment, he might spill the secret again.
During an Aug. 5 interview with the BBC, Gerd Leipold, outgoing executive director of Greenpeace, admitted that his organization emotionalizes issues to influence the public. At the time, he was admitting his group had made an error in its July 15 news release that claimed "we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030."
"I don't think (the Greenland ice sheet) will be melting by 2030," he said. "That may have been a mistake."
Or maybe it was one of those examples that Greenpeace embellished to stir fear in the public? If so, it wouldn't be an isolated case. Others have admitted they're willing to bend the truth in order to draw attention to the cause.
Twenty years ago, Stanford University environmentalist Stephen Schneider told Discover magazine that it's perfectly fine "to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we might have. . . . Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Al Gore noted the power of propaganda when he once told Grist, a magazine for environmentalists, that "it is appropriate to have an overrepresentation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."
So why all the distortions about global warming? To save the planet, to save us from ourselves? No. To choke economies in developed nations, particularly the U.S.
...When all the pretense about science is stripped away, it becomes clear that the global warming scare is not about the planet, but about establishing egalitarianism across the world. It's about making everyone more equal by slowing growth in rich nations rather than increasing growth in poor and developing countries.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Obama's Cronies vs American Citizens: Whose Medical Decisions?: Part 1
Obamacare's Phony Arguments: Whose Medical Decisions?" Part 2
Obama's Bait and Switch: Whose Medical Decisions?" Part 3
The Obama Vision: Whose Medical Decisions?" Part 4
Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core. You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame' America crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where thegovernment sector dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the goldenegg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics againstcertain banks and corporations.
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challengingyou on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consideropposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient. You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Reilllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I willprobably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett TRUE - CHECK: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it. Big surprise.Since it hit the internet, however, it has had over 500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. (Thomas Jefferson)It's happening right now.
Monday, August 17, 2009
...As a U.S. senator, Mr. Kerry has the luxury of treating Latin America like his playground, as Democrats have done for decades, foisting on it ideas that Americans reject. Venezuelans still recall how Connecticut's Chris Dodd played the role of chief Chávez cheerleader in the Senate while the strongman was consolidating power.
But Mr. Obama is the president and commander in chief, and millions of people in this hemisphere are counting on the U.S. to stand up to Venezuelan aggression. Playing footsie under the table with Mr. Chávez on Honduras while the Venezuelan is threatening the peace isn't going to fly in a hemisphere that prefers liberty over tyranny.
Both Colombian and U.S. officials allege that the Venezuelan National Guard and high-ranking members of Mr. Chávez's government are in cahoots with criminal enterprises that run drugs in South America. The evidence suggests an alliance between the terrorist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)—the largest exporter of cocaine from that country—and members of Mr. Chávez's cabinet. There is also evidence in documents and video captured from the FARC that the rebels have influence at high levels of the Ecuadoran government.
The cocaine business is a big revenue raiser for the terrorist organization and for its business partners on the continent. This is why Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has agreed to allow U.S. drug-surveillance planes to use Colombian military bases.
In Quito, Mr. Chávez flew into a rage about that agreement. "The U.S. is the most warlike government in the world," he told his South American peers and Mr. Zelaya. "The Yankee military pays no mind to its president," he said, artfully exempting Barack Obama from blame. "In Colombia [the U.S. military] has immunity. They can rape women, they can kill and they can destroy in every direction. You can't do anything to them. It's horrible."...(Anti-American Amigos at WSJ).
Sunday, August 16, 2009
The actual meaning of “free market” is: the economic system of laissez-faire capitalism. Under capitalism, the government’s sole purpose is to protect the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness from violation by force or fraud. This means a government is limited to three basic functions: the military, the police, and the court system. In a truly free market, there is no income tax, no alphabet agencies regulating every aspect of the economy, no handouts or business subsidies, no Federal Reserve. The government plays no more role in the economic lives of its citizens than it does in their sex lives.
Thus a free market is a market totally free from the initiation of physical force. Under such a system, individuals are free to exercise and act on their own judgment. They are free to produce and trade as they see fit. They are fully free from interference, regulation, or control by the government.
Historically, a fully free market has not yet existed. But it was America’s unsurpassed economic freedom that enabled her, in the period between the Civil War and World War I, to become an economic juggernaut, and the symbol of freedom and prosperity.
That freedom has largely been curtailed. But one sector that remains relatively free is America’s high-tech industry. Throughout the late 20th century, the computer industry had no significant barriers to entry, no licensing requirements, no government-mandated certification tests. Individuals were left free for the most part to think, produce, innovate and take risks: if they succeeded, they reaped the rewards; if they failed, they could not run to Washington for help.
The results speak for themselves.
Between 1981 and 1985, about 6 million personal computers were sold worldwide. During the first half of this decade, that number climbed to 855 million. Meanwhile, the quality of computers surged as prices plummeted. For instance, the cost per megabyte for a personal computer during the early 1980s was generally between $100 and $200; today it’s less than a cent.
That is what a free economy would look like: unbridled choice in production and trade with innovation and prosperity as the result.
But this is hardly what the economy looks like today.
The latest Federal budget was $3.6 trillion dollars, up from less than $1 billion a century ago. Taxes eat up nearly half of the average American’s income. A mammoth welfare state doles out favors to individuals and to businesses. Hundreds of thousands of regulations direct virtually every aspect of our lives. The Federal Reserve holds virtually unlimited control over the U.S. monetary and banking systems.
All of this represents the injection of government force into the market..(continue reading at The Ayn Rand Center For Individual Rights)
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Apparently, Obama will allow Doctors to own their businesses but will mandate what they can treat, who they can treat and how much they can charge. This is fascism whichever way you turn it around. The Germans hated private individuals, private property, individual rights - their idea was to crush individualism and their main goal was control over the individual.
Until, these bureaucrats change math as well, 2+2=4 and government control over the economy = destruction of the principles of our founding: The right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Richard E. Ralston is Executive Director of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine and recently wrote the following: "AMERICAN FASCIST HEALTH CARE SYSTEM".
Many years ago America started down a path that has gradually limited the free practice of medicine and the relationship between physicians and patients. You can never really have a private meeting with your doctor anymore, because the government is always in the room with you. Now, under the electronic medical records provisions of President Obama's stimulus package, whatever happens in that room will be reported to the government with the rest of your medical history—without your permission.
American medicine is constrained in a Byzantine web of regulations, legislation and bureaucracy. It is a mess, and the status quo cannot be defended. It should be reformed.
Americans are appropriately concerned at the prospect of socialized medicine. Some advocates want exactly that, and many politicians are pushing us in that direction.
But the system we now have and the course it is on is more accurately described as fascist. Factions vie for the patronage of political-power brokers.
When Hitler was asked why, as the leader of the National Socialist party, he did not nationalize businesses, he responded that such action was not necessary, because "I have nationalized the German people."
This practice has been evolving for generations and takes place at all levels of government. At the state level it takes several forms. Medical licensing was created to protect the public, but it can and has been used to limit the entry of new competition for current practitioners. It has also been used to threaten the careers of currently… (Read at CapMag.com)
Friday, August 14, 2009
Every breath you takeEvery move you makeEvery bond you breakEvery step you takeIll be watching you("The Police" 1983)
...We see Barack Obama's smile broadcast 24/7, in a fashion we have not seen previously of earlier presidents. A Newsweek editor referred to Obama as a "god." MSNBC's Chris Matthews claimed physical ecstasy when Obama speaks. A Washington Post reporter swooned over Obama's "chiseled pectorals."
There are similar Big Brother attacks on recent critics of the Obama administration's health care initiatives. Once-praised dissent has become subversive. Protesters are a mob to be ridiculed by the government as mere health-insurance puppets.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., is suspicious of the nice clothes the protesters wear. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi used a few isolated incidents to claim that the health care dissidents were "carrying swastikas and symbols like that" to compare Obama and Democrats to the Nazis.
...Doublethink is common. Presidential sermons on fiscal responsibility tip us off that deficits will soar. Borrowing an additional trillion dollars to manage health care is sold as a cost-saving measure. Racial transcendence translates into more racial identity politics, reflected both in rhetoric and presidential appointments.
The government wants to determine how some executives should be paid. The administration assures millions of citizens it will now intrude into everything from buying homes and cars to how they go to the doctor.
...George Orwell, a man of the left, warned us that freedom and truth are not just endangered by easily identifiable goose-stepping goons in jackboots. More often he felt that state collectivism would come from an all-powerful government — run by a charismatic egalitarian, promising to protect us from selfish, greedy reactionaries.
Orwell was on to something. (READ AT IBD)
Thursday, August 13, 2009
1. Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar, Richard Holbrooke
2. AIDS czar, Jeffrey Crowley [openly gay white man]
3. Auto recovery czar, Ed Montgomery
4. Behavioral science czar, position not yet filled
5. Bailout czar, Herbert Allison Jr., [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant
6. Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]
7. Border czar, Alan Bersin
8. Car czar, Ron Bloom [Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury , under Senate oversight]
9. Climate change czar, Todd Stern
10. Copyright czar, not appointed yet
11. Counterterrorism czar, John Brennan
12.Cybersecurity czar, position will be vacant on August 21st [upon the departure of Melissa Hathaway]
13. Disinformation czar, Linda Douglass [This is a new media buzz since our earlier list, a response by pundits to the White House request for informants: see Glenn Beck and Lew Rockwell]
14. Domestic violence czar, Lynn Rosenthal
15. Drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske
16. Economic czar, Larry Summers
17. Economic czar number two, Paul Volcker
18. Education czar, Arne Duncan
19. Energy czar, Carol Browner
20. Food czar, Michael Taylor [a former Monsanto executive, or, the fox in charge of the henhouse]
21. Government performance czar, Jeffrey Zients
22. Great Lakes czar, Cameron Davis
23. Green jobs czar, Van Jones [who has a communist background]
24. Guantanamo closure czar, Daniel Fried
25. Health czar, Nancy-Ann DeParle
26. Infotech czar, Vivek Kundra [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source). His last day in DC government was March 4 but on March 12 the FBI raided his office and arrested two staffers.]
27. Intelligence czar, Dennis Blair [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position. He is a retired United States Navy four-star admiral]
28. Latin-American czar, Arturo Valenzuela (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominatied to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation. Voting on his confirmation was delayed to clarify his position on Honduras. Watch WaPo’s Head Count to track status of confirmation.]
29. Mideast peace czar, George Mitchell
30. Mideast policy czar, Dennis Ross
31. Pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg
32. Regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein
33. Religion czar, aka God czar Joshua DuBois
34. Safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings [appointed to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, a newly created post (that does not require Senate confirmation); openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]
35. Science czar, John Holdren
36. Stimulus oversight czar, Earl Devaney
37. Sudan czar, J. Scott Gration
38. TARP czar, Elizabeth Warren [chair of the [Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is frequently called the TARP czar]
39. Technology czar, Aneesh Chopra
40. Trade czar, Ron Kirk
41. Urban affairs czar, Adolfo Carrion
42. War czar, Douglas Lute [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]
43. Water czar, David J. Hayes [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]
44. Weapons czar, Ashton Carter [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]
45. Weapons of mass destruction czar, Gary Samore
Positions being planned:
Income redistribution czar
Mortgage czar, formally “consumer financial protection czar” (source)
Radio-internet fairness czar
Student loan czar, to oversee a program of mandatory service in return for college money (source)
Voter list czar
Obama has moved swiftly to concentrate power in the White House, bypassing the review of our elected representatives in Congress in most of the posts listed above. Even though cabinet positions are part of the executive branch, the cabinet secretaries must be approved by Congress, they are funded by Congress, and they can be called before Congress to testify. Most of these czars, on the other hand, are appointed by Obama at his sole discretion, and are answerable only to him. If subpoenaed by Congress, they can claim executive privilege. (Frontpage.American Daughter.com)
Even Senator Byrd is worried about this concentration of power in the person of Obama.
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), who for decades has battled White House power and championed congressional clout, is questioning President Obama's appointment of "czars" to oversee key policy areas, including energy and climate.
"The rapid and easy accumulation of power by White House staff can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances," Byrd wrote in a letter to Obama. "At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials."
Byrd specifically cited the creation of a new White House Office of Energy and Climate Change, which is headed by Carol Browner. He also noted new offices for health reform and urban affairs policy and the appointment of White House staff to coordinate on technology and management performance policies. (Read)
Presenting the science behind what causes global warming or cooling is followed by IBD's conclusion.
...These findings are largely being ignored by the mainstream media. They simply don't fit the worn narrative that man is dangerously warming the Earth through his carbon dioxide emissions and a radical alteration of Western lifestyles mandated by government policy is desperately needed.
They will be ignored, as well, by the Democratic machine that is trying to ram an economy-smothering carbon cap-and-trade regime through Congress.
Despite efforts to keep the global warming scare alive, the growing evidence that humans aren't heating the planet is piercing the public consciousness and alarmists are becoming marginalized.
Sharp Americans are starting to understand H.L. Mencken's observation that "The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it." That pretty much sums up the modern environmentalist movement. (Read the whole article at IBD here).
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
"How End-Users Suffer Under Socialism".
If you ever wonder why we so resist socialism, consider the latest news out of that collectivist island paradise known as Cuba.
Central planners announced this week that they were fresh out of money to buy toilet paper — yes, toilet paper — for the island's 9 million citizens. But not to worry. A nameless official for state-run monopoly Cimex and quoted by Reuters assured that "the corporation has taken all the steps so that at the end of the year there will be an important importation of toilet paper."
The predicament would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. But toilet tissue is hardly the only item Cuba is lacking. Food itself is in short supply, with red bean and chickpea rations cut by a third, according to the Miami Herald. Special hard-currency-only stores for the elites have mysteriously failed to open after last week's "inventory," with no explanation given.
There's no gas, either. The Associated Press this week reported that state planners have decreed that oxen — yes, oxen — would replace tractors in the fields, a bid to conserve fuel. This, despite the fact that Cuba gets 100,000 barrels of oil a day from Hugo Chavez's Venezuela — effectively free, because Cuba never pays its bills...(READ AT IBD).
“The Big Biz Show,” with Bob “Sully” Sullivan & Russ “T” Nailz, is syndicated via Business Talk Radio Network on 150 AM stations and heard on Internet Sites via BTRN, CBS radio, Chat-About-It, AOL radio, and wsRadio. The show can be heard live online from 1 to 3 p.m. Pacific Time (10–1 EST) at http://www.businesstalkradio.net/ (click on "listen live")
Thursday, August 13 2:10 PST: Alex Epstein—Defending the Oil Industry2:40 PST:
Richard M. Salsman—Health Care, the Economy, and the California’s Financial Crisis Monday, August 17 2:10 PST:
John David Lewis—How Obama Care will Destroy Private Health Insurance Tuesday, August 18 2:10 PST: Raymond C. Niles—Property Rights and Crisis of the Electric Grid
Please help promote these events by posting the information to websites, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, and the like.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
States have to learn that to prosper you cannot tax the citizens to death. They have to be able to live a decent life. Government, be it national, state or local should be on the periphery of our lives not sucking us dry.
Perhaps states are starting to learn the right fiscal lessons from the red-ink blowouts in high-tax California and New York. Today, the legislature in Arizona will vote on a tax reform designed to entice more employers and high-income taxpayers to the state. Sponsored by Republican Governor Jan Brewer, the plan would cut state property taxes, the corporate tax and personal income taxes, in exchange for a temporary rise in the sales tax.
Most economic studies agree that states have more jobs and higher income growth when they tax consumption rather than savings, investment and business profits. This explains why most of the nine states with no income tax at all—such as Texas, Florida and Tennessee—have been economic high-flyers in recent decades.
Ms. Brewer’s proposal reflects this economic logic. Effective January 1, 2011, her plan would reduce the state’s corporate income tax rate to 4.86% from 6.97%, which would be one of the largest business tax cuts in the nation in recent years. The proposal also cuts all personal income tax rates by 6.6%, thus lowering the top marginal rate to 4.24% from 4.54%. A hated statewide tax on commercial and residential property would also be abolished.
Arizona has been hit especially hard by the housing slump, and its budget woes were compounded thanks to former Governor Janet Napolitano’s spending spree before she joined the Obama cabinet. On her watch the budget grew by more than 50% in five years...(WSJ)
Monday, August 10, 2009
Hondurans don’t want Mr. Zelaya in their country because he leads a violent, antidemocratic mob, and he tried to use it to undermine the country’s institutions in exactly the same way that Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez has done. Mr. Chávez has also coached Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, Ecuador’s Rafael Correa and Bolivia’s Evo Morales. Those democracies, too, have been seriously compromised.
...But even if Messrs. Obama and Calderón don’t care about the freedom of Hondurans, they can’t ignore the likelihood that the establishment of a chavista government in Honduras would raise the cost, in blood and treasure, of their war on drugs.
The FARC connection could go a long way in explaining why Mr. Chávez is pushing so hard for Mr. Zelaya to be restored to power. It is already well established that the Venezuelan strongman actively supports the FARC in South America. Rebels have a safe haven across his border ...
A July report from the U.S. General Accountability Office found that Venezuela has become a major transit route for Colombian cocaine, 60% of which is exported by the FARC. The GAO also found that high-ranking members of Mr. Chávez’s government and the Venezuelan military are accomplices. ..
The leaders at the summit today are going to talk about their war on drugs. Perhaps Mr. Calderón and Mr. Obama will tell us why they are backing an ousted Honduran politician whose supporters make common cause with drug-trafficking terrorists. All North Americans deserve an explanation.
Sunday, August 09, 2009
In a quiet victory for a tiny democracy, U.S. buttinskies have stopped trying to restore a dictator to power in South America. Tiny Honduras is winning its fight for freedom.
...The reality is, the Hondurans shouldn't be on the spot at all. What happened wasn't a coup; it was a good-faith effort by decent people to fix a difficult situation that threatened their democracy.
This, by the way, also opens the door to a return of democracy in troubled nations like Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Cuba and Venezuela. People in those nations can take courage from Honduras.
The U.S. was smart to take the side of freedom. The Hondurans, however, were right all along. After all, it's their democracy. And now they've won it back. (READ at IBD) also watch
Saturday, August 08, 2009
If the government is to provide health care how can they know how much to provide, how many doctors will be needed, what the payments should be, who should be seen for what conditions etc. etc. All these decisions need to be made in the market place otherwise the government run health care will cause scarcity as it has in Canada and in Britain...besides also delivering mediocre if not downright BAD care.
The only rights any individual has and which is enshrined in our founding documents are the rights to one's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. This is so profound a statement that I believe to this day that not many people understand this. The job of governments is to protect these rights - NOT to invent new ones that have to be provided by others. I have a right to find a doctor who agrees to treat me if I pay for it but I don't have the right to demand it of anyone. Neither do you.
If there is a right to health care, someone has the duty to provide it. Inevitably, that “someone” is the government. Concrete benefits in pursuance of abstract rights, however, can be provided by the government only by constant coercion.
People sometimes argue in favor of a universal human right to health care by saying that health care is different from all other human goods or products. It is supposedly an important precondition of life itself. This is wrong: There are several other, much more important preconditions of human existence, such as food, shelter and clothing.
Everyone agrees that hunger is a bad thing (as is overeating), but few suppose there is a right to a healthy, balanced diet, or that if there was, the federal government would be the best at providing and distributing it to each and every American.
Where does the right to health care come from? Did it exist in, say, 250 B.C., or in A.D. 1750? If it did, how was it that our ancestors, who were no less intelligent than we, failed completely to notice it?
If, on the other hand, the right to health care did not exist in those benighted days, how did it come into existence, and how did we come to recognize it once it did?
...After 60 years of universal health care, free at the point of usage and funded by taxation, inequalities between the richest and poorest sections of the population have not been reduced. But Britain does have the dirtiest, most broken-down hospitals in Europe.
There is no right to health care—any more than there is a right to chicken Kiev every second Thursday of the month. (Read at WSJ).
Friday, August 07, 2009
Thomas Sowell with his usual eloquence calls us all to vigilance toward our precious freedom. Remember, that most of humanity for most our history has lived in subjugation to the powers that be. We in the United States are an anomaly, an oasis of freedom. We should protect it at all costs unless we be the chattel of politicians.
"Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom." We have heard that many times. What is also the price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections. If everything that is wrong with the world becomes a reason to turn more power over to some political savior, then freedom is going to erode away, while we are mindlessly repeating the catchwords of the hour, whether "change," "universal health care" or "social justice."
If we can be so easily stampeded by rhetoric that neither the public nor the Congress can be bothered to read, much less analyze, bills making massive changes in medical care, then do not be surprised when life and death decisions about you or your family are taken out of your hands-- and out of the hands of your doctor-- and transferred to bureaucrats in Washington.
Let's go back to square one. The universe was not made to our specifications. Nor were human beings. So there is nothing surprising in the fact that we are dissatisfied with many things at many times. The big question is whether we are prepared to follow any politician who claims to be able to "solve" our "problem."
If we are, then there will be a never ending series of "solutions," each causing new problems calling for still more "solutions." That way lies a never-ending quest, costing ever increasing amounts of the taxpayers' money and-- more important-- ever greater losses of your freedom to live your own life as you see fit, rather than as presumptuous elites dictate...(Read at CapMag.com)
Thursday, August 06, 2009
The candidate who told his supporters "to argue with them and get in their face" now finds the shoe on the other foot. So they're taking names and encouraging you to turn in your neighbors.
So this is hope and change — telling American citizens who in a democracy disagree with you that they are mind-numbed robots participating in mob action and expressing "manufactured" outrage.
Considering that upward of 80% of those hooligans like their doctors, like their insurance and like their care, anger over your government-run health care was not that hard to assemble.
It was not that long ago that Barack Obama told a crowd of 1,500 supporters in Elko, Nev., to challenge those who disagree with them and him: "I want you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independents or Republicans. I want you to argue with them."
President Obama spoke then as the community organizer he was — a true disciple of Saul Alinsky who worked with and for Acorn in the days when they were storming banks and government meetings to force them to ditch creditworthiness as a criteria and forcing them to issue loans to those who couldn't afford them...(Read at IBD).
Monday, August 03, 2009
Sunday, August 02, 2009
"The Story of Stuff" is a Leftist Indoctrination Movie Being Shown in Schools All Over America. The voice over is the truth. There are 4 parts to this propaganda - this is part 4.
Go here to watch the other 3 videos responding to these mankind haters especially American man.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
After many a disappointment with someone, and especially after a disaster, we may be able to look back at numerous clues that should have warned us that the person we trusted did not deserve our trust.
When that person is the President of the United States, the potential for disaster is virtually unlimited.
Many people are rightly worried about what this administration's reckless spending will do to the economy in our time and to our children and grandchildren, to whom a staggering national debt will be passed on. But if the worst that Barack Obama does is ruin the economy, I will breathe a sigh of relief.
He is heading this country toward disaster on many fronts, including a nuclear Iran, which has every prospect of being an irretrievable disaster of almost unimaginable magnitude. We cannot put that genie back in the bottle-- and neither can generations yet unborn. They may yet curse us all for leaving them hostages to nuclear terror.
Conceivably, Israel can spare us that fate by taking out the Iranian nuclear facilities, instead of relying on Obama's ability to talk the Iranians out of going nuclear.
What the Israelis cannot spare us, however, are our own internal problems, of which the current flap over President Obama's injecting himself into a local police issue is just a small sign of a very big danger.Nothing has torn more countries apart from inside like racial and ethnic polarization. Just this year, a decades-long civil war, filled with unspeakable atrocities, has finally ended in Sri Lanka..(Read here at CAPMAG.com)