Tuesday, November 30, 2010

A Discussion About the Fourteenth and Seventeenth.

Yesterday's post was cross posted at http://www.hammeroftruth.com/.  First off, thank you to the folks at Hammer of Truth for allowing me to cross post to you site.  I should also like to thank P, for commenting on that post.  He brought up a point, which I believe merits some discussion.  His belief, is that Joe Biden wishes to dispense with troublesome debate about the fourteenth and Seventeenth amendments due to their vital roles in today's American fabric.  P posits that these two additions to our Constitution are so important than Biden is correct in dismissing out of hand the crazy talk of having them repealed.  Fair enough.  I shall now destroy this notion.

First the Fourteenth, which follows here:

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratifi ed July 9, 1868.
(Note: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution was modifi ed by
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment.)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United
States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall
make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges
or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall
any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor deny to any person within
its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several
States according to their respective numbers, counting the
whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians
not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for
the choice of electors for President and Vice President of
the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive
and Judicial offi cers of a State, or the members of the
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants
of such State, [being twenty-one years of age,]* and
citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except
for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of
representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion
which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the
whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in
such State.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress,
or elector of President and Vice President, or hold
any offi ce, civil or military, under the United States, or
under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a
member of Congress, or as an offi cer of the United States,
or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive
or judicial offi cer of any State, to support the Constitution
of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or
rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the
enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds
of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized
by law, including debts incurred for payment of
pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection
or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the
United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt
or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion
against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation
of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and
claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate
legislation, the provisions of this article.
*Changed by Section 1 of the 26th Amendment.

This amendment was added to the Constitution immediately after the Civil War as a direct remedy to what the southern states were trying to do to abridge the rights of former slaves.  The amendment has 5 sections.  Section 1 states that anyone born in the territory of the United States was henceforth a U.S. citizen.  The sole purpose of this was to keep former slave owners from denying former slaves citizenship, and all of the rights and protections therein.  This is also the section which gave us the concept of anchor babies about a hundred years later.  This is the reason that a lot of conservative groups are for repealing this amendment.  The practice of illegal aliens crossing the border illegally during the 39th week of pregnancy in order to have their children be able to claim citizenship is well beyond what the authors of this amendment had in mind for us, 150 years later.  whether or not a person agrees or disagrees with repealing this amendment, there are two things any thinking person would have to agree to.  One, discussion of the amendment is at least not just a crazy waste of time.  Two, an amendment added specifically for the purposes of post Civil War reconstruction, has lost some of its usefulness, just because we are 150 years past the Civil War.  There are no longer any former slaves living today, there are no longer former officers in the Confederate Army who could possibly run for public office, There are no longer any Confederate Bonds which have been sold to foreign governments for the United States to deny payment on.  P's assertion that this amendment was vital to the continuation of the USA is just plain silly.

On to the Seventeenth, which is more complicated of an issue.  It requires a serious discussion of the direction we want to take our country.  That discussion is necessary, but I am angered by a Vice President of the United States who considers people who want to hold that discussion as being ignorant cranks. 

Read the Seventeenth here:

Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratifi ed April 8, 1913.
(Note: Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution was modifi ed by
the 17th Amendment.)
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two
Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for
six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors
in each State shall have the qualifi cations requisite for electors
of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State
in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall
issue writs of election to fi ll such vacancies: Provided, That
the legislature of any State may empower the executive
thereof to make temporary appointments until the people
fi ll the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the
election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes
valid as part of the Constitution.

It is important to note that the original mandate for how Senators were picked.  Senators were originally chosen by how each individual State Constitution provided.  Most State Legislatures and or Governors chose the Senators without holding direct State elections.  The reasoning for this was as follows.  The Senator's mandate was to be the voices of individual States in the business of Federal Governance.  The direct representatives of the people was with the House of Representatives.  The Federal Government was checked in its power by the formation of the Senate.  Ohio, for example, had a voice in the formation of Federal Legislation which the State of Ohio might find infringed on Ohio's rights as a State.  By removing the voice of individual States, we have effectively removed the ability of individual States to be a check on the size, power, and scope of the Federal Government.  As evidence of this, you need look no further than the last 90 years.  As for me, I actually agree with repeal of the Seventeenth.  I believe that a check on the Federal Government's ability to mandate itself more authority, size, scope is sorely needed.  This amendment, more than anything ever legislated in this country has done more damage to our rights and protections guaranteed by our Founding Fathers.  Calling me crazy for believing this is avoiding the debate, which I believe Joe Biden is probably afraid of losing.

UPDATE:  I have heard some pushback that the 14th Amendment extends the Bill of Rights to the States.  That somehow, the rights guaranteed under these Amendments only applied to the Federal Government prior to the 14th.  This is of courst preposterous.  Putting asside the fact that there is not one single case of these Amendments being ignored by any court in the land prior to the Civil War Reconstruction, Article VI also addresses this argument.  Article VI follows:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before
the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against
the United States under this Constitution, as under the
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States
which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the
United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and
the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing
in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and
the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive
and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of
the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation,
to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever
be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust
under the United States.

Article. VI.


Monday, November 29, 2010

I Will Say This About President Obama, He's Better Than Howard Dean.

A lot happened over the weekend, and I've chosen this one as my Monday Post.  Howard Dean opined on the Sunday shows again.  It seems he is once again pushing the Fairness Doctrine nonsense.  First listen to this little gem from about two months ago.  When you stop laughing, read on.

Putting aside for the moment that we have a Vice President who actually believes that both you and I are too stupid to decide for ourselves which news outlets are appropriate for us, but we are also incapable of acting as our own filters as to what to believe or not believe from those outlets.  Next Dean decides to deride the members of the Tea Party for advocating the repeal of the 17th and 14th amendments.  He claims that this shows an ignorance of the Constitution which is laughable.  I am not going to argue the merits of repealing these amendments, rather who is actually ignorant of how the Constitution works, Howard Dean, or the nefarious Tea Party.  The fact that the framework for both amending and repealing amendments to the Constitution is self evident.  One, there are currently 27 amendments to the Constitution.  The last one was added May 7, 1992.  To find evidence of repeal, look no further than the 18th Amendment, which was repealed 18 years after it was added to the document.  Score this one for the Tea Party.  The next point is that this statement itself is advocating for regulating speech by a panel of bureaucrats, not elected, but appointed by other appointed bureaucrats in the FCC.  Even a junior high kid would be able to point out that this flies in the face of the First Amendment.  Score another for the Tea Party.  Howard Dean is an imbecile, and there really is no diplomatic way to state that, or even lessen the blow.  I guess the ironic thing is, we were told adnauseum by the same media Dean wants to add unconstitutional regulation to, that Sara Palin was the dummy.  Even if Governor Palin were as dim as she was reported to be, if she were to attend an event with Joe Biden, she would have to wear an, "I'm with stupid," tee shirt.

Friday, November 26, 2010

Why Are We Members Of The United Nations?

Nothing is as good an example of the hypocrisy and evil that the U.N. has become than the U.N. Human Rights Council.  Sitting on the council advocating for human rights at the U.N. are Iran, Libya, China, Syria, and Saudi Arabia among others.  The only thing this wonderful body does, is pass proclamations against the tiny nation of Israel.  This video is a great example of that hypocrisy.   Each of the nations listed earlier belongs to that select group consisting of the worst human rights violators in the world today.  Currently, they are targeting the United States as a nation of interest in one of their probes.  According to the tin pot dictators of the world, we are guilty of being, wait for it.............., Islamophobic.  So, I posit this question.  For what purpose are we a member of the United Nations.  There is truly zero good done by this group of thugs posing as diplomats.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Happy Thanksgiving!

Today is Thanksgiving, and I am not going to bore anyone with any true stories.  For me anyhow, giving thanks by stuffing myself into a comatose state will be enough.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

I'm Glad Hillary Travelled The Globe With Her Reset Button.

Think back to the campaign season of 2008.  We were told endlessly by the liberal elites how the rest of the world viewed America.  We were told that America was hated, because of our arrogant go it alone attitude.  Well have a peek at a British newspaper article to see how they view us now.  As we conservatives pointed out, that with out America projecting its strength, our allies would fall prey to their enemies.  You liberals called us paranoid, foolish, naive, wingnuts.  Shockingly, our predictions turned out to be correct, and yours turned out to be devastatingly wrong.  Now it is yesterday once more.

During the late 1970's, we had a President named Jimmy Carter.  His approach to foreign policy was the same as we are seeing today.  Then as now, his blustering praise lavished upon tin pot dictators, coupled with his failure to support our allies had disastrous results.  Jimmy Carter's foreign policy gave us the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the Iranian Revolution.  These are two hotspots America is still paying the price for.  Today, Obama's projection of weakness is producing a North Korean aggression against South Korea, and a Chinese muscle flexing aimed at Taiwan and Japan.  The Kumbayah school of diplomacy is a proven failure.  How many times must we witness, and actively participate in this foolishness before we stop this. 

I have heard many times from liberals that Obama will win in 2012 because we simply don't have any stars in the GOP who will be up to the task of the Presidency.  I can not think of a single Republican who would perform the task of being President any worse than Obama.  Don't get me wrong, there are a slew of Republicans who I don't want to see being President.  It is also that Obama sets the bar really low.

Hat tip Speranza, http://www.theblogmocracy.com/

Tuesday, November 23, 2010


Every once in a while, something happens in life that illustrates whatever point I am trying to make better than any argument I would ever be able to posit.  No matter how eloquently I could state something, no matter how passionately I could feel about a subject, life just does a better job. 
Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor
Published: November 22, 2010
KABUL, Afghanistan — For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.
But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all. In an episode that could have been lifted from a spy novel, United States and Afghan officials now say the Afghan man was an impostor, and high-level discussions conducted with the assistance of NATO appear to have achieved little.
“It’s not him,” said a Western diplomat in Kabul intimately involved in the discussions. “And we gave him a lot of money.”
American officials confirmed Monday that they had given up hope that the Afghan was Mr. Mansour, or even a member of the Taliban leadership.
I saw this posted by Ironfist at theblogmocracy.com.  I believe he saw it in the NYT.  I have often told anyone who would listen that the Obama Administration was a collection of incompetent fools.  Holding negotiations with Joe Blow off of the street certainly proves that fact.  It is more than amateurish.  Incompetence on this scale needs its own word.  Obamateurism is the only thing I can think of to describe this.  I did not coin that phrase.  It is a daily feature by Ed Morrisey at Hotair.com.  If this does not give the phrase new life, beyond this Presidency, there is no justice in the world.  Indeed, this is failure beyond any one person, even if he is the current President.  From now on, Obamateurism refers to that most colossal ineptitude, formerly referred to as Carteresque.

Monday, November 22, 2010

Law Enforcement As An Effictive Tool To Combat Terrorism? Not So Much

We have been having this debate on a national level for about a decade now.  Who is better equipped to fight the War On Terror?  The conservatives in this country believe that it should be treated as a war, and that terrorists should be treated as enemy combatants, and further, the military is best equipped to deal with this.  The Liberals believe that it should be treated as a law enforcement matter, that terrorists should be treated as criminals, and further, that law enforcement is best equipped to deal with this.  Let me end any speculation and state on which side of this issue I come down on.  The Liberals in this country are crazy.  These terrorists have stated that they are enemy combatants waging a war against us, and that they are committed to the eventual destruction of our Nation.  Their stated goal is to replace the Stars and Stripes with the flag of Sharia.  Our once successful goal of unconditional surrender should be revisited again, in the present.

Putting aside for a moment the absurdity of our soldiers in the field going into battle armed with copies of the Miranda advice, or the belief that people who are actively trying to destroy our society will slow down their murderous dreams if they could only see that our judicial system is fair.  What is likely to happen during these show trials is disastrous.  We have already witnessed a vast majority of Gitmo detainees who were released returning to the battlefield to commit further atrocities against American Military and civilian personnel.  Now, we get to send them back with a golden invitation to sue us for false imprisonment in civil proceedings.  The canard that our treatment of enemy combatants as POW's is somehow causing more terrorists to be born totally discounts the history of the last 50 years.  Here is a link of Islamic terrorist attacks starting back in 1968.  Gitmo was not established prior to 2002.  It would seem, to even the sleepiest observer that there was ample terrorism prior to us supposedly helping with the Islamist recruitment. efforts. 

Friday, November 19, 2010

Free Wesley Snipes!

Free Wesley Snipes!  I am not certain if his reasons for fighting the IRS are the same as mine would be, but I really don't care.  Free Wesley Snipes!  I have always thought he made a great hero and villain in every movie I've seen him in.  He is that perfect spokes person, to stand as a symbol in our fight against a behemoth non accountable government, which has grown in scope beyond anything envisioned in even the darkest nightmares of our founding fathers.  Free Wesley Snipes!  It is not at all important to me what his politics are, or even might be.  I love his movies.  I want him to be able to make more of them, and enjoy the fruits of his labors.  Free Wesley Snipes!  There have been a plethora of Hollywood's stars who have run afoul of the dark side, known as the IRS.  Charlie Chaplin, Redd Foxx, Errol Flynn, to name a few.  They were all offered deals to make movies for free, and turn proceeds over to the government.  I have no reason to believe that Snipes was not offered this same deal.  He is going to jail instead of giving in to that monstrous bloated group of useless bureaucrats.  Free Wesley Snipes!  Did I say that already?  In an age when so few are willing to take the smallest stand for principles, for values, for what they believe personally, Wesley is going to jail.  He may or may not agree with my political leanings, but I don't care.  I think he is as good a spokesperson as any, and I like anyone who doesn't want to pay their taxes in such a visible fashion.  Snipes is taking a stand, which is a lot more than a good bit of our national leaders.  I say we run him for Congress when he gets out, in 36 months.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Mystery Security Theater 3000.

First I have to say this.  I want to fly on secure airlines.  I want our air travel to be every bit as safe as the Israeli airline industry.  That being said, the TSA's current efforts to accomplish safety on our passenger jets will not come anywhere close to achieving this level of success.  What we have now, is the TSA version of Kabuki Theater.  How fitting for the current administration, which is the Kabuki Presidency.  We have had the Beer Summit, teleprompters used for speeches with fifth graders, a walk to the capitol building with a cartoon sized gavel, a staged tongue lashing of the Louisiana Governor, Air Force One buzzing the Statue of Liberty, and a host of other substitutions of slickly produced stage shows for actual governance.  Now we have the appearance of doing something which could be mistaken as security by the brain dead and the irretrievably gullible.  I have a serious question, why not take a lesson from a nation which has been extremely successful in this effort. 

Israel has not had an incident on one of their aircraft for at least four decades.  There should be no doubt that these groups of fine individuals who have us molesting wheelchair bound grandmas and toddlers would rather blow up Israeli planes.  Israel faces a terrorist attack almost every day.  School buses, pizza parlors, teenage dance clubs, synagogues, schools, day cares, and just about anything which you can imagine has been a target in Israel, but no airplanes.  Yet, the Israelis have no body searches, no body scanners, no bans on personal hygiene products.  How do they do it?  Well, they use the most powerful tool on Earth.  They use their heads.  The Israelis use profiling techniques.  Beyond profiling, which is actually a small part of what they do, their agents ask questions of everybody boarding, and they make eye contact with the people they are talking too.  If they don't feel comfortable with the person or answers, they quietly pull the person aside, and ask some more questions.  How much more effective is that technique?  Here is an illustration of that.  Richard Reid, the shoe bomber actually tried to board a flight to Israel.  He succeeded in flying on Air France to Tel Aviv.  The Israelis asked him three questions and pulled him aside.  They flew him back to Paris, seating him next to the undercover air marshall.  The Israelis turned him over to the French authorities stating their concerns, and leaving instructions that he was not to return to Israel.  Two hours later, Reid was on his way to the U.S.  Our enhanced security failed to prevent a person who was identified by the Israelis as a real problem from boarding an American Airlines flight across the Atlantic.

Something else the Israelis do is to place an undercover air marshall on each and every flight.  These marshalls, would actually have been able to prevent the Sept. 11th attacks.  The difference of course is that Israel has been fighting against terrorism and not treating it like Kabuki Theater for a very long time.  We in the United States have not ever taken it seriously.  We have talked about taking it seriously, but have worried solely about the appearance of effort than actual results.  This political correctness is going to put us all in increasing danger until this enemy is defeated.

UPDATE:  Charles Krauthammer wrote an article that had me laughing for 15 minutes.  I saw this article linked originally at http://www.theblogmocracy.com/

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

What does our Palestinian aid do for the Palestinians?

I suggest that you read the article first.  I am sorry to do that to you, but I feel that it was necessary for the purpose of this simple economics lesson.  There is a danger to perpetuating yourself as a permanent victim class in order to achieve a political goal.  One of the unintended consequences is that it has a catastrophic effect on  the prosperity of your victim population.  There is a reason why Israel, the only place in the entire world which is absolutely devoid of any oil, has the highest percapita GDP in that region of the world.  There is a corollary to that as well.  The oil rich nations which surround Israel are world leaders in terms of poverty.  Israel is an open and free society which employs a representative republic governance style, and a capitalistic economic system.  How oppressive is the Palestinian Authority?  One of her citizens is being executed for the crime of conducting business with a Jew.  Not only have they stifled economic progress through thuggery and fear, they have put an end to this poor man's ability to be a positive influence on his community.  Perhaps he was going to use the Israeli land to grow food for his starving community.  Or he could have helped his impoverished community by hiring others to work at his business.  The other side of the coin is the claim of victim hood for the Palestinians.  Isn't it terrible that they have such a poor standard of living?  Perhaps they would enjoy a better standard of living if they allowed their citizens live free lives when they had the temerity to be productive.  I feel sorry that the Palestinians don't have cable T.V.  But it is important to note that the reason the Palestinians don't have cable is not that the Israelis stole it from them.  the reason is that when you execute large numbers of your own citizens, chances are pretty good that one of those you killed may very well have been the person who would have brought cable to your people.

For those of you who don't know, UNICEF is one of the ways Americans are duped into funding this very lunacy.  For years we all watched the cute little children in the commercials carrying that box on Halloween to help feed starving children in some imaginary place.  We were led to believe that by giving the kids spare change for Halloween, we would be helping to feed them.  Well guess what.  As it turns out, that money went directly to Yassar Arafat, (who coincidentally died with over $2 Billion in his Swiss bank account.)  After Oslo, the money flowed directly to the Palestinian Authority.  So, if you give to UNICEF, congratulations, you are funding terrorism.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Here's one from Lary Elder on the Media Double Standard.

I have often seen and pointed out examples to media bias, as have many conservatives.  While Ronald was President, we were treated to endless jabs at his intelligence.  He was regularly lampooned in comic strips, music videos, and stand up routines.  He merely performed as one of our truly greatest Presidents of all time.  Gerald Ford faced the same thing.  His two years as President were at an extremely difficult time for our nation, and yet he did a brilliant job of bringing respect back to Washington, brought us through a recession, and held our standing firm in the rest of the world at a time when it would have been easy to let it slip.  He did this all with the citizens of the U.S. laughing at him.  Jimmy Carter was supposed to be one of the most intelligent of all of our Presidents.  After two years of his administration, we had pieces appear in Time and Newsweek asking if it were even possible to govern the U.S. as President.  We have had the same articles appear for the next genius President, Obama.  In other words, their failure was so epic, the only possible explanation is that the job itself is impossible, not that the smartest amongst us are incompetent.

I believe that the answer is adequately given here, in this well written article by Larry Elder.  Elder gives several examples of the bouncing double standard which our politicians are held up to. 

Monday, November 15, 2010

Well this just in, that health care law passed by our congress critters about a year ago is not going to come anywhere near delivering a cost savings as promised by our President.  How bad is it you ask?  To date, 111 exemptions have been granted.  These exemptions have been granted to large corporations, unions, and land grant universities.  These are the vary organizations who advocated for its passage.  The irony here is rich indeed.  The irony comes from so many different directions, it is tough to know where to start.  The SEIU Union, who picketed several state governor's mansions demanding that their taxes be raised, apparently feels that while we need the socialized health plan, it is not appropriate for their membership.  Get that?  Those purple shirted clowns suddenly appreciate the current health care system, after inflicting the damage on somebody else, (meaning you and me.)  How many times over the past 40 years were we told that people just starting out at say a fast food chain for their first job could not get health care because their employers would not cover lower paid workers, they could not afford coverage on their meager non living wages, part time employees were never covered, etc...   Well guess what, McDonalds is one of the companies granted the exception due to, you guessed it, their need to cover the part time entry level employees who make up the bulk of the workforce within that company. 

The out and out lie about this law being a cost and budget saver has been exposed and in fact exploded since day one.  Another lie exposed was done by none other than Paul Krugman who on CNN over the weekend admitted that the Death Panels, as pointed out by Sarah Palin, (who by the way was vilified for this mercilessy,) actually will exist once this monstrosity is in full swing.  This means that for each sickness, a cost benefit analysis will be performed by a bureaucrat to determine if treatment is appropriate.  So tell your parents not to get sick after 2014, because the government bureaucrat in charge may well decide to save a buck or two by telling you that Mom and Dad have lived a full life already.  Where can you find the information on the waivers?  Well the Obama Administration doesn't exactly make it easy to find, it takes you no less than six clicks deep on the health care website.  How does that square with the hopety change promise of the most transparent administration evah? 

Through all of this, it has been fun to watch the furious spin from the media, and this White House.  We said, "don't pass this sink hole of a bill, or there will be electoral hell to pay."  They passed it anyway.  The Dems took an historic shellacking at the polls.  When I mean historic I mean by these numbers.  64 House seats switched parties.  This is the highest total since 1930.  6 Senate seats switched, roughly 43% of the total being defended by the Dems.  10 Governorships and 680 State Legislature seats tilted from Democrat to Republican.  After all of this, I am told that I am just crazy and not too bright, and that it couldn't possibly have anything to do with not liking Obama's policy implementation.  Make no mistake about it, this election was a cease and desist order filed with the court of public opinion against the Obama Administration. 

As a special treat, here is Michelle Bachman speechifying about these vary exemptions.

Friday, November 12, 2010

More on That Media Spin.

Well, here we are, about a week and a half after the election, and everyone of my predictions about the spin coming from the left has come true. We've run the gamut from out and out denial, to claiming it as an actual victory to calling Americans flat out crazy. Get ready for something you won't expect. Get ready for a solid two years of this spin. We will be told that this vote means that the American People wish to see more moderate Republicans who will be able to get along with President Obama and actually help him pass his agenda. We will be told that in order to have any hope of winning in 2012. we need to follow the lead of more conciliatory liberal Republicans, rather than following the lead of the grass roots movement known as the Tea Party.

Don't believe a word of it. Remember, these are the same folks who told us all that the country was ;hungry for a left leaning Republican like John McCain, and then absolutely roasted him during the general election. The next two years will bring an endless supply of news stories touting polls which will be worded to show that the American People actually wanted the opposite of what the current congress was elected to do, and coincidentally the opposite of what they campaigned on. The losses in 2006 and 2008 were well deserved. The Republicans were shellacked precisely because they abandoned their principles and governed contrary to what they promised while campaigning. The current elected officials have a mandate, as all who win elections actually do. They need to remember their campaign promises and stick to their ideals. As long as the current group of Republicans stand strong and consistently stand for smaller more accountable governance, they will continue to win elections. The media spin that by sending Conservatives to congress, Americans actually want bigger less transparent government, is just plain silly.

In looking at which Republicans lost in 2006 and 2008, it was mostly the moderates. They were defeated by Democrats who did a good job of pretending to be Conservative Democrats, the Blue Dogs. The Blue Dogs lost this time because the people who voted for them realized that the concept of a Conservative Democrat was little more than a lie. Ignore the Spin and stick to our principles, that is the only way we can put a stop to the reckless spending, and keep our elected leaders accountable.

As I was writing this post, I read this laugher in The New Republic which proves my point exactly.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Give Me a Break Mr. Buffett!

Well, I got sucked into a protracted discussion with one of my liberal friends this afternoon at lunch. It seems that Warren Buffett is doing his thing again. Now that the Conservatives in this country have gained a slight ability in putting a stop to the march to Marxism, Warren is jetting around the country telling anyone who will listen that he pays too little in taxes, and his secretary pays too much. We should all despise, "rich people," excluding him of course. That we need to increase the taxes on high wage earners, because they after all are the real problem with America today.

First, a little something to say about Mr. Buffett. I do not begrudge him his success. I thank God that I live in a wonderful country where every person who lives here legally has the opportunity to reach any level of success that they wish to. While there is no guarantee, the ability to try, and to keep trying is there. Next, I have yet to see Mr. Buffett hold up his check where he paid extra to the National Coffers. There is not a single instance of his paying what he feels he should have to make life more fair. Nor has Mr. Buffett explained how punishing the high wage earners help any of us who belong to the poor helpless masses class. I know that Warren knows that he is allowed to donate to the IRS, because the President explained this very thing to him during the 2008 State of the Union Address.

Here is why Warren's claims are intellectually dishonest. He has something most Americans do not. He has a mammoth asset base, and a whole team of accountants with the sole task of limiting his tax liability. While he proudly proclaims that he has $46,000,000 in income and only paid an effective rate of 17%, he neglects to tell us all that it is mostly passive income. He is paid mostly in the form of qualified dividends. When Berkshire Hathaway declares a dividend, it usually amounts to about $22,000 per year. Qualified Dividends are treated as Capital Gains for tax purposes. (While it is true that the IRS can change this rule, history has shown that the result will be less dividends, and more sale of stock by corp. execs. which presents a moral hazard the government wishes to avoid post Sarbanes Oxley.) Warren is also able to invest money in DPP's which would present positive cash flow while showing phantom pass through losses, and then use a series of 1031 exchanges to defer taxation pretty much indefinitely. In short, no matter how we tinker, change, or outright try to punish success, Warren Buffett will not pay a dime more in taxation. What's more, change of the taxation system may even incent Mr. Buffett to pay less. Institute a program where passive income is taxed the exact same as regular income, and it will change Buffett's investing habits.

Here is the dirty little secret in this whole thing. Wealth is not taxed in our country. Income is taxed. Increases in taxation rates always, without fail produce decreases in revenue raised. This speechifying by Mr. Buffett has nothing to do with helping the Government to pay for anything. What it has to do with is a system for punishing people for daring to succeed. That is something that I have a problem with.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Global Warming, Really?

Well, here we are, a mere eight days post filing of Obama's Cease and Desist Order as filed by the American Electorate, and we can see the evidence of the political left's coming unhinged.  Even as the CCX, which was the Greenhouse Exchange located in Chicago, collapses and shuts down, a group of global warming con artists are going to meet in California to begin combating the collapse of their hoax.  IBD editorials has an excellent piece on this which appeared in Yesterday's edition, which you can read here.  What I find interesting is the fact that these charlatans claim to be willing to debate all opponents to this hoax after years of doing whatever was available in their thuggish bag of tricks to silence opposition.  There have been thousands of scientists who have spoken out against the whole idea of Global Warming, and against the concept that if it does exist that it is caused by humanity.  They were treated as heretics.  Before he died, Michael Crichton wrote a scathing article on this very subject, which I have linked here. 

The good news to all of this though is that this is the last gasp of the Global Warming for profit charade.  The collapse of the cap and trade exchange coupled with the hysterical last gasp effort to inflict panic on the public shows me that the East Anglia e-mail leak has planted the seeds of reason, and that they have grown.  there are two initiatives worth keeping an eye on in the national sense.  One would be the Cap and Trade Bill.  The other is the U.N. initiative to bilk the U.S. out of a Hundred Billion to alleviate our guilt for using energy to fuel the world's most successful and productive economy.  May all of this nonsense die quickly.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

I will shout my support for Nancy Pelosi from the rooftop of my house.

To SanFran Nan, you go girl.  Can we, as conservatives get any luckier.  Make no mistake about the recent midterm elections, it was probably about all of the above.  All of the above consisting of what ever conservative pundit you happening to be listening to at the time.  (The reasons given by the liberal/progressive pundits have bordered on the absurt to truly idiotic.)  This was a restraining order against Barak Obama.  This was about firing Nancy Pelosi.  This was a center right nation having a violent reaction to the socialistic turn it unknowingly took in November of 2008. 

Wait a second, did I say it was about Nancy Pelosi.  As the author of a contrived blog, I will stipulate that I did say that.  Let's explore that, shall we.  Nancy Pelosi worked hard to be the face of the Democrat Congress Critters.  As the Liberal leader in the House, she effectively nationalized congressional campaigns starting back in 2000.  She took a page out of Gingrich's playbook, and began working fererishly to become the first Woman Speaker.  Even after zero success in 2000, 2002, and 2004, a tenacious Nancy kept her face and campaigns in the spotlight.  In 2006, she won.  She built on that lead in 2008, and kept working hard to be a very visible Speaker.  She was so successful, that Republican National Party Chair, Richard Steele, drove around the country in a Fire Nancy Pelosi Bus. 

The GOP attempts to nationalize the House Elections were successful for two reasons, one:  the tea party and it's conservative ascendancy messaging.   Two:  Nancy Pelosi's rightful place as the defacto face of modern liberalism.  All of Nancy's proclomations were repeated back to conservative voters.  Each closed door dirty deal was exposed to the light of day and remembered against a template of Nancy's promise of the most ethical and transparent House ever.  Nancy's arm twisting tactics and earmark bribes forcing members of her caucus to vote against the will of their constituents and collective personal beliefs are legendary. (In fact, it is that authoritarian rule that the other Democrats claim to need so much now.)  So why am I so happy to see Nancy remain as the leader of the Minority?

Well, it means that nationalizing the 2012 Congressional elections will be really easy.  The Democratic Party lost 376 years of Congressional experience from their leadership ranks this week.  They lost an entire generations worth of recruiting of candidates who at one time were credible as conservative Democrats.  Most importantly, they lost 680 state legislature seats and 9 Governor's posts.  This alone means that it will be a good decade before they will have a level playing field in the House.  That doesn't mean that their chances are shot completely, just that they must really outperform the GOP in order to take back the House.  By really out perform, I mean be leading by 10 plus points in a generic ballot will give them a slim chance.  Their best bet is to keep it all local, and run away from national politics.  The single worse person to help them accomplish this is Nancy Pelosi.  So once again, as a Conservative let me say loud and clear to Nancy, YOU GO GIRL!

Monday, November 8, 2010

Something else to Ponder

I read this today on Hot Air, and while I usually agree with Ed Morrisey's analysis, there are some times when I feel like I could add just one more thought.  Here is the Hot Air piece, with my, "one more thought added to the bottom.

Most people only expected hardball efforts to get party switchers in the Senate if it wound up closely divided, either 50-50 or 51/49 in either direction.  However, Fox reports today that Senate Republicans have greeted special-election victor Joe Manchin (D-WV) with a big push to get him into the GOP caucus.  And they may well have found a way to convince him to join the minority:
Republicans are making some big promises to try to lure West Virginia Senator-elect Joe Manchin to cross the aisle.
Aside from his pick of committee assignments (likely the Energy and Natural Resources Committee), Manchin might get support for one of his pet projects – a plant to convert coal to diesel fuel that has stalled under Democratic leadership in Washington.
It’s one of Manchin’s pet projects and could mean big money for the state’s coal producers.
“Republicans believe in an ‘all of the above’ approach to energy,” one top Senate aide told Power Play. “And coal-to-diesel could certainly be part of that.”
Manchin’s switch could mean Republican support for not just $1 billion in seed money for the project but also a deal, much sought in coal country, to require the armed forces to use converted coal for fuel.
Republicans believe Manchin is particularly susceptible to the overture because he is up for reelection in 2012 and will have to be on the ticket with President Obama, who is direly unpopular in West Virginia. Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Independent Joe Lieberman are the other two prime targets of Republican advances.
The response from Manchin’s team won’t make Democrats feel very secure.  Essentially, they don’t commit to much of anything except “to try in good faith to make changes” to the Democratic Party from within, since they just got him elected to fill Robert Byrd’s remaining term.   The message is that either Democrats have to change direction in the Senate or Manchin might take some of this wooing seriously.
Will he jump?  If he did and Nelson comes with him to protect his own prospects in 2012 — which were seriously damaged by his acquiescence on ObamaCare — then that would leave Republicans with only 49 seats.   They would need to get someone else to jump, like perhaps Mark Pryor, who watched his colleague Blanche Lincoln get slaughtered in the midterms last week, to get to 50.  Fox focuses on Joe Lieberman, but he has less reason to switch now than before.  Not only is the Iraq War no longer a big concern, but Lieberman just watched a self-funding Republican in Connecticut lose big to a Democratic establishment candidate in the middle of a Republican teanami.   Lieberman wouldn’t stand a chance of getting re-elected as a Republican in 2012, nor is he a fan of Tea Party political positions anyway.
Even getting to 50 won’t mean control of the agenda.  Joe Biden will cast the deciding vote on leadership positions, which means Harry Reid will still control the Senate, although committee assignments will become more equitable, according to tradition.  Manchin will have to spend two years in the minority and then hope his personal approval ratings remain high enough to prevail against another Democrat in 2012.
Manchin’s team promises to consider the options if Democrats refuse to change directions.  I’ll go out on a limb and guess that Manchin will give them about 18 months to prove themselves one way or another, and then align himself with the party that promises him the brightest future when the 2012 election nears.

The Democratic Caucus in the Senate has an interesting dynamic facing it for the next two years.  Anyone who follows polotics knew that winning the Senate this year was going to be a very difficult task.  Of the 36 seats up for grabs, 19 of them were under the control of the Democrats.  Swaying 6 of 19 represents a swing of 31%.  That gain alone was huge.  A good bit of those 19 seats were in the Bluest of Blue States.  This is not so for 2012.  The Democrats will be defending 21 of 34 in two years.  There aren't the usual Blue State hiding places for the Democrats to count on for not needing to be spent on with open check books.  Most of those Democrats who swept into power in 2006 and 2008 did so by pretending to be Conservative Democrats.  This is something the rest of America realizes is a myth by now.  All of these poloticians will have a very real pressure to convince their fellow citizens that they really are what they pretended to be, and they will all have just two years to do it in.  So, Senator Manchin will not be alone in this struggle.  A full 40% of Senate Majority Leader Reid's Caucus will have a very real and pressing incentive to split off of his voting bloc and vote with a GOP Minority over the next two years.  So while Harry gets to claim the title and responsibility of being Majority Leader, his actual ability to control that Majority has been severely diminished.  A prediction two years out, if the Democrat majority in the Senate lasts the two years, it will not survive the next election cycle.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010


Two States made decisions yesterday which I find hard to understand.  First we'll look at California.  California, a State which faces insolvency, decided to elect Jerry Brown, the man most responsible for the current fiscal mess, as it's leader once more.  His campaign promise? why more social engineering of course.  To the folks of California I say this.  You are on your own.  You who voted are adults, and as such should be held accountable for your actions.  One of the great mysteries of life for me is the fact that liberals always seem to find a way to escape their well deserved consequences, and electorily anyhow, conservatives get the blame, and the responsibility.  It took the Soviet Union 80 years to collapse.  It has taken California a mere 40.  Well, you are on your own.  The rest of us in the country are in no mood to rescue you from insolvency.  The practice of Federal Bailouts was ended on November 2, 2010.  President Obama was officially served his cease and desist order.  The problem with Socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people's money.

Secondly, let's look at West Virginia.  Joe Manchin got elected to the Senate by pretending to be a Conservative.  He took his rifle and shot a hole through a copy of the Cap and Trade Bill.  Will West Virginians hold him accountable to the Conservative Standard he set for himself.  Manchin is up for re-election in two years.  If Manchin does not join the Filabuster against this legislation during the lame duck session, or if he hops on the Obama agenda wagon during the next two years, West Virginians will have a clue as to whether or not Joe Manchin was truthful in his campaign.  Will West Virginia hold him accountable for his record at that time?  Cap and Trade would devistate you wonderful state.  Is Joe Manchin worth that gamble?

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Today's Shellacking at the Polls.

Tomorrow morning, starting with the plethora of vacant morning talk shows, we will be told what this election really means.  We will be told this as if we did not participate.  The spin meisters, who by the way are no smarter than we are will tell us the following:  Americans want a more civil atmoshphere of cooperation and compromise.  The party in power generally looses seats anyhow. This is not about the current direction of a federal government growing not only out of control, but also to monstrous proportions.  Voters are misplacing their anger about a recession which, while it has lasted too long, also started on the last watch.  The cycle of spending like drunken sailor's didn't have sufficient time to work, and Americans just aren't as patient as they should be.  We will hear these musings on each and every outlet, presented as though the person giving it to us somehow just thought of it him/herself.

I have this to say.  This election, however it turns out, was America's filing of a reastraining order against President Obama.  Cease and Desist your march to socialism.  The car in a ditch scenario which President Obama seems to like so much actually is fitting.  The difference is of course is that the car was not driven into the ditch by poor GOP leadership, but rather pushed into that ditch by a Democratic Party hell bent on creating regulation not meant to promote transparency and prevent fraud, but rather a regulatory environment designed to promote political favoritism and bribery.  Fanny and Freddie were monsters created and run by Democrats.  They were given teeth by Democrats.  Now that the car ended up in the ditch dug by Democrats, President Obama has told us he plans to drive off a cliff in order to escape the ditch.  President Obama, I don't even like slurpees, and even if I did, carefully and calmly driving to safety is a darned sight better than recklessly flying over a cliff. 

To the elected GOP majority, stick to your guns.  If we wake up in two years and read that you capitulated, compromised, and/or caved, you will be fired next.  The retribution will be just as swift and severe as what got you elected this time around.