Category Archives: Democrats

With Friends Like These

With Friends Like You

A few days ago I received an issue tracking survey email from Chuck DeFeo at the Republican National Committee that began with the sentence:

At the RNC, we’re always working on ways to grow and strengthen our party.

Well Chuck, I looked at your survey and found it pointless and repetitive, so let me share with you a few ideas.

First, it’s about the Country, not the Party. Want people to like the Republican party? Make the Republican party about the United States. Friend of my friend, and all that.

Next, we’ve seen what “principled conservatives” like John Boehner and his ilk have done, and frankly I’m over that term, especially when it’s coming from the elephants mouth.

I do not think it means what you think it meansYou had a grassroots movement thrust into your lap. A vibrant and effective movement that was looking for partners, not controllers, and the GOP went and mucked that up to the point there’s an effective third part that is only nominally Republican, and getting more and more fed up with even that tenuous connection.

The reason? The GOP is not about about Constitutionally limited government. It’s not about conservatism. It’s not about freedom or liberty. Oh, it pays great lip service to them, but they aren’t really guiding principles. It seems they’re being used more to placate and control a voting bloc which are then manipulated to your own preferred ends.

Think this means I’m jumping ship to the (D) side? Not a chance. Everything bad about the Republican party is magnified 10 times worse for Democrats. That’s the party of the nakedly powerful manipulating and controlling and enslaving the weakest to increase their own power. Republicans are the party of those desirous of power or content in mediocre levels of power trying to control the middle class to keep them in power. Also, the Republican party at least pays lip service to freedom and liberty, while the Democrats stopped doing that years ago.

What it does mean is that I’m not enthused, not excited, not interested, and not particularly hopeful of our chances. With bumbling idiots like you and your pals in the driver’s seat, who needs Democrats.

You don’t get technology. You don’t understand branding and the marketing of ideas. You can’t conceive of any idea that began outside the paneled rooms of the upper echelons of party power. Democrats won the last TWO Presidential elections because they were able to manipulate those at the bottom into supporting yet another upper cruster by thinking it was their own ideas embodied in Mr Obama. I like Romney and think he would have made a fine executive, but once again, since he had friends like y’all, he had no need of enemies.

The only purpose to engaging minority communities is to welcome them into the melting pot. We love their food, most aspects of their cultures, their character, their skills, their passion for liberty that far exceeds our own. We don’t need them to remain outside, separate, different.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
~Emma Lazarus

The United States was and is a nation of immigrants. Sure there are some who want the border locked down tight, and they have good arguments, but they’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Yes, there are some who want to benefit from the very cheap labor these new and frightened people are willing to give up for the appearance of success. The first rule of immigration has to be: It has to be easy and safe and fast. This means removing bureaucratic bloat and testing and retesting each aspect of the process for efficiency and efficacy. There should be no reason for people to come here illegally because we should welcome any and all legally and openly. The penalties for illegal immigration should be just and fast. These people are not our citizens and are not owed any Constitutional privileges. Make the process just, make it fair, and make it safe, but make it about the rule of law. When the door is wide open, punishing those who still refuse to use it regains it’s moral legitimacy.

Armed Liberty

The GOP can be the party of a strong defense (offense has become offensive, good or bad) by being vocally and effectively protective of any and all US citizens endangered overseas.

The Constitution doesn’t need to be protected, it needs to be applied. Applied with judicial and legislative force. Applied brutally. The government has become brutal in its overreach and it hurts everyone it touches. It must be beaten back with equal force and vigor.

You can’t reform entitlement spending because the very idea that people are entitled to something is bunk, false, and results in theft. You can only end it. Cut it, by significant margins. By real margins instead of the fake margins we’ve been lead along with for the last two decades.

You’ve let yourself get bogged down in squabbling and in-fighting while we out in the trenches, in the real world, who have to live according to the dictates of your political operatives and political failures, face the brunt of each and every assault on our freedoms, our pocket books, our lives and families and property. And it’s not like the Democrats haven’t given you golden opportunity after golden opportunity. They’re the party of the gaffe, the flub, the out-of-touch snobbish elite who thinks his jet-set lifestyle is normal and acceptable.

Victor Davis Hanson has some good advice that I’ll leave you with:

To survive, Republicans must go on the offensive and point out that their accusers never live the lives they advocate for others. Liberal feminists seem to be John Edwards and Bill Clinton. Liberal men of the people are Al Gore, John Kerry, and Jon Corzine. Their populists who deplore outsourcing, offshore accounts, and non-unions are Apple and Facebook grandees who embrace all three. White privilege is not the fate of the West Virginian or West Texan working at Target, but the tiny, inbred old-boy and old-girl world of prep-school to Ivy League to the insider pull of Dad and Mom to land up with a phoned-in job in journalism, politics, finance, entertainment, the arts, and academia on the East and West coasts, followed by pro forma praise of diversity — for others. Open-borders zealots have their children behind the walls of private academies.

Surely there is a populist case to be made — or is the Republican establishment to manage a permanent, sober, and judicious out-party, as it is demagogued to death by the privileged?

Victor Davis Hanson, A Beat-up, Exhausted, and Terrified Republican Establishment

Threat Of Tax And Regulation Is No Stimlus

Allan Meltzer calls it like it is with the sub head on this article:

Why Obamanomics Has Failed
Uncertainty about future taxes and regulation is enemy No. 1 of economic growth

Let us put our minds together and imagine for a moment, a world in which we ran businesses.

We must buy and sell and add value. We must hire and employ and sometimes even fire. We must take what we have and mix all the depths of our creativity along with every ounce of our passion and most of our effort and life into the raw materials of labor and goods to develop a product. And then we must sell that product for more than it cost us to make it.

Let us say we’ve found that point at which enough people who want it can afford it. That’s something we learned in economics years ago in college when our professors went gaga for a whole semester over these two curved lines and we spent the whole semester trying to figure out where they met.

And we’ve controlled out costs until they are just below that point where the curves of cost and demand meet. That is called a profit. We’re a small outfit and don’t spend too much effort on innovation except to encourage it when and where we can. And so with our costs mostly flat, we can’t really increase the quality or complexity of the product without making it more expensive, which would take us out of that sweet spot in pricing and we’d lose customers as a result.

This is where many small businesses are. This is also where many medium and even a few large businesses are. In fact, most companies who employ most of the people and shuffle the most money around most efficiently are in this boat, right alongside us.

Most businesses don’t operate from malicious greed, despite what Hollywood and the popular culture will try to get us to believe. Most businesses operate with the understand that they can only make money so long as they are making  sufficient numbers of other people sufficiently happy.

Some people don’t get this.

Most professors outside of business school don’t get this. And many professors inside business school don’t either. It’s a curse of our amazing educational system that it has attracted and nurtured minds that are as closed to facts of life as any that walk this earth and still remain sentient.

Most people who get into politics and become successful at it are the same, though they are for a different reason.

You get what you ask for and what you deserve. And because many people in America, average Joes and Janes alike, do not get this, politicians take what is called a populist stance, and become whatever they must in order to win a few more votes.

Sock it to ‘em, the little man says on the corner. And the big Man, because he wants to keep that little man needing him and thus voting for him, echoes the cry. But when the big Man speaks, things may actually happen.

Regulation, taxation, “fair shares” and “spreading the wealth” all sound so very good to those of us living on the dole or spending too much time gazing up the tall ladder above us filled with so many other people and wishing there were an easier way than taking it one step at a time.

In hopes of making it easier to climb the ladder, and perhaps out of a little jealousy at those who have gotten higher on the ladder than you or I, we subscribe to the notion that the government ought to be the arbiter of the “fair share”, the decider of “enough”. Actually, it’s mostly out of jealousy. We don’t want to climb the ladder, we’re content in our squalor and mediocrity. We just want everybody else to roll in the same mud we are.

So there is the promise of taxation and regulation, making it harder and more expensive to make those products and to deliver those services than it was before. We hope that the extra taxes and regulation will fill the government purses and that we’ll benefit from the largesse, but we’re not expecting to buy a new house based on the unearned raise.

Or maybe we are.

The problem is, instead of helping everybody up the ladder, taxation and regulation only chop the ladder a little shorter. Sure, you’re nearer the top, but only because the top was lowered, not because you’re any higher.

So that company we’re each running in our heads right now, it has the costs balanced carefully with the price to hit that sweet spot where we can attract the most people possible. But now you have to task Sally and Harriet and Jim and Larry to filling out these forms and making sure these reports are run. Why? Because the government decided they know better how to run your company than you do. Except, instead of these forms and reports benefiting you, you’re paying 4 people just to fill out forms and run reports instead of produce goods and improve your services.

That’s dead weight.

You have to spend resources without a corresponding benefit to you. Of course you raise prices but you can’t raise the quality, but now fewer people can afford it. Or you cut quality but keep the prices level, and now fewer people buy it because it’s not as attractive.

You have to lay people off. Now you’ve sloughed off your dead weight onto the general economy. Your taxes and everybody else’s taxes are now paying for the employees you used to pay independently.

That’s the reality of taxation and regulation.

Productive businesses don’t like taxes and regulation, and they’ll seek ways to avoid and minimize their exposure to them.

Now, what about the threat of taxes and regulation?

The threat of taxation and regulation is the same effect as the fact of taxation and regulation, except magnified.

Once the taxation and regulation are in place, there is little the business can do. If it wants to survive it does the best it can to manage costs. Quality suffers, but because it suffers for most other companies too, it’s only the consumer (you and I) who lose out in the crap we pay real money for in the stores. That’s inflation. The same dollar used to by a real sweet whiz bang that is still whiz banging away 20 years later and now that dollar just buys a whiz, and a cheap one at that. But the costs have stabilized and now we just have to keep pressing ahead if we’re going to survive as a business.

When the taxation and regulation are threatened, companies go into protection mode. Any ejectable dead weight is ejected. Any loose operations are cut. Anything that can be jettisoned is jettisoned. And real people are fired. And real lives are hurt.

Just for the threat of taxation and regulation.

It’s not that the businesses are mean and vengeful. In your mind-business you know you’re a good employer. You’re caring and you’ve got a great little family growing out of all the individuals you’ve hired. But with your costs already high and threatening to go higher, you’ve got to let someone go. If you don’t let someone go, you’ll be forced to let all of them go when you’re bankrupt. You have to cut their pay or fire them, there’s no middle ground. And even though they say they understand and are glad to still have a job even if it doesn’t pay quite as many bills as it did, you know you’ve hurt them deeply and they really are upset at you.

Were you a fool for getting into business in the first place?

Those who claim to love the most and care the most and feel the most are often guided by uneducated and ignorant feelings into callous and silly actions with effects that are not silly.

Allan Meltzer has seen silly people’s desires ignored to the benefit of entire nations:

In 1980, I had the privilege of advising Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to ignore the demands of 360 British economists who made the outrageous claim that Britain would never (yes, never) recover from her decision to reduce government spending during a severe recession. They wanted more spending. She responded with a speech promising to stay with her tight budget. She kept a sustained focus on long-term problems. Expectations about the economy’s future improved, and the recovery soon began.

That’s what the U.S. needs now. Not major cuts in current spending, but a credible plan showing that authorities will not wait for a fiscal crisis but begin to act prudently and continue until deficits disappear, and the debt is below 60% of GDP. Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wisc.) offered a plan, but the administration and Congress ignored it.

We don’t need feelers and healers at the head of this nation. We need heads, brains, experienced and opinionated people with strength of character and resolve. But mostly, experienced and sound.

When there is a strong plan there is hope. Real hope, not in change, but in the future.

For just as the threat of taxation and regulation stagnate and stifle and strangle and hurt, a sure and steady plan which shows how those in authority will not abuse their power but will shrink themselves and leave to the businesses the running of those businesses and leave to the people the living of lives and leave to the churches the telling of morals and leave to the press, the real press and not these buffoons gasping for relevancy in front of their unblinking cyclopses, the telling of the truth, will result in growth as sure as if that plan were in effect.

So throw out the buffoons who don’t know the bitter end from the over priced breadstick they had on your dime at some gala affair list night. Throw out the scoundrels who’d rather take your child’s inheritance than force their own children to work honestly. Hamstring the bums who prefer the golf course to the desk, the courts to the shoreline, make then 1st term lame ducks, the whole lot of them.

After all, we’ve got businesses to run.

The Ugly Head Of Good Intentions

Henry Waxman and... his brother?

Pro-Abortion Democrat Bart Stupak joined Henry Waxman in chiding AT&T, Caterpillar, and several other large corporations who have adjusted their balance sheets in response to some of the first changes of the Health Care Socialization bill to take affect.

These large corporations have been enjoying a substantial tax deduction in return for their paying for their retirees prescription drugs. Because they had built their budgets around the savings this program gave them, as this program ends, they have to report the loss of this expected revenue.

And it’s significant amounts we’re talking here. After all, several hundred million here, a billion there, and pretty soon we’re talking real cash.

So Henry Waxman, from California (“sorry folks” says this former Californian)…

…sent AT&T, Caterpillar and Deere a sharp letter, questioning the charges and saying he wanted top officials from those companies to testify at an April 21 hearing he has scheduled on the issue.

What, he didn’t get enough validation of his supposed superiority after grilling Mr Toyoda of Toyota motors?

Congress is on a power trip the likes of which I haven’t seen before.

Bart Stupak joined in sending the letter which, among other things presumably, said:

The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern.

Ah, the ugly head of good intentions.

Some studies (which no doubt the Congress-people held to savagely in order to assuage their own consciences for this dastardly deed) projects savings of $3000/employee for employers under this bill.

Unlike the government, though, businesses have to abide by what are called Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or GAAP (pronounced “gap”) which requires, among other things, that expenses be reported in the financial quarter in which they are incurred. A significant loss of revenue cannot be offset, on the books, with a hoped for or expected long term savings. The company can report that expected savings in their reports to shareholders in order to rally them up and encourage them to keep their investments. But to use a hoped-for (not even really expected) long term savings to offset a current expense is a serious No-No. And if the government were held accountable for it’s accounting, it might actually know that.

So AT&T and these other companies did what they were supposed to do.

Even the AFL-CIO isn’t very enthusiastic about this particular provision:

Gerry Shea, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s chief strategist on health care, stopped short of calling for a repeal of the provision. “We’re very concerned about the disruption that could be caused because of this, with people being pushed out of employer plans,” he said. “With all the changes we’re looking at because of the new health legislation, we feel you don’t need this.”

And the President’s response?

White House officials said the provision would not affect job creation because it does not take effect for three years and any charge for a given year would not be large.

They’re reflecting the reality of the situation reflected, in turn, badly on those who jammed this travesty of a Health Care bill through. And one thing we can be sure about, people on power kicks don’t like being shown to be liars and cheats. And since their on a power kick, in all likelihood they’ll use that power kick to try and arm-twist until they get what they please.

So, word of advice to AT&T and Caterpillar and all those other companies writing down significant losses: Don’t go to Washington. They’re out for your head and they’ll stage a show and the MSM will go along because they don’t like you either. You’ll not get a fair shake.

Instead, take your message to the masses. Use that advertising budget to do PSAs on TV, radio, newspapers, and internet. Go viral with your message on Youtube and the like. I’ll even post it here if you do it.

Show the hollow nature of these good intentions. Show how blinded the Congress was by their own ambition and greed that they crafted this nightmare. Show that it’s not just a nightmare for you and others with large pocketbooks, show that it’ll be a nightmare for us as you have to cut benefits and trim payroll.

Good intentions have once again reared their ugly head. Lets cut it off this time.

Quotes from NYTimes article “Companies Push To Repeal Provision Of Health Law”.

Selling Their Souls

Shameful Stupak: Selling babies out by the millions

Bart Stupak sold his soul and the lives of countless innocent babies for not even a bowl of porridge but the promise of a liar.

I’m proud to report that my representative, Congressman Dan Lipinksi, a Democrat whose pro-life stance stood firm in the face of what was reportedly intense pressure from the party leadership to support this particular pet project of the President, voted against the health care takeover and unconstitutional government power grab because he didn’t trust the promises of San Fran Nan’ and President Hope’nChange.

The battle isn’t over. After all, the sell-outs and pols who passed this know it’s not the right thing or the best thing. Why else would they push the implementation off for years?

Lipinski stuck to his principles

What they have accomplished is to paint massive targets on each and every one who voted Aye. Come election time fiscal conservatives will vote out those who levied hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt onto each and every one of us, our children, and our children’s children. And social conservatives will vote out those who signed on to the government sponsored slaughter of millions of innocents.

The Great American Genocide has only just begun, and the blood of millions of black and white, and hispanic and asian babies will cry from the dirt and garbage bins to the every listening ears of God.

Congressman Stupak, shame. Shame on you for selling your soul on the promise of a liar. Shame on you for selling out the countless babies who might have been born had it not been for your craven and cowardly act of supreme selfishness. Shame on you and your cronies who took a stand and abandoned it at the first hint of real trouble.

We, your electorate will indeed be coming for you come election time, but we’re not who you ought to fear. Fear a just and holy God who knows your heart and mind as well as we know your actions.

How did your representative vote tonight?

Samuel Adams penned these lines in response to those who would not stand and fight the necessary and good fights of his day:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.