Archive for March, 2009

A Wakeup Call

Posted: 26 Mar 2009 in Conservatism, Truth
Tags: ,

Some of you are so friggin’ clueless, it makes me ill.

Here’s an excerpt from Ayn Rand’s book Atlas Shrugged:

Read it all.

“Francisco’s Money Speech”

“So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Anconia. “Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor–your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?

“Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions–and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

More

The Give/Save act passes the Senate. What a disgrace. There seems to be only a few people in the Senate that have any sense of responsibility, fiscally, or otherwise.

Here are the fiscally responsible 14:

Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)

Here are the those that have no nuts:
Not Voting – 11
Begich (D-AK)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Martinez (R-FL)

Here’s Senator DeMint’s speech(emphasis mine):

Transcript:

NATIONAL SERVICE REAUTHORIZATION ACT – (Senate – March 24, 2009)

Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I wish to speak for few minutes on the Serve America Act. I think this is a great opportunity to talk about what is good about a lot of the Members of the Senate. I certainly appreciate and applaud the sponsors of this bill for their good intentions and know their hearts are in the right place. Some of my best friends are supporting this bill. But I think, as we look at what is good about the hearts of many Members of the Senate, we need to recognize this bill does represent a lot of what is wrong with our Federal Government today-a lot of our philosophies, and a lot of our departures from a constitutional form of government.

What works in America today is our civil society-a lot of the volunteer groups that many of us have been a part of. I know for years I spent more time in United Way and a lot of the charity groups, being on their boards back in my community, and I saw what the volunteer arts groups and PTAs and health groups did to build a strong community. Civil society works in America. They are small groups. They are the true engines of character in our country. They promote service and patriotism. In this time where we have seen some of our economic institutions let us down, we have certainly seen our Government and our policies let us down, civil society does not let us down. It works in America today.

It is understandable why Congress would want to get involved. We see that passion to serve, that desire to do something that is greater than yourselves. We look at that working in our civil society and we want to get involved and expand it.

Unfortunately, our history shows us when Government gets involved, it tends to take something that is working and make it not work nearly as well. Civil society works because it is everything Government is not. It is small, it is personal, it is responsive, it is accountable. Civil society must be protected from any effort to make it more like Government.

That is what we are doing with this bill today. This bill centralizes control of important functions of our civil society. There is a downside to good intentions here in Government. The Founders created a limited government and our oath to support and defend the Constitution means that is our focus here. Our oath is to a limited government. The Founders wanted the people to be free from our good intentions. Government charity is anathema to what our Founders intended and what our Constitution stands for. Despite our good intentions, where we try to implement those good intentions and our compassion through the force of Government, we are effectively violating our oath of office here.

Well-intended legislation has left more than half of all Americans dependent on the Government. Today in America over half of Americans get their income from the government or a government source. About 20 percent of the country works for the government or an entity that gets its primary source of revenue from government. Another 20 percent gets their income and health care from Medicare or Social Security. Once you add in welfare and other subsidies, you make it so over half of all Americans are already dependent on the Government. This bill proposes to spend nearly $6 billion over 5 years, which means it will be probably $10 billion, probably more, over a 10-year period. It will have nearly a quarter of Americans working for it, which means it will be the 14th largest company, as far as employees, in the entire world.

What have we done here that suggests we can manage anything like that? Do you see anything in our history as a Federal Government that shows we have the ability to effectively manage something like that without extreme levels of waste and fraud and abuse? Look what we have done recently with the stimulus plan and the bailout plans. As soon as it comes to light what is actually happening with that money, people are outraged at what is going on. Despite the good intentions of this bill, we are creating a huge new government entity that will be unmanageable and violates some of the core principles of our civil society. Every time the Government steps in to solve a problem, it creates three new problems in its place.

This bill is everything wrong with how Congress sees the world. Government will make service organizations less effective, less responsive, and less personal. When the French historian de Tocqueville came to the United States not long after we were founded, one of the things that amazed him about our country that was so different from France was that in his home country when there was a problem, people would say: Someone ought to do it and government should do it; but in America we were different. When someone saw a problem, they went and got a friend and formed a small group and solved the problem themselves. Much of that was motivated by religious convictions that our place in this world is not only to help ourselves but to love and help those around us. That was key.

Jefferson called it little democracies, when he saw these little groups all around America voluntarily doing things to solve problems and make communities better. Burke called them little platoons. Most people who understand America know that those voluntary groups are what made our country great and what sustain us even today. Civil society binds communities, not by its fruits, but by its motives-charity, donations, giving without thought of getting anything in return. This is the selfless sacrifice that happens throughout America today. This is what works.

What does not work is what we are doing right here. The big difference is private service organizations exist for the people who receive the aid. Government service organizations exist for the people who give it-in this case, for the people who are paid to do it. You cannot pay people to volunteer and expect the organization to remain focused on its mission. Charity is a private, moral impulse, not a government program.

Government will not and, by definition, cannot strengthen and replace the civil society. Volunteerism is something that works in America. When we think of America, we do not think of Congress and Presidents, we think of Little League games and PTA meetings and bake sales.

Civil society is America. It responds to needs, meets challenges, and solves problems because it is free from Government. Because volunteers donate their time and money, accountability is acute. I have seen it. I have sat on a United Way board. Every year we evaluate every program and every dollar we have given to someone, and we determine is it working or can we make it more efficient.

If the program is not working, the money goes away immediately. That does not happen here. If the program does not work here, we add more money to it. That is going to happen with every program we start, including the one we are talking about today.

Projects that do not work in a civil society get cut. Organizers who lose or abuse funds are dismissed. It is voluntary. So everyone is invested in its success. We know the large groups throughout America, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the United Way, the Salvation Army, the YMCA, Catholic Charities, fraternal orders, groups such as Kiwanis, Rotary, Knights of Columbus. These are large organizations, but they work because they are locally controlled.

Smaller groups, local arts councils and community theatres, PTAs, youth sports leagues, the animal rescues, the book clubs, crisis pregnancy centers, soup kitchens, food and other clothes drives that go on, church service groups, they are everywhere.

Those are the little platoons, the little democracies that make this country work. For us to presume, in the Congress, that somehow we are going to reach out into all these groups and make it work better is pretty presumptuous based on our history.

Why now? Why at a time in economic crisis with unimaginable debt and spending do we come in and say: We need to spend another $10 billion over the next 10 years to create another Government program to do something that is already working.

At the same time, we are talking about creating this new bureaucracy to replace private voluntarism with Government programming. We are actually cutting some of the incentives for people to give to charity and for the private sector to work. The President’s budget actually cuts the charitable donations of the people who give the most to charity in this country. So look at what we are doing. We are making it harder for the private sector to work.

You also look at what we have done over the years, forgetting that a lot of private charity and the motivation to serve God and community is a religious-based motivation. What have we done in this country?

We have essentially tried to purge that motivation from our country. Most public schools, or at least a lot of them, used to sponsor Boy Scout groups. But after being sued for years because the Boy Scouts have God in their pledge and they set standards for their leaders that some do not agree with, the threat of lawsuits essentially means our Government schools have thrown out the Boy Scouts.

More than half our astronauts, half our FBI agents, a lot of the most successful people in this country were trained in the Boy Scouts to serve their community, where their character was developed. But this Federal Government has forced them out of public places. For years we purged religion from our society. Religion was the primary motivation for a lot of civic groups, a lot of services, a lot of charities, a lot of hospitals that were formed, a lot of schools.

But we have said that has no place. Because we have unleashed the ACLU and other groups to constantly sue and intimidate groups, that religious motivation has been moved, has been purged in many cases.

Now we are going to come in and help solve the problem we have created. We want to promote voluntarism, we want to promote community service, when what we have done over the last several decades is essentially tried to destroy the motivation for people to serve a cause that is greater than themselves.

We cannot replace private charity with Government programs. If we try, a lot of people are going to miss meals, suffer cold winters, and leaky roofs. I wish to go back to where I started. I appreciate the motivation, the heartfelt sense of compassion and the patriotism that I know my colleagues feel in sponsoring this legislation.

But I think we need to come to a point as a government that we recognize we cannot do everything. That is why we take the oath to the Constitution to defend and protect the very limited form of Government. This Congress, this Government, does not need to start or expand an organization to a quarter million people, when we are paying people to do work that we decided needs to be done and take those decisions out of the hands of millions of Americans who look around every day and see what they can do to make their families, their communities, and their country a better place to live.

These are not Government decisions. We need to focus on what we were set up to do and do it much better than we are doing, instead of every week coming in here, bringing our good intentions and our compassion and every problem we see across the country we say something needs to be done. Then we say: The Government needs to do it.

That is the fatal flaw of the Congress today, is we forget that sacred oath of office that says: We will protect and defend the Constitution which says this Federal Government has a very limited function. And those functions that are not prescribed in the Constitution are left to individuals and to the States.

This is a huge well-intended mistake we are making. It serves a point that we need to realize this Government needs to stop spending and stop borrowing, stop taxing, and let America work.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I discussed this earlier. And now there are more people leaving AIG. Most likely, the ones staying are the idiots that can’t find employment elsewhere, or they’re just hard headed. In either case, AIG just cost the American tax payer $15 billion for Congress and the Ass-Clown in Chief to be outraged about RETENTION bonuses. How friggin’ stupid can you be?

Here’s Hot Air’s take:

More departures at AIG after bonus outrage

Jake DeSantis may have been the most publicly vocal departure at AIG after Congress and the media attacked his compensation, but he’s not alone. Reuters reports that several high-ranking executives at AIG have given notice.  The insurance giant, 80% owned by the US at the moment, says it can get by for now, but more departures could cripple their ability to pay back taxpayers for the massive bailout:

Several more employees are leaving the controversial financial products unit that brought American International Group Inc to its knees last year, according to a person with knowledge of developments there.

The resignations are in addition to the “handful” of senior AIG Financial Products executives who have already given notice, said the person, who could not quantify the total number of departures.

To date, AIG said the situation at the financial products unit remains “manageable,” despite the departures. But if too many employees quit, Chief Executive Edward Liddy has warned it could be disastrous for AIG and, ultimately, for U.S. taxpayers who are the insurer’s majority owners.

Reuters manages to report correctly on the bonuses, a breath of fresh air after two weeks of media screeching and hyperbole about the supposed villains getting rich off the taxpayer teat:

More

Here’s a great look at “assault weapons”. In case you were wondering, I knew as soon as I looked at these which one was the real one, assault rifle that is…

Would you know an assault weapon if you saw one?

Pop quiz, which of the following is an assault weapon:

A) 

B) 

C) 

D) All of the above

If you answered “D)all of the above” congratulations, you qualify for a California Senate seat! You’d also be wrong.

Those who want to take away gun from civilians know they can’t take them all at once. The only way to get them is to vilify and ban one class of firearms at a time. Two of the most frequent targets are handguns and “assault weapons.” But, what exactly is an assault weapon, and why do they claim we need to ban them?

Actually, the term “assault weapon” is made up. It is a derivative of the real phrase “assault rifle” which is a selective fire (can switch between automatic and semi-automatic) rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and high-powered rifle ammunition. If you look at the above pictures again, only one of the above is an assault rifle, and that is “B”, a M-16. Both the AR-15 (A) and the SIG 556 (C) are semi-automatic only. But the gun grabbers want to ban them because they are evil looking black rifles.

More

The outcry about the AIG bonuses was a sham. Now that Congress and Obama have vented their “outrage” to the world, the people that actually had a shot at turning this company around, and were NOT responsible for the current mess, but were actually hired to fix it, are telling everyone to “take this job and shove it!” Since Congress AND the President are absolutely clueless when it comes to business, how to run one, or how not to, AIG will now suffer even more. So will we the tax payer.

$165 million is nothing compared to the price we’re paying to and for this congress. Your outrage is directed at the wrong people.

Going Galt at AIG

Now that Congress, Barack Obama, and the media feel thoroughly satisfied in their two-week screechfest over AIG’s retention bonuses, the bill may come due for American taxpayers who invested in the company’s bailout to the tune of over 1,000 times the amount of the bonuses.  The New York Times reprints a resignation letter from one of the targets of Official Ire over the bonuses, a man who worked for the huge salary of $1 apart from the bonus he was promised for helping rescue the company from bankruptcy.  He blames Edward Liddy for not defending his employees, and refuses to work any longer for no compensation:

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in – or responsible for – the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company – during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 – we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

More

Obama is peddling his budget on prime time and trying his utmost to scare the hell out of Americans by throwing out a few choice words in the process. The “zero growth” BS is one example. I don’t know how it’s possible to have any growth with the kind of tax and spend and increases that he proposes. It’s absolutely ludicrous.

Give the money to Americans and stop the BS programs that drain the coffers of America and restrict growth. If Americans have more money in their pockets, they’ll spend more, they’ll save more, they’ll do what America needs to grow. All without government intervention. Imagine that.

The Obama Press Conference… A Cornucopia of !%&&%#*

Posted By Bobby Eberle On March 25, 2009 at 7:03 am

President Obama went before the American people (again) in order to pitch his brand of socialist policies. His budget has come under attack, as I reported yesterday, and on Tuesday night, Obama tried to clarify why massive government spending and saddling America with unprecedented levels of debt are justified.

A number of statements and comments really caught my attention. From Obama saying that his administration needs to make some “tough budgetary choices” to his comment that there will be “zero growth” if his agenda is not passed, there were plenty of sound bites to make the American people shudder. Please Republicans… step forward and lead… we can’t let Obama take us down the path to socialism.

First, a note about the teleprompter… As reported in the Associated Press story on GOPUSA, Obama had a new teleprompter in place to deliver his opening remarks. As the AP notes, “President Barack Obama took no chances in his second prime-time news conference, reading a prepared statement in which he took both sides of the AIG bonus brouhaha and asked an anxious nation for its patience.”

More

I like this. The states in some cases are revisiting the 10th Amendment of the Constitution and telling the idiots in Washington, D.C., that they are on notice. When Congress and the President overstep their bounds, then the states must act in sovereignty as is the case with Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington. There’s speculation that they will be joined by 12 other states on this.

I say bravo! That is what America was built on. Freedom and not subjugation by government. Walter Williams explores this in more detail:

States Rebellion Pending

by Walter E. Williams

Our Colonial ancestors petitioned and pleaded with King George III to get his boot off their necks. He ignored their pleas, and in 1776, they rightfully declared unilateral independence and went to war. Today it’s the same story except Congress is the one usurping the rights of the people and the states, making King George’s actions look mild in comparison. Our constitutional ignorance — perhaps contempt, coupled with the fact that we’ve become a nation of wimps, sissies and supplicants — has made us easy prey for Washington’s tyrannical forces. But that might be changing a bit. There are rumblings of a long overdue re-emergence of Americans’ characteristic spirit of rebellion.

Eight state legislatures have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution; they include Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington. There’s speculation that they will be joined by Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.

More

I choose to be conservative. I am not ashamed of it, nor will I back away from it. Here’s a good article on this:

Why be a conservative?

By Christopher S. Brownwell

Setbacks in recent elections have left some self-proclaimed conservatives announcing the era of Reagan is over.  David Frum thinks conservatives need to be less aggressive and move to the center to win.  David Brooks suggests that Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal’s conservatism is stale.  Possibly, the Kathleen Parkers, Peggy Noonans, Christopher Buckleys of “conservatism” are just embarrassed by the NASCAR watching, Wal-Mart shopping, Jesus-loving conservative base.

In a survival of the fittest, these political pundits have tried to spontaneously generate an evolving definition of conservatism.  They then try to put conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, Bobby Jindal, and Sarah Palin in a closet of political extinction.  However, these and many other conservative Neanderthals refuse to go quietly into the political closet despite the ridicule.

Let me follow these conservative examples and come out of the closet by announcing my political orientation.  I am a conservative and I am proud of it.  Furthermore, I was born this way.  Some might say “No, you weren’t.  You were indoctrinated to be conservative by heartless, authoritarian parents.  You chose to be conservative because you are mean-spirited.”

More

Alicia takes a look at how we can change. I’ve mentioned this on several occasions and will continue to do so… She’s smarter than me, so go read her stuff.

Looking for Solutions Not Rhetoric

Posted on March 24th, 2009, by Alicia Colon

I’m getting rather tired of hearing about the dangerous path on which the Obama administration is taking this country. I agree that the steps being taken are sinister and designed to destroy the foundation of our economy. The obvious truth that escaped the majority of voters last November is that Barack Obama and the Democrat leaders in Congress are not capitalists. They are socialists doing all they can to transform the structure of this nation into a failed European model. No matter what speeches are given to soothe the anxieties of the nation, the fact is their agenda is clear. I know all this but what I want to know is what can we do about it NOW. Can all these proposed executive decisions be reversed and stopped in their tracks?

More

Concealed Carry Works…

Posted: 25 Mar 2009 in Guns, Truth
Tags: ,

CCW works. Here’s a prime example of it:

Robber Fatally Shot in Miami Burger King Holdup

A robbery at a Burger King in Miami’s Upper East Side neighborhood left one person dead and another seriously injured.

An afternoon shootout at a busy Burger King restaurant in Miami left a potential robber dead and the customer who shot him seriously wounded.

The bloody event unfolded about 4 p.m. Tuesday at the restaurant at Northeast 54th Street and Biscayne Boulevard. It was a time, employees said, when it is usually crowded with schoolchildren and people getting out of work early.

The robber entered wearing a ski mask. He approached a clerk, showed his gun and demanded money, said Miami police spokesman Jeff Giordano.

A customer eyed him and the two started arguing. The customer had a concealed-weapons permit and his gun — and the two exchanged gunfire.

The robber crumpled to the floor and was pronounced dead at the scene.

The customer, with several gunshot wounds, was in serious but stable condition at Jackson Memorial Hospital’s Ryder Trauma Center.

More