Archive for April, 2009

Democrats: Centralized Government Dead Ahead

April 30, 2009

Governor Gregoire signed a bill taking away from the people of Washington State to choose how their electors will vote in the electoral college. Instead of giving that power back to the legislature, they gave that power to the majority of the population of the United States. (link)

Hey, I have a proposal the democrats will all get behind. Why not just elect a president who can write laws and appoint judges and get rid of the congress? We could hold a national election once in a while, maybe 4 years or 10 years, or perhaps even when he dies. Better yet, let’s just let the central leader choose his own successor.

Sounds great! Sounds new and fresh, too! And neat! One person to do everything in the government for us. I am sure the Democrats will get all aboard on it—since that is the direction they are heading.

For those of you who don’t see the problem, let me spell it out: Power corrupts. Once a person gets in government, something changes and they become evil. It happens to everyone. He becomes evil because he wants to wield the power of government to exactly what it is not intended to do—oppress the people and abuse their rights.

The Founding Fathers knew this, so they wanted to build a system where no one man or even one group could ever consolidate all the power. They did so with a system of checks and balances. That’s what has kept our government from becoming too powerful all these years. It’s the system the democrats are trying to overthrow so that they can use government to abuse the rights of the people.

What are those checks and balances? Well, you may have heard how the president, congress, and the courts are set in opposition one to another. Each has a noose around the neck of the other, and if they so desired, they could easily extinguish the power of the others. I won’t describe the checks and balances here; they are well documented in the constitution itself.

There are two other entities that have a check and balance over the entire federal government. One is the people. The people created the government, they elect the representatives, they compose the militia, and they serve on juries for all criminal and serious civil trials.

The other is, or rather was, the states. The states had power over the federal government because they were independent of the federal government and chose the senators and the president. Of course, since then the people have taken the power to elect the senators and have mostly taken the power to choose the president.

The problem with giving all the power to a majority of the people is that people don’t always do what’s best for them. It is actually quite easy for a politicians, like Barack Obama, to fool the majority of the people with lies and deceptions. With a silver tongue, he can easily tell the people he will do the impossible. A desperate people will respond to this sophistry at precisely the moment they need to apply logic and reason.

That’s true for a majority. As the majority goes off the cliff like lemmings, a minority will see what’s right and make wise decisions. The important principle of our government is that it is ruled by the people—all of the people—not the majority. The majority may choose some things, but they cannot and do not choose everything. The power of the majority is tempered by the minority who have power given to them—minorities like the senate, the president, the state legislatures and governors, and the courts. Usually, there are enough in the sane minority who still hold on to the powers of government that they can correct most unwise decisions by the people.

This is the secret of our government. If we turn over all of our power to a majority, or any group, we will fail. It is important to keep the states empowered and functional as one of the checks and balances in our system of government.

Debating Obama

April 30, 2009

President Obama said that he doesn’t understand those who protested his massive increase in government scale and demanded that government cease bankrupting our country. He said he is willing to consider serious ideas to fix our economy.

Let me give him serious ideas.

Idea #1: STOP the federal government. CUT it down to size, somewhere below 10% of our economy. The federal government, and ALL governments, operate in direct opposition to the principles of wealth creation. Every penny that the federal government spends is a penny taken away from the private sector, from the very people who know how to make that penny turn into a dime and then a dollar. Every penny spent is a penny that now controls a part of our economy, putting the government in charge of our private lives.

Idea #2: DRAMATICALLY CUT federal regulation and legislation. Rather than use the force of government to try and dictate the way people should live their lives, the government should use its legislative power to simply ensure that the people have their rights and freedoms intact from each other, foreign aggressors, and the federal government itself. That’s right—the federal government should write laws to keep the federal government out of our lives!

Idea #3: ENFORCE the constitution! The president has sworn an oath to God that he would enforce the constitution. He swore his fealty to that sacred document, and he is duty and honor bound to do so. Read the provisions of the constitution, read them without the congress of the courts dictating what it means to you. YOU are the president, one of the three branches of government. YOU are ENTITLED to your own interpretation of what those words in that sacred document mean and how they should be applied! That means if you believe a law is unconstitutional, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ENFORCE IT, no matter what the courts or the congress says! If you believe the courts have exceeded their legal bounds, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO MIND THEM!

Idea #4: Appoing judges who judge by the LETTER OF THE LAW, not the whims and passions of the people. We, the people, need to live under a law that doesn’t constantly shift and change with the tides and passions of democracy. We need a law that can be a rock to build our futures on. Having judges who understand the importance of not altering a word of legislation nor reinterpreting what those words mean is an important step!

Idea #5: Wield the veto pen like a sword in the fight for freedom! You, the president, are one of the last lines of defense against a congress who becomes drunk on corruption and the spending of our money. If you think the congress is irresponsible, USE YOUR POWER to stop them! It is your duty to do so! The Founding Fathers gave you that power for a reason!

Idea #6: Begin building the people’s confidence in themselves. Point out how all the answers to today’s problems lie within the individual, the family, and the churches, and the government only brings problems. Point out how the NYSE has been better at delivering on retirement promises than Social Security. Point out how private health care has delivered more than Medicare or any government health program has. The people ARE the answer to our problems!

Idea #7: Be an advocate of the PEOPLE, not the government. When the government is being used to oppress the people, use your power to oppress the government! Look into the government for corruption, excess, and dishonesty, expose it and crush it! Look out of the government for your power and solutions! We elected you to be our advocate against the government!

Idea #8: In the foreign political scene, identify our friends, those who want us to succeed, and our enemies, those who want us to fail. Spell it out. Make a “good” and “bad” list. To our friends, use whatever power you have to help them so that they can help us. To our enemies, use whatever power you have to convince them our interests are mutual. But if they cannot be convinced, do not be afraid to rattle swords! We have an individual president for this reason—because he will be a man of passion and temper! Challenge Obama to a fist-fight! Tell Ahmedinajed that you want to take him behind the barn and wail on him with a 2-by-4! Explain to Kim Jong-Il that the Americans no longer tolerate oppression of any people anywhere! The president cannot declare war, only congress can. But the president can effectively be our advocate internationally!

These are practical ideas, ideas that are not popular but are effective.

The Opposite of “Live and Let Live”

April 30, 2009

“Live and Let Live”, right? If I want to blow my brains out with a 44, that’s my right! If I want to get hooked on crack it’s my right! If I want to mutilate my body or engage in dangerous sexual practices, it’s my right! Or not?

What is the opposite of “Live and Let Live”? Perhaps it could be the philosophy “Kill and Let Kill”. Or maybe you’d word it “Die and Let Die”. Either way, it’s the same concept.

What would it be like to live under the philosophy of “Die and Let Die”? That would mean you could go around destroying yourself as much as you wanted. You could take into your body whatever poisons you can get your hands on. The poisons that alter your mental state are more desirable than the ones that simply destroy your body since they do even more damage. It would mean we should allow people to kill each other if they really wanted to. It would mean not stopping a murderer on a rampage, or a drug dealer, or our enemies who want to slaughter us.

In fact “Die and Let Die” would dictate that we shouldn’t do certain things or allow certain kinds of behavior. It would mean we shouldn’t engage in productive behavior that will help us feed, clothe and shelter ourselves. It would mean not reproducing, or reproducing but bringing children into an environment in opposition to the environment that would raise them into healthy adults. It would breed those children to live by “Die and Let Die”. And it would mean we would use physical force to stop those who engaged in productive behavior.

I hope this sheds some light on what the opposite of “Live and Let Live” really is. When you use “Live and Let Live” to justify the use of dangerous, addictive chemicals, when you use it to justify destroying our ability to reproduce and raise children in a wholesome environment, when you use it to justify allowing people to injure and damage each other, you are doing it wrong.

Freedom and liberty are not the freedom and liberty to destroy. It is not the freedom and liberty to pervert and corrupt and punish wholesome behavior. Freedom and liberty demand that we imprison and punish those who would harm our freedom and liberty, or those who would use their freedom and liberty to do evil. If it were not so, it would not be freedom and liberty in the first place!

Three Ways Government Steals From You

April 30, 2009

There are three ways government steals from you. Barack Obama is busy with all three.

1. TAXES.

2. INFLATION. By printing more money, the money in your pocket, your bank account, your retirement account, and your insurance policy loses value.

3. BORROWING. By borrowing money from the private sector, the amount of money available to you and others is diminished.

Unlike the government, businesses can only obtain money by one method: PERSUASION. They must persuade people that by giving them money, they get something better in return.

Government does no such thing! It obtains its money by theft!

The Government must stop spending! It must reduce its budget to a tiny fraction of our economy, focusing only on the highest priorities such as national defense and the enforcement of the law!

Lead Scientist: NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR AGW

April 28, 2009

A NASA scientist has published a paper that declares that there is no supporting evidence for Anthropogenic Global Warming. In other words, there is nothing that supports what Al Gore is preaching about humans causing the earth to warm up. Nothing! (link)

The climate debate is over, and it’s been over for a long time. Humans do not have an effect on climate. The earth may be warming or cooling but it’s not because of us. In fact, we want the earth to warm because it will be wetter and more fertile.

Specter’s Formal Departure a New Day

April 28, 2009

As a Republican, I am angry that people like Arlen Specter abuse the name I believe should stand for individual liberty and other American ideals.

It’s interesting to note that after 30 years of lying to voters to get elected, and after just 6 weeks ago promising not to leave the party, Arlen Specter lied once again to become a Democrat. That’s right—his admission ticket was a long line of lies.

Another thing Arlen Specter is known for is putting government ahead of the people. When has he ever stood for individual liberty? I can’t think of any time. He sold future generations of Americans down the river to pursue psychotic politial policies proven over and over again to be sorely lacking in results.

Congratulations! I say. Good riddance! May the rest of the Republicans who fear the word “liberty” follow you shortly!

By the way, if conservative ideals are losing in blue states like Pennsylvania, why does Arlen Specter have to flee the candidate associated with that label? Could it be because individual liberty has been and always will be a winning issue in this country?

Yes.

To all of you buying the hype that this shows weakness in our ideals, let it be said that we do not take advice from our enemies. When has the old media stood on the side of the individual? When have they espoused the ideals of natural law and individual prosperisty? When have they chastised the government for overreaching its bounds like a greedy tyrant? We have no friend among the old media. Let them bray like the jackasses they are! We will ignore them just the same.

President Obama Scares New Yorkers

April 27, 2009

President Obama had Air Force One fly through New York to update their file photos.

The sound of a 747 roaring through the city sent the people of the city into panic.

I guess the people don’t trust Obama to keep our country safe. The first time they hear an airplane they assume that the worst is happening.

Are you Corrupt Enough to Serve in the White House?

April 24, 2009

If you want to get a job in the White House, you have to be corrupt enough to blatantly steal an election.

Stefan Sharkansky won a lawsuit against King County over a public records request. King County not only counted hundreds of illegal votes, but withheld the evidence from a trial and lied about everything in connection to it knowingly. (link)

Now, you can safely say that the 2004 election was stolen. King Country paid $225,000 to Stefan Sharkansky for it.

Here’s to hoping we can throw the filthy politicians and official in prison! With $225,000, I am sure Stefan Sharkansky is considering his options.

The Solution to Poverty

April 24, 2009

On Peter Weissbach’s show last night, he had a guest on (whose name I can’t remember) who published an essay (at a site I can’t find) that was introduced as the following.

Imagine tomorrow scientists announced they had finally discovered a cure for cancer. It was a drug that was cheap and could be easily synthesized everywhere. Surely there would be rejoicing worldwide as we would no longer have to fear cancer.

Imagine, however, that there was a disease far worse than cancer, that claimed far more lives than it. Imagine this disease was currently affecting the vast majority of the world. But imagine that we have already discovered a marvelous cure for this disease, and it is already being eradicated where it is being applied.

Why isn’t the cure being trumpeted from the housetops across the world? Because the disease is poverty, and the cure is the free market.

The guest explained the problem and the solution this way. People are poor because they don’t have jobs that pay very well, if they have jobs at all. Where do jobs come from? Productive jobs, jobs that create wealth where there was no wealth before, come from entrepreneurs. In the United States, the vast majority of productive jobs come from the small business sector.

How do you create more jobs? You either become and entrepreneur or you create conditions that allow entrepreneurs to do what they do best.

President Obama’s “stimulus” plan and his budget do none of that. In fact, they provide a terrible disincentive to go out and create jobs for the people. That’s why our economy isn’t recovering yet. It won’t recover until conditions are right for entrepreneurs to go out and create jobs.

Free market principles are transforming the worlds poorest into the middle class all over the world, but particularly in India and China. At the rate people are rising out of poverty, in our lifetimes we will likely see the majority of the world in the middle class. Provided, of course, that we continue on this course of creating more and more free markets everywhere we go.

The guest was adamant that free markets simply don’t exist naturally. It requires some level of government regulation to create free markets. What happened the past year wasn’t a problem of free markets. It was a problem of over-regulation in some areas and lack of regulation in other areas. The people who were supposed to be writing laws to help the entrepreneurs flourish were asleep at the switch, or actively working in the wrong direction. Government mis-regulation got us to where we are; it will not get us out.

What kinds of regulations do we need? The kinds of regulations that entrepreneurs want. What kinds of regulations do they want? Regulations that help them evaluate what is happening, regulations that keep people honest, regulations that don’t encourage people to do things that are counter-productive, and regulations that pave the way for innovation and ownership.

I simply can’t argue with these premises. I’d like to throw the question to my readers.

The question is: If entrepreneurs don’t create jobs that produce wealth, who or what does? If entrepreneurs don’t know what kinds of regulations they need, who does? If congress and the state legislatures don’t write regulations that help entrepreneurs do their job, who will?

Please keep your answers short. I’ve noticed a terrible trend among socialists that they try to mask their logical incompetence in a flurry of words. Such is the way of all tyrannical concepts from the beginning of time.

President Bush: Savior of Hundreds of Thousands of Lives

April 24, 2009

Under Saddam Hussein, about 3,000 Iraqis were slaughtered each month.

Under Bill Clinton’s embargo, almost 10,000 Iraqis were slaughtered each month.

Under President Bush’s Operation Iraqi Freedom? Only 1,500 were killed each month. (link)

War is bad. But Saddam Hussein and Bill Clinton were worse.