Saturday, November 29

Is this NEWSWORTHY these days?

No kiss or sex before the wedding. At least they portrayed them in a positive light. But to think that his is somehow different these days. Sad.

Parents need to learn the word No

Tuesday, November 25

3.5 Trillion and counting

To date the government has dumped 3.5 trillion into every bad businesses stretching out a hand. Trillion is a big number for any of us to try and comprehend, but divided out it would be over $45,000 for every American household or over $11,000 for every man woman and child in the country. If I had my choice between $11,000 vs. bailout of big failed business I would sure take the cash.

Please, stop the bailouts!

Sunday, November 23

Toward USSR End

This is from an op-ed in the Washington post. Now to the point of printing money and central planning?
Calling upon the Fed to print money is radical. But desperate times demand creative remedies. Fortunately, Obama has chosen to surround himself with experienced technocrats -- pragmatists who excel at imaginative improvisation.

Obama=FDR and Dirty Thirties all over again.

More deficit spending.
“It will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy,” Obama said. “We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools that are failing our children, and building wind farms and solar panels; fuel-efficient cars and the alternative energy technologies that can free us from our dependence on foreign oil and keep our economy competitive in the years ahead.”

Saturday, November 22

10 Just Government Economic Principles

In the wake of the abandonment of basic conservative economic principles, I am working on establishing 10 just government economic principles that all conservatives can hold to and point to when deciding economic policies. As you can see they are still a work in progress and I hope to get your comments and suggestions.
  1. Government has the power and right to tax its citizens.
  2. Taxes must not be punitive; fines may be used as punishment.
  3. Tariffs and trade barriers should only be used as a diplomatic and national security solution with the knowledge that all trade barriers hurt both countries involved.
  4. All government ownership of property must be related to the securing inalienable including and never economic organization.
  5. Government can pay to use the services of individuals and business related to securing inalienable rights, but never make direct payments to individuals or companies to redistribute property.
  6. Government sets and enforces standards such as measurements money, etc.
  7. Government enforces contracts made between two individuals.
  8. Property includes intellectual property and the rights to inventions. Government can issue patents for limited time to protect these rights and promote innovation.
  9. ?
  10. ?

Cali Court and Tea Parties

It's never good to trust a judges' restraint but we will be asked again to do so when the California Supreme Court takes up the marriage amendment (Prop. 8) this spring. If they overturn the amendment it will be the most blatant act of judicial Constitutional rewrite I have ever witnessed and will need Federal intervention to preserve a republican form of government.

They will try to say that the amendment was a revision rather than a Constitutional amendment both of which are provided for under the California state constitution. However, a deeper and historical look again demonstrates the near dictatorial powers the Courts would have to employ. If you look at the California Constitution the revision aspect is designed for major changes and can only be decided by a convention. In the past, the Supreme Court has declared some constitutional amendments to be invalid if they have been large and massive in changes. In this situation, Prop. 8 was as specific and small as any amendment has been or almost could be.

If the Cali Court strikes this down, it would be a Constitutional crisis. Indeed, so much that the federal constitutional guarantee of a "republican form of government" in Article IV would be in jeopardy. According to Randolph at the constitutional convention the purpose of this section was that"...no state in it ought to have it in their power to change its government into a monarchy." If the judges in California overturn this constitutional amendment it would would be an oligarchy--a distinction without a difference from a monarchy and NOT a republican form of government.

The courts overrode the legislative will of the people. The people responded not by impeaching the judges but by the proper means: constitutional amendment. For the Courts to overturn the amendment for being in violation of "fundamental liberties" as they are being asked would upset their responsibility to uphold that very constitution. If clear legislation cannot check a judicial decision, if a constitutional amendment cannot check a judicial decision, then the only law left is the opinion of the judges. Unless the federal government steps in (which it should) California could be left with seven new King Georges. And then, let the San Fransisco Bay Tea Party begin.

Tuesday, November 18

How Obama Got Elected

Monday, November 17

Conservatives Revive

Good to finally see conservatives come back to economic conservative principles and oppose the car bailout.

Saturday, November 15

Free Hunting: Feral Pigs

I told my brothers to keep this in mind. I hate how expensive hunting can be. Maybe this is what I could take up.

Feral pigs are considered unprotected wild animals and may be hunted year-round, according to DNR officials.

The only day they cannot be hunted with a gun is the Friday before the nine-day gun deer hunting season. Also, hunting hours are the same as deer during the nine-day season. During the rest of the year, there are no hunting hour restrictions.

There is no bag limit on feral pigs. Landowners may shoot feral pigs on their own property without a hunting license. Anyone else can shoot a feral pig as long as they possess a valid small game license, sport license, or patron license and have landowner permission if they are on private land.

Paulson is a Banking Pawn

So AIG and Goldman Sachs get a free bailout while Paulson is skeptical about the auto industry. That's because Paulson comes from the financial world. We should have seen this a long time ago.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Wednesday called the auto makers critical to the U.S. economy. But he said any financial aid for GM, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC must be used for an aggressive restructuring of the money-losing, unionized manufacturers. "Any solution has got to be leading to long-term viability" for those companies, he said.

Mr. Paulson ruled out using money from the $700 billion Wall Street rescue fund to help the auto makers, saying the intent of that measure, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, is to deal with financial institutions.

Wednesday, November 12

Now Auto Companies Too Big to Fail

Tuesday, November 11

AIG $150 B Scam

More gov't welfare for big business. Not. With. My. Tax. Dollars.

So when car and insurance companies make millions while effectively providing quality and inexpensive product liberals holler higher corporate taxes. When they fail they hand business a welfare check. Punishment for success and reward for failure.

Please!?

Saturday, November 8

Five Great Depression Myths

Quick, readable, and defended. Read it all.

Myth 1: Herbert Hoover, elected president in 1928, was a doctrinaire,
laissez-faire, look-the-other way Republican who clung to the idea that
markets were basically self-correcting
.

Myth 2:The stock market crash in October 1929 precipitated the Great Depression.


Myth 3: Where the market had failed, the government stepped in to protect ordinary people.

Myth 4: Greed caused the stock market to overshoot and then crash.

Myth 5:
Enlightened government pulled the nation out of the worst
downturn in its history and came to the rescue of capitalism through
rigorous regulation and government oversight.

How we are about to repeat the Great Depression

I am shocked at how quickly and completely the circumstances have led us to repeat the same problems that kept the American economy in a depression for most of the 1930s.

First there is the similarities in personality and party. In 1930 FDR was swept into power as a Democrat on a campaign of personal hope in difficult economic times. He told us that all we had to fear was fear itself. Obama tells us "Yes we can." FDR also took over from the unpopular and big government Republican Hoover who had already unsuccessfully tried to revert the economic disaster by government meddling in the private market and dramatic governmental spending. I'm sad to say it, but Bush looked very much like Hoover in his final months in office with his $700 billion bailout.

Second, and more specifically America talked and built trade barriers. As one of Hoovers parting floundering moves to try and stabilize farm prices, he signed the Smoot-Hawley tariffs. Economists still disagree on all the reasons that caused the depression but almost universally these tariffs are condemned as contributing to the depression. And Obama now? One of the things he has promised is to renegotiate NAFT which stripped of the poli-speak means he will increase trade restrictions in some way. If there is anything that economists can agree on it is that restricting free trade will only hurt the economy.

Third, we are soaking the rich and the corporations. FDR passed the Revenue Act of 1935 that increased the top rate of tax for those earning more than $50,000, and increased the corporate tax. Today Obama wants to tax the Joe Plumbers and windfall profits from the oil companies and anyone else who has succeeded. If we are concerned about the lack of capital in the market, why would offer as a solution to tax that capital more and decrease the supply? It makes no sense at all.

Some might look at the Revenue Act of 1935 and believe that it was part of the solution to the problem since the worst really happened in 1929 and everything after that was smooth upward sailing. Not so. In 1937 we had the Roosevelt Depression which drove the economy down and unemployment up significantly in a manner that perplexed Roosevelt. Additionally, one of the biggest points missed about the Depression is not that we had a crash or panic in 1929. All through American history the relentless drive upward has experienced panics, recessions or drops. Most of the time these panics have been short-lived and limited to those who speculated. The depression was unique not only in how deep it went but in how long it lasted. It was more than a decade until we recovered. Not surprisingly, it was unique in that amount of government intervention.

So our outlook for the future? I want to be on record to say that if Obama repeats these problems of the Great Depression, we are not likely to see an economic turn around very soon. I don't say this lightly. I believe the American economy has an incredible resiliency, yet it is not above being strangled. Welcome to the european/socialist invention of the extended and expanded recession.

Update: Below is a graph of unemployment during the 1930s. (Stanley Lebergott, Manpower in Economic Growth: The American Record since 1800 (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964), table A-3.)

Notice two things. First, unemployment peaked about three years after Roosevelt took office. Second, it continued for years and shot up again in 1938. It will take lots of government intervention to destroy American industry, but if anyone could it is Obama right now. Fasten your seat belts and cinch in the belts.


Gun Sales Thru the Roof

Smart market responds.

Franklin Gun Shop outside Nashville, Tenn., sold more than 70 guns on Tuesday, making it the biggest sales day since the shop opened eight years ago. Guns & Gear in Cheyenne, Wyo., also set a one-day sales record on Tuesday, only to break that mark on Wednesday.


HT: Instapundit

Republican Reform

DeMint on future of conservatives:

Republicans have a history of moving right after defeats, embracing Ronald Reagan after Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford had failed, and Newt Gingrich after George H. W. Bush had. Each time the party thrived as conservative independents and Democrats joined it. Many conservatives think that the party will succeed again just as soon as it ditches the big-spending, soft-on-immigration George W. Bush. But Republicans succeeded on those previous occasions because they addressed the concerns of the day for the vast middle class; moving right alone was insufficient.

As it will be in today’s very different political landscape. Based on the exit polls from 2004 and Tuesday, Republicans have lost more ground among self-described moderates than among conservatives. Even if Senator McCain had won the same percentage of conservatives that President Bush did in 2004, he would not have won. Moving right will work only if moderates are given a reason to move right too.

New Republican Leadership Needed

I am a believer in graceful exits. The present Republican leadership in the Congress and Senate as well as McCain as a former Presidential candidate did a fine job on many things. On the moral issues they stood firm, and have the respect of the American people on those issues.

However, we still drastically lack good strong conservative leadership on the national stage. My biggest problem with the present leadership is the lack of a conservative economic plan. Big business must be allowed to fail. No more $700 billion bailouts and the multiplying problems. (There is nothing sacrosanct about a company like GM. If they can't make it, they should be allowed to go bankrupt so that new (maybe electric?) car companies can turn a profit.) Even more so, where is the plan for social security, education, and a host of other issues. I don't need a new program, but I need a conservative response to the liberal mudslinging.

So Boehner and McConnell must go.

Paul Ryan would have been a great choice but I respect his desire to stay home with his family.

We need leadership that believes in small government and limited spending and can stand up to the corporate welfare lobby.

Justice in Jakart for Bali bombers

Justice

Three men convicted of killing 202 people in a 2002 bombing at two nightclubs on the Indonesian island of Bali were executed by firing squad early Sunday, attorneys said.

Presidentail Elections and Wisconsin

Seriously. Of the bleak Wisconsin is the bleakest. Take a look at this map from USAToday.

It is easy to see that Wisconsin has the highest number of counties that switched from Rep in '04 to Dem in '08. These are scattered all across the state but heaviest in the north eastern part of the state. Also look at the closest contested counties. A huge percentage are located along Wisconsin's western half and spilling over into eastern Minnesota a Iowa.

Several reasons why I think this happened. Wisconsin politics is about being different and innovative even maverick. Now that might seem like a perfect Wisconsin fit for McCain but the element he was missing was the community rather than individual political tilt. Wisconsin is different in that it shuns many libertarian individualistic ideals for community and religious ideals. Taking party out of the mix, Obama fit that mold much better than a McCain or Hillary. As a Republican candidate, Huckabee would have run much better in the state even if he probably would have done worse across the nation.

The solution? When Tommy Thompson won the state and Bush almost took the state twice they emphasized their comitment to both conservative ideals as well as social concerns like education, inner-city poor, and welfare. They had distinctly conservative approaches (welfare to work, vouchers) but their empathy was real and felt. McCain was just too cold.

Myth of More Green More Jobs

It is the old broken window fallacy:

As appealing as the repackaging seems on the surface (lots of high–paid, high–tech workers in lab coats), the support for these claims collapses once it is examined. A little thought experiment helps give perspective.

Fuzzy Math

Suppose Jones used 1,000 kilowatt–hours (kW–h) when the price of electricity was $0.10 per kW–h. He spent $100 on electricity (1,000 kW–h x $0.10 = $100). Now suppose the price rises to $0.15 per kW–h. Responding to the higher price, Jones cuts his electricity consumption to 700 kW–h. How much better off is Jones with the higher price? Most would say, since he is now spending $105 for less electricity (700 kW–h x $0.15 = $105), he is worse off.

However, those promoting restrictions on CO2 turn economics, logic, and math upside down. In their world, the answer is: Jones consumes 300 kW–h less and, at $0.15 per kW–h, he saves $45 (300 kW–h x $0.15 = $45). Then he spends this "extra" money and creates jobs.

Everybody else correctly thinks that since Jones now spends $105 for 30 percent less electricity, he is $5 poorer and has to get by with less energy. He has less to spend, not more. Thus there will be less employment, not more. This is especially true since one of the ways Jones cuts energy consumption is to use more expensive energy–conserving products, making his loss greater than $5
.

Time to clean the 'ol Rifle

Hunters and wildlife watchers interested in should plan to be in their favorite easy chair in front of the television at 8 p.m. Nov. 13 to catch “Deer Hunt 08” with host Dan Small of the Wisconsin Public Television show Outdoor Wisconsin.

Emanuel tied to Freddie and Fannie

Anyone caught up with that organization should be hanging their head in disgrace.

President-elect Barack Obama’s newly appointed chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, served on the board of directors of the federal mortgage firm Freddie Mac at a time when scandal was brewing at the troubled agency and the board failed to spot “red flags,” according to government reports reviewed by ABCNews.com.

How we are about to repeat the Great Depression

I am shocked at how quickly and completely the circumstances have led us to repeat the same problems that kept the American economy in a depression for most of the 1930s.

First there is the similarities in personality and party. In 1930 FDR was swept into power as a Democrat on a campaign of personal hope in difficult economic times. He told us that all we had to fear was fear itself. Obama tells us "Yes we can." FDR also took over from the unpopular and big government Republican Hoover who had already unsuccessfully tried to revert the economic disaster by government meddling in the private market and dramatic governmental spending. I'm sad to say it, but Bush looked very much like Hoover in his final months in office with his $700 billion bailout.

Second, and more specifically America talked and built trade barriers. As one of Hoovers parting floundering moves to try and stabilize farm prices, he signed the Smoot-Hawley tariffs. Economists still disagree on all the reasons that caused the depression but almost universally these tariffs are condemned as contributing to the depression. And Obama now? One of the things he has promised is to renegotiate NAFT which stripped of the poli-speak means he will increase trade restrictions in some way. If there is anything that economists can agree on it is that restricting free trade will only hurt the economy.

Third, we are soaking the rich and the corporations. FDR passed the Revenue Act of 1935 that increased the top rate of tax for those earning more than $50,000, and increased the corporate tax. Today Obama wants to tax the Joe Plumbers and windfall profits from the oil companies and anyone else who has succeeded. If we are concerned about the lack of capital in the market, why would offer as a solution to tax that capital more and decrease the supply? It makes no sense at all.

Some might look at the Revenue Act of 1935 and believe that it was part of the solution to the problem since the worst really happened in 1929 and everything after that was smooth upward sailing. Not so. In 1937 we had the Roosevelt Depression which drove the economy down and unemployment up significantly in a manner that perplexed Roosevelt. Additionally, one of the biggest points missed about the Depression is not that we had a crash or panic in 1929. All through American history the relentless drive upward has experienced panics, recessions or drops. Most of the time these panics have been short-lived and limited to those who speculated. The depression was unique not only in how deep it went but in how long it lasted. It was more than a decade until we recovered. Not surprisingly, it was unique in that amount of government intervention.

So our outlook for the future? I want to be on record to say that if Obama repeats these problems of the Great Depression, we are not likely to see an economic turn around very soon. I don't say this lightly. I believe the American economy has an incredible resiliency, yet it is not above being strangled. Welcome to the european/socialist invention of the extended and expanded recession.

Friday, November 7

WSJ Says Paul Ryan for Republicans

Thursday, November 6

I support Ron Paul

At least on this one:

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress’ throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It’s bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

Evangelical Electoral Map

Tuesday, November 4

Prop 8 Hate Crime?

Where is this guys tolerance?

CARLSBAD, Calif.—An elderly Carlsbad couple was punched by a neighbor during an angry confrontation over Proposition 8 yard signs.

Lt. Neil Galluci says 53-year-old Lawrence Pizzicara was arrested Monday night and booked for investigation of elder abuse and battery causing great bodily injury.

Investigators say the couple—a 76-year-old man and his 77 year-old wife—had placed a "Yes on Prop. 8" sign in their yard. Tuesday's ballot proposition would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

The lieutenant says the couple's neighbor then allegedly placed a "No on Prop. 8" sign on the couple's property and a fight broke out.

Paramedics treated the couple.

Saturday, November 1

Europe and Obama Like this

Just another reason to vote McCain. Unless you want the moral and economic collapse of Europe.

If John McCain becomes the next U.S. president, it will send europe into a fit of despair not seen on the old continent in decades. After all, Barack Obama is Europe's candidate,