Friday, June 29, 2012

Supreme Agony, Statist Ecstasy

I do not agree with Chief Justice John Roberts' decision.  It explodes government's taxation powers.  I side with the dissenting minority, so this is an explanation, not a justification.

Democrats are right. The Supreme Court is political. It's complex interrelationship with the other branches always has been, going all the way back to President Andrew Jackson’s famous quote defying a Supreme Court decision: “John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!”

The Supreme Court tore up FDR in the early days of his creating alphabet soup agencies. But the public began to perceive them as obstructionist in a time where the federal government needed latitude, so they softened their stance to guard their power. Later, President Roosevelt would overreach, threatening to pack the court. The public rejected that as well, and thus continued the political balancing act.

The result was a continued expansion of federal power that was begun at the start of the progressive era.

Chief Justice Roberts Saved the Day

In a feat of cowardly political and legal jujitsu, Chief Justice John Roberts made a political calculation, joining with the liberal justices to avoid a five alarm political firestorm in an election year. This kicks the issue back into the political arena where it belongs. Being on the winning side, he got to write the majority opinion and shape it, carving the precedent as narrowly as possible.

He allowed Obamacare to stand while simultaneously checking an expansion of federal power under the commerce clause.

Roberts apparently found the two other likely outcomes too earth-shattering

Striking it down completely could have set a precedent that government does not have the power to tax us in this way, setting the stage for the destruction of Social Security and Medicare, which are funded by mandatory taxation.

Small government conservatives like me thrill at the prospect, but suddenly shattering a model that tens of millions depend on is not the smart way to do something, and such radical remedies are not conservative.

Commerce Clause expansion was the argument upon which opponents hung their opposition.  The other outcome he avoided was allowing government to claim it had this authority under the commerce clause. That would have been catastrophic, essentially declaring that there is nothing the federal government may not do if it posits an appropriate pretext.

He ingeniously rejected the notion that this was permissible under the commerce clause, thereby saving us from another expansion of this already gargantuan federal government permission slip. It was also a stroke of genius to declare this as falling under the federal government’s already-established taxation power.

This decision sets no precedent

Government already and still does have too much power, but this did not grant it any new ones. There is no precedent here, no new rights created.  What the ruling does do is egregiously expand government's taxation powers. The government can tax what it wants when it wants to, and that is the bucket the Chief Justice has dumped Obamacare into.

They won’t force you to eat your arugula or put solar panels on your roof, they will just tax you punitively if you don’t. Could we end up being taxed by the pound? Why not? This opens the way for Bloombergian taxation of all kind of stuff that’s bad for you: Fatty meats, cheesecake, ice cream…

But the power was already there. Has been for a hundred years, it is just metastasizing now.

Elections have consequences. The final vote on Obamacare will be this November.

Bonus Material:
Market-based Alternatives to Obamacare
Why Obamacare will fail: A Reading List
Why Obamacare is Doomed

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Progressive States of America

Here is where the United States is at:
The regime of public spending has at last drawn so many groups into the public arena in search of public dollars that it has paralyzed the political process and driven governments to the edge of bankruptcy.
Rent-seeking coalitions have little interest in moderating their demands in the interests of the broader economy ... (Future Tense – The Fourth Revolution)
President Obama is right. We can’t go back to the failed policies of the past. Progressive tax and borrow and spend does not work.

James Piereson has written an article entitled Future Tense – The Fourth Revolution. In it he explains that the US government, rather than being equally shared by two parties, has actually always been dominated by one party or the other that sets the “regime” that the other party must work within. The regime continues until a “revolution” happens that breaks the grip and ushers in something new.

Three Revolutions
The United States has been shaped by three far-reaching political revolutions: Thomas Jefferson’s “revolution of 1800,” the Civil War, and the New Deal. Each of these upheavals concluded with lasting institutional and cultural adjustments that set the stage for new phases of political and economic development. 
The dominant parties in each of these eras might be called “regime parties” because they were able to use their political strength to implement and carry forward the basic themes around which these political settlements were organized.
In this sense, the United States has rarely had a two-party system but rather a one and one-half party system consisting of a “regime party” and a competitor forced to adapt to its dominant position.
Are we on the cusp of a new upheaval, a “fourth revolution” that will reshape U.S. politics for decades to come?
... based on the evidence of the three previous revolutions, American voters are unlikely to support for very long any party that fails to enhance their standard of living or the nation’s position in the world.
... each of these realignments discredited an established set of governing elites and brought into power new groups of political and cultural leaders. After reorganizing national politics around new principles, these new elites took control of the national government, staffing its departments and agencies with their political supporters. As they strengthened their control over the system, they also gradually extended their influence into important subsidiary organizations, such as newspapers, college and university faculties, book publishers, and civic associations. 
College and university faculties and our major newspapers today are overwhelmingly Democratic; from the 1870s into the 1930s, they were generally Republican. This is one of the factors that cements any realignment in place and gives it the stability to persist over many decades. (Future Tense – The Fourth Revolution)
It makes sense. It explains why even Ronald Reagan, with the electorate overwhelmingly behind him, could not roll back government. Skilled communicator that he was, he was debating issues framed by FDR and LBJ.

It's FDR’s World, We Just Live in it…
In the midst of the Great Depression, FDR’s Democratic Party organized the modern system around the politics of public spending and national regulation. (Future Tense – The Fourth Revolution)
The FDR system is collapsing--It's unsustainable...
The question today, then, is whether or not the party system formed in the 1930s and 1940s is about to exhaust itself in a new upheaval that will lead to some new political alignment around a new constellation of issues. There is little doubt that many of the political signs present in earlier upheavals are increasingly in play today. (Future Tense – The Fourth Revolution)
He concludes that the answer is yes…
This point will arrive fairly soon for the following reasons: (1) unsustainable debt; (2) public promises that cannot be fulfilled; (3) stagnation and slow growth; and (4) political paralysis. The last point is important because it means that the parties will fail to agree on any preemptive solutions to the above problems until they reach a point of crisis.
I agree. The way ahead? Booming Sweden’s Free-Market Solutions

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Western Nile Delusion Syndrome

What's happening in Egypt should not surprise anyone.  It is a traditional country and its people express traditional views.
We can’t do anything about the disposition of the Egyptian electorate, but we could at least stop deluding ourselves. (Mark Steyn – Brother’s Day)
Everyone is wondering how the Muslim Brotherhood candidate won in Egypt, and how they won so many seats in parliament. What happened to the secular, sexy and cool revolution?

A simple reading of Egyptian polling data predicted this:

* 95%: Say it's good that Islam plays a large role in politics
* 54%: Believe men and women should be segregated in the workplace
* 82%: Believe adulterers should be stoned
* 84%: Believe apostates from Islam should face the death penalty
(Source:  Globe and Mail PEW Survey Results)

We’ll see how “sexy and cool” this all is a year from now…

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Obama's Immigration Decree: The Ugly Details

Obama’s Dream Act gambit is a bald-faced political ploy to make up for his immigration enforcement sins

Obama’s imperial Dream Act decree is fraught with danger and rife with loopholes, not to mention that it deals with a murky world where facts cannot be established and documentation fabrication is rife. This is a perfect example of why our government was not designed to be run by dictatorial fiat. Open hearings where experts for all sides can testify is how policies like this must be enacted in a democratic republic.

Mickey Kaus provides damning details on Obama’s immigration diktat:
It also would give work permits to those who snuck across the border by themselves as teenagers. “Through no fault of their own” is a talking point for DREAM proselytizers, not an actual legal requirement. (Kausfiles – Maddening Details)
He goes on to explain that “Continuous residence” doesn’t mean what we think it does. Even those who returned home (wait, I thought this place was their home?) and then came back are still eligible. Also, criminals are not excluded so long as their jail stay was less than 90 days.

Please go read Micky Kaus’s excellent blog post on this. He is a superb blogger who marshals his facts carefully, and most importantly, he links everything so you can go investigate it yourself. Follow the links in his post and you’ll understand why the President’s actions are so damnable.

The Obama Administration has done a pretty good job on immigration

I want to give President Obama credit. About 1/3 of jobs filled in the US now use e-verify, and under the Obama administration, government immigration audits of companies has increased. I applaud this approach. I don’t like workplace raids, with armed federales storming workplaces like this is some third-world dictatorship.

E-Verify cracks down on identity theft and reuse of dead people’s social security numbers, which is how illegal immigrants get “legal” documentation. The immigration audits do the same kind of checks on a company’s personnel data. When an auditor finds a discrepancy, he asks to interview the employee in question. If the employee is using bogus data, he takes a powder. If it is a mistake, the employee comes forward and the situation is resolved.

This two-pronged approach is the intelligent and efficient way to go about it. Add in some smart border control and we would have the problem of illegal immigration contained. I’m not so adamant on The Fence. An 11 foot ladder overcomes a 10 foot fence. What I am for is to stop spying on Americans with all those drones and instead press them into service on the border. Add in sensors on the ground, command and control networks, National Guard augmentation, and you have something much more effective than a fence.

Once people know that they cannot get a job or social services using bogus credentials, they will stop coming here illegally. With the border secured and our immigration situation under control, we can then allow in people who want to work or visit relatives. Most importantly, they can enter and travel freely with dignity, as befits this land of the free and home of the brave.

Kausfiles – Dream a Little Dream

Monday, June 25, 2012

“The Whole Damn Kebab Van will go up in Flames”

The Greek vote two weekends ago merely delayed the inevitable. The continuing Eurozone saga lurches from crisis to “solution,” temporarily soothing the markets until the solution is seen to be no solution at all, then a new crisis flares up… See the pattern?
Greece is still likely headed for the exits this year. The economy is just too sickly to meet the bailout requirements, and Germany is highly unlikely to ease them enough to make a difference. (James Pethokoukis)
It’s Too Big to Control

I love Brit Janet Daley’s caustic but accurate take…
The economy is now beyond the control of national governments, and therefore outside the remit of democratic politics. It has become truly global, and thus a law unto itself; nation states have gone broke in their attempt to feed its gargantuan appetites for consumption and debt.
The remedies for this began in panic and are now ending in delusion: first the banks went bust and were bailed out by governments; then the governments went bust and needed to be bailed out by – whom? International funding agencies which get their cash from – where? From central banks which will have to print gigantic amounts of money to replace all the money that simply disappeared in the bad debt that bankrupted the banks in the first place.
If You Believe in Fairy Tales, Clap Your hands!
And if we all agree to accept the illusion that this newly printed cash has actual value – if we all clap really hard and say that we believe in fairies – then the whole show can get back on the road and we will be rich again.
Give us the Loot or Tinkerbell gets it!
But what will be required is a world-wide agreement to participate in the illusion. It will rely on every country, and every government, and every electorate, being prepared to say: “Wealth can come from thin air. It doesn’t need any basis in real income or assets to make it viable.”
If the population or the political leadership of one country (Germany) insists that money must be earned before it is spent, then the game is up and Tinker Bell dies. (Janet Daley)
Democratic Dark Ages

London Mayor Boris Johnson puts his own formidable intellect to the task of scattering the fairy dust…
It is one of the tragic delusions of the human race that we believe in the inevitability of progress.
We look around us, and we seem to see a glorious affirmation that our ruthless species of homo is getting ever more sapiens. We see ice cream Snickers bars and in vitro babies and beautiful electronic pads on which you can paint with your fingertip and – by heaven – suitcases with wheels! Think of it: we managed to put a man on the moon about 35 years before we came up with wheelie-suitcases; and yet here they are. They have completely displaced the old type of suitcase, the ones with a handle that you used to lug puffing down platforms.
On the contrary: history teaches us that the tide can suddenly and inexplicably go out, and that things can lurch backwards into darkness and squalor and appalling violence. The Romans gave us roads and aqueducts and glass and sanitation and all the other benefits famously listed by Monty Python; indeed, they were probably on the verge of discovering the wheely-suitcase when they went into decline and fall in the fifth century AD.
And now look at what is being proposed in Greece. For the sake of bubble-gumming the euro together, we are willing to slaughter democracy in the very place where it was born. What is the point of a Greek elector voting for an economic programme, if that programme is decided in Brussels or – in reality – in Germany? What is the meaning of Greek freedom, the freedom Byron fought for, if Greece is returned to a kind of Ottoman dependency, but with the Sublime Porte now based in Berlin?
It won’t work. If things go on as they are, we will see more misery, more resentment, and an ever greater chance that the whole damn kebab van will go up in flames. (Boris Johnson)
I am not reveling in any of this. The same problems beset us as well, to the tune of over $4 trillion at the state and local level alone. The irony is that as soon as our economy starts booming again, the interest on our debt will shoot up and consume an even greater percentage of our federal budget.

But on the bright side, President Obama Played his 100th Round of Golf last Week!

Sunday, June 24, 2012

How do You say I Love You?

My wife just got back from a month of being with her mother who is ailing. My mom and dad took the kids, so we're enjoying a honeymoon. Staying up late talking, listening to music or watching a movie. Serenades, dancing, cooking, lazing in bed way past the usual wake up time and enjoying the cool mornings.

Every couple with children still in the house needs to take some time alone. Life's everyday troubles and mundane minutiae accumulate like barnacles on our souls, and some time alone focusing on just one another can melt them away.

I'm not the strong silent type who grudgingly grunts out answers, but I'm not Mr. Romantic all the time either, constantly holding hands and calling Mrs Silverfiddle "honey dear," and being at her every beck and call. I'm a big honey-do shirker and I am also not very good at empathy, or listening to long, drawn-out emotional sagas. Having daughters, I'm getting better at it though.

But my wife and children know that I love them, and my wife and I do our best to model a good marriage for our children. The psychological imprint of husband and wife, dad and mom, man and woman is critical to the ability of children to become healthy adults and form meaningful, nurturing relationships of their own.

I express my love by singing and cooking and dispensing cash

I thanked my dad for coming over to pick up the kids by smoking a mess of beef ribs and serving them up with corn on the cob.

I welcomed my wife with hot wings, shrimp scampi skewers, asparagus and seasoned potato wedges, all grilled. And of course I grabbed my guitar and serenaded her with our old romantic favorites (that include both Guns and Roses and Jose Luis Perales) as she sipped a chilled Spatlese I had poured for her. Tonight I'm doing her favorite, smoked baby backs.

It is so easy to say I love you, but putting love into action is the real test, and like all of us, I have failed many times, probably more than most.

There are an infinite number of ways to say I Love You...

...Patiently rearing and nurturing young souls, freely giving them your time and guidance, and spending your money on them instead of yourself...

...Being both mom and dad for months and years while your husband is off serving in some foreign land again...

...Giving back your bride temporarily to the family who gave her to you because they need her...

...Returning to your childhood home to nurse the aging mother who long ago nursed you...

May I never miss another chance...

Friday, June 22, 2012

Ask Comandante Obama

What if Obama took another cue from Hugo Chavez and started hosting his own TV show?

Frank J Fleming, the founder of IMAO has a book out and has been making the rounds. He’s a cross between Dave Barry and P.J. O’Rourke. His most famous essay is Nuke the Moon, “A Realistic Plan for World Peace.” I’ve been a fan of his since 2003. It was pretty cool hearing him interviewed on The Michael Medved show.

His blog posts are often bullet lists of quick-hit thoughts such as this one:
“What I hate most about Obama’s kill list is that he’s hogging all the choosing who dies. I want to pick some!”
It gave me a great idea. Obama could have his own weekly TV Show, like Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, call it “Ask Dear Leader” or something like that. People could call in and ask him about drug use and how to start your own choom gang, identity politics and basketball tournament brackets.

He could lecture us on improving communities based upon his "successful" efforts in crime-riddled Chicago, or regale us with tense stories of eating popcorn in the situation room while real men grimly and professionally carried out his orders.

Imagine his O-ness, teleprompters at the ready, taking phone calls live on the air from ordinary proles:
Caller:  Hey Uncle Obama, gimme summa those Obamabucks you got in your stash!
Prez:  Do you own a green company?
Caller:  Commandante, is driving a bus a green job?
Prez:  "Why sure it is!" In fact, every one of those passengers on your green bus is counted as a job saved!
"Pick the Target"

A special feature of the show could be “Pick the Target: You be the President,” where a lucky citizen could help El Presidente select the next target for extra-judicial killing. Imagine the fun! One of King Obama's ordinary subjects shuffling through a card deck of bad guys, maybe there could be a bonus if the person picked happens to be a US citizen.

Perhaps a few times a year the White House could make it extra-special by letting the lucky participant pull the trigger. Maybe once a year they could pick one of the previous winners to actually fly in the Batcopter with the President and VP Biden as they swoop down into a terrorist compound a kill a perp with their bare hands!

What do you think? I’d like to hear your ideas for making Comandante O’s television program an entertainment success!

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Liberal Talking Points, and Other Amusements

Privatization can save money, but not how progressives do it...

Last week, the Marxist Merganser quacked:
If you were up on what Landesinspekteur Bloomberg is really up to you'd be debating Matt Taibbi's article on his thought's about privatizing the city's parking meters and how well that worked in Chicago.
This is a prime example of the intellectual flabbiness of the left. Ordinarily smart people like Ducky read something, partially digest it, and run off screaming whatever half-baked propaganda lesson they think they got from it. 

I went to Tabbi the Hissing Cat’s article expecting an anti-libertarian, anti-privatization diatribe. Instead, I read a thoughtful piece on how short-sighted and desperate progressive governments can be.
A New York parking meter deal, like the Chicago deal, would be a perfect example of the deeply cynical short-term thinking of many American politicians these days. These deals involve a sitting executive selling off a valuable piece of city property at a steep discount to private financial interests (often, to friends or campaign contributors), in order to solve a current cash flow problem that, surprise, surprise, will still be there the year after you finish spending the proceeds of your sale.
In Chicago’s case, Mayor Richard Daley sold 75 years of meter revenue – worth an estimated $5 billion – for $1.2 billion. So he gets 20 cents on the dollar for the city’s parking meters in 2008, and then in 2009 the city still has a budget problem that’s now worse, because there’s no parking meter revenue anymore, ever.
[...] In some Chicago neighborhoods, the meter rates went from .25 cents an hour to $1 an hour in the first year of the deal, and then to $1.20 after that. (Taibbi – Rolling Stone)
When cornered, the rats will eat their own children. We should learn a few lessons from that. First, do not put progressives in charge of anything larger than their own lives or their own voluntary collectives. The larger lesson we should learn is to never take at face value anything a lefty says.

The Progressive State is Eating Itself

See, the economic object of something like a parking meter, a gas tax, or a fishing license, is to collect money for an activity from the groups of people that do those activities, like parking, driving on our roads or fishing in government lakes and streams. It makes sense. But the progressive government model has eaten the seed corn, the inheritance is gone, and they’ve got to hock the family china and silver, as well as sell off some of the family businesses, just to maintain their outrageously generous lifestyle.

Privatization makes sense for, say, trash collection, reducing the payroll and getting the city out of the business of maintaining a fleet of trucks. The same could apply to outsourcing parking meter operations to increase efficiency and save taxpayers money. But that’s not why they did it in Chicago, and it’s not why New York is doing it. 

They’re doing it because they are junkies who need cash. Now.  Taibbi is right. They are foolishly forgoing a future revenue stream for cash today, and they are getting pennies on the dollar. This is a sign of desperation; the drunk selling the family car so he can buy more hooch. This is where pie-in-the-sky progressivism ends up. They always end up running out of other people’s money.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Illegal Immigration Benefits all Americans

Democrats, and skeptical Republicans, are making much of Romney’s bobbing and weaving this past Sunday on the immigration issue and Obama’s decree that those brought here as children be shielded from deportation and given legalized status. I’m not defending Romney, he’s a politician in the arena so he’s fair game for the rotten eggs flung his way.

People on all sides want to paint this as a black and white issue, but it’s not. We have laws on the books, but we don’t enforce them, making a mockery of not just immigration laws, but all laws. Illegal immigration has a corrosive effect on our society and our souls.

Progressive nanny-staters and the Chamber of Commerce form an unholy alliance to continue bringing in second-class citizens so we can exploit them for cheap labor and add them to the cohort of government wards. We are collectively committing a human rights abuse on a grand scale. Yes, “they” come here illegally, but we put the come-hither on ‘em, we beckon them. Border enforcement is paltry, worker verification a joke, social welfare readily available with no questions asked, free school and medical care, housing and food assistance…

Can you blame people coming here illegally? 

 Put yourself in the shoes of a mom or dad. They improve their quality of life by simply crossing the border, and from their reasoned point of view, the American government can’t be serious about its laws when they give illegal immigrants access to all the same stuff a citizen gets?

Really, what separates an illegal immigrant from a citizen? They’re normalized! They work, own houses and cars and their kids graduate high school and college. They just have to look over their shoulders every now and then.

We can’t punish the children for the crimes of the parent, say those who want to legalize people brought here as children. But children are punished all the time for their parents mistakes. Parents who act irresponsibly can drive the family to poverty; the children pay. Parents who commit crimes go to jail and leave parentless children behind, so this argument doesn’t hold up.

On the other hand, does it make sense to send a person back to a country he or she has never been to? Especially if that person is a productive member of our society and we encouraged the parents to come here?

The battle lines are drawn: Liberals who have no respect for the rule of law except when it benefits them want all immigrants legalized because they need new voters. Or maybe it’s compassion? Conservatives want them all deported because rightwingers hate everybody that doesn’t look and talk like them. Or maybe they hold the quaint idea that laws should be enforced?

The Simple Solution

The simple solution is to protect our borders and enforce existing immigration law. Put worker verification in place nation-wide. Our banking system of ATMs and debit and credit cards works almost flawlessly, and you’re going to tell me we can’t verify if someone is legally entitled to work in the US or not? We have the technology. We also have to put policies in place to determine status before doling out government assistance.

If conservatives saw that government was enforcing the law, most would probably accede to liberal demands to legalize those already here who meet the criteria laid out by President Obama. But who wants solutions when festering sores and bloody shirts are so much more effective in stoking ideological fervor?

Census Bureau – Hispanic Facts
Americans Favor Arizona Immigration Law
Pew Hispanic Center
NRO – Hispanic Poll Results
TNR – Immigrants and Job Creation

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Dead Voters, Brain-Dead Government

Obama’s Party and Legal Plenipotentiary Heinrich Holder, cornered and in a defensive crouch, is an embarrassment to himself, his Department of inJustice, and the Imperial President who appointed him. Do the forces of good finally have him cornered? The party apparatchiks are circling the wagons, so he probably will survive.
Next Wednesday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, headed by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), will decide whether to move a long-threatened contempt citation forward to the full House.
The smoking gun was the discovery earlier this month of wiretap applications that made it clear that senior Justice officials — including Assistant AG Lanny Breuer and others — were not only in the loop on F&F, but had approved its tactics.
And done so over the vehement objections of agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, who were tasked with the operation.  (Holder’s Last Days?)
Minister of Just Us

Holder’s most important mandate has been to advance the cause of Obama’s Democrat Socialist Party at all costs…
The AG is also involved in two controversial lawsuits, one against Arizona’s immigration-enforcement policies, the other against Florida’s attempt to purge felons, foreigners and the deceased from its voter rolls. In each case, Justice’s position plainly has more to do with firing up the Democratic base than with upholding the law. (Holder’s Last Days?)
Florida is Firing Back
The state of Florida is taking its controversial push to purge the state's voter rolls of ineligible voters to the next level with a suit against the Department of Homeland Security filed by Secretary of State Ken Detzner on Monday.
The suit accuses DHS of failing to provide the state with access to the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program database to verify the citizenship of suspected illegal immigrants on Florida’s voter rolls. Florida has been working off of its Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Department information over the past year to purge its voter rolls of suspected illegal immigrants, but the data can be out of date or incorrect. (Florida Sues DHS)

Why are they purging the roles? 53,000 Dead Voters Found in Florida
Only a vote fraud loving liberal would consider it “controversial” to clean a state’s voter rolls of illegal aliens, convicted felons and dead people.

RNLA lists instances of voter fraud in 46 states, but even one case is one too many. Every illegal vote disenfranchises a legal voter, and the franchise is the only power we hold over our governments at all levels.

USA Today – Voter Fraud
Minnesota Voter Fraud
Yes, Virginia, There Really is Voter Fraud

Monday, June 18, 2012

Obama Decree Aimed at the Illegal Immigrant Vote

The Obama Administration:  Constitutionally Ignorant
This term alone, the high court has ruled unanimously against the government on religious liberty, criminal procedure and property rights. When the administration can't get even a single one of the liberal justices to agree with it in these unrelated areas of the law, that's a sign there's something wrong with its constitutional vision.  (Why Obama Strikes Out in Court)
This statement from Heimatlandsicherheit Kommisar Janet Napoleonitano is exemplar of this administration’s bald-faced contempt for the constitution and the law:

Our nation's immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in a statement. "But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual circumstances of each case.” . (Obama Commands Immigration Laws be Loosened)
Is she stupid? Or evil? What is the symbol of justice? If a bureaucrat doesn’t like the law, she can’t just reinterpret it.

So Let it be Written, So Let it be Done!

I would have little problem with cutting some slack for people brought here illegally as children, were it not done via regal edict. Issues of this magnitude can only be accomplished by legislation, and only after we have put some controls on our border.  We are a democratic republic, not a dictatorship. 

What this will do is immediately attract more illegal immigrants hoping to cash in on the deal. 

"But Obama said they have to have to have lived here for five years! …” 

Illegal immigration is an industry based upon phony documentation. It will be easy enough to make anyone who arrives here eligible. They’re estimating 800,000 could take advantage of the program? I predict at least double that.

This is a play for the illegal immigrant vote by an administration that brazenly violates the constitution it swore to uphold.

Sunday, June 17, 2012

Military Gay Pride

OK, I'm trying to envision what the DoD's Gay Pride Month is going to look like...

I'm not being provocative or trying to be funny.  As most of you know, I am very libertarian on the issue of homosexuality, although I do take issue with noisy activism.

Here's where I'm coming from.  In the military, we celebrate Black History Month, Hispanic History Month, Asian-Pacific Islanders Month (I wonder how Japanese, Koreans, Hawaiians and Fijians all like being lumped into one government pigeonhole?), Women's History Month...

Each of these observances (except for Women's History Month, which is a stretch, but it works) is a celebration of language, folklore, dances, costumes, culture, food and music. They are fun for everyone, as the honored group invites in everyone to show off their culture.  Tuskegee Airmen, female generals, Asian scientists, Hispanic war heroes, all come in to speak at prayer breakfasts to honor each occasion.

So, someone help me out here.  What activities will mark Gay Pride Month?  Do homosexuals have special foods or dances that the rest of us don't know about?  Culture?  I could make jokes here about bathhouses and tea room sex (the always quaint British call it cottaging in merry ole England), but I won't.

Other than bringing in some gay veterans to speak, and holding diversity panels to lecture everyone, I don't know what activities they could feature.  Can anyone help me out?  Maybe I'm missing something...

Friday, June 15, 2012

The Bloomberg Conceit

Ray Bradbury died last week, and Bloombergian Progressives marched on...
“I think our country is in need of a revolution,” Bradbury told the L.A. Times. “There is too much government today.
We’ve got to remember the government should be by the people, of the people, and for the people.” He told Time a week later, “I don’t believe in government. I hate politics. I’m against it.

And I hope that sometimes this fall, we can destroy part of our government, and next year destroy even more of it. The less government, the happier I will be.”  (Ray Bradbury quoted at

Mayor Michael Bloomberg responds for the nanny state:
The NYC Department of Health is continuing its efforts to combat this epidemic by seeking to prohibit the sale of sugary drinks in containers of more than 16 fluid ounces at restaurants and food carts.  (Michael Bloomberg)
Michael Kinsley, whom I have always liked despite his liberalism, makes the basic libertarian case:
The basic case against New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s latest crusade, to outlaw the sale of extra- large sugared soft drinks, is Libertarianism 101: In a free country, people should have the right to do what they want, even if it’s bad for them. (Kinsley)
After that simple, heroic statement, he goes squishy.  But still he does us a service by damning the soulless process where our individual liberties are collectivized and thus made subject to public opinion and government authority:
Under the national health-care reform law, insurance companies must accept all comers. They cannot discriminate against you simply because you have terrible dietary habits and are almost sure to develop complications such as diabetes as you guzzle your way through life. Thanks to worthless bums like you, my insurance rates will be higher. So this is one in favor of the mayor. (Kinsley)
No.  It's not one in favor of the mayor.  Instead, it is a big one in favor of individual liberty.  Contrary to Kinsley's contention, it is a gargantuan argument against throwing all our rights into a big government pile and then diving in and fighting over them.  It is an argument to bar government from distorting free markets.

He concluded that nannying does work, using the government's decades-long anti-smoking crusade as an example…
But the results have been so dramatic that my libertarian instincts have been overwhelmed. During the 1990s, about 70 percent of high school students said they had tried smoking a cigarette. By 2009 the percentage was down to less than half. Regular users peaked at 36 percent in 1997 and were below 20 percent by 2009. Frequent users went from 12 percent in 1991 to 7 percent in 2009. Thousands of lives have been saved. (Kinsley)
But forcibly marching fatties off to diet and exercise reeducation camps would also work. And why not? Government could do it based upon already-established pretexts:  It's for the children; It’s for the good of the nation; and it will keep everyone's health care costs down!
Whether you're a majority or minority, bug off! To hell with anybody who wants to tell me what to write. Their society breaks down into subsections of minorities who then, in effect, burn books by banning them.  (Ray Bradbury quoted at

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Why I'm Voting for Mitt Romney

I don't hang on the words of politicians, and I ignore most of their blather for the public opinion-tuned rhetoric it is. I am also not a huge Romney fan, but the next President of the United States will either be him or Barack Obama, so for me the choice is an easy one.  I want the rich guy who understands economics and who actually has some accomplishments under his belt.

Granted, it's just words, but this is how a president talks.  Here's Mitt on Government:
Where my vision believes in the ingenuity of the American people, his vision trusts the wisdom of political appointees and boards, commissions and czars. It’s one in which ordinary Americans must get permission from people in Washington before they can buy, build, invest or hire.
It’s a world of federal mandates and waivers, tax credits and subsidies, federal grants and loan guarantees. It’s an economy where a company’s lobbyists will be more important than its engineers, and federal compliance lawyers will outnumber patent lawyers.
Business models based on building a better mousetrap will give way to those that seek the right mix of government subsidies, waivers and loan guarantees. And Chief Government Officers will join the ranks of Chief Financial Officers and Chief Operating Officers in corporate America’s executive ranks.
President Obama trusts in the wisdom of government. I put my trust in the ingenuity and creativity and commitment to hard work of the American people.  (Quoted by James Pethokoukis)  
When's the last time a Republican has stood up and said something like this, and campaigned on it?

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Loony Left's Intellectual Death Spiral

Lefwing wackadoos are becoming increasingly unhinged, and the derangement will swell as the campaign season wears on. If Obama starts sagging in the polls, I predict a 5 Alarm meltdown, complete with violence. Their worldview so conflicts with reality that they get nuttier by the day.

Trying to “prove” Obama isn’t the biggest spender president in history in light of his documented $5 trillion in debt strains credulity to the point of absurdity. Reagan was a skinflint compared to our current president. Yes, Reagan blew a lot of money, but he also killed inflation, reduced unemployment to 5%, brought down interest rates, strengthened the dollar, grew the economy by 30% and doubled real-dollar federal revenue intake. To top it off, Reaganomics kicked off the longest economic boom in our nation’s history. Every one of Obama’s economic indicators are the opposite.

For a recap on how a real president does things, read Veronique de Rugy’s data-filled article, President Reagan, Champion Budget Cutter. He’s the only president in the last 50 years to make real department cuts, and he did it by working with Democrats dominating both houses of congress. Obama's team is whining that they didn't have a supermajority.  Obama could learn some lessons from Reagan, but he won’t.

Not only does the left not have facts on their side, they suffer from an inability to see things as they really are…
Vanden Heuvel’s analysis of why the left lost in Wisconsin is simple, and if it is true, the left looks doomed. The answer is money, she says, reflecting a very widespread line of analysis. Thanks to the Supreme Court, the right is able to outspend the left ten to one, ensuring that the left can never win. (WRM)
This is why the left is doomed. Not because of Big Money flowing from the Koch Brothers and evil corporations, but because of their defeatist thinking. Rather than charge into the marketplace of ideas with bold, fresh thinking, they instead make whiny excuses for why they can’t win. Too much money against them, people are too stupid to understand their positions, vast Right Wing Conspiracies, rightwingers won’t let Obama and the Pelosicrats spend the Krugman-prescribed amount of stimulus money, republicans (who control only one house and for only half of Obama’s first term) are blocking everything…

They really believe, and explode in rage that they can’t get others to believe, that the Wisconsin recall election was decided by outside corporate money rather than Walker lowering taxes and unemployment and eliminating Wisconsin’s Democrat-induced debt without any government layoffs.

Do liberal Democrats really believe Wisconsinites are so stupid that they just sit by the TV drooling at the GOP ads and then go robot-like off to the polls rather than look at the facts?

This is an intellectual death spiral.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Free Market Myths

The problem with businesses and corporations is the rent-seeking relationships they've set up with governments at all levels:
(Adam) Smith knew the difference between being sympathetic to the competitive economy—which he called the “system of natural liberty”—and being sympathetic to owners of capital (who might well have acquired it by less-than-kosher means, that is, through political privilege). He knew something about business lobbies.(Sheldon Richman)
Very true, and it's a distinction we have lost. We should not be "pro business," we should be pro-free market, and let the capitalists take care of themselves.

Adam Smith warned us about rent-seeking capitalists who attach themselves to the government:
"The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order [that is, 'those who live by profit'], ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."  (Quoted by Sheldon Richman
Liberal Michael Kazin has written an article I agree with. First, he calls out Republicans for being hypocrites on the issue keeping business and government separate...
So it is ironic, if not hypocritical, that they constantly peddle a notion about the separation of business and government that has no basis in American history.
Conservatives now object to “crony capitalism,” but for much of U.S. history, businessmen have been hungry for it. Since the early nineteenth century, the government has helped fuel economic growth and corporate profit-making, and savvy businessmen and, recently, businesswomen have lobbied hard to keep those benefits coming. (Why Crony Capitalism is as American as Apple Pie)
All true, but is he really arguing that if we see that a policy we supported is wrong we should stick to it to avoid being hypocritical?
We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.  -- C.S. Lewis
It’s a good critique that is historically accurate, but then the author ruins it by making a common progressive mistake of conflating genuine government duties of infrastructure-building, with true crony capitalism

But I give him credit for discussing the good and the bad, because life is full of trade-offs. The big bad trusts that TR’s progressive government busted got big and bad through government protection. Big business welcomed government food safety laws knowing people would see the USDA stamp as a stamp of approval, while the onerous regulations would run the small guys out of business and act as a barrier to new entrants.

See also: 
 The Myth of the Free-Market American Health Care System
True Capitalists are Pro-Market, not Pro-Business

Monday, June 11, 2012

Whistling through the Graveyard

China and Russia are Cosying up to Afghanistan and Pakistan...
With the prospect of a decline in US influence in the region in sight, Russia and China are reaching out to Pakistan and Afghanistan in a bid to improve economic ties and to secure their southern borders against the spread of Islamic fundamentalism. (Foreign Policy)
They can succeed in AfPak where we have failed...

China and Russia can exploit with impunity the Afghan people and denude the environment as they strip the country of it’s mineral wealth. We cannot.  Our most sincere efforts are dogged the whole way by CNN, BBC and a polyglot crowd of nattering nannies from multifarious international organizations. We care about those things and adjust our policies until they are completely ineffectual, and then we are assailed for not doing enough and abandoning people.

Russia and China suffer under no such scruples. China is not content with slavery within its own borders.  It now runs slave camps all over Africa, complete with armed Chinese soldiers and mandarin bureaucrats. Do you think Russia will care about Karzai or the Pakistani’s hurt feelings? If they try the crap on Putin that they do on us, he will simply cut off the money and twist their tits until they cry uncle, all the while never changing his stony expression. Yes, the Russians and the Chinese know how to play the great game, we do not. We should admit it and quit the region. It’s a ruthless place and we just don’t know how to roll like that.

An Alignment of Strategic Objectives

We don’t want Afghanistan to revert to a terrorist haven. China and Russia share that goal, and it’s their backyard…
Both China and Russia will be happy to see US troops leave Afghanistan, but they are equally worried about the Taliban and other extremist groups penetrating Xinjiang province in southern China and the Central Asian republics, whose national security is very much in the hands of Russia.China is deeply concerned by the long-running crisis in Pakistan, fearing that it may lead to a strengthening of Islamic fundamentalism. (Foreign Policy)
A perfect opportunity to get them to pay the freight

We’re worried about who will fund the Afghan government, police and military? If Russia and China want to enrich themselves exploiting Afghanistan’s natural resources while checking terrorism, they will have no choice but to pony up the money to secure the place. Us getting out of there and leaving them to foot the bill would be a major feat of strategery.

China Gets Approval for Afghanistan Oil Exploration Bid

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Sunday Breakfast Burrito

I’m not a Rule 5 guy, but I’ve noticed that three of my top five posts involve bikini-clad women, and the fourth one is a close up of two women sipping cocktails. Hmmm… But I take comfort that Jesus is still #1.

Your Government Can’t Save You

There’s a serial bomber on the loose in Phoenix. Where’s Heimatlandsicherheit? Where’s Janet Napolianitano? Needle attacks in New York, children setting other children on fire in Florida…

We are an ill society, and no amount of government can protect us from ourselves. If someone wants to randomly shoot into people’s houses, or destroy as many others as possible with his car, he can do it, and get a lot of damage done before somebody intervenes. Someone can punch fellow pedestrians as he walks down the street or snatch a child that has strayed.

That’s life, and it’s why culture, morality and virtue matter more than the number of pie wagon bureaucrats we have on the public taxpayer-funded dole.

The Scott Walker Indictment Thing

What was behind a teary-eyed Fathead Ed Schultz bawling that "Scott Walker could very well be indicted in the coming days?"

Here’s the only halfway credible article I could find. It’s written by a lefty blogger in the normally sane Forbes Magazine: Is Scott Walker Facing Indictment? By Rick Ungar.  There could be something there, but we'll have to wait and see.

Go Army!

I took the kids out to Fort Carson yesterday to see the live fire demo they had prepared for the public.  It was really cool, with lots of static displays.  It started with a 6 humvee convoy coming under attack, exchange of small arms fire, then a blackhawk came in for a dustoff as they towed the disabled vehicle and called in reinforcements to bring down the bad guys.  They fired howitzers and tactical rockets and then two F-16s came in low to bomb an enemy position.

It brought back some memories.  You never appreciate that stuff as you do when you're being mortared and then you hear those F-16s screaming in low, cutting through the sky to bomb the crap out of the perps, and the artillery fire is music to your ears.  It was 90 degrees out and I had goosebumps.

I was more at home as we went through the support tent, since that featured my area of commo:  Radios, computers and satcom.  It was really neat being back in a tactical environment, even if I was merely among the herd of observers that included little kids and grandmas.  I also enjoyed seeing all the uniforms again and talking turkey with the Signal Battalion troops.

Hopefully we will continue to unwind our overseas contingencies and these types of exercises on our own territory will again become the norm.

Friday, June 8, 2012


That's right...  Fred Flintstone Beef Ribs!

Industrial man --a sentient reciprocating engine having a fluctuating output, coupled to an iron wheel revolving with uniform velocity. And then we wonder why this should be the golden age of revolution and mental derangement. -- Aldous Huxley

We live in a digital age, but the earth and humanity are analog, with our diurnal rhythms, ebbing and flowing and our refusal to conform to theoretical models.

Smoking meat, like most things in life has a science, but the process can only be perfected by art, that maddeningly unquantifiable pinnacle of human accomplishment.

The biggest mistake is taking them off too early.  Don't do that.

The charts will give you temperatures.  The charts will give you times.  But only a human being using subjective stimuli and atavistic judgment can tell when the ribs are done.  

Basic BBQ Rub from The Big Green Egg Cookbook:

3 Tbsp  sweet paprika
1 1/2 tsp celery seed
2 tsp garlic powder
2 tsp cayenne pepper
1/4 tsp sage (the book says cloves, but I don't like them)
1 Tbsp kosher salt
1 Tbsp ground black pepper
1/4 cup firmly packed light brown sugar
Combine all ingredients and mix well

How to prepare the ribs:

* Remove the membrane from the underside of the ribs and discard
* Brine them for 12-24 hours in a mixture flavored with the BBQ rub or seasoning of your choice
* Rinse them after brining to get all the salt water off, then apply the rub
* I smoke 'em at around 200 degrees, usually 5 hours or more.  Pecan, Oak, Apple and Cherry are all good woods to smoke these with

* Take 'em off, eat 'em, maybe with some corn on the cob (cooked on the grill still in the husk for 15 minutes after soaking them in water), and wash 'em down with a good microbrew of your choice.

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Culture Matters

Along with Thomas Sowell, James Delingpole and Mark Steyn, Victor Davis Hanson is one of my favorite regular reads. This past week he contrasted Germany and Switzerland with messier places like Italy and Greece to explain why culture is important

I have developed an unscientific and haphazard — but often accurate — politically incorrect method of guessing whether a nation is likely to be perennially insolvent and wracked by corruption.
Do average passersby throw down or pick up litter? After a minor fender-bender, do drivers politely exchange information, or do they scream and yell with wild gesticulations? Is honking constant or sporadic? Are crosswalks sacrosanct? Do restaurant dinners usually start or wind down at 9 P.M.?
Can you drink tap water, or should you avoid it? Do you mostly pay what the price tag says, or are you expected to pay in untaxed cash and then haggle over the unstated cost? Are construction sites clearly marked and fenced to protect pedestrians, or do you risk walking into an open pit or getting stabbed by exposed rebar?   (Why Bonn is not Athens
I had to laugh knowingly at his observations. Been there, done that. I have fallen into an open manhole in Quito, and I did almost impale myself on a jutting piece of rebar in Iraq, although it wasn't Iraq's fault.  It was a result of our bombing.

He’s also right on about imperiled pedestrians, and honking and screaming drivers and the wild gesticulations. Ever seen a car wreck in Italy?  Or a traffic jam in Tegucigalpa?  Places that feature such amusements are basket cases.  If you've ever driven in Spain but have never almost lost your life, count yourself extremely lucky.
To put these crude stereotypes more abstractly, is civil society mostly moderate, predicated on the rule of law, and meritocratic — or is it characterized by self-indulgence, cynicism, and tribalism?
The answers to these questions do not hinge on race, money, or natural wealth, but they do involve culture and the way average people predictably live minute by minute. Again, these national habits and traditions accrued over centuries, and as much as politics or economics, they explain in part why Bonn is not Athens, and Zurich is not Naples, or for that matter why Cairo is unlike Tel Aviv or why Mexico City differs from Toronto.   (Why Bonn is not Athens 
He ends by skewering the multi-culti PC crowd:
There is one final funny thing about contemporary culture. What people say and do about it are two different things. We in the post-modern, politically correct West publicly pontificate that all cultures are just different and that to assume otherwise is pop generalization, but we privately assume that you would prefer your bank account to be in Frankfurt rather than Athens, or the tumor in your brain to be removed in London rather than Lisbon.  (Why Bonn is not Athens)
Some challenge me on my dim view of Islam and Islamic countries. I’m not a natural bigot.  I’ve seen them up close with my own two eyes. And their cultural record over the past thousand years stinks, from number of books published to a paucity of benefits bequeathed to mankind. Who would want to live in one of their bigoted, constipated countries?  I don't begrudge them their lifestyle; it's just not my cup of tea.

Some have tried to make similar observations of Latin America, but they don’t murder one another over religion. Latin America can be dangerous, but much more often it is a place of happy wild abandon, dancing, laughing and drinking, and the women are much nicer.  And Panama, that place we cruelly ruled as a colony for 100 years (according to loony lefties who've never been there), is the only Central American country where you can drink the tap water.  Coincidence?

They do engage in bribery and nepotism in Latin America, which contributes to their tragedy of the commons, so pedestrians beware!

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Welfare Bums

They say you can’t legislate morality, and I tend to agree. We can put laws in place to punish certain activities, but the state cannot instill morality in individuals. It can tear them down, though.
After her lottery win Clayton continued to claim $200 a month in food stamps despite paying cash for a new home and car and said, 'I'm still struggling.'
The 24-year-old argued that she was entitled to the welfare handout as she has two homes to run.
'I feel that it's okay because I mean, I have no income and I have bills to pay,' she said. 'I have two houses.' (Amanda Clayton)
Massachusetts shows us how to handle cases like this…
Authorities say winning hundreds of thousands of dollars in the state lottery wasn't enough for two Massachusetts men.
They also allegedly collected welfare benefits at the same time.
State Auditor Suzanne Bump says both men face larceny charges. (Boston Globe)
Our government now provides many opportunities for citizens to debase and besot themselves and then cry that it’s not their fault. We provide incentives for it. How many government incentives are there to get off your ass and become self-sufficient?


Scott Walker kicked public sector union ass, again, last night, and I know everybody is flying high over that, so please feel free to go off topic and crow.  This is bad news for democrats and good news for America.

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Military Lactivists

More social activism in our nation's military...

“While there is no policy that addresses breastfeeding in uniform, Air Force spokesperson Captain Rose Richeson told MSNBC: "Airmen should be mindful of their dress and appearance and present a professional image at all times while in uniform." (Yahoo – Shine)
Hiking up your BDU blouse and t-shirt and opening your bra in public like the young lady in the picture does not present a professional military image.
"People are comparing breastfeeding in uniform to urinating and defecating in uniform. They're comparing it to the woman who posed in "Playboy" in uniform [in 2007]" Scott told Yahoo! Shine in an interview. "We never expected it to be like this."   (Yahoo – Shine
People who stir controversy with photos like this aren't advancing a cause, they are being provocative.  They love stirring the pot and making martyrs of themselves.

The problem here is that it is not their uniform. The uniform and all it stands for belongs to the United States Air Force. They throw out the red herring about people comparing breast feeding to urination, defecation or having sex in uniform to detract from their poor military image.  If there is an issue with the DoD not providing private facilities to breastfeed, then address it!  But you don't do it by disrespecting the uniform and violating the rules.

The DoD sets policy of dress and appearance and standards of behavior while in uniform. For example, you can’t walk around with your shirt unbuttoned or your jacket open. You must wear a hat when outside. You also can’t be fat. Even details like umbrella use and how to carry things in your hands are regulated. All of these things detract from a professional appearance and tarnishes the image of the military.

Motherhood First

We don't need Zena the warrior goddess mommies. Our country is not in mortal danger where we need every last citizen manning the battle lines. If motherhood conflicts with military duties, one of them has to go, and it sure shouldn't be the baby.

 A woman in the article talked about breastfeeding during a guard weekend. Should we be paying people to do that on military time? How much duty are you really pulling if you take your baby with you? Our military is becoming a European-style social program. We have maternity versions of Battle Dress Uniforms. Think about that. A pregnant woman dressed in combat camouflage. That same woman, rightly so, is also on a medical profile that prevents her from being ordered to dig holes, fill sandbags and perform other arduous field duties, but she’s being paid and she’s wearing the uniform.  It don't make sense

Rush Limbaugh said it best: The mission of the military is to kill people and break things. I served with many outstanding women, and I am all for them being all they can be so long as serving does not conflict with their motherhood.

* - I am very pro-breastfeeding.  Please see Breasts, Bucks and Bondage

Monday, June 4, 2012

They Need Us More Than We Need Them

China is cosying up to Pakistan...

Sensing an opening, China’s foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, is leading a high-level delegation to Pakistan’s capital. This is how the Pakistani press described Yang’s visit:
Yang met President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and held formal talks with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. He is also scheduled to meet Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani today.
At a joint news conference with his Pakistani counterpart, the Chinese foreign minister threw his country’s weight behind Pakistan’s efforts to safeguard its sovereignty, security, territorial integrity and dignity. (China Cosies up to Pakistan)
Our policy should be a modified Henny Youngman-Brer Rabbit Gambit.  It goes something like this:

“No, No, please China! Don’t take our friend Pakistan away from us! Please!”

“Please Pakistan, don’t run into the arms of China…”

Heh heh heh…

The dirty little secret is that us leaving Afghanistan and telling Pakistan what they can do to themselves and their Taliban friends creates a big mess for China, Russia and Pakistan. We leave, but there’s still the gaping open wound of murder, superstition, corruption and stupidity that we foolishly thought we could heal. And it’s on China’s doorstep and Putin’s “near abroad.”

Pakistan needs our billions. Why do you think we are still there, conducting drone strikes with impunity? Do you really believe Pakistan government statements about them being mad at us for conducting them? We’re doing it all from one of their military bases! We would be gone today, or our personnel there jailed if we were really violating the wishes of the Pakistan government. 

 It’s a cynical, hypocritical game, and we need to cash in our chips and wish them all a nice life.

Sunday, June 3, 2012

The Ultimate War on Women

Republicans played politics with the abortion issue last week, putting to an unsuccessful vote a law that would have criminalized sex-selection abortions...
Groups opposed to abortion rights are turning charges of a GOP "war on women" against Democrats who are opposed to legislation meant to ban sex-selective abortions.
Democrats hoping to grow a gender gap among female voters tilted toward their party have repeatedly hammered Republicans for engaging in a war on women over issues such as contraception rights.
Now opponents of abortion rights used the phrase ahead of a House vote Thursday imposing fines or imprisonment on doctors who perform abortions they know are motivated in part by the fetus's gender. The bill would also require medical professionals to tell law enforcement if they suspect an abortion has been performed for that reason. (Ultimate War on Women)
I’m torn. This is horrible law, based upon emotionalism and supposition rather than material fact, but I always enjoy it when republicans can hoist democrats on their own petard.

You can kill your unborn baby for any reason in the world except because she’s a girl

The law and the arguments surrounding it leads to a swampy quagmire. Abortion is OK, but not if you do it because the fetus is a female, but you can abort a female fetus as long as you don’t say that is why you’re doing it. 

Doctors must report to law enforcement if they think the abortion is sex-motivated, but only for female fetuses. Under the proposed law, a woman can storm into her nearest abortion mill and demand they rip the paternalistic, woman-subjugating male chauvinist piglet from her belly and she will continue to enjoy the favor of the state.

Whatever happened to Liberty?

We find ourselves in legislatively-created swamplands because there is no logic there, and without logic, it’s all up to the whims of whoever has the power. So we end up with contradictory and capricious laws that inevitably lead to thought crimes where the state of mind of the “criminal” is more important than the damage he has done.  This is not lawmaking.  It is issuing decrees and commands based upon the whims of the rulers.

Politics aside, we should pause to consider that abortion has led to the largest legalized slaughter of women and minorities in human history.

Ultimate War on Women
House Rejects Bill

Friday, June 1, 2012

Jackie Mason -- From Rabbi to Comedian

I love Jackie Mason.  Here's a short but funny one about how life can throw you a curveball...

How many of you started out doing one thing, but ended up on a different path? Are you happy with the outcome? I'm not one to live in the past or regret lost opportunities. The past is full of roads not taken, and regret will eat you up inside. I thank God for the twists and turns in my life, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

You can get your Jackie Mason fix at his You Tube channel, The Ultimate Jew.