I saw this story and was floored.  The WSJ reports that Democrats in Maine are doing the opposite of what Democrats normally do, and lowering taxes.  It seems that they recognized that if you tax businesses and individuals like crazy, they won’t put that money back into the economy.  They actually think that people and businesses are the best deciders at where to spend their own money.  Huh.

Anyway, here’s a quote I liked from the article, with a little true independent Maine style thrown in:

One question is how Democrats in Augusta were able to withstand the cries by interest groups of “tax cuts for the rich?” Mr. Baldacci’s snappy reply: “Without employers, you don’t have employees.” He adds: “The best social services program is a job.” Wise and timely advice for both Democrats and Republicans as the recession rolls on and budgets get squeezed.

That’s right.  Without employers, you don’t have employees.  Huh.  It’s like the whole world is turning upside down.  You should read the whole thing.

It’s only 5 minutes, so don’t expect every I to be dotted, and every T to be crossed, but the reasoning is sound.  The video is there to get you to understand why government will never clean up corruption on its’ own.  Government cleaning up government corruption is as good of an example of the fox guarding the henhouse as I’ve ever seen.  The bottom line is that it’s up to all of US to get our elected representatives to pare down this mess in Washington.

A simple analogy that answers the question, “What’s so bad about socialism?”

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little.. The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great; but when government takes all the reward away; no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that.

If not, let me explain.  Simon Jester is a personality invented by a sentient computer named Mike to harass the minions of the overbearing Lunar government, in conjunction with the Lunar inhabitants (Loonies) fighting for their liberty.  His symbol is reminiscent of the small picture you see at left.

Now, someone (well, Professor Bernardo De La Paz and Wyoming Knott) has put up a site which speaks to all of those who aren’t being heard.  That site is http://simon-jester.org.

As they say, they are neither Right nor Left, though I have a feeling that there are plenty on the Left who are all for the overreaching madness of the Federal government which is unfolding before us.  Those of the Left see the government as solution to all of the ills that exist in the world, even though their promises and programs over the last 70-some-odd years have not done anything except make these problems worse.  They have forgotten what Jefferson said – “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.“  They have also never learned of the Loonie saying TANSTAAFL (There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch).

Not so the folks at Simon Jester.  In a brilliant piece of writing, Professor De La Paz (or simply “Prof”) writes an engaging post describing who Simon Jester is and what he stands for.  You should read the whole thing, but here’s a little kernel of joy from this post:

This whole thing isn’t about the Democrats or the Republicans, because they are both taking us to the same place and they aren’t afraid of us anymore. It is about our Constitutional form of government.  The Rights were there before the words were written, for they are inherent in all people.  They don’t come from government; government, no matter how hard it tries, cannot dissolve them.

Incidentally, Thomas Jefferson made a similar statement about fear and government: “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.  When the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

As Simon Jester says, the government doesn’t fear the taxpayer any more.  There’s no reason for them to.  If they need more of what you have, they take it, while being exempt from this same theft.  Government derives its’ power from the people, and it is time to remind them of this fact.

Visit Simon Jester, read the blog, get fired up, wear a Simon Jester t-shirt to your local Tea Party, and get involved!  It’s time.  This is the only time I would have you follow the advice of President Obama, but as he said during his campaign, get in their faces!  The soft feelings of the statists can only be overcome with logic.  You don’t have to get mad and physical, but you have to keep them focused on the arguments and not allow them to get off topic with some statistic or manufactured story about starving environmentalists, wolf children subject to discrimination, or welfare queens not able to afford their massive texting habits.  They can’t think, they only feel.  Help them think and you’ll change their minds.

And if you’ve never read “The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress“, now’s as good a time as any.  You’ll definitely find some parallels.

What similarities? Hat tip: http://personallitmus.blogspot.com

I came across two interesting questions while reading today.

1. Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another?
2. And, if that person does not peaceably submit to being so used, do you believe that there should be the initiation of some kind of force against him?

I can easily answer both a big fat NO! I am curious what kind of answer you would get from most liberals. Our President keeps telling us we need to sacrifice more of what we have. This of course, is only focused on those of us who are already paying most of the taxes. Nothing is asked of those we are sacrificing for.

This leads me to a quote from Ayn Rand, “It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.”

I think it is easy to realize who wants to be the master. It is getting so tiresome to be told this is the new era of responsibility when the government does nothing but save businesses and individuals from their irresponsible choices, costing us a great deal of money and freedom.

First quote:

“And that’s what we’ve already begun to do. We, as a nation, have already begun the critical work that will lead to our economic recovery. It’s a recovery that will be measured by whether jobs are being created and families have more money to pay their bills at the end of each month. That’s why we’re preventing teachers and police officers from being laid off, and putting Americans to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges and dams, creating or saving 3.5 million jobs in the coming years.”

First, the government never creates jobs, they only create work. Work that ends when the job is over. Work, at the expense of the tax payer. Now those who have lost their jobs on Wall Street, IBM, and other places can look forward to doing construction work.

Next quote:

“And that’s why we’re putting a tax cut into the pockets of 95% of working families who will see it — see that tax cut in their paycheck by April 1st.”

We will all need this money back in our pockets.  Too bad it only added up to 30 dollars on our check, and only comes out of withholding, so it will be… you guessed it, taxable.  How this will cover the rising costs of goods and services? Can this possible help pay for the rising energy costs that will occur when he passes his cap and trade plan? He must not realize that people pay taxes, not corporations.

Another tidbit:

“This plan is one of the reasons that mortgage interest rates are now at near-historic lows. And we’ve already seen a jump in refinancings of mortgages, and homeowners taking advantage of lower rates. And every American, by the way, should know that up to 40 percent of all mortgages right now are eligible for refinancing.”

He states 40 % can refinance, but according to real estate market reports only 26% of Americans qualify based on the current criteria. Where does Obama get his numbers? There are 52 million homeowners with mortgages; 27 million owe more then the value of their home. Obama’s plan is suppose to help 4 million modify their loans and make it possible for another 5 million refinance. How does this add up to 40%? It is not even 40% of those who are underwater. Just more proof that he does not understand economics. Here is an article that shows all these numbers.

More:

“A lot of that is prompted by the financial crisis and the locking up of the credit markets. And that’s why when we are — when we talk about dealing with this credit crisis and the banks, I just want everybody to understand it’s not because we’re overly concerned about Wall Street or a bunch of CEOs; it’s because if we don’t fix credit, if we don’t get liquidity back to small businesses and large businesses alike who can have that — use that line of credit to buy inventory and to make products and sell services, then those businesses shrivel up and they start laying people off.”

More proof of what an idiot he is when it comes to the economy. He doesn’t even understand what happens during a credit crunch. Hasn’t the use of too much credit gotten us into this mess? Are they laying off because they cant get a loan, or is it that the government is taxing them out of business? It would be interesting to see what would happen if the government just let them keep some of their money.  Also, does he even know what the word “liquidity” means?  He is equating credit with liquid assets.  You can’t make this stuff up!

Let’s keep slogging through:

“Our success will also require freeing ourselves from the dangerous dependence on foreign oil by building a clean-energy economy, because we know that with this will not only come greater security and a safer environment, but new high-paying jobs of the future to replace those that we’ve lost.”

Where are these high paying jobs being created? The work his plan creates are all related to building roads, windmills, and solar panels or laying electric lines. (For full details on these, read the transcript.)  When have these jobs ever been high paying? Unfortunately for those looking for these high-paying jobs, he answers this in his next quote:

“All this can be done, but it also creates jobs right now. Our biggest problem, we don’t have enough electricians to lay all these lines out there. And these are jobs — these are union jobs that potentially pay $80,000-$90,000 a year, with benefits. But it’s a matter of making the investment in infrastructure and also then training the workers to be able to get those jobs. And that’s where we’re going to be focused on. That’s where the job growth is going to occur.”

These jobs are high paying because unions are involved. Look at what unions have done to the auto industry. We will be funding another group of overpaid union workers. Does anyone wonder what this will actually cost the tax payers? It is not sustainable, just look at where he United Kingdom is headed. His plan is to replace non-union jobs with union jobs, which will be bad for us all. He reinforces this further in the next snippet:

“Now, a lot of the outsourcing that was referred to in the question really has to do with the fact that our economy — if it’s dependent on low-wage, low-skill labor, it’s very hard to hang on to those jobs because there’s always a country out there that pays lower wages than the U.S. And so we’ve got to go after the high-skill, high-wage jobs of the future. That’s why it’s so important to train our folks more effectively and that’s why it’s so important for us to find new industries — building solar panels or wind turbines or the new biofuel — that involve these higher-value, higher-skill, higher-paying jobs.”

Here in New York and New Jersey, engineers and other high paying positions have been lost because their companies have moved out of the country. Are these the low-wage, low-skill labor jobs he referred to? It is a direct reference to the 5000 employees who were laid off from IBM. His plan is to replace these high-paying, non-union engineering jobs with high paying, high skill jobs building solar panels. Their current skills, and college degrees have prepared them well for these jobs. And if not he will train them for their new job.

Moving on to education:

“So a lot of times in Washington we get an argument about money versus reform. And the key thing to understand about our education system is we need more resources and we need reform. If we just put more money into a system that’s designed for the 19th century and we’re in the 21st, we’re not going to get the educational outcomes we need. On the other hand, if we talk a lot about reform but we’re not willing to put more resources in, that’s not going to work.”

Spending per pupil has never proved to correlate with providing a better education. Washington DC is a perfect example of this. They spend more per pupil than most places in the U.S., yet have some of the worst results in the country. He put a big emphasis on early education, from the cradle on and that kids no longer need a summer to work on the farm. How much time do they need to indoctrinate children?    One good thing that might come from this is an unhappy generation of kids who will never get a break. They might grow up wanting some real change.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. This doesn’t even begin to touch the amount of bull from this “town hall meeting”. I could go on and on, but I will leave you to read it and find for yourself his plans for our future.

What’s that?  You didn’t know about these terrorist criteria?  According to the governor of Missouri (any guesses on which party he is affiliated with), and the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) a report was made that describes these terrorists.  You can read the analysis and report here.

Have we forgotten what a patriot is? Does the fact that we disagree with the current administration make us domestic terrorists?  If so, the left certainly have been engaging in similar acts of “terrorism” for the last eight years. Weren’t they the ones that insisted “Dissent is patriotic”? It seems hypocritical for them to spend the last eight years working against Bush, but we are now told we need to just come together and give this new administration a chance.

David Harsanyi points out their hypocrisy in the Denver Post.  Here’s a quote:

“To require such fealty to power in the name of patriotism was once repugnant to the left. Now, with the right guy in charge, apparently it can once again be embraced. Change, indeed.”

Again a example of the pot calling the kettle black. When I watch what’s occurring in our country today, my children’s future is being changed to resemble something very different then what our founding fathers wanted for their posterity. Its hard for me to believe that when we speak up against the “change” they are bringing, that we are suddenly the enemy.

I have heard several things being thrown around about these tea parties etc that conservatives are traitors, racists, or just plain stupid and need to be reeducated.  Scary!!!!!  So does standing for the principles, values, and ideas that this nation was founded on make us patriots or terrorists?   If you have to think about this, you probably need to go back to U.S. History class.  Read the Declaration of Independence and The United States Constitution. I think so many fail to realize what it is our founding fathers sacrificed everything for. They certainly didn’t sacrifice so much for the what the statists are trying to force upon us.

“Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them.”

–Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking up Arms, 6 July 1775

Anyway! Time for some righteous indignation, done right.

If you haven’t seen or heard the next piece yet, you’re in for a treat. Hooray for the Internet and YouTube, which allows thing like this to go viral and get the exposure they deserve. Of course, this also brings us things like the two Chinese students who lip sync Backstreet Boys songs, but on the whole, it’s worth it. No more waiting for Big Media to decide what is “important” news and what is not.

Daniel Hannan is a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for South-East England. Last week he laid into Gordon Brown, who as Prime Minister of Great Britain, is implementing similar disastrous polices in the UK as we’re now seeing in the US. Unfortunately for the UK, they’ve been doing it for longer, so their economy sucks more.

Here’s my favorite part:

“I’ve long accepted that you’re pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things – it’s that you’re carrying on, wilfully worsening the situation, wantonly spending what little we have left. Last year, in the last twelve months, 125,000 private sector jobs have been lost – and yet you’ve created 30,000 public sector jobs. Prime Minister you cannot go on forever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorging of the unproductive bit.”

I encourage you to watch the entire thing. Then, I encourage you to ask your local representative why we’re not seeing similar pointed language from them directed at the current Congress and Administration.

What do these two people have in common? Both are connoiseurs of the luxury you can only find in a Gulfstream.

Everyone’s favorite Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is at it again.  The NY Post reports that Madame Speaker and her staff were up in arms due to the lack of Gulfstream G-5s to accomodate Madame’s Memorial Day plans.  Instead, the Air Force offered up a 737, but that was apparently not good enough.  When you are a celebrity, whether P. Diddy/Puff Daddy/Sean Combs, or Nancy Pelosi, the G5 is a must have item!  (Difference is, Puffy pays for his as a fractional.  Nancy has taxpayers to foot her bill)

Anyway, her office cracked the whip on the Air Force (because that’s why the USAF exists, to shuttle around Nancy Pelosi).  In an angry email full of the disdain her office feels for the military, they snapped “It is my understanding there are no G-5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable . . . The speaker will want to know where the planes are,” and in another, “This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset speaker.”

Someone tell me why she deserves this special treatment.  She is still a representative of the people, of her constituents.  Her actions, and those towards the USAF, indicate differently.  I thought we were in an economic crisis!  What happened to sacrificing and saving money?

Maybe Nancy could take some advice from the NY Times Editorial Board, dished out in November 2008.  True, this advice was given to auto industry execs who flew in on private jets to beg for their first handout, but paraphrased, the advice applies to Nancy and company.

“If [Congress] want[s] hardworking taxpayers to [fund their outrageous budget], they should leave the gold-plated transportation at home and fly the way their would-be benefactors do (if they fly at all): on ordinary commercial flights.”

Somehow, I don’t think the NY Times Editorial Board will apply the same logic and advice to Madame Speaker.  I am also awaiting the demonization of Speaker Pelosi from Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) and Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA).  They also excoriated the auto execs for their jet usage, offering up their extensive knowledge of the private sector to provide cost saving ideas and demogoguery.  Strangely, they remain silent on this latest excess of wasted money.