After poking around a little, I decided that I should point out the differences between the two major ideologies controlling American politics today. The fact that America, in my opinion, needs a third party on the national stage is another blog all together.
There seems to be a consensus that to the extreme right you have anarchy and to the extreme left you run into communism. The spectrum does not run circular, meaning if you keep going right you will not end up on the left.
The basic difference boils down to one thing, government. Liberals believe in big government and conservatives believe in limited government. It goes so much beyond, so I'll try to explain a little better. Conservatives believe in individual liberty, liberals believe in governmental control. Conservatives believe that people should be responsible for their own actions and their own lives. Liberals believe that people are a victim of society and need their lives regulated. A liberal will give a person a fish, a conservative will teach them how to fish. A liberal will give a person bread, a conservative will teach them how to bake. Liberals believe that people need everything provided for them, conservatives believe people are responsible for themselves. Conservative believe that hard work is rewarded, liberals believe that hard work should be taken. Conservatives believe that people are smart enough to make their own decisions, liberals believe that they are smarter than the people and should make the decisions for them. If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one, while the liberal tries to get guns banned. If a conservative doesn't like whats on TV, they change the channel while the liberal tries to ban the show. Basically, if a conservative doesn't like something, he chooses not to support it and the liberal tries to outlaw it. Liberals blame people for all the woes of the world, conservatives try to find the true cause of the woes.
There are a couple of current issues that helps illustrate this point. Health care and cap and trade. Both of these bills, take from those who produce and give to those who don't produce. The health care bill includes provisions to pay what you can, or more realistic pay what the government says you can afford. 5% of people need help with healthcare, but instead of correcting a flawed system, the liberal wants to control the healthcare for 300,000,000 people, because they know better. Because the humans are destroying the earth (based on flawed science), we need to monitor the consumption of America and take away from those who are "polluting" and give to those who aren't. Liberals want to set up smart grids and smart boxes to make sure we don't use to much energy.
The problem is the two major parties in America are all moving to the left, way left. The Democrat party is all about socialism and now the extreme left might as well be the Communist Party of America. The republican party is moving towards the center, the moderate republicans are just the old school democrats. Will this bring the injection of voters the Libertarian party needs to make serious inroads on creating a three party system in America or is the Shadow Party emerging?
Friday, November 27, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Obama the Moderate
As Rep. Wilson shouted "You lie!" during Presidential health care address to a joint session of Congress most people had an opinion whether he actually lied about illegal immigrants being covered by Obamacare. Is it really a lie if you change the law to grant amnesty to all the illegals that are going to be covered? Maybe the lie that Rep Wilson was talking about was all of the campaign promises that Obama made and hasn't come close to fulfilling. I'm not talking about all the promises all the politicians make when campaigning, I'm talking about Obama lying about the type of person he was during the campaign. Let's take a look at what Obama said or didn't say during the election and if had told the truth would he still have been elected?
If we start with the most common, had he told us we would appoint nearly 3 dozen czars, reporting only to him, not vetted by Congress or even approved in a constitutional way. That among these czars there would be a self proclaimed communist, a czar that believes forced abortions should be used for population control, a czar that believes that state should control the media. If Obama told us the truth about his plan to socialize the auto industry and replace the CEO with a campaign contributor. If Obama campaigned on shutting down thousands of auto dealerships whimsically choosing which ones stay open and which ones get closed. If Hugo Chavez said Obama would end up politically to his left, and talks shows warned against a socialist takeover would the Obama stream media attack them as domestic terrorists. If Obama told us he would spend $3 billion on "Cash for Clunkers" that uses taxpayer money to buy foreign cars. If he told us the stimulus bill was a joke, that it doesn't create jobs and the unemployment rate would soar. If he told us that his nomination to the Supreme Court was an activist judge that believed in legislating from the bench or State Department lawyer is a transnationalist who wants to use foreign law binding to US citizens or his regulation czar wants the right for animals to sue humans. If we knew that he would be a flop as a commander in chief and not speak to the field commanders for months, even after being sent a critical report. If Obama had told us the he would guarantee 90% of mortgages, imposing trillions in debt on US taxpayers who pay their mortgages and pay 80% of student loans at a cost of $1 trillion. If Obama told us he was going make the government a major shareholder in Citigroup. What if Obama's healthcare plan was the same as Hillary Clinton's, which Obama attacked in the campaign; that it would force everyone to buy insurance, tax good policies, business and insurance companies and use federal money to pay for abortions, grant health care benefits to illegal aliens. If Obama had told us that he would increase federal spending and debt from the multibillion to multitrillion and told us he would spread the wealth from the rich to the poor causing the budget deficit to balloon. If Obama had told us that his first speech abroad would be in Muslim Turkey apologizing for America and proclaiming that we don't consider ourselves a Christian nation. If we had known any of these things, maybe we would have known that when he said days before the election that he was days away from fundamentally changing this country, he was talking about socializing the country. Would he have been elected President of the United States. Obama campaigned on being a fiscal conservative and has proved to be anything but, spending more in the first year of his presidency than all other Presidents combined. He campaigned on creating a transparent government and the transparency is as clear as a brick wall. Obama campaigned on working with both parties and has shut the opposing party out. Obama said to judge him by who he surrounds himself with and if you look at his czars, you can see that he surrounds himself with radical, left wing extremists bent on destroying the America we know and our fore fathers build.
It gets even worse, would we have elected Obama if we knew that he didn't understand mathematics? When I was teaching and training to be a teacher we were learning about what was called new math, I wasn't a math teacher, so I didn't bother paying attention to "new math". I think I might need to explain. Edmunds.com released a study concluding that "cash for clunkers" cost taxpayers $24,000 per vehicle. Of course the White House accused Edmunds of using cars sales data on Mars. The study compared historical sales data during the recession to conclude that the $3 billion program only generated 125,000 new sales (sales that wouldn't have normally occured). "The Administration"'s rebuttal didn't include any figures, just the "excitement" generated by the program and failed to mention the number of foreign cars sold. That's not the only instance of "new math". Lets look at the stimulus program. "The Administration" issued a report claiming the stimulus created or "saved" 640,000 jobs (I have yet to find an economist that can measure a "saved" job) and quickly revised the report to 1 million jobs. If you take the 1 million jobs by the $160 billion (amount allocated by Sept 30) it cost taxpayers $160,000 per job created or "saved". VP Bidens aide accused reporters of calculator abuse and didn't include the jobs the White House hoped to create or "save" by the end of the year. The abuse of math with the White House doesn't end there, lets look at the first time home buyer program. $8,000 tax credit for 1.9 million people who qualified equals $15 billion in government subsidies. 350,000 sales generated by the program means that it only cost taxpayers $43,000 per house. These house were already built and didn't create or "save" any jobs. Obama's new math program must have been created to avoid releasing real information that shows how poor of a job "the administration" on trying to fix the economy.
The stimulus package is not intended for the United States citizen, it's intended for the the United States Government, to pay for all the new bureaucrats and federal agencies created to oversee these wasteful programs. It's designed to see if anyone is paying attention, just a small tax, a prelude to many more to come. All non governmental economists warned that a stimulus package would create a "W" recession, where there is a small recovery followed by another recession. You can't spend your way out of a recession.
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Winston Churchill
If we start with the most common, had he told us we would appoint nearly 3 dozen czars, reporting only to him, not vetted by Congress or even approved in a constitutional way. That among these czars there would be a self proclaimed communist, a czar that believes forced abortions should be used for population control, a czar that believes that state should control the media. If Obama told us the truth about his plan to socialize the auto industry and replace the CEO with a campaign contributor. If Obama campaigned on shutting down thousands of auto dealerships whimsically choosing which ones stay open and which ones get closed. If Hugo Chavez said Obama would end up politically to his left, and talks shows warned against a socialist takeover would the Obama stream media attack them as domestic terrorists. If Obama told us he would spend $3 billion on "Cash for Clunkers" that uses taxpayer money to buy foreign cars. If he told us the stimulus bill was a joke, that it doesn't create jobs and the unemployment rate would soar. If he told us that his nomination to the Supreme Court was an activist judge that believed in legislating from the bench or State Department lawyer is a transnationalist who wants to use foreign law binding to US citizens or his regulation czar wants the right for animals to sue humans. If we knew that he would be a flop as a commander in chief and not speak to the field commanders for months, even after being sent a critical report. If Obama had told us the he would guarantee 90% of mortgages, imposing trillions in debt on US taxpayers who pay their mortgages and pay 80% of student loans at a cost of $1 trillion. If Obama told us he was going make the government a major shareholder in Citigroup. What if Obama's healthcare plan was the same as Hillary Clinton's, which Obama attacked in the campaign; that it would force everyone to buy insurance, tax good policies, business and insurance companies and use federal money to pay for abortions, grant health care benefits to illegal aliens. If Obama had told us that he would increase federal spending and debt from the multibillion to multitrillion and told us he would spread the wealth from the rich to the poor causing the budget deficit to balloon. If Obama had told us that his first speech abroad would be in Muslim Turkey apologizing for America and proclaiming that we don't consider ourselves a Christian nation. If we had known any of these things, maybe we would have known that when he said days before the election that he was days away from fundamentally changing this country, he was talking about socializing the country. Would he have been elected President of the United States. Obama campaigned on being a fiscal conservative and has proved to be anything but, spending more in the first year of his presidency than all other Presidents combined. He campaigned on creating a transparent government and the transparency is as clear as a brick wall. Obama campaigned on working with both parties and has shut the opposing party out. Obama said to judge him by who he surrounds himself with and if you look at his czars, you can see that he surrounds himself with radical, left wing extremists bent on destroying the America we know and our fore fathers build.
It gets even worse, would we have elected Obama if we knew that he didn't understand mathematics? When I was teaching and training to be a teacher we were learning about what was called new math, I wasn't a math teacher, so I didn't bother paying attention to "new math". I think I might need to explain. Edmunds.com released a study concluding that "cash for clunkers" cost taxpayers $24,000 per vehicle. Of course the White House accused Edmunds of using cars sales data on Mars. The study compared historical sales data during the recession to conclude that the $3 billion program only generated 125,000 new sales (sales that wouldn't have normally occured). "The Administration"'s rebuttal didn't include any figures, just the "excitement" generated by the program and failed to mention the number of foreign cars sold. That's not the only instance of "new math". Lets look at the stimulus program. "The Administration" issued a report claiming the stimulus created or "saved" 640,000 jobs (I have yet to find an economist that can measure a "saved" job) and quickly revised the report to 1 million jobs. If you take the 1 million jobs by the $160 billion (amount allocated by Sept 30) it cost taxpayers $160,000 per job created or "saved". VP Bidens aide accused reporters of calculator abuse and didn't include the jobs the White House hoped to create or "save" by the end of the year. The abuse of math with the White House doesn't end there, lets look at the first time home buyer program. $8,000 tax credit for 1.9 million people who qualified equals $15 billion in government subsidies. 350,000 sales generated by the program means that it only cost taxpayers $43,000 per house. These house were already built and didn't create or "save" any jobs. Obama's new math program must have been created to avoid releasing real information that shows how poor of a job "the administration" on trying to fix the economy.
The stimulus package is not intended for the United States citizen, it's intended for the the United States Government, to pay for all the new bureaucrats and federal agencies created to oversee these wasteful programs. It's designed to see if anyone is paying attention, just a small tax, a prelude to many more to come. All non governmental economists warned that a stimulus package would create a "W" recession, where there is a small recovery followed by another recession. You can't spend your way out of a recession.
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Winston Churchill
Monday, November 2, 2009
Gun Control
Gun History
After reading the following historical facts, read the part
about Switzerland twice.
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.. From 1929 to 1953,
about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million
Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated
------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964.. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. >From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated
----- -------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million
educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
-----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
because of gun control: 56 million.
------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their
own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500
million dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was
expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them
of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens.'
Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew
most Americans were ARMED!
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS AND ISSUES EVERY ADULT20A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.
DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS
IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment, if you are too, please forward.
After reading the following historical facts, read the part
about Switzerland twice.
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.. From 1929 to 1953,
about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million
Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated
------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964.. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. >From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated
----- -------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million
educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
-----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
because of gun control: 56 million.
------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their
own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500
million dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was
expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them
of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens.'
Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew
most Americans were ARMED!
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS AND ISSUES EVERY ADULT20A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.
DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS
IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment, if you are too, please forward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)