Obama to be ousted in bloodless coup? Really?
September 30, 2009
The media is all a flutter with reports that the military may be planning to oust Obama. John Perry has the lead story titled, “Obama risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention“. Gore Vidal chimed in suggesting “We’ll have a dictatorship soon in the US“. Okay, this must be just a couple of kooks, right? Lots of folks are actually discussing the possibility including Rick Moran, Logan Murphy, Kathy Kattenburg, Darren Hutchinson, Will Bunch, Alan Colmes, John Marshall, Ed Morrissey, The Washington Monthly and the Times of London. First, good thing I still have my gun (do you have yours?). Second, I think it is offensive to make the charge that our military leaders would consider the possibility of ousting Obama. There are real men standing in those uniforms – men with honor and courage – to suggest they would commit treason is offensive.
So who would take over for Obama? Admiral Michael Mullen is currently the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Mullen graduated high school from Notre Dame High School in Sherman Oaks, CA and attended the United States Naval Academy. He has served our country his entire adult life. Want to make a bet as to whether or not Admiral Mullen will depose Obama? I would take your action that he wouldn’t.
So what about General James Cartwright, he is a marine and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – maybe he would be the one to depose Obama. General Cartwright graduated West High School in Illinois and attended the University of Iowa where he studied medicine. Cartwright is a naval aviator and has served in the military his entire adult life. Do you like him better for traitor than Mullen? Are you offended yet – I am sure he is.
So what is all the chatter REALLY about? The real issue is that the Left is trying to scare the American people – to further divide us. Conservatives have ZERO interest in a military dictatorship.
In defense of rape. . .
September 29, 2009
I recall a Texas gubernatorial candidate likened bad weather to rape suggesting, “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it”. Conservatives didn’t like his joke one bit and he lost the election. Earlier today I wrote about one of Obama’s czars who did nothing to protect a 15 year old from the sexual advances of an older man. I can’t imagine why we would put him in charge of protecting our children. What is going on in America?
This evening I was shocked to read blogs and news stories from the left defending Roman Polanski. For those of you who don’t know the story, at the age of 44 Polanski had sexual intercourse with a thirteen year old girl who he admitted drugging. He plead guilty and fled the country prior to sentencing. Polanski was arrested in Switzerland and is in the process of being deported to serve his sentence for rape. I guess I just don’t understand what is going on anymore. Some of my favorite filmmakers have signed a petition asking for Polanski to be released. Do they support Roman’s actions? How do they separate the man from the act? Is he such a great filmmaker that he deserves to get away with rape? Here are just a few of the 70+ film industry luminaries standing up for rape:
- Woody Allen
- David Lynch
- Martin Scorsese
- Michael Mann
- Harvey Weinstein
- (the full list is here)
We need to remember, as Kate Harding reminds us, “Roman Polanski Raped a Child” – this isn’t some private indiscretion between adults. Woopie Goldberg has suggested that this case is not about “rape rape“. Not rape? Huh? The Smoking Gun has the Grand Jury testimony here and explains the ‘non-rape rape’ as follows,
The thirteen year old’s troubling–and contemporaneous–account of her abuse at Polanski’s hands begins with her posing twice for topless photos that the director said were for French Vogue. The girl then told prosecutors how Polanski directed her to, “Take off your underwear” and enter the Jacuzzi, where he photographed her naked. Soon, the director, who was then 43, joined her in the hot tub. He also wasn’t wearing any clothes and, according to Gailey’s testimony, wrapped his hands around the child’s waist. The girl testified that she left the Jacuzzi and entered a bedroom in Nicholson’s home, where Polanski sat down beside her and kissed the teen, despite her demands that he “keep away.” According to Gailey, Polanski then performed a sex act on her and later “started to have intercourse with me.” At one point, according to Gailey’s testimony, Polanski asked the 13-year-old if she was “on the pill,” and “When did you last have your period?” Polanski then asked her, Gailey recalled, “Would you want me to go in through your back?” before he “put his penis in my butt.” Asked why she did not more forcefully resist Polanski, the teenager told Deputy D.A. Roger Gunson, “Because I was afraid of him.”
Not sure what to say. I can’t imagine how anyone could defend him or his actions. I just don’t understand.
Sidenote: Talk about unqualified!
I was shocked to learn that Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and the top health care guy in the Senate is worth -$40,000. Let me repeat – Senator Baucus is worth a negative forty thousand! The guy earned a BA in economics from Stanford and a law degree, but he has a negative net worth? Why did we (i.e. the richest country in the world) put the poorest guy I know in charge of our finances (much less health care reform)?
Another Czar-uption over underage gay rape?
Literally, you can’t make this crap up. The latest news on yet another Obama Czar with problems is Kevin Jennings the ’safe school czar’. The Washington Times is reporting that Mr. Jennings, as a high school teacher, learned a 15-year old student was having sex with an “older man”. At the time, the law required that he report the incident – at the very least the student was the victim of statutory rape. Jennings described the event to another teacher explaining “the 15-year-old boy met the “older man” in a “bus station bathroom” and was taken to the older man’s home that night.” Jennings’ peer begged him to report the incident and when Jennings’ refused the teacher called his failure to report the statutory rape “unethical”. Jennings’ threatened to sue the teacher for defamation claiming he had no evidence any sort of sexual act took place. However, according to the Times story, Jennings clearly knew the student was having intercourse with the older man in his book, “One Teacher in 10″ and then in various speeches the latest of which in 2000 to the Iowa chapter of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. Is this the best guy we could get for this job? Who is in charge of vetting these people?
Inconvenient truth: Americans have highest life expectency in world!
September 26, 2009
No really. If you remove obesity and homicide from life expectancy data Americans have a SIGNIFICANTLY higher life expectancy than any other developed country. Of course we are really fat – more twice the number of obese people in Canada and ten times that of Japan. Ouch. Homicide and obesity are NOT a health care issue. The Allysia Finley from the Wall Street Journal has an interesting article that points out that Obama’s assertion that “We spend one and a half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it” isn’t true. Health care reform or insurance reform can’t make us skinny or prevent us from murdering each other. Today we spend more on health care than any other developed country because we are able to borrow the money from China. As a result we are the healthiest people in the world. Money = Health. Health Reform = Less Money.
Good thing we canceled the missile shield
September 25, 2009
Just eight days ago Obama announced that we were not going to build the missile defense shield. The ground based system was to be based in Poland and the Czech Republic. Obama made the decision to cancel the missile shield after reviewing a report suggesting Iran was five years behind on their nuclear missile program. The May 2009 report suggested that Iran’s intercontinental missile capability would be live by 2020, instead of the 2015 the last National Intelligence Estimate reported. When I read the reasoning I thought to myself, “I hope they aren’t wrong.”
This morning we learned that Iran began construction on a secret underground nuclear fuel plant five years ago. The facility is now largely completed and will begin generating nuclear fuel early next year. I guess the NIE report might be a little off. What if Iran is capable of launching an intercontinental missile before 2015? I guess the good news is that our original missile shield wouldn’t have been ready anyway. The bad news is that we won’t be ready until at least 2020 – and the planned shield is a ‘theater shield’ for Europe. The original shield was designed to protect Europe AND the United States. Note in the image below the red area originating in Iran – the flight path of any missile would fly directly over Poland or the Czech Republic – evidently location is important when intercepting nuclear missiles.
So what will Obama do? Will he call the Polish or Czech representatives and ask them if we can go ahead with the shield? I guess that is what he should do, but I suspect he won’t. Iran promises their secret nuclear program is for peaceful medical and energy purposes. Maybe we should just believe them. What do you think?
Vote with your wallet. . .
Dissatisfied with the Democratic agenda? Frustrated that Pelosi struck down a bill that would have required them to actually read the bills they are voting on? Confused by Reid’s unwillingness to require background checks on ‘czars’? Angry that Obama claims he is not increasing taxes when he increases ‘levies’? Scared by the unprecedented deficit spending? You aren’t alone.
Millions of Democratic donors are voting with their wallets. Democratic fundraisers across the board have seen a steep decline in their fund-raising efforts this year – more than 20-30%. Paul Kane suggests that the decline is “a result of complacency among their rank-and-file donors and a de facto boycott by many of their wealthiest givers, who have been put off by the party’s harsh rhetoric about big business.”
The midterm elections this year will be perhaps the most important of our lifetime. Take a moment to fund the opposition – you don’t have to agree with the GOP – but if you give them a few more seats in the Senate they can block Obama’s agenda. Got a credit card? Send the Republican National Committee $25, $50 or $100 – small contributions matter most!
Note to Obama: H1N1 is airborne!
September 24, 2009
The Obama administration has installed hand sanitizers in the White House to combat the H1N1 virus. Even though I don’t like the administration I certainly don’t want them to get sick. The consensus among scientists is that the influenza virus, specifically the H1N1 virus, is airborne. Simply using hand sanitizers won’t do the trick. The BEST way to fight the H1N1 virus is to expose the virus to ultraviolet light in the ‘C’ band. I would flood the White House with UV light and keep the hand sanitizers around (we have them everywhere). Get the bulbs here.
Do we still need the Postal Service?
Everyone likes their mailman (to be honest I haven’t seen mine in years) so the idea of eliminating the United States Postal Service doesn’t usually get much play. But maybe we should ask the question as to whether or not we really need a government run postal system anymore. The USPS spends approximately $80 billion each year to have 656,000 people deliver the mail throughout the United States. Earlier today Congress began passage of a $4 billion bailout of the postal service. Basically Congress would allow the USPS to defer a $4 billion payment to their retirement system – exposing the taxpayers to a guarantee of the retirement system should the USPS be unable to make up the difference. Can someone remind me why the government delivers the mail?
The Postal Clause of the Constitution was included to provide a source of revenue for the early United States, it was never designed as a federal jobs program. If we are making money – fine, but the government simply can’t run a business. It proves it year after year. I know it isn’t in favor anymore, but why not privatize the system? We could sell it to a private equity firm and let them handle it. We could pocket a little cash and let the ‘dark pools’ of private equity floating around take on the business and the risk. I bet they are able to turn around the business in no time.
If you don’t like this idea, why not increase the cost of stamps? Why not stop delivering mail on Saturday? Why not lower salaries? Why not reduce benefits? We need to operate the USPS like a business and not a federal jobs program. Don’t you agree?
Public schools teach equality of outcome?
Last night I watched a CNBC special on Walmart. Much of the report centered on the frustration of workers who want to be paid more. Some Walmart employees have no problem working at the store on one day and on the next picketing the same store clamoring for “equal pay for equal work!“ In his campaign, Obama specifically called out Walmart as an organization that needs to start following the equal pay for equal work concept. This morning one of my Facebook friends sent me a link to a YouTube video showing children at a public school learning a song about Obama that featured lines like, “Obama says we must be fair today, equal work means equal pay.“ Both got me thinking. What are all of these people talking about?
The Equal Pay Act of 1963 requires that jobs that require the same skill, effort and responsibility, under the same conditions at the same establishment should offer the same level of pay. The bill was designed to minimize the effects of discrimination against minorities. Of course Obama and the folks yelling at customers entering Walmart are NOT suggesting Walmart is violating the Equal Pay Act, instead they are suggesting that the definition of ‘equal pay for equal work’ should be expanded. Under this new view of the the ‘equal pay for equal work’ everyone should be compensated similarly.
For example, some on the left suggest that TRUE equality can only be accomplished when we are equally compensated. Feminist suggest that mothers should be given government funded grants to cover the cost of childcare which “she could use for daycare, or alternatively, give to a relative, say a grandparent, who looked after her child or children, or keep herself and take the option of avoiding work outside the home.“ The idea is very simple, all people, regardless of gender should be compensated similarly for their effort. This is a scary idea.
The Walmart employees yelling at customers as they enter their stores want to be paid more money, plain and simple. They don’t think it is fair that a sales clerk at Tom Thumb earns, on average, two to three dollars more per hour than a Walmart sales clerk. They want Walmart to pony up – match the wages of other companies with different business models. Of course the food I buy at Tom Thumb is more expensive than what I could buy at Walmart, but I prefer the service I get at Tom Thumb and I am willing to pay more. If the Walmart employees were truly interested in equality, they would look at their peers in the retail space. Target, about a third of the size of Walmart in the US, pays their employees almost EXACTLY the same hourly rate. The real argument is that some Walmart employees just want to make more money.
When I saw the video of the public school children singing about equal pay for equal work I realized that the debate has changed. Obama wants to remake America for the better – a new system of capital creation and distribution. We aren’t talking about the 1960’s definition of equality, instead we are reaching farther back. In college I learned about something called the Labor Theory of Value (LTV) where the value of a product is related to the labor needed to produce it. Obama believes in LTV and agrees with this sentiment: “The worker becomes all the poorer the more wealth he produces, the more his production increases in power and range. The worker becomes an ever cheaper commodity the more commodities he creates. With the increasing value of the world of things proceeds in direct proportion to the devaluation of the world of men. Labor produces not only commodities; it produces itself and the worker as a commodity — and does so in the proportion in which it produces commodities generally.”
The last two hundred years has been a testament to how wrong the LTV folks were. Value is NOT the result of a products ‘inputs’ i.e. labor, but rather subjective judgments of individuals. Have you ever held a Louis Vitton handbag up next to a no-name brand handbag? They have roughly the same materials, same quality and same labor costs – but look at the price tag. The value of the handbag is equal to the subjective judgment of the buyer. Of course this is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
In a free society we are able to enter into contracts with each other on the assumption they will benefit us. If we allow the government to interfere with our contracts with one another our ability to improve our lot in life – our standard of living, our wealth – we allow the government to usurp control over our lives. The Constitution prohibits laws that infringe contracts between any two parties including contracts between employers and employees. The 9th Amendment states that rights not enumerated in the Constitution are retained by the people and this includes the ‘freedom of contract’. Article one section ten prohibits the states from “impairing the obligation of contracts”. The Supreme Court, under pressure from Roosevelt, in 1937 cut against this idea and allowed federally mandated minimum-wage laws.
Most of us have accepted minimum-wage laws and the fact that they infringe on our right to enter into contracts with one another. But the problem with this acceptance is that it has opened up the door for more damaging programs. By accepting that our leaders can intercede on behalf of one or more parties of a private contract we opened the door for Obama to promote the concept of ‘equality of outcome’. Obama, with help from Congress, could simply pass a law requiring that all bankers should make $100,000 per year, all lawyers should make $150,000 per year, all auto workers should make $50,000 per year and so on. The Constitution matters – we shouldn’t allow the government to intercede in matters that are none of its business – when we do we eventually sacrifice our freedoms.
If you work for Walmart and you don’t feel you are fairly compensated, don’t picket the company or ask the government to intercede on your behalf – instead find another job or start your own company. The same system that seems heartless to some, is the same system that allows ANYONE to become anything they set out to become or accomplish (see Obama). There is a price to be paid for our freedoms – for some it means they will give their lives, for others it means they will have to work for low wages – but I would argue that freedom is worth the price.
