Saturday, November 6, 2010

We Can't Afford Not to Cut Taxes

President Barack Obama, in his first weekly radio address since Congressional elections, said he is willing to work with resurgent Republicans but feels the country can't afford giving tax breaks to the wealthy.

Mr. President, it is not your money. It is not your job to "improve" the economy. Why is that you think the middle class is more deserving of their money than the wealthy? You want to save this country? You love this country? You want this country to be prosperous again? Get out of our way!

1) The economic argument

The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

Does Increasing Tax Rates Increase Revenue?

IMF Concludes Lower Tax Rates Can Yield More Tax Revenue

2) The moral argument:

The root of production is man’s mind; the mind is an attribute of the individual and it does not work under orders, controls and compulsion, as centuries of stagnation have demonstrated. Progress cannot be planned by government, and it cannot be restricted or retarded; it can only be stopped, as every statist government has demonstrated. -- Ayn Rand

We have a right to ever single dollar we make. We have earned it! If you would stop giving away our money to people who could not earn it, you would see the economy grow. You would see people being charitable. You would see the poorest people in this country living like kings.

Life is not fair. Some people are smarter, work harder, save more money, and enjoy learning more. They deserve to be rewarded for these virtues. Leave these people free to make the world better.

Don't steal our money, and then sell yourself as some sort of moral agent for change.

Whether rich, middle-class, or poor, in a free country we each earn our money and it is ours by right. An argument can be made for taxing in order to pay for the police, the military, and our courts, because these are things that we need the government for. To protect our lives, liberties, and property. But there is no moral argument for taking from those who produce and give to those who do not.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Hyperbole? I Don't Think So.

America's Last Chance
-Michael Hurd

[T]he sad truth is that a rabid socialist is still in charge at the White House. And now he's really, really annoyed -- making him, in a way, more dangerous than before. Obama has not been challenged very much over his life. He's used to being fawned over, praised for things that are not his own accomplishment (e.g., half his race), and being cool and enlightened in the circles where he travels -- although not in the world of reality, where most people have to live.

Dr. Hurd offers up a fantastic action list for those of us who care about freedom and America:

1) Obama must be fired in 2012 on the premise that he is irredeemably bad.
2) Republicans in Congress MUST propose and stand for legislation that lowers taxes, reduces the cost of government and the scope of government.
3) Republicans must not compromise on ANY legislation that raises taxes or increases the cost of government in any respect.
4) Republicans must propose the repeal [the anti-capitalist legilation] Obama has done to date --most especially, ObamaCare.
5) Americans who voted for the Tea Party and Republicans have to put their money where their mouths (and votes) are, and support the Republicans to the point of demanding that they go at least this far.

Voters Show Their Enthusiasm for Obamacare’s Repeal

Oddly enough, Obamacare has performed a worthy clinical purpose. Barely seven months old, this monstrosity has been a $2.5 trillion inoculation against future outbreaks of U.S. socialism. Over unanimous Republican opposition and the screams of the American people, Democrats injected the electorate with the Obamacare needle, insisting that it would ease their pain. Instead, it triggered Tuesday’s dramatic side effects. But Obamacare seemingly has vaccinated Americans against future charlatans who soothingly promise free unicorns and rainbows that are nothing but mirrors and gases.

Krauthammer Gets It Wrong

A Return to the Norm

An interesting, albeit pessimistic read. The recent election results may as Krauthammer says just be a return to the norm, but I don't think it is. This election unlike any other began with an entire new party being formed for the specific purpose of stopping the lurch to the Left by both Republicans and Democrats. Unlike when Perot tried to run in 1992 and 1996, or the Republican "Revolution" of 1994, there is real philosophic and political principles being voiced today as the reason for dissatisfaction.

My thought is that this "wave" is going to be what we make of it. It could be nothing, and in 2012 and 2014 this election will just be seen as a blip, could be seen as start of something. I, for one, am going to do all I can to help it be the start of reduced government spending, a return to limited government, and a full and complete understanding of the idea that individual rights trump everything in politics.

The Mandate To Repeal ObamaCare

Tea Party Flexes Muscle with Republicans

Even as he and his fellow Republicans tried to chart a path forward, Mr. Boehner said Thursday that he was seeing signs that President Obama and Congressional Democrats failed to realize that Republican gains in Congress resulted from a potent backlash against the Democratic agenda.

“There seems to be some denial on the part of the president and other Democratic leaders of the message that was sent by the American people,” Mr. Boehner said in an interview with ABC News. “When you have the most historic election in over 60, 70 years, you would think the other party would understand that the American people have clearly repudiated the policies they’ve put forward in the last few years.”

Given the chance in the interview to agree with Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, that the party’s goal should be to make Mr. Obama a one-term president, Mr. Boehner responded only that this was Mr. McConnell’s opinion, suggesting that Mr. Boehner was interested in staying out of that particular fight right now.

NYT on Republican Congress

Democrats (and even some Republican dissenters) like to mock Republican predictions that tax cuts will raise government revenue as voodoo economics. Yet when it comes to the claim that extending government-subsidized health insurance and drug coverage to tens of millions of people will create "cost savings," the Times offers not even a scintilla of skepticism.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

He's Still There

He will use the regulatory agencies of the federal government to ram through whatever he wishes in the coming two years. Who's going to stop him? Republicans? Republicans have never stood on principle before, and have never stood up to a liberal Democratic President before. If they do this time, it will be different. I'm waiting and watching to see how they respond to this President's forthcoming abuse of executive power. America is about to meet the real Obama. Fasten your seatbelts, because it's not going to be pretty.

I do not if Dr. Hurd's prediction is right. But if it is, it our job is not to stand on the sidelines. Our job, is to write. Write everyday. Write letters to the editor, op-eds, blog posts, our govenors, and our congressmen. Write everyday; write everyday to make sure that they know; write everyday to give the Republicans the strength and certainty they need in order to defend our country, our Constitution, ourselves.

Rush Has It Right

Compromise? We Won a Wipeout!
-Rush Limbaugh

RUSH: There was a meeting today on Capitol Hill, right before the program started. Republican leaders held a press conference. This is a portion of what Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, and he might well be the majority leader if he holds on. This is what he had to say.

MCCONNELL: We are indeed humbled and ready to listen to the American people who are determined to stop the agenda Americans have rejected and turn the ship around. We'll work with the administration when they agree with the people and confront them when they don't. This election yesterday was clearly a referendum on the administration and the Democratic majority here in the Congress. It seems to me the best strategy for the other side would be to listen to the voters yesterday. They made a clear statement about what they'd like to see done. If the president comes in our direction, obviously, we want to make progress for the country over the next few years.

RUSH: "If the president comes in our direction." Compromise only happens for the losers. The winners do not compromise.

Seriously, Mr. President?

34 warships sent from US for Obama visit

Here is something else the Republicans can now do: in addition to de-funding Obamacare, de-fund Obama. Cut the White House budget to the bone.

Update (11/4/2010): this seems to be the most credible article on the subject of the POTUS's trip to Mumbai:

Security Entourage Earning Epic Reputation Ahead of Obama India Visit

I'm not typically concerned about such things, but whatever the figures, this trip seems utterly outrageous.

Memo to POTUS: Pretending nothing happened won't erase Tuesday's results.

A prez in denial

Democratic Pollster: The Economy ‘Was Not the Decisive Factor in this Election; Health Care Was’

He doesn't get it, and the exit polls show it, and the results do. This was not just -- the economy, as important as it was, was not the decisive factor this election; health care was....Among Democrats who favored repeal, 36 percent voted for Republican[s]. Among independents who favored repeal, 86 to 9 voted Republican. You could see Democrats going down who voted for health care -- the health-care bill -- being wiped out....[L]ook, in my lifetime, this is the first time my party will have less than 200 seats in the House. Health care is a major thing. You look at the economy, look, 34 percent of people who said their financial situation worsened voted Democratic. I could show you lots of evidence. Just look at Nevada and California, two of the highest -- Nevada the highest -- unemployment states in the country, and two Democratic senators; Democrats did all right. It care [that] killed them, and they don't understand, the American people found this a crime against democracy -- I've been saying this since March -- they want it repealed, and this issue is gonna go on and on, and he [Obama] seems absolutely tone-deaf.

Letter to the Editor

Below is a letter to the editor that I plan to send to a number of newspapers and to my congressmen and govenor.

When I voted straight Republican, I was voting for gridlock.

I do not want compromises with the Democrats, I don't want the two parties to come together to "move the country forward". I want gridlock. I want the government to do as little as possible for the next two years. I want President Obama to do as little as possible for the next two years. I want America's lurch to the left to stop.

If both parties insist on coming together and "doing something", here is what I suggest: cut spending, extend the Bush-era tax cuts, reduce taxes even further, balance the budget, repeal ObamaCare, repeal Sarbanes-Oaxley, simplify the U.S. Tax Code, and start discussing and planning to phase out Medicare and Medicaid.

No new laws, no new taxes, no new regulations, no new czars. Nothing new! I don't want new. I did not vote for new. As an American, I have the right to my opinion. I have the right to vote. I voted. I voted for gridlock.

I hope in two years to have the opportunity to vote for even better politicians, especially for a president who understands that my freedom, my rights, and my life are mine--mine by right. The government has just one job, that of protecting my rights, not of telling me how to live my life.

Can’t be Dem-lite

I voted Republican to ensure gridlock in Washington, but I have no illusions that Republicans will restore rationality to politics and begin unwinding all the evil laws passed since the founding of this country.

This country was not founded as a democracy where two wolves and a sheep decide what’s for dinner.

The Obama presidency is your fault, Republicans. You were supposed to be the party that protected our rights, and instead you opted to be the Dem-Lite party with President Bush paving the way for a full frontal assault on our liberty by President Obama.

No More Goodie Two-Shoes

Rush Limbaugh said the meaning of the election was "No, we don't want to ‘work together,' and the American people did not say they want to work with you. The American people said yesterday they want to stop you!"

Communication: Knowing Your Limitations

Gus van Horn has a interesting blog post that I would like to recommend: A Very Deep Well

This post by Gus dove tails quiet nicely into things I have been thinking very hard about the past couple of months: how to have worthwhile conversations, and relationships, with people that although explicitly in philosophic and fundamental disagreement with you, are still great values to you, your friends, or your romantic partner.

How do you communicate with your friend from high school (20 years ago), or your fiancée's best friend about things both of you are interested in, but are in complete disagreement about? How to you nurture these relationships? When you can't nurture them, how do you make the time with those people civil and pleasant?

Well, I am still thinking and not ready to post my thoughts. But soon, I hope!

Five Steps to Fix the American Economy From the Wrath of Statist Regulation

Lower the corporate tax rate
Reduce crippling regulations
Learn to compete with foreign workers (end min-wage laws, lower taxes)
Improve America's educational system (free market solutions)
Balance the federal budgets

Democrat Drubbing

Republicans: I Voted for Gridlock!

From President Obama's press conference yesterday:

I’m not suggesting this will be easy. I won’t pretend that we will be able to bridge every difference or solve every disagreement. There’s a reason we have two parties in this country, and both Democrats and Republicans have certain beliefs and certain principles that each feels cannot be compromised. But what I think the American people are expecting, and what we owe them, is to focus on those issues that affect their jobs, their security, and their future: reducing our deficit, promoting a clean energy economy, making sure that our children are the best educated in the world, making sure that we’re making the investments in technology that will allow us to keep our competitive edge in the global economy.

I do not know what the American people are wanting. And personally, I do not give a damn!

When I voted straight Republican, I was voting for gridlock.

Without a veto-proof majority in both the House and the Senate, there is very little the Republicans can do. I do not want compromises with the Democrats, I don't want the two parties to come together to move the country forward. I want gridlock. I want the government to do as little as possible for the next two years. I want President Obama to do as little as possible for the next two years.

1) Reducing our deficit
There is only one way to reduce the deficit. Cut spending! And there is only way to cut spending, reduce the size of the government. Are Obama and the Democrats willing to do this? If so, go ahead and start.

2) Promoting a clean energy economy
Where is the referendum for this. Which American people want a "clean energy" economy? And of those who do, which of them want the government involved in FORCING it to happen. Again, not me! I did not vote straight Republican in this election in order to "green" American business. On this issue, I vote for Gridlock.

3) Making sure that our children are the best educated in the world
What?!? I don't care if American children are the best educated. Why the hell does this matter? I thought multiculturalism meant that no race, group, our country was better than any other. Screw this! I want the government out of education. I most definitely do not want my kids going to government schools. On this issue, I vote gridlock!

4) Making sure that we’re making the investments in technology that will allow us to keep our competitive edge in the global economy.
As with point two...since when have Obama and the Left been concerned with America having a competitive advantage? The Left hates the fact that America is a superpower. That hate that we force our values on, and police, the rest of the world. I do not want one dollar of my money to be taken out of my pocket, and handed over to anything that Obama thinks might give us a "competitive advantage". If he wants America to be competitive, then allow America to be competitive, and get the hell out of the way!

If Republicans want to do something, then defund ObamaCare!

Other than that, I recommend spending every single day writing and submitting bills to the Senate that call for the repeal of one program after another: defund ObamaCare, defund the U.N., end the U.S.D.A, defund Freddy and Fannie, defund NPR, phase out Social Security, phase out Medicare, privatize education, repeal Sarbanes-Oaxley, repeal the Sherman Antitrust act. Start there, and if you need more ideas, I promise I have more.

The Democrats complained that you were the party of 'No'. I vote for the Republicans showing them what an actually party of 'No' means.

It's not just the economy, stupid

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

"So, if most of the country supposedly voted Republican because the economy is so lousy, why did California (with double-digit unemployment) elect or reelect mostly Democrats?" - Tom Rothacker

Precisely the type of thing the government should not be doing:

Fed to Spend $600 Billion More To Help Boost US Economy

"[A] separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church." -- Ayn Rand

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" -- Barry Goldwater

Just read the most fantastic tweet, referencing Obama's speech today:

Obama at 1:20: "Let's not relitigate the past." Obama at 1:24: "We already had a large deficit, which I inherited."

Another gem from my facebook wall today:

Scott Holleran disagrees with the new GOP House leader that it is government's proper role to "bring down the cost of health care" as he claimed today in vowing to repeal but replace ObamaCare. Get the goddamn government out of my health care.
Things Worth Praising:

Boehner calls health care law 'monstrosity,' vows to roll it back

He also suggested that the GOP's cooperation was conditional, saying: "We hope President Obama will now respect the will of the people, change course and commit to making the changes they are demanding. To the extent he is willing to do this, we are ready to work with him."

We are not looking to compromise. We are willing to work together when we are respected, when our values and ideas are understood. We are not looking to compromise our values.

How's this: to the Left I say, you can have what you want, if it doesn't come from my wallet, or my rights. You can tell me where you want to go, and how you want to get there, but first take away the gun you have pointed at my head, and take out the hand you have in my pocket.

Things Worth Praising:

Welcome, Senate Conservatives
Remember what the voters back home want—less government and more freedom.

As seen on facebook today:

"‎.... and the people learned "Yes We Can!" and acted .... Thank you for the lesson Mr. President!" -Gennady Shenker

Anonymous Donors and the Future of Politics

“Don’t just stand there, undo something!”

What a great, great political phrase!

The National Review Gets It Right

My on-again-off-again-love-hate-affair with the National Review continues.

Today, they got it right. Very right!
From Defeat to Rout

The Tea Partiers have much to be proud of. Portrayed as extremists and racists, they succeeded in forming a coalition that won a majority of the votes — and, incidentally, elected a record number of non-white Republicans. (The country will now have two Indian-American governors, both conservative Republicans.) Like any political movement, and especially any new one, the Tea Partiers made mistakes. But they saw an opportunity to change the country’s direction and had the fortitude to do it. They have been indispensable to electing several new conservative stars, including Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, and Ron Johnson. (All three of them come from states that supported Obama, in case anyone’s counting.) Many of the same pundits who after Obama’s election foresaw a Republican retreat to the South will now act as though they expected these results all along. They will move on to warning Republicans of doom next time around. And indeed there are caveats and warnings that Republicans need to hear — but not, today, from us.

GOP: What Our Votes Mean

A Republican voter...
By Jared Rhoads

My votes were cast with one goal in mind: to stem the tide toward statism and in so doing buy more time for rational ideas to take hold in the culture. On the surface, that means limited government, lower taxes, lower spending, and less regulation. More deeply, it means individual rights.

In the most optimistic sense, my vote is to support the repeal of unconstitutional and rights-destroying legislation such as the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare). Blocking or undoing various "stimulus" expenditures would also be a positive outcome.

At the very least, I would be pleased if my vote helped to achieve a state of gridlock in Washington. At a time when practically all of the decisions and programs coming out of the federal or state government do more harm than good, a do-nothing Congress could mean that less harm may be done. Of course, one fear under this scenario is that officials might begin to compromise and work for "bipartisan" solutions, which would yield doubly awful results.

As I wrote on October 25th:

So, if you are planning to do the same. Take heart! Vote out the Democrats, and then start riding the Republicans hard on November 3rd:

* Repeal ObamaCare.
* DRAMATICALLY cut spending
* Reduce taxes
* Protect individual rights
* Protect property rights
* Destroy our enemies
* Stop meddling in our lives
* Take many, many long vacations

And if the Republicans do not listen, make sure they know that they will be next to go!

This is Nov 3rd! And I, for one, have no plans to let the Republicans forget.

"A lot of talk about how the Republicans failed to take the Senate, as if Democrats have a reason to be smug about this. 60 seats were gained in the House, the largest Republican surge since 1938. One of the 6 gains in the Senate is the Illinois seat once occupied by Barrack Obama. This was not indiscriminate voter anger, it was not merely anti-incumbent or because socialist policies weren't being cranked out fast enough. This was punishment of the Democrats, and there is no minimizing that or pretending otherwise."

-- Bryson Borgstedt


One of the strategies that Republicans and Tea Partiers campaigned on was Replace-Repeal-Restore.
As in REPLACE liberal politicians; REPEAL the government takeover of health care; RESTORE the founding principles in our nation.

Even though this slogan helped motivate and excite their base, and get a lot of the bums thrown out, they did not win enough seats in both Houses of Congress to repeal ObamaCare and thus need a new plan. One strategy that can realistically work, and that will lay the ground work for an even more achievable Replace-Repeal-Restore campaign in 2012 is to Defund-ObamaCare.

I will be looking into this more. I hope the GOP does as well!

GOP: If You Forget, You Will Be Next

Paul Hsieh has another fantastic op-ed over at at Pajamas Media:

GOP: Dance With The One Who Brung You
"Celebrate Tuesday's election results, but don't forget who put you in office and why — namely, the independent-minded Tea Party voters."

No compromise, no surrender:

[T]here will be no compromise on stopping runaway spending, deficits and debt. There will be no compromise on repealing ObamaCare. There will be no compromise on stopping Democrats from growing government and raising taxes. -Congressman Mike Pence

Election Results

I am going to have lots to say over the next few days, if the next two years about this election, but for for a first response, here is a great blog post by Scott Holleran:

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Golden Gate Bridge and Chris Matthews

Chris Matthews, of MSNBC fame, just implied that the Golden Gate Bridge was built and financed by the government. Here is the story as told on Wikipedia:

The Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, authorized by an act of the California Legislature, was incorporated in 1928 as the official entity to design, construct, and finance the Golden Gate Bridge.[11] However, after the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the District was unable to raise the construction funds, so it lobbied for a $30 million bond measure. The bonds were approved in November 1930,[13] by votes in the counties affected by the bridge.[22] The construction budget at the time of approval was $27 million. However, the District was unable to sell the bonds until 1932, when Amadeo Giannini, the founder of San Francisco–based Bank of America, agreed on behalf of his bank to buy the entire issue in order to help the local economy

Sounds to me like it was a private company, not the government, that paid for the greatest, and most beautiful bridge in the world.

Highly recommend:

Alex Epstein's Newsletter

Mr. President, is this some of the change we could believe in?

US to spend $200 mn a day on Obama's Mumbai visit

I so can't wait for this guy to be sent back to Chicago!

A Vote Against Dems, Not for the GOP

The Ten Biggest American Cities That Are Running Out Of Water

Is this a problem of population growth, climate change(yeah, whatever!), or of government growth?

It would be interesting to compare the water policies of these ten areas, with ten large cities that do not have a water issue.

Voting: Neither Moral Virtue, Nor Moral Duty

The following are unedited comments that I made in a thread on a friend's facebook wall:

When it comes to voting, two things make me ill: 1) Uninformed people who vote because they feel they have to. 2) People who make the uninformed feel they must vote.

One should only vote if they consider themselves educated on the issues, or candidates, and they feel motivated to vote. Not voting is not a crime or immoral. I have voted in only two elections in my life. The presidential election of 1992, and the mid-term election of 2010. I have considered myself knowledgeable enough to vote in every election between 1992 and and 2010, however, the knowledge I had in those years, the knowledge I still defend, is that my vote did not matter in those elections, and/or who won or lost in those elections were so similar in view that it did not matter to me who won, and finally that my knowledge caused me to have no motivation to spend my time at the polls in those elections.

Voting or not voting is not a sign of a good citizen.


There are many valid reasons for not voting. In numerous elections, both sides, both candidates, are equally vile. And my "vote", if you want to call it that, is to not vote. Not to give the process, the system, the candidates, or our culture an ounce of sanction. But rest assured, I am going to bitch....and bitch loudly!

Voters to Democrats: It's Obamacare, Stupid

The Myth of Off-Year Elections

A very good read:

Hugh Hewitt: Pelosi and Obama's agenda down in flames

The myth about "off-year" elections is already being spun out by the left as a threadbare cover for their leaders' collective collapse. These observations overlook 1934, 1954, 1962 and 2002 as examples of elections following a new president's entry into office when he managed not to get clobbered at the polls.

FDR saw the Democrats add nine seats in the House of Representatives in 1934. Dwight Eisenhower's GOP lost 18 House seats and JFK's Democrats lost four in '54 and '62 respectively. George W Bush's Republicans actually added eight House members in 2002.

Two other parallels are exact: Presidents Reagan in '82 and Clinton in '94 were also both new presidents taking office after an administration of the opposite party and who had governed for 22 months when the public got to deliver a verdict. Reagan watched the GOP lose 27 seats to the Democrats, and Clinton witnessed the rise of Newt Gingrich as the GOP added 54 seats.

Be Sure to Let Them Know What Your Vote Meant

Paul Hsieh wrote the following note on Facebook. Since Dr. Hsieh's note has not been reposted on one of his blogs or websites, and because it so good and saves me the time and effort of trying to say the same thing, I am reposting here.

Tomorrow, many Americans plan on following the strategy recommended by Dr. Leonard Peikoff and Dr. Harry Binswanger and voting for Republicans:

In many cases, this will involve holding our noses and pulling the lever for some truly bad Republicans who hold all sorts of terrible views on abortion, religion, etc.

I understand (and essentially agree with) their arguments that voting for the Republicans may be the best way to "send a message" that we are thoroughly rejecting the horrible policies of Obama and the Left. Hence, we may be voting for some bad Republicans not because we support the Religious Right, but *despite* it.

But in addition to sending this implicit message next week on Election Day, I also want to encourage everyone to make that an explicit message.

In other words, don't just pull the lever for the Republicans.

Instead, consider writing your county and state Republican Party leaders and telling them that you are voting GOP to support properly limited government -- but not for the Religious Right agenda.

(You can usually find the relevant websites and e-mail addresses for you local/county/state GOP organizations via a quick Google search).

If applicable, write the winning Congressman or Senator whom you voted for and tell him or her the same thing.

Similarly, consider writing an LTE or OpEd for your local newspaper explaining that your vote for the GOP candidate should not be construed as supporting the Religious Right agenda, but rather the principles of limited government as articulated by the American Founders and by Ayn Rand. (I'm working on my own OpEd on precisely this theme which I hope will appear soon after Election Day.)

The key is to not let your vote be the only thing you say. After Election Day, many interest groups will attempt to portray your vote as support for their agenda -- even if you don't intend it to be.

Hence, make your meaning as clear as day by explicitly telling the R's, the D's, the media, and the rest of America exactly what your vote means.

We still have freedom of speech in this country -- and there will be no better time to use it than now!

"President Obama is on the campaign trail warning voters about 'returning to the very same policies that failed us during the last decade.' If he’s talking about bailouts, ineffective stimulus packages, and massive government spending, then we won’t be returning to them because we’ve never left in the first place."

The Madness of Barack Obama: How Can We Go Back to ‘Failed Policies’ if They’ve Never Left?

Monday, November 1, 2010

Campaign finance red tape in Colorado

"The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man's rational nature, that it protects man's survival qua man, and that its ruling principle is: justice." -Ayn Rand

To Those Who Wish to Fight

Whether or not the Republican take control of congress tomorrow, or not, for those of us who want to see our government brought back under the control, respect for our individual, inalienable rights restored, for government spending to be slashed, for our a rational, self-interested foreign policy to be implemented, and for government to get out of a our private lives...I recommend taking time to understand that this fight is not just a practical fight, a fight for better policy because better policies lead to more jobs, better pay, and a stronger economy. This fight, our fight for the past two years, for the next two years and beyond, is an ideological fight; it is a moral fight; it is an intellectual fight.

From Ayn Rand's article, 'The Cashing-In: The Student "Rebellion"':

If they seek an important cause, they have the opportunity to fight the rebels, to fight ideologically, on moral-intellectual grounds--by identifying and exposing the meaning of the rebels' demands, by naming and answering the basic principles which the rebels dare not admit. The battle consists, above all, of providing the country (or all those within hearing) with ideological answers--a field of action from which the older generation has deserted under fire.

Ideas cannot be fought except by means of better ideas. The battle consists not of opposing, but of exposing; not of denouncing but of disproving; not of evading, but of boldly proclaiming a full, consistent and radical alternative.

This is how we have to see our fight, this is the motivation we must have if we are going to be successful in repealing ObamaCare, in slashing taxes, in slashing government spending, in giving American's back their freedoms, and in winning the war on Islamic Terrorism. It is going to be a long hard fight, but we can win. We can win, and we should win, because we have right on our side!

Not Here, Not Now, Not Ever!

The very thing we do not to see in America:

A man gets on his knees next to a car carrying U.S. President Barack Obama.

ObamaCare Repeal Pledge

Thanks to Paul Hsieh over at at We Stand Firm, I learned about the following -- both of which, I highly recommend both:

Richard Ralston: Health care queries for candidates

ObamaCare Repeal Pledge

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Potential Slogan: Don't Tax Virtue

After writing the previous post, I noted how much I liked the phrase "Don't Tax Virtue".

If one's goal is to get people back to work, to encourage business owners to hire new employees, if one's goal is to grow the economy, to increase production, then one must not punish people for performing the very virtues you are wanting to encourage.

Wikepedia has a interesting page of virtues. Virtues from different periods, and different philosophies. The page gives a nice general definition of virtue: a virtue is a trait or quality deemed to be morally excellent and thus is valued as a foundation of principle and good moral being.

Given the world we live in, the values of our culture, and my own personal philosophy. Here are the virtues that jumped out at me:

ability, assertiveness, attention, focus, autonomy, confidence, cooperativeness, courage, courteousness, creativity, curiosity, dependability, determination, diligence, discernment, endurance, enthusiasm, foresight,independence, integrity, intuition, justice, optimism, purposefulness, resilience, tenacity

All of these are values required by businessmen, producers, workers, great employees, great managers, innovators, scientists, and teachers. And this is the rub. If the government considers its job to decrease unemployment, increase home ownership, kick start the economy, get people working, and provide more people with a living wage. Then you would think they would want to encourage these virtues, and not punish them (i.e., tax them).

But the government, especially the current administration, is not primary concerned with encouraging production, but instead with redistributing wealth, i.e., taking from the producers and giving to those that are honestly and simply less productive, or to those that can accurately be described as lazy, slothful, and incompetent.

I have never spent much time thinking about campaign slogans, or how one goes about helping such slogans catch on. But in my honest and proud opinion this one is good, and worth catching on for the 2012 election.

Don't Tax Virtue

Although I disagree with the slant of this piece, it contains a number of interesting facts and raises several interesting points:

Why We Should Eliminate the Corporate Income Tax

For the reasons raised by McArdle, plus the fact that one should never be taxed for producing, I most definitely agree: the corporate income tax should be eliminated.