timely quote

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.

Theodore Roosevelt

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Breakdown of Obama's Weekly Address

Obama said several things that concerned me.
  1. Congress must put more tax money into the economy.
  2. The government must put 2 million people to work.
  3. Create a "green" energy economy with $150 billion.
  4. Create a Social Healthcare program.
  5. Giving any child who wants it an education.
I'll go through these one at a time.

Congress must put more tax money in to the economy:
Next week, Congress will meet to address the spreading impact of the economic crisis. I urge them to pass at least a down-payment on a rescue plan that will create jobs, relieve the squeeze on families, and help get the economy growing again.
So we're looking at a new rebate of some sort, combined with another business stimulus of some sort. Maybe the automakers, maybe something different. The problem is, we're in the hole almost $1Trillion already because of what's already been done. And Obama hasn't even gotten started yet. We're already asking OPEC countries for $300 Billion.

The consumer is supposed to put more money in the economy, not the government. Things will smooth out, and the economy will will rebound. Let's give people a chance to calm down. Don't make big changes right now. Voting another huge bailout or creating another huge program we can't afford won't help.

The government must put 2 Million people to work:
That means putting two million Americans to work rebuilding our crumbling roads, bridges, and schools.
This is obviously a reference to his "voluntary" service program. First, the roads, bridges and schools are state property. The state governments are responsible for their upkeep. Is the federal government going to start usurping the states authority? Wouldn't that be in violation of the 10th Amendment? Also, the federal government already employs more than 1.8 million people. Do we need to pay more?

Creating a "green" energy economy with $150 Billion:
It means investing $150 billion to build an American green energy economy that will create five million new jobs, while freeing our nation from the tyranny of foreign oil, and saving our planet for our children.
So where do we invest $150Bn to create an economy? What is a green economy? We know he wants to bankrupt the coal industry and put it out of business. So what will he do with all of those jobs? I guess he means to create an industry around climate change. The next Kyoto Protocol will be just as damaging to the economy as the first would have been, had we subscribed to it. How is this supposed to help?

Creating a Social Healthcare program:
It means making health care affordable for anyone who has it, accessible for anyone who wants it, and reducing costs for small businesses.
Ah, Socialized Medicine(tm). The holy grail of Democrats over the last couple of decades. It sounds so reasonable. Everyone needs healthcare, right? Except that it's not the government's job to provide it. The Constitution doesn't guarantee healthcare, or jobs or cars or TVs or anything.

Above and beyond that, The size of the program would be staggering. The amount of money it would take to either control the entire healthcare system, or subsidize it enough to make it "affordable" would be gargantuan. Hundreds of thousands of people. Doctors would work for the government and not be making any money. I like my doctors rich and happy. Driving nice cars. I don't want a pissed off, government employee type doctor.

Look. I have insurance. I don't pay too much for it. I can get in to the doctor with little or no notice if necessary. My family and I are healthy and happy. Those who aren't as lucky as I, have the ability to go see the doctor too. There are already programs to help people who don't have insurance. If the government gets in the business of providing healthcare, how will it be payed for?

Anyway, look at England's social medicine program. Yeah, that's what we should aspire to.

Giving any child who wants it an education:
And it also means giving every child the world-class education they need to compete with any worker, anywhere in the world.
Again, it sounds so righteous. We all want our kids to get a good education, right?

My problem here is that an education is not a guarantee, and it's not the federal government's job to provide the education. While I believe in the idea behind the No Child Left Behind program, I think it was poorly done. The idea was to provide testing to make sure that children are actually learning what they need to learn. It turned into a school punishment tool.

If the government gets in the business of providing college education, the entire system will become watered down. If anyone can get in to college, regardless of academic fitness, then the degree will mean nothing.

Obama's socialist programs will be hugely expensive, leading to higher taxes across the board. There is no way to create these kinds of entitlements and giveaways without incredible amounts of money. That money will have to come from somewhere. Obama is already trying to lower the public's expectations.

I thought as soon as Obama was elected, everything would Change(tm) and everything would be better. Wasn't that what he said? I guess this was the change he meant. More taxes, more programs, more entitlements and less Pursuit of Happiness.

Your Weekly Address from the President-elect

Well, I am just getting started on my migration back to SUSE linux and I'm waiting for my backup to run so I can wipe this computer.

While I was waiting, I found an article on the front page of FoxNews titles, "Obama, I have a Plan." Since I've been waiting to hear anything specific, I figured I'd check it out. The article is short on specifics, not surprisingly, so I searched for the radio address transcript.

I found it at the Office of The President-Elect, Change.gov. Huh. I'd seen it, but it never struck me. There is no office of the president-elect. Nice.

So here is Your Weekly Address from the President-elect. Enjoy.

It would be better if he'd beat on the desk and yell some. You know, he is certainly holding true to what he said during the campaign, and that's what scares me. Explain to me how this isn't socialism he's describing. Please.

A New Book for my Reading List

From World Net Daily:

Hilmar von Campe was a member of the Hitler Youth, and later a Nazi soldier who fought in Yugoslavia against the Red Army. He was captured and later escaped. He is now a U.S. citizen and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."

Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism, warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth in a new book.

"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes Hilmar von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."

Von Campe has founded the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – a key, he believes, to keeping America free.

"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."


"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Hypocrisy in full view in Congress

The Democrats in Washington told the big 3 automakers today that they have to show a business plan before any bailout will be considered. They have to prove they're going to use the $25Bn responsibly.


Are these the same people that gave THREE QUARTERS OF A TRILLION DOLLARS to a man who has no idea how he's going to spend it? With no oversight? And no accountability?

"If they make sense and as they've met the criteria the leader and the speaker have laid out, then we'd like to move forward and be of assistance," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking, House and Urban Affairs Committee.

Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., head of the House Financial Services Committee, will manage the negotiation with the heads of General Motors, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co.

Aren't Dodd and Frank the same people who helped start the sub-prime problem we have now?

So the Dems in Congress have the nerve to require that the automakers prove that they are going to responsibly spend the money. Now, yes, flying out in the private jet to beg for money because you're broke is in bad form, and they need to quit hemorrhaging money, but congress? Being concerned about how the money is spent?

Apparently Pelosi and Reid have no sense of irony. Personally, I think Pelosi and Reid need a lot more supervision with the money they spend.

Reid said the auto industry executives that testified on Capitol Hill this week did not "convince the Congress or the American people that this bailout will be their last" or stop the bleeding from the troubled industry.

"Until they show us the plan, we cannot show them the money," Pelosi added

Pelosi said that Congress wants to help the automakers because "survival is essential to maintaining our manufacturing and industrial base and that industrial base is essential to our national security."

Nice. The bailout is all about national security. Must be ok then.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Nanny State in Oklahoma?

I'm going to go a little closer to home tonight. A local Democrat lawmaker wants to require schools to weigh children 16yo and younger, calculate BMI and send letters to the parents of children over or underweight. The scaled and related equipment would cost less than $3 million.

Democrat Representative Richard Morrissette says, ''If they're malnourished in some way, that is some form of abuse. This is not meant to be punitive; it's meant to help children."

But Think Of The Children! (tm)

He says that 11 other states have some sort of BMI program.

You know, I don't care what other states do. I know that here in Oklahoma, we want to raise our kids ourselves. It's my job as a parent to teach my kids how to eat. I don't need anyone, ANYONE, telling me how to raise my kids.
The intent of his legislation is to educate parents and to bring about opportunities for better health for children who aren't eating the right kinds of food, he said.
If Morrissette is so fscking worried about the childrens' health, why doesn't he take that $3m and put it in to DHS and get some good caseworkers. He can focus on the real child abusers.

Then, he can introduce a bill that would get pizza hut and taco bell and everything fried and no accessible fresh vegetables out of the schools. We have two major school districts where I am, and the food my kids eat at school is better than the other district, but still not worth much.

Then, he could re-institute physical education in schools. One hour a day would be plenty. Send the kids outside and let them run around. Let them play games. Get the phones and games and outside books out of school and send them outside to play.

But don't parent my children. If someone is abusing their children, take them away. Put the parents in jail. That's the law. It's a good law.

I want the teachers at my kids' school to be able to teach them what they need to learn. If that means they have to discipline my kids to get them to pay attention, so be it. Sometimes you have to get their attention. But they don't need to rear my kids. That's my job.

Of course, the case could be made that Morrissette is a racist. After all, repeated studies have shown that minorities have a much higher rate of obesity at almost all age groups. So I guess Morrissette is saying he wants to target minorities because they're overweight.

Also, obesity used to be a sign of wealth. These days, since it is less expensive to eat food that is bad for you, obesity is a sign of poverty.

So Morrissette is targeting poor minorities with his plan. He must not think they're very good parents. If I were one of his constituents, I wouldn't ever vote for him again.

Ok, I'm sure his thought processes didn't run to that particular logical conclusion. That's because I don't think he thought about it much at all.


I wrote my state Representative and Senator an e-mail about this issue.

I assume you’ve heard about Rep Morrissette’s proposal to force weigh-ins for children under the age of 16. His reasoning is that some underweight children could be abused. He wants to spend $3m on scales and related equipment. I heartily disagree with this idea.

Just to get it out of the way, that $3m can be spent in several different ways, any of which could benefit abused children.

If he is really concerned about obese or underweight kids, let’s focus on the root of the problem, not the symptom. Overweight kids already know they’re overweight. Instead of stigmatizing the children who are of “incorrect” weight, why don’t we focus on the wholly unhealthy food schools are feeding children. Or that most kids are no longer required to participate in real PE anymore, and most competitive games have been removed from what PE there is due to, “some kids would have to lose, and that’s bad for their self-worth.” If that’s it, consider that self-worth is built at home. Kids with two parents have better lives. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_/ai_14922840

In the end, this is a ridiculous proposal, which involves the state government in something that is none of their business. Personal responsibility has to come in to play somewhere, and that is something that can’t be legislated.


The Line is Here

I found a new blog through Liberty Girl. I'm linking to one essay, but Ted is going in my blogroll.

The Line is Here: This IS my Veteran's Day Post

He writes like I want to.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Bailout gone bad

From AP/Yahoo:

After all of the furor about getting the bailout together to buy mortgages and help the poor lenders who can't make good money decisions, Paulson changed his mind.
Faced with exasperated lawmakers upset by shifts in bailout strategy, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson launched a spirited defense Tuesday of his handling of the $700 billion program and expressed fresh reservations about tapping the pool for mortgage guarantees to relieve skyrocketing home foreclosures.

Members of the House Financial Services Committee grilled Paulson for not doing enough to help distressed homeowners and for failing to force banks that get some of the bailout money to specifically use it to bolster lending to customers, one of the prime reasons behind the rescue package.

"It is essential" that some of the bailout money be used to ease foreclosures, said the panel's chairman, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a key player in shaping the package that Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law Oct. 3.

The Democrats in congress are going crazy over this. Here's the best quote:
"It appears that you seem to be flying a $700 billion plane by the seat of your pants," said Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.
We gave Paulson $700 BILLION, because he said we had to fix the mortgage problem. Now it's not enough to fix the mortgage issue, so he wants to give it to credit card companies and other lenders.

Oh, also, he doesn't think he can spend it all before January 20th, so after that, Obama will get to determine how the money is spent. That's quite an inauguration gift.

I think maybe he just wanted to take all the money and dive in it like Scrooge McDuck.

Monday, November 17, 2008

McCain bows down

Well, McCain has apparently forgotten all the things he said about Obama's policies and politics during the campaign. They had a meeting, and posed for pictures. Afterwards, when asked if he was going to help the new administration he said, "Obviously."

The two former rivals met in Obama's transition headquarters in Chicago. Obama said before the meeting that he and McCain planned "a good conversation about how we can do some work together to fix up the country, and also to offer thanks to Sen. McCain for the outstanding service he's already rendered."


Am I the only one who read, "Good boy. Now go back to Washington."

If Obama is so bad (remember the ads McCain ran?) why would you want to work with him? He is a socialist who wants to create a civilian defense force while cutting military funding, increase the taxes on the only people who pay the taxes and give that money to the people who don't. He wants to give immunity to millions of illegal immigrants, who will get some of that money, too. He wants to play nice with governments who help the people who want us dead and think we're the great satan. He wants to force everyone to contribute to a government controlled retirement account (another one, different from SocSec).

These were all the things that McCain fought against in his run for the presidency, and now, he wants to help Obama "fix up the country."

That's quite a change.

From CNN:
"It is in this spirit that we had a productive conversation today about the need to launch a new era of reform where we take on government waste and bitter partisanship in Washington in order to restore trust in government, and bring back prosperity and opportunity for every hardworking American family," they said.
A new era of reform. I don't like his ideas of reform, because they come straight out of 60's Chicago. I think that if there is a huge rally around Obama for the next four years, there will be a culling in Washington at the next election.