Hillary Clinton represents an existential threat to the nation. She would perpetuate the liberal dumbing down of America, attempt to load the courts with more leftists, and redefine our unalienable rights to match the progressive agenda. Under no circumstances would I endorse or even remotely consider voting for her.

That’s the preface necessary to set the stage for dissent. As I wrote previously, questioning Trump’s policies will not make you a #NeverTrump Clinton supporter. We can see Trump as a leftward lurch by the GOP or we can view him as an opportunity to take a malleable candidate and show him why fiscal conservatism is the right direction for America if we want to thrive today and be sustained into the future. I’ve held to the hope that the latter can come to pass but recent trends point to the former being the more likely scenario.

A recent poll should shock every fiscal conservative in the Republican Party. 85% of Republicans surveyed said that free trade has cost the U.S. more jobs than it has created, compared to 54% of Democrats. Let that sink in. The party of Reagan that has witnessed the tremendous benefits of a free market economy and the absolute need for free trade as a hallmark of our fiscal plan has reversed its perspective in a single election cycle. I don’t care how charismatic of a salesman someone is – this should not have been even remotely possible.

There’s a difference between believing that our current free trade agreements can be improved and believing that free trade is bad. Free trade is not bad. It has always been the driving force for our economic prosperity. Today’s communication and infrastructural advancements make this the perfect opportunity to take advantage of trade in ways that we have never been available to us.

More importantly, we are no longer the only consumers nor are we the primary producers. The global economy is expanding and the United States needs to lead it, not break away from it. The fear of globalism is a righteous fear. It’s the primary reason that we need to maintain as much control of global trade or risk losing our place as the main benefactors.

Here’s a short video from 2010 that explains it quite nicely:

The biggest argument against free trade is that it means more jobs are sent overseas. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of economics. In a thriving free market economy driven by free trade, the “loss” of jobs is an opportunity to replace low-yield employment with higher-yield employment. As companies rightfully send certain jobs, particularly manufacturing jobs, to places where they can be done more cost effectively, the nation’s economy becomes more stable. With stability comes the creation of more industries and increased domestic employment requirements within those industries. Jobs aren’t lost. They are traded. They are replaced. As a consumer-driven nation, the need for better employees rises with free trade. As a technology-driven nation, the need for higher-skilled employees rises with free trade as well.

“Fair” trade is part of an anti-growth economic system. It’s a short-term bandaid that forces companies to keep jobs and production facilities in the United States. This concept is being sold as a good thing. Unfortunately, it’s only a good thing in the beginning. As revenues dry up due to increased production expenditures, costs of goods rise for consumers. Whether through tariffs or forced domestication of production, the benefits for a few are taken from the wallets of the masses. For example, let’s say Apple was forced through tariffs or mandates to produce the iPhone in the United States. That would bring a huge number of jobs back; over a million people contribute in some way to iPhone production worldwide. It’s a win, right? The problem is that production costs would skyrocket. The already-overpriced iPhone would need to retail over $2000 to make up some of the difference. As sales volume drops, so too would jobs.

If you’re thinking that Apple makes enough money already and should bring those jobs to the United States without raising prices, you’ve already taken your first steps towards a socialist mentality.

The GOP has been more responsible over the years when it comes to fiscal planning… at least that’s what we’ve been led to believe. I contend that the GOP isn’t pushing to the left because of Trump. Instead, it has always wanted to be the moderate populist party for the sake of winning elections rather than a party that believes in the tenets of fiscal conservatism.

The shift away from free trade is reminiscent of a lesson in George Orwell’s 1984 that doesn’t get as much attention as others. In the dystopian novel, we learn of the dangers of an overreaching government and how “Big Brother” can make our lives miserable for the sake of a perceived good to the oligarchy. We all know about doublespeak. What gets less attention is the lesson of controlled perceptions. In the book, Oceania is in a constant state of war with either Eurasia or Eastasia. The question of who the enemy is at any given moment is dictated by the leaders and maintained in false perpetuity, including in the past. If Oceania is at war with Eurasia at any given moment, it has always been at war with Eurasia. If the government shifts and declares that they are at war with Eastasia, then they have always been at war with Eastasia and have never been at war with Eurasia. Attempts to say otherwise are punished.

Somehow, the electorate is believing the manufactured reality that the Republican Party is now against free trade. If you were to question some of the 85% of Republicans who believe this, I would wager that a majority would say that the party has always been against it. Sadly, they may be inadvertently correct.

Jon Sable: My finders fee is 30%

Client: That’s pretty steep!

Jon Sable: Depends on how you look at it. I’ve always figured that 70% of something is worth more that 100% of nothing.

John Sable, Freelance #11 Maggie the Cat 1984

Cleveland Browns running back Isiah Crowell has a history of bad decision making dating back to his Georgia Bulldog days:

Georgia running back Isaiah Crowell, who was in and out of Bulldogs coach Mark Richt’s doghouse as a freshman, was dismissed from the team Friday after being arrested on weapons charges by Athens-Clarke County Police overnight.

Crowell, from Columbus, Ga., was arrested and charged with two felonies and a misdemeanor, according to the Athens-Clarke County Jail booking report.

Crowell, 19, was charged with a felony count of possessing a weapon in a school zone, a felony count of altered identification mark and a misdemeanor count of possession/carrying a concealed weapon.

So there was not a lot of surprise when he made another bad decision to send out a cartoon showing a police officer getting his throat slit by a masked man on social media

Crowell pulled the cartoon but his initial apology went over flat, but old friend Ed Morrissey is giving him credit for attempting to do better the second time around

Give Crowell some credit, too. He’s parting with nearly a month’s salary (when spread out over the year), and the money goes to help those who truly need some community support. On top of that, he’s offering a personal and full apology, not some I’m sorry everyone misunderstood my genius non-apology. “I don’t want to be part of the problem,” Crowell said in the video above, “I want to be part of the solution.” Making amends is the first step. Maintaining that example for his fans is the next step. He really is putting his money where his mouth is, and maybe that will be a valuable life lesson to Crowell and others to think before engaging in public debates.

Now as a good Catholic I’m certainly a big fan of constriction and I very much hope that Mr. Crowell is sincere in his regret but I think the real lesson from this story is that if there was one subject that Mr. Crowell aced during his time at first Georgia then Alabama State it’s economics.

You see Mr. Crowell is slated to earn $592,000 this season with the Cleveland Browns and if the Browns decided that he is too radioactive to keep then that 592K will be in jeopardy.  And if the NFL decides the same then Mr. Crowell might find himself unemployable as a football player and lucky to find a $15 hr job even if the minimum wage is raised that high.

So while some might say that $37,000 is a high price to pay for a single cartoon, I submit and suggest that fully tax deductible $37K is a wise investment in remaining in the top 10% of American incomes for at least the next several years.

That’s the thing about math, it doesn’t care what you believe or what you think, it’s just relentlessly true.

I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level


Today I saw the Market Basket Movie food fight, several thought:

  1. The Movie focused a lot on the distribution crew, which makes sense, they took the biggest risks and without their willingness to take the big hit, none of this stuff works.
  2. The film talked a bit about the June vs December business, thoughts to the contrary I do believe that Arthur S would have won if he made his move in the Winter not only because it would have squeezed the workers harder but it would have meant there would have been no pressure on Pols to move.

  3. Some of the strategies of the work slowdown were simply brilliant and simply involved applying the skills the management team already had. It also pointed to the power of social media

  4. Seeing Maggie Hassan on the screen talking about the layoffs that prompts the pols to get involved was greatly frustrating to me as it reminded me of the missed opportunity of the GOP to get behind these people in a work action that was basically Pro-capitalism

  5. The movie didn’t touch at all on the attempts of the unions to get involved and unionize the workers and the employees decision to tell them to get stuffed. That is a significant part of the story and its exclusion needs an explanation.

  6. The willingness of customers to boycott really did a lot to win the day, it’s shows what a difference customer choice makes.

  7. Finally the single most important point of the movie is the Market Basket culture, it’s of hard word and dedication rather than entitlement. That culture is why they won, why they recovered and is the thing to celebrate.

On the way out of the picture I interviewed one of the people who saw it with me

The one odd thing to me was opening at 1:20 PM. It means that any Market Basket worker on 1st shift or 2nd shift couldn’t go to see it.

Just after the election I made the point that the reason the Earned Sick Time ballot question (Question 4) passed while the Gas Tax (Question 1) & the bottle bill (Question 2) did not was because consumers didn’t see the costs of the former directly while they saw the costs of the latter.

Most voters didn’t understand what it means to supermarkets like Market Basket Restaurants like Singapore and even pizzeria’s like Espresso’s in fact all you might see if you are a bagger, a busboy or a pizza driver all you know is you’ve just got an hour of paid sicktime for every 30 hours you work up to a maximum of one paid 40 hour “sick” week a year. That’s likely why it passed by almost 400,000 votes.

Even when the supermarket inch up their prices the Restaurant cuts your hours and the pizza place decides not to hire the votes won’t make the connection that the cost of that effective 2-3% pay raise that you forced them to give is going to have to come from somewhere.

That disconnect from reality is why the same “highly educated” voters who repealed the onerous Gas tax can re-elect almost every single state senator and representative who voted to impose it upon them without batting an eyelash.

Thursday yet another Jonathan Gruber story appeared in a location other than the MSM which I suspect will give it a passing mention on Saturday for the sake of saying they mentioned it.

This post at Breitbart focused , as most such pieces have,  on the deception involved in the passage of Obamacare, but the video they embedded accidentally makes my question 4 point that is worth highlighting.

Gruber names John Kerry as one of the Heroes of Obamacare by shifting the argument from a tax on individuals insurance plans something impossible to a tax on “The Insurance Companies” (emphasis mine)

John Kerry said, No No. we’re not going to tax your health insurance we’re going to tax those evil insurance companies. Where going to impose a tax because if sell health insurance that’s too expensive we’re going to tax them and conveniently the tax rate will happen to be the marginal tax rate (inaudible). So basically it’s the same thing. We just tax the Insurance companies they pass on higher prices that offsets the tax break we get, so it ends up being the same thing. It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American Voter.

Do you see the lesson here? Gruber is kindly explaining the point I was making least week, a point that conservatives have been trying to get through to the american people for decades.

Higher taxes on business is simply a tax on consumers

In fact it’s even worse.  It’s almost certain that any price increase will be higher than the tax.

A while back a man in the delivery business explained it.  He needed to increase his margins but didn’t want to increase his base price, the gas price spike solved that problem for him.  As gas prices soared he had to make up the price so he added a “gas surcharge” and incorporated the margin increase into the surcharge.  Since the customers knew gas prices were going up they didn’t blink an eye at the high price and viola a hidden price increase.

Do you think for one moment that insurance companies forced to increase prices because of Obamacare didn’t do the same?

If I’m a conservative leader I use this clip from every single time the left tries to increase taxes on the “Evil [insert business here]” and use it to teach the uninformed voters two things.

1.  A Tax on business is a tax on you

2.  The left has been using you as a bunch of suckers for decades.

If Jonathan Gruber’s Obamacare speeches allow us to teach that lesson to the country maybe someday a GOP leader will give a speech calling him the hero of the tax reform movement.


Olimometer 2.52

If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below

If course if you can do both, I’m  fine with that too.

Consider Subscribing to support our lineup of  John Ruberry (Marathon Pundit)  on Sunday Pat Austin (And so it goes in Shreveport)  on Monday  Tim Imholt on Tuesday,  AP Dillon (Lady Liberty1885) Thursdays, Pastor George Kelly Fridays,   Steve Eggleston on Saturdays with  Baldilocks (Tue & Sat)  and   Fausta  (Wed & Fri) of (Fausta Blog) twice a week.


I noted today, as has Stacy McCain that true believers in Barack Obama are alive and well.

In so noting however he repeats a question raised by Ace of Spades on the subject

And the Liberal Chattering Classes are facing a question now: “Will my reputation and sense of pride survive Obama’s incompetence?”

And: “How absurd am I willing to make myself in order to cover up for this arrogant buffoon’s incompetence?”

The question  has been answered by Newsbusters: or should I say they quoted Real Clear Politics answer

MSNBC blazed its own path, encouraging Chris Matthews to channel his inner advocate and hiring people such as Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Martin Bashir, even Al Sharpton. Not unintelligent people, certainly, but not reporters, either — and in some cases, not journalists at all. Meanwhile, except for the successful “Morning Joe” program, MSNBC dropped its token conservative voices and for the most part eschewed original reporting in lieu of talking heads.

The upshot has been uneven. More money for MSNBC, as it slipped by CNN in the ratings, but more controversy, too.

The key line is that screed is “more money for MSNBC” and this shouldn’t surprise anyone particularly not Stacy McCain:

But this false accusation — the Duke players did not have sex with the strippers, much less hold them down and f–k them against their will — is not enough to discredit Amanda Marcotte in the eyes of those who share her worldview. This is how the Ideology of Error operates: As long as one speaks, writes and behaves in accordance with the ideology, any resulting errors are written off as if they never happened.

Amanda Marcotte can be absurdly wrong and crudely offensive and yet still be endlessly applauded by her fellow leftists. This hate-filled lying fanatic is a valued contributor at Slate and a welcome guest at MSNBC not despite her fanaticism, but because of her fanaticism.

Given that  that MSNBC is more profitable now than it was before it decided to go full bore as an  affirmation machine for the people propping Obama up, I’m afraid the answer to Ace’s question: “How absurd am I willing to make myself in order to cover up for this arrogant buffoon’s incompetence?” is apparently “pretty damn absurd.


Olimometer 2.52

It’s Black Friday 27 hours to go and still $179 shy

Can still get things done with less that 10 tip jar hits of $20 or $25

If you can afford it and if you think this type of site is worth your while, please consider hitting DaTarJar below and make the first month of the Magnificent Seven a successful one.

We are offering sponsorships of both the Magnificent Seven & the Magnificent Panel now is an excellent time to jump on board, contact me here for more details

Last week I was on a conference call with Americans for Prosperity. they put out their scorecard rating each member of congress. It’s an elegant card of excellent use if you want to see exactly how your congressman or Senator did last session.
You can pull your information based on the categories that mean the most to you:

search issue

You can also search by state, name or even by your individual zip code to see how your members of congress have done.

As nice as the page looks, what matters is the score. As you might guess AFP being a fiscally conservative group a person like Rand Paul does pretty well in their rankings:

Rand Paul

91% Pretty good numbers. It will come in handy when Rand Paul runs in 2016 but what about his most visible potential rival in the Senate Marco Rubio?


100%. A perfect score. That’s pretty impressive but scoring 10% higher than Rand Paul on Economic Freedom?. One would not think that’s possible.

If you are going to run for president as a fiscal conservative and you are scoring nearly 10 points higher than Rand Paul on the AFP scorecard that’s a walking talking Billboard for campaign contributions.

It will be interesting to see if Rubio can keep that score above the Senator from Kentucky. It’s the type of talking point that will play very well in Iowa and New Hampshire.

and That’s how Politics works.

In the National Review, Heather MacDonald laughs at the New York Times for it’s hand-wringing and pearl-clutching over the idea of rural teenagers using their high school degrees to make good money without first going to college.   Teenagers are making an economically rational decision to work for several years, learn a skill, and earn very good money (for an unmarried teen/twenty-something with no financial obligations).  They do not see the need to head straight to college as an “undecided” major, rack up debt, and spend four to six years out of the workforce.  Good for them.

Now comes the news that graduates with occupational/technical associate’s degrees (e.g. nursing) earn more than their counterparts with bachelor’s degrees, and significantly more than their counterparts with B.A. degrees.  There is the usual caution that this is salary straight out of school, not lifetime earnings, but underscores a harsh reality: people are paid to do things that someone else wants to get done, not to be their own amazing phenomenal selves, nor to develop emotionally, think deep thoughts, or engage in preening.  People want and need nurses, plumbers, electricians, and paralegals; they do not need someone to regurgiatate third-wave feminist philosophy.

More importantly, the “lifetime earnings” canard is just that.  There is no law saying that you cannot obtain a bachelor’s dgree at night or after several years in the workforce.  Those kids in Montana may work in the oil fields for several years, then get a degree in petroleum engineering.  The plumber could go to school at night.  A nurse could continue obtaining degrees if it benefits her career or stimulates her intellectually. This is university with a purpose – not as the mindless pursuit of an aimless teenager, aged out of state-mandated daily schooling and desiring to ape the customs of the nineteenth-century’s upper class.

Moreover, the value in a non-technical college degree had mostly been to show discipline and the ability to learn.  Before the days of grade inflation, getting into college, and staying in, were no small feats.  The work was harder, the courses more rigourous, and thus, the value of the degree, greater.  Consider, however, the modern college student, and compare to the young men highlighted in the New York Times:

“I just figured, the oil field is here and I’d make the money while I could,” said Tegan Sivertson, 19, who monitors pipelines for a gas company, sometimes working 15-hour days. “I didn’t want to waste the money and go to school when I could make just as much.”

Less than a year after proms and homecoming games, teenagers like Mr. Sivertson now wake at 4 a.m. to make the three-hour trek to remote oil rigs. They fish busted machinery out of two-mile-deep hydraulic fracturing wells and repair safety devices that keep the wells from rupturing, often working alongside men old enough to be their fathers. Some live at home; others drive back on weekends to eat their mothers’ food, do loads of laundry and go to high school basketball games, still straddling the blurred border between childhood and adulthood.

While the NYT may think that a young man is “straddling” the border between childhood and adulthood while working 15-hour days laying pipeline, most employers will understand that this is an adult in every sense of the word – in a way that college students, and college graduates, are not.

Who would you rather hire – the young man who has gotten up at 4 am every day for four years, or the B.A., communications graduate, who hasn’t gone to bed before 4 am in four years?  Let’s also not forget: should the oil boom dry up, these kids can go to college, but the college graduate, B.A, gender studies, may never get hired for one of these jobs.

That’s what I take away from this line via Glenn from the Wall street Journal:

“What I find reprehensible beyond belief is that the people pushing [high-density housing] themselves live in single-family homes and often drive very fancy cars, but want everyone else to live like my grandmother did in Brownsville in Brooklyn in the 1920s,”

That’s Joel Kotkin a demographer interviewed by the Wall Street Journal, he sees the following endgame:

Mr. Kotkin also notes that demographic changes are playing a role. As progressive policies drive out moderate and conservative members of the middle class, California’s politics become even more left-wing. It’s a classic case of natural selection, and increasingly the only ones fit to survive in California are the very rich and those who rely on government spending. In a nutshell, “the state is run for the very rich, the very poor, and the public employees.”

So it will be the Lords, the Serfs and the servants in the castle. Feudalism is alive and well!

Our progressive friends leading the people back to the 11th century!

They said that he will print anything Media Matters will give him, and look who is still leading the drumbeat vs Rush on Memeorandum ten days later:

Think Progress and…..Greg Sargent.

Meanwhile as large chunks of the left talk to themselves some members of the left (via legal insurrection and my under the fedora column) demonstrate they can still count:

The dustup over Sleep Train, along with the blowback suffered by Carbonite over that company’s public denunciation of Limbaugh, demonstrates that the iconic radio talk show host is dealing from a position of strength in the campaign to deprive him of advertisers. One tends to prosper when one advertises on Limbaugh’s show. But cross him, and one will suffer.

The one overwhelming fact is that Limbaugh commands many millions of listeners. There is no evidence that any of them have stopped listening because of the kerfuffle with Sandra Fluke. Indeed, one suspects that Limbaugh has gained listeners, curious about what the fuss is all about. As long as the show maintains its listener base, it does not matter if any advertisers bail on Limbaugh for political reasons. There will always be others who will want to take their place, because it is good business to advertise on the most listened-to radio talk show on the planet.

Remember Dan Riehl mentioned on Friday a story the left was crowing about that seemed too good to be true for them

I don’t know, I’m no industry expert, but I’d be skeptical of a big story like this breaking on a Saturday. I could be wrong, but I think I’ll wait until I hear what, if anything, is said about all this on Monday when most radio talkers are back on the air.

Maybe it’s just me, but I suspect that if there was a true mass exodus of advertisers from Rush the MSM would have spent yesterday crowing and would still be doing it today.

Yet there are only the three Memeorandum leads, two by the same person Judd Legum from Think Progress and Greg “Anything you want it that’s is what I’ll print it” Sargent and the lefty blogs that mimic them. If it wasn’t for Sargent’s position at the Washington Post it would be a total case of crickets.

And the post actually pays him for this!

According to CNN, Rick Santorum, devout Catholic extraordinaire, has failed to win the Catholic vote.  This is apparently an indictment of Rick Santorum, and not of the shoddy exit polling that enables people to self-identify as Catholics when they haven’t graced the door of a church in years.  Of course, some of the problem is in the way that leftists have tried to turn the word “Catholic” into a synonym for “wealth redistributor”:

“Catholic voters care more about economic issues that affect their families than they do about socially divisive wedge issues like contraception,” said James Salt, executive director of Catholics United, in the statement.

“Mainstream Catholics want leaders who can address the moral challenges of our day like income inequality, underwater mortgages and poverty,” Salt continued, “not leaders who perpetuate a never-ending culture war that divides our community.”

Right.  Who cares about whether or not we murder a million babies a year when someone might want to take another vacation to Aspen this winter?  Don’t you know that the two-thousand year history of the Church is all about those Aspen vacations?

To be serious: the great “moral” problems of income inequality, underwater mortgages, and poverty are all direct results of contraception, abortion, and the decline of the family unit.  As Charles Murray explains in great detail, poorer communities are getting poorer because they are not marrying, while wealthy, educated people are more likely to marry, and are especially more likely to marry before having children. These days, people without college educations have children out of wedlock, and doctors marry other doctors, and people can’t understand why family incomes aren’t equal.

Poverty: never-married mothers are six times as likely as their married peers to be in poverty.  The federal government alone spends over $100 billion a year on subsidies to never-married parents that it would save if our out-of-wedlock birth rate were the same as it was in 1950.

Underwater mortgages: kind of hard to pay for your house when your three baby daddies can only give you $100 a month in child support because he’s also supporting a few other baby mammas.  Sort of hard to have a new crop of home buyers when over ten million would-be-adults are victims of abortion and decaying in trash heaps, not putting down payments on houses.

Rick Santorum scares people because he explains how this all works together.  He scares Cafeteria Catholics who want to believe that the mandates of their faith are limited to voting the (D) at the polling place.  He frightens lefties whose entire anti-social agenda depends on people not noticing that the family is the strongest bulwark against a tyrannical state – and the breakdown in the family unit costs us serious money.  Rick Santorum probably frightens James Salt, too, because people with a good head on their shoulders tend to scare the daylights out of ditzy-brained morons.

With the reverses in popularity the occupy movement has suffered lately, I’m sure they are happy to see this story of the average consumer moving away from big banks to a different kind of “cash” card:

Linda Black, the first person I walk up to, is happy to show off her blue plastic. Like others, Black has not had a good track record with banks, specifically Bank of America.

“Every time I went there, I’m owing this, I’m owing that,” Black says. She was frustrated that even though she had money in the account, she’d always have more fees to pay.

“So I said forget it,”

Not only does this new card charge a flat $3 a month fee it has other advantages:

Lisa Barnes, a waitress, says she’s been saving money with the card since overdrafting isn’t even an option.

“You can’t spend what you don’t have, so you can’t go over,” Barnes says. “You [just] don’t get in trouble with it.”

Yet you can still use it as an ATM card and direct deposit is available:

“[You] fill out a form and your money comes directly on the card.”

Nixon says it’s possible to do everything she needs to with the MoneyCard, like buy things online, pay bills, even buy movies from Redbox. “You can basically do anything with it,” she says.

That’s why Nixon has closed her bank account, technically joining the ranks of the “unbanked.”

So there you have it, a company providing a service needed by all, without the hidden fees of the big banks serving the 99%. How happy the occupods and the radical left that populate them must be. I’m sure they wil be celebrating that company in music, song and drum circles.
Continue reading “The occupy movement finds its Dream Company”

Last week, Elizabeth Warren infamously described the collectivist mentality:

WARREN: I hear all this, “You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever.” No! There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you! But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.

Dianne Williamson did a wonderful job of attacking the problems with this kind of thinking – namely, that someone who “build[s] a factory” is employing other people, paying taxes, improving the economy, providing a good to Americans (that can also be exported), and generally keeping things going.  Additionally, if our taxes are only going to police, fire, roads, military, and education, well, then, sign us up for that America – an America in which “the rich” are not seen as a golden goose for the nearly half of working Americans who don’t pay any taxes and the millions who get government hand outs.

But, being an engineer, I’m going to go into this whole “build a factory” thing and talk about how that happens – an event that the esteemed Prof. Warren elides away, assuming it to be about as difficult as writing a book, or perhaps even doing an extra load of laundry.

Starting at the beginning: your factory has to make something – either something that hasn’t been made before (a new drug that cures a deadly disease? an iPad?), or makes something that we already have for less money.  So you have a whole engineering and design process that produces new technology that improves our lives.  At this point, you’ve already contributed to the country by making it a bit more advanced than it had been before, or you are able to bring a good to Americans for a bit less money, so that the working and the middle classes have more cash in their pockets at the end of the week.

If you hired people to develop this cool new gadget/lifesaving drug/inexpensive consumer good, then you’ve reduced the unemployment rate, probably providing health care and retirement to them, helped people to develop their skills, employed people who paid taxes, paid into Social Security and Medicare, and reduced the need for welfare.

You’ve probably patented your invention, thus employing a few patent attorneys and paying fees to the USPTO (whose fees go into the general revenue stream of the US Government).

So you have your cool new product.   Now you want to manufacture it en masse.  You have to get financing for this project, and it’s you or your company who is on the hook for that money if the venture falls apart.  Alternatively, investors pour their money into the factory; Elizabeth Warren isn’t volunteering to give one red cent to those people should their venture fail.  If you are a business owner, you eat last: you pay all of your employees, your contractors, your bills before you get a dime in your own pocket.  So you’ve taken risks with your  money – money that could be used to put yor kids through college, help you retire, or pay down your mortgage.  (Many small business owners run up credit card debt, take out lines of credit against their homes, betting it all on making it big enough one day to be worthwhile.  Take away the pot of gold, and no one would be so mental as to take those risks.)

So you have your financing and your cool idea.  Now to build the factory.  First step: purchase land, pay tax on the purchase price, pay property taxes. Second step: pay people to evaluate the land, pay fees to the town you are in, and, often, donate a part of the land to the town as a condition of developing it.  Next, employ construction workers, architects, chemical engineers, environmental engineers, a few police officers, security guards, and the whole rest to get this factory built.  As per above, all of those people now have jobs, incomes, health care, retirement, and then pay taxes (FICA, state income, federal income, sales, property, gas, ad infinitum).

Now, your factory is built.  Dozens, if not hundreds, of people have gotten jobs from this.  You have yet to make a single cent.  The process has taken years. You’ve worked eighty hours a week and possibly invested your entire life savings into this.  You may have had to defend yourself against a few frivolous lawsuits.  Although you haven’t made any  money yet, you’ve employed engineers, scientists, construction workers, electricians, plumbers, attorneys, and others – all of whom are then paying taxes into the system, and all of whom have gotten their biweekly salaries that can’t be taken away if the venture collapses.

According to Elizabeth Warren, the moment you first flip a switch in that factory and start producing a good, you are an evil rich person who needs to “give back”, because building that factory just sort of happened, without effort, intellect, financial risk, or the employment of others.  Had this chickie even run a lemonade stand, she would understand the fallacy in her thinking.

“You built a factory out there? Good for you!” is not unlike saying, “Your country went to the moon? Good for you!” as if the only feat worth noting were being a Harvard professor.  Sorry, chickie.

…and they were right!

An attorney in her mid-thirties has resorted to topless dancing to make ends meet while she goes back to grad school and gets a degree.  The legal job market is a mess and will not recover for a long time; the profession is also rather overcrowded, so many JDs never even practise law.   Furthermore, attractive young women have always been well-compensated for taking their clothes off for men, should they so choose that route.

But… okay, you’re a thirty-something lawyer with nine years of experience in the field.  Surely, there are jobs out there that would pay you at least the $20/hour you get for taking your clothes off for strangers, right?  Rather than having a family who is “proud” of you for doing whatever needs to be done to make ends meet, shouldn’t that family open up a home?  (Not that I’m a fan of thirty-somethings boomeranging back home, but if it’s that or letting strangers gaze at your naked breasts for money, surely, the spare bedroom in the parents’ house is a sensible solution.)

Thoughts, dear readers?

Such a post wouldn’t be complete without a conservative feminist rant, so here it is: the government thought that it was being “compassionate” and giving everyone an “opportunity” by funding generous, virtually unlimited student loans.  Unfortunately, it didn’t repeal the law of economics at the same time, so the influx of easy cash created a bubble in the higher education market.   Economists have estimated that universities raise tuition concurrent with raises in available federal financial aid. Moreover, schools have an incentive to accept as many students as possible, training them in whatever fields they desire, even if there isn’t a market for those skills.  Thus, young people have an easy time getting loans, but the loans are for such huge amounts of money, often in very crowded or low-paying fields, that they become difficult or impossible to pay off.  So we’ve gotten to the situation in which young women’s best prospects for financial solvency involve selling their bodies – the exact situation which easy student loans and access to higher education was supposed to prevent, but one that sets women’s advancement back to the nineteenth century nonetheless.

Cross-posted at Haemet.

According to CNN.com,

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney repeated his campaign line that President Obama has made the economy worse in New Hampshire Monday, a sentiment that has received criticism from those on the left and independent fact-checkers.

“The recession is deeper because of our president, it’s seen an anemic recovery because of our president,” Romney said after a July 4th parade in Amherst.

The New Hampshire Democratic Party quickly jumped on the “debunked” claim that they said “has been central to his campaign message.”

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, as pointed out by the Washington Post, the recession officially ended in June 2009.

Let’s examine this “debunked” claim.  The recovery has been the slowest of the last fifty years (see nifty graph here) and payroll employment is 5% lower than when the recession began forty-one months ago.  Unemployment in June 2009, the end of the recession, was 9.5% (up from 9.4% in May 2009); it has dropped to 9.1%.

So what is the problem?  What are these “fact-checkers” asserting? A change from a 9.5% unemployment rate to a 9.1% unemployment rate is a robust recovery?  The non-shovel-ready $278,000 per job stimulus made things better? The passage of ObamaCare increased employment?  Do they disagree with former professor of economics Phil Gramm’s assertion that, “If we had recovered at the rate we recovered from the 1982 recession — and I remind you we had a little bit higher unemployment then than we had in this recession — we would have 15 million more jobs today and per-capita income in real terms would be $4,000 higher”?  That the “unexpected” nature of the double-dip in housing prices somehow means that housing prices are not still declining?  Do they take seriously the allegations that gasoline going down to a mere $3.50 a gallon will stimulate the economy more than when gas was $1.75 a gallon?

Kudos to Romney for not backing down; he is entirely correct.  Maybe the former Governor grew a spine and a political orientation, and is hammering Obama because Obama should be hammered for his anti-business, anti-growth, big-government policies.  Maybe Romney is still testing the political winds, and knows that 9.1% unemployment and $4 per gallon gasoline means that the vast majority of the electorate is hurting or knows someone who is hurting, Obama-spin aside.  Either way, this blogger can’t help but think that the “fact-checkers” and pundits are only damaging their own credibility in this battle, which is a good thing.

A few weeks ago a column by Bonnie Erbe to nobody’s surprise who is paying attention (PBS on their online site actually refers to her as “non-partisan” which says more about PBS than it does about her) noted church closing in the East and painted it as a result of the old church orthodoxy:

Dogmatic, dictatorial churches do not resound with today’s spirituality, and young people are not clamoring to join them. So sending a message that says, in essence, “Follow my rules or go to hell” might be a good way of retaining older parishioners used to such harsh boundaries. But as elderly parishioners die off, they take the church’s message with them.

I live in a city where 4 Catholic churches recently closed and it is a shame to see churches close in NY and other urban areas, yet lets look at Dave Weigel’s column today about redistricting which links to this rather good 8 decade chart at the NY Times and what do we see? We see a flight of people not from the church but in general from particular states.

More and more of the faithful youth are fleeing high tax liberal states and settling elsewhere as Michael Barone writes:

Texas’ diversified economy, business-friendly regulations and low taxes have attracted not only immigrants but substantial inflow from the other 49 states. As a result, the 2010 reapportionment gives Texas four additional House seats. In contrast, California gets no new House seats, for the first time since it was admitted to the Union in 1850.

There’s a similar lesson in the fact that Florida gains two seats in the reapportionment and New York loses two.

This leads to a second point, which is that growth tends to be stronger where taxes are lower. Seven of the nine states that do not levy an income tax grew faster than the national average. The other two, South Dakota and New Hampshire, had the fastest growth in their regions, the Midwest and New England.

I suspect that if you want to see where the church is growing and thriving just follow that electoral population.

My oldest son is a solid Catholic who is going to college on a full academic scholarship. As soon as he graduates he plans on getting out of this state and I can’t say as I blame him.

So Bonnie rather than your argument concerning the empty churches I would refer you to Stacy McCain’s explaining the demographic facts of life and Ed Driscoll who says this:

And it seems rather difficult to build an emerging Democratic majority when two of the most prominent “liberal” cities in America (very much in name only, given the mammoth regulatory mazes and bureaucratic armies these cities come equipped with) have such poor future demographics. Or as Mark Steyn, who inspired our headline above with this classic 2006 article, wrote about Europe’s similar (and not at all coincidental) demographic woes, “what’s the point of creating a secular utopia if it’s only for one generation?”

As even Illinois, which is among the democratic states losing a congressional seat, is learning you can’t vote the dead if you oppose them being born.

I can tell you for a fact that yesterday killing of the Omnibus spending bill will be cheered by almost every business I’ve talked to as I stated in my Examiner column today:

I submit that if a congressman, state rep or MSM reporter came with me for a week door to door; they would not dare advocate the taxes, spending and regulation that they do.

Read the whole thing as they say.

It’s not often that I disagree with Rush Limbaugh AND Sarah Palin but it is my opinion that the Obama Tax deal is an excellent deal for the GOP and the right, particularly on the political side.

1. The two-year tax cut deal as I’ve already said gives us the ability to constantly bring up a vote to make the tax cuts permanent and put Senate Democrats and the president on the spot again and again and again. (If it passes we get credit, if it fails it becomes a political issue for 2012)

2. Democrats, by extending unemployment save the republicans the tough issue of refusing to extend them. As for paying for it, there is nothing to stop congressional republicans from allocating tarp funds etc to pay for said benefits AFTER Jan 3rd. Also by not including or demanding additional benefits for the 99 week guys it takes it off the table (even liberal democrats didn’t want this extra spending).

3. The individual pork pieces in the bill can be attacked by individual bills during the next session, forcing the left to defending them. Each time the left defends said pork, it becomes an issue for 2012.

4. Thanks to Bernie Sanders filibuster an actual unapologetic socialist is now the iconic image of the left…

4a. …And of course it shows the intransigence of the whole bunch of them in attempting to block this, making the lie over the “compromise” issue. This firmly establishes the idea of democrats unwilling to compromise, (particularly to those who have voted for them in the past whose unemployment benefits are on the line) that we can play up over and over again in the next session. It will be an excellent counter to the media goes that will try to make GOP intransigence an issue. We will answer: “Oh it’s the democrats being just as uncompromising as there were with the president in December.” It shatters the media’s template built carefully over decades.

5. And finally I’d rather have the actual tax rate in place than to simply have a football to kick democrats with. Why give the economy a hit when we don’t have to.

Ted Kennedy was always smart enough to take a piece of what he wanted and then amend it over time. We may have disagreed with Sen Kennedy over issues but tactically we should be just as smart.

I’m very hard on Joe Scarborough mostly because I like him (I’m always harder on people I like because I expect more from them) but today he said something that is incredibly important.

He was going on about the hypocrisy of both right and left on deficits and said this:

“There are a couple of tea partiers who care about this (the deficit) Rand Paul and Jim DeMint,that’s it!”

Although Joe likely doesn’t know Porkbusters he has a point. The Tea Party crowd doesn’t actually trust the republicans. I could not find a single person in the crowd at the Washington Freedom Works rally who would say they trusted republicans.

A lot of the newly elected republicans in congress got little or no help from the national GOP. This was due to several factors, they were not professional pols, the party didn’t expect them to win, but also because they are committed controlling spending.

Trent Lott gave the game away in July:

the last thing Lott needs is a bunch of unwashed, Tea-Partying right-wingers coming to Washington on a wave of anti-establishment, free-market populism, and messing up the good thing he has going.

“We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples,” Lott told the Washington Post, referring to the conservative South Carolina senator who has been a gadfly for party leadership and a champion for upstart conservative candidates. “As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.”

But Lott is no longer in the Republican leadership — he resigned from the Senate in December 2007, mid-term, just before a law kicked in that would have required him to wait two years before lobbying the Senate. So who is he talking about when he says “we need to co-opt them”?

“We” means the K Street wing of the Republican Party.

There are an awful lot of republicans who are more interested in chairmanships and favors than controlling spending and lowering taxes (and yes they are connected). That group needs to keep the good will of the Tea Party voters who brought them over the top for now so they will play ball, but if they get the chance they will try to turn the newly elected reps.

This is going to be the fight that will dominate Washington over the next 2 years and will determine the party and the country’s future longterm and will actually have a lot to do with both the presidential elections in 2012 and if we have a tea party 3rd party in 2014.

If Morning Joe follows this story, they will have a jump on the rest of the MSM.

I think we should make the deal and pass it:

–“Obviously Obama is so very, very wrong on the economy & spins GOP tax cut goals;so fiscal conservatives: we expect you to fight for us &…

–Thank you, @JimDeMint – DeMint comes out against tax deal, says GOP must do ‘better than this’ – http://t.co/BmjsAh3”

Could we get a better deal? Maybe but if the goal is to get it done I’d rather have the deal in the pocket and make adjustments later if possible. If the dems want to walk into the trap I say let them.

There are other reasons I think this, but I’d prefer to discuss them after Jan 3rd.

Take a look at this ad that Moveon has produced by merging youtube videos together:

What do you have here? A group of self identified dupes who actually believed the hype that we conservatives and some liberals saw in 2008. It is like a political Darwin award.

Oh and to the woman who says she doesn’t need the Money let me remind her of the Surber Challenge:

From Glenn Reynolds: “Hey, Fareed: The Treasury accepts donations. Make one, and post the receipt.”

This triggered a thought. Why don’t we skinflint conservatives with our miserly ways and narrow minds write a check to the Treasury and show that even though we oppose higher taxes, we are willing to — as patriotic and loyal Americans — voluntarily bail out our national government?


While liberals talk, conservatives act.

So I wrote a check for a hundred bucks today to United States Treasury and mailed it to:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

Don Surber’s challenge was only for $10 but he ponied up, have you? Has Moveon?

There is an old saying about how it is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. The people in this video were played in 2008 and at the urging of Move-on now have been played for suckers twice.

It’s pretty sad, but as always in the US we get the government we collectively deserve.

Next time someone argues that tax cuts need to be paid for follow these steps:

Step 1: Ask them to hand you a $20

If they say NO press them, if they point out it is their money ask why they have a right to keep their own money but someone else doesn’t?

If they say YES or just give you the money put it in your pocket and drop the subject.

Step 2: Wait for them to ask you for it back.

If they don’t ask for it back, keep it until they do, if they never ask for it back when you see them next go back to Step 1

If they ask for it back, inform them they you can’t give it back until you can find a way to “pay” for that $20. If they absolutely insist tell them you’ll be happy to negotiate a deal whereby he gives you $5 a week over the next 4 weeks and you will give them back that $20.

If they argue that it’s not the same thing because they are not “rich” point out any one thing that they own that you don’t to illustrate they have more than you and how unfair that is. Watch them become free market capitalists almost instantly!

…How many people in the middle and lower classes write paychecks?

If you want jobs to be created you need to make the cuts for the people who PAY employees.

The problem with democrats is they use the tax code as a punitive measure, not to raise revenue but to “get” people they don’t like. That’s not tax policy that self-righteousness.

Anniahita gives us a rundown of the movie I want Your Money with a special deal for Tea Parties

She is very right that the actual Economic message needs to be understood.

The movie’s web site is here and the preview follows

On a personal note I had the pleasure of speaking to this young lady for a while after the interview, she is intelligent active and quick-witted. If I’m a group looking to promote anything, I’d have her on my short hire list.

I interrupted his dinner at a Washington Restaurant two nights ago to interview him on camera about the tea party.

Paul Johnson at George Washington
Unfortunately something must have happened with my card since I can’t find any trace of it on my media, (although the photo I took is there). That is totally my bad.

His site has video of his appearances in costume but the most important thing on his site is the parable of the closed steakhouse:


…the rest is on his site. His talk about ratios and expenses is business 101. Would that more people in the White House had his sense.

The New Democrat by Loren Spivack
If you have found memories of a certain children book about a cat who knew it all but caused a lot of trouble this parody The New Democrat by Doctor Truth (aka the Free Market Warrior).

In this parody we have a know it all (aided by Dem 1 and Dem 2) trying to show the country the best was to prosperity. With predictable results.

The book is not yet available on Amazon but you can get it directly from the Free Market Warrior site here.

At the end of the Seminar that he gave to the Twin City Tea Party he read us this book, we were laughing very loud. I suspect if you get this book you will too.

If you’ve never heard of Loren Spivack here is the video I shot at the Twin City Tea Party:

He is available to speak anywhere about Capitalism and it’s fruit. Get the book if you want to laugh, arrange the seminar if you want to learn.

Well the BBC has decided to state the obvious

BBC Director General Mark Thompson has admitted the corporation was guilty of a ‘massive’ Left-wing bias in the past.

The TV chief also admitted there had been a ‘struggle’ to achieve impartiality and that staff were ‘ mystified’ by the early years of Margaret Thatcher’s government.

Tell me this doesn’t sound like Mika on Monday totally confused about the Glenn Beck restoring honor rally.

memeorandum thread here.

Speaking of saying things aloud that everyone already knew

In 1864 the incorruptible but unqualified general Nathanael P. Banks led his army up the Red river to what would become an inglorious (or glorious depending on what side you were on) flogging by forces under Richard Taylor.

One of the things that complicated his retreat was that the annual rise of the Red River didn’t materialize. Banks was unlucky in that he hadn’t realized that in 1855 and 1846 (every 9 years) the river failed to rise. Now Banks had no idea about said cycle so perhaps he can be excused for this mistake, but whatever his deficiencies as a general his experience as both Governor of Massachusetts and Speaker of the House of Representatives provided him with the sense to listen to Major Joseph Bailey a person with practical experience in dams, but no formal education. Bailey was not only able to save the fleet by his exertions but provide a dry-shod crossing at a second point in the retreat saving the army.

What does this have to do with the economy? Just this: An economy like the Red River had a regular cycle and during those cycles you can usually tinker a bit without a lot of issue, but the best solution is to wait things out and let the business cycle take it course.

Once in a while however the cycle is extreme, just like the 9 year cycle of the Red. During those times it is very hard to convince people to wait it out. Particularly if previous tinkering have made things worse. When this happens you need people with actual practical, rather than theoretical experience to make a difference.

Right now we are in an extreme business cycle. Like any cycle the best move is to hunker down, not panic, and wait for the cycle to finish.

The problem if you are a political animal is that there is no credit to be had for the business cycle, and when times are bad the people demand action. The trick it to attempt to tweak the cycle so that you are able to take credit when the cycle is in your favor and divert blame to your foes when the cycle is against them.

Now president Obama is not a man with practical business experience. He is surrounded by and has emerged himself with people who’s experience is not in the business cycle, the creation of jobs or the stimulation of an economy and frankly his goals and priorities are in the direction of government control not the free market.

If president Obama had a Joseph Bailey to advise him, he could make tweaks to actually stimulate businesses to hire. He would decrease regulation, drop taxes and make transactions for small business and manufacturers more fluid.

But president Obama decided instead that his statist agenda was the way to go and convinced democrats that his tinkering with the business cycle and allocation of stimulus money would mean a better economy come election day, just in time to keep them in office, and they believed it, the more fool them.

Will the president change course after the election? I don’t think think so, he doesn’t have a Joe Bailey and he wouldn’t listen to one if he had. The republican party will have to do it for him, if they are willing that is.

The MSM has been very careful to talk respectfully about Reagan lately but Eugene Robinson just gave up the game. He agreed with Charles Krauthammer statement of the following:

The net effect of 18 months of Obamaism will be to undo much of Reaganism.

On Morning Joe he agrees saying saying on Morning Joe that the president is “Reversing Reaganism” but unlike Charles he things this is a good things and the rest of the MSM is with him 100%. He thinks they just need to sell it.

Of course the media would also love to reverse the country’s love of Reagan but they’ll settle for this as the next best thing.

Fox news reports the following:

The campaign to move the 2011 All-Star Game out of Phoenix to protest Arizona’s immigration law heated up this week, with some of baseball’s superstars threatening to sit it out and demonstrators trying to deliver thousands of petitions to Commissioner Bud Selig.

The increased pressure coincided with this year’s All-Star Game, which was to be played Tuesday night in Anaheim.

Increased pressure you say. Let see just how much pressure there is as we look at the latest poll from that hotbed of conservatism CBS:

Public support for Arizona’s controversial new immigration law has increased slightly, a new CBS News poll shows, with 57 percent of Americans characterizing the law as “about right” in the way it addresses the issue of illegal immigration.

And the pie graph shows that a further 17% doesn’t think the law goes far enough. Only 23% oppose the law as going too far.

So tell me Baseball owner who wants to draw fans, do you want to draw from the 74% or the 23%. Tell me player who makes millions, how will alienating 74% of the people who pay your salary affect your ability to get a big contract?

Think long and hard before you do something stupid MLB

Robert Stacy’s post happens to coincide with a subject that recently came up for me.

As you may or may not know my own unemployment benefits have run out and my wife recently lost her job so things have become incredibly tight around here with only two teenagers working, however I have a liberal friend who has been in much more dire straights for much longer. I’ve been hoping and praying that he would find employment and just got the news today that he has been offered a good job at good money. He will likely start next week.

I had been in a very bad mood to day so this brightened me up considerably. I congratulated him on his change of fortune and we talked about the position. I was arguing that his employment benefits others and talked about the multiplier of employment, he insisted otherwise saying that he learned to live bear bones and would likely keep doing so. Every time I mentioned an item he insisted he would still do without. Finally I brought up shopping suggesting he might purchase perhaps a name brand rather than a generic on some items. His answer blew me away.

He said it was not a fair example since he is still on Mass. Food Stamps the state gives them out 6 months at a time so he will have them for some time while employed. He maintained the example is bad because his food would be paid for with “free money” so of course he would buy better stuff now that he has some other income, but for his own money he would be not be spending a penny that he didn’t have to.

Listening to him describe how foolish Massachusetts is was really something. He talked about establishing residency in NH to avoid the Mass income tax and how he would buy the groceries in NH since stores across the border take them. Liberal views be damned, if Massachusetts was dumb enough to give him the money he was going to spend it and if he could avoid the taxes he would do so.

Liberalism you might want to vote it but you don’t want to live it.

Went to breakfast with a friend who is in town for the 4th. When I brought up the parade with John Olver and Bill Gunn, he expressed satisfaction that Olver was being challenged but expressed doubt that he could be beaten. It’s been a few years since he lived in this neck of the woods, if he had followed me to the local Barnes and Noble he might have changed his mind.

One of the signs of a down economy is that business that once catered to political whims don’t have that luxury, they have to make money to survive and act accordingly. Just two years ago at the local B & N you would find plenty of liberal books in your face while you need to search for conservative volumes near the back.

I’ve mentioned that last year conservative authors started to get more space but I was still shocked when in the prominent works section I found The Road to Serfdom not only in the area for notable books and new bestsellers, but with only 3 copies left on a practically empty shelf.

My surprise was even greater when as I headed for the history section, there on the featured author table were the works of…Glen Beck!?!

Glenn Beck a featured author in Leominster Massachusetts? Totally unheard of. Even worse for the left was the lack of liberal volumes on display. I found Stephen Colbert in the bargain section and he wasn’t alone. He was joined by Bill Bradley (not so odd) but also by…Ted Kennedy?

Run that through your head for a moment. The last of the Kennedy Brothers, the man who won 69% of the vote in 2006. Gone less than a year yet Liberal Lion the fall and rise of Ted Kennedy. is in the bargain bins. 47 years in the Senate and he is an afterthought. His widow had better take that into account when 2012 comes around.

If you want to know why John Olver and company feel the need to run like the wind, this is it. People are voting with their wallets and retailers can’t waste shelf space on unwanted liberal books.

Oh and there is bad news for Mitt Romney as well. Both his new book and Sarah Palin’s were available as audio books. Sarah’s Going Rogue was discounted 20% after being out nearly a year. Mitt’s No Apology was discounted 40% after being out 3 months.

If this is Massachusetts what must be happening in New Jersey?

Apparently it all depends on what is being paid for.

When it is welfare and other social programs that the left likes it is “Government” paying for it.

But if it is something unpopular like say the oil spill, then it becomes the taxpayer money.

This is not a comment on how it should be paid for but it’s an interesting contrast as to when the media decides the money belongs to us isn’t it?

Personally I’m delighted that the left has discovered the source of government funding and hope they can remember it in the future.

This call as highlighted by the Lonely Conservative is the type of call that SHOULD get on the air.

Until folks understand what people are actually thinking. Until people understand that many of the folks actually believe that their checks are coming from some magical stash rather than taxpayers pockets there will be nothing to stop us from becoming Greece.

I guess that WSJ wasn’t just whistling dixie about liberals and economics..

I dislike the financial bill as much as the next guy. I don’t trust this administration at all and the attitude of trying to stifle business’ that actually provide jobs in idiotic, but listen when a senator makes a vote against you it doesn’t make him a “traitor”.

At normal times you will not get 100% on any particular issue from any person.. I’m certainly not going to throw Scott Brown out the window over one issue or even two.. The next election in Massachusetts is in 2012. If you want Martha Coakley in 2012 or a liberal just like her who will be soft on the war on terror, soft on immigration and not vote for the repeal of Obamacare in 2013 (Which is the absolute earliest time possible to repeal it) say so now but I don’t want to hear anyone complaining if the repeal effort fails by a single vote.

Eyes on the prize people, eyes on the prize.

Let’s take a peek around a few blogs in the field guide:

We will start with Cynthia Yockey who explained what liberal taxation did to a once thriving film industry in Maryland:

Maryland’s film industry caught my eye. Not too long ago, the Baltimore-Washington area was third in the country after Los Angeles and New York for film and TV production. However, thanks to Democratic Gov. Martin O’Malley and a Democratic-majority legislature full of believers in high taxes and big government — who also, disastrously, have no comprehension whatsoever of the concept of competition, or the remotest inkling that they were in one where the film business was concerned AND WINNING — Maryland’s film industry has been almost completely destroyed

The mindset was explained thusly:

“It’s like, if I gave you one dollar and you gave me back 20 cents, you’d still have made 80 cents. But the state doesn’t think of it as making 80 cents. They just think, ‘Hey, we gave you 20 cents!‘”

Not the best news plan if you want to create jobs, does anyone else have a different plan?

At American Freedom Barbara Espinosa is not thrilled with the president of Mexico these days:

How will drones be able to stop the violence, sure it can pinpoint a location and take a picture? The use of drones will help law enforcement patrol the border more effectively.. That is a big problem the real conservatives have with the GOP.
Build the fence and push for it. All Democrats are trying to do is acquire a new voting populace. He has no intention of enforcing existing laws. And Calderon is NOT on our side. What has he done to take care of his own populace? What has he done to create jobs, REALLY fight the corruption? I call BS and if you really represent us, you will too.

She has some VERY GRAPHIC EXAMPLES of what is going on just over the border.

The Lonely Conservative’s headline and first paragraph says it all:

Millions of Deaths Be Damned! Dalai Lama is Still a Marxist!. No wonder his people live in exile and poverty. Ironic that they’re in exile from a Marxist land. When it comes to Marxist ideology common sense never has been in vogue.

You would think Tibet never happened. Robert Stacy has a suggestion.

Meanwhile on a different subject Andrea of the Job corps fraud blog finds the bugs in the system bedbugs that is:

While trolling the internet for buried stories about Job Corps mis-management I found a Facebook Page called The Scupper. This is no ordinary page mind you, its author is apparently a student/staff who wanted to share the truth behind the bed bug infestation at Flint/Genesee Job Corps Center… The Scupper’s site is replete with pictures and information that has so far been successfully white-washed by its “business community liaison ” Verona Terry. She/he did a great job downplaying the seriousness of the situation and minimizing the size and scope of the infestation.

It certainly doesn’t inspire confidence.

and finally speaking of confidence DaScienceGuy notes a problem with people who fund research:

What bothers me is that I have been reading a lot of history books. There is no doubt in my mind that scientists, engineerings, experimentalists, etc are responsible for things like the wheel, things like the laser….All manner of stuff.

Modern day politicians and companies have the folks who fund this research so scared that if a project doesn’t work they’ll be fired that you almost can’t get research funded that is anywhere risky. You almost have to prove it will work before you can get funding to make it work.

How do you make REAL progress doing this. Sure you can make incremental progress made but real revolutionary process can’t be done.

Of course it would be a lot easier to fund science if people weren’t making stuff up.

Again we see the media and the left (I know that’s redundant) celebrating the passage of a law that has kicked the stock market between the legs:

Stocks logged their biggest drop of the year Thursday as investors worried about two events coming Friday — a German vote on the EU bailout and options expiration.

Plus, a vote in the Senate to end debate on financial reform cleared the path for a final vote tonight or tomorrow, which added another layer of selling pressure.

It’s very simple, if you want to create jobs you need business to be able to make money and make profit. If they do not then they will not hire.

Small business, big business any business that is the way it is. As long as this administration is unfriendly to business and the bottom line, the jobs are not going to come.

And remember those jobs produce TAX PAYERS. Without taxpayers we can’t continue on the route we are going.

This is economics 101. Until or unless people figure this out the economy will not recover. Period!