Wednesday, March 30, 2016

What Happened to "We the People..."

In the game of politics, superdelegates in both parties are Americas party-anointed royalty.  They are the professional party members, elitists, and comprised of current and former office holders.  Essentially, they are lordships in the Modern Age.  These delegates are the power in the party itself, capable of working against your democracy--the voice of the people--they are subverting Democracy itself.  While all other delegates of a state awarded in the primaries are proportionally formed based on population or registered voters, superdelegates are not.  In some cases, a candidate can win a primary, but come up short on awarded delegates, solely due the preferences of the superdelegates.  

This is not a representative democracy if the majority vote can be overturned by a designated select few placed with higher regard than John Q. Citizen.  

This is "pay to play" politics, wheeling and dealing, back room negotiations, favors, kickbacks, payoffs, and blackmail.  Just like lords in the old kingdom made deals with Kings and Queens for more land, titles, and riches, superdelegates wield the power for the benefit of themselves and what they can get for their vote.  The lands today are gerrymandered congressional districts where representatives have drawn the lines in such a way that they have picked their voters, instead of the other way around.   

The two party system is broken.   Throughout the primaries, each party attempts to influence the electorate to place a candidate of the party's design in the presidential running.  That candidate is beholden to the party, and if they do not cooperate, they will not get the highest support from the "the party."  Why are citizens bothering to vote in the primaries if the the party can override the electorate with superdelegate votes that offset or overrule the vote of the people?  Why are citizens bothering to show up in the primaries if the delegates can change their mind and vote differently at the convention?

When the people in power make rules to keep themselves in power and set themselves higher and apart from the citizens---we are no longer living in a democracy.  This is the America our Founding Fathers warned us about.  This is what they tried to prevent.  

What happened to "We the People...?"  What happened was that those elected to represent us put power for themselves above the good of the people and the nation.  They realized they could vote for their own raises; they could exempt themselves from insider trading laws; they could vote for their own retirement benefits; they could make laws against term limits; they could steer billions of dollars in "earmarks" to businesses in their districts that they (or their families) are connected to resulting in personal gain; they could pass laws to eliminate competition to technologies they are personally invested in; and they could pass laws for the rest of us and exempt themselves.  This is now routine behavior from our elected officials; this is business as usual.  


"When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."    ~ Benjamin Franklin

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Airport Security: Please Take Off Your Shoes

Terrorists today just proved that airport baggage screening is obsolete.  

There is no security to enter an airport.  Brace yourselves.....your shoes, electronic devices, your razor or tweezers, and your liquid toiletries don't matter.

You enter with your luggage, stroll up to a counter, turn in your checked baggage, and then you make your way to the security line where you are body scanned and your carry on bag is scanned.  

The Brussels terrorists showed us none of that matters.  They walked into the check-in desks with luggage full of bombs and took advantage of the people standing in the bottle neck of long lines at the check-in desks and security checkpoints.  

Now what? 

No matter where we move the security check point, it will always create a choke point resulting in a bottle neck of potential targets--vulnerable to opportunistic terrorists looking for an easy target.  For example, in 1993 CIA employees driving to work were waiting in their cars to make a left turn into the facility's security gate, and Mir Qazi--a Muslim terrorist--opened fire and killed two people and wounded three others.

No matter how far we push the security check point back, they can--and will--target the queue. 

My point here is...defense is not working. We need to go on offense. 

We aren't stopping immigration of radicals from Muslim countries.

We aren't properly vetting the Muslim immigrants, or any other immigrants for that matter.

We aren't properly assimilating Muslim immigrants into society or preventing sub-cultures from forming geographical enclaves that provide safe havens for radicalization.

We aren't going after the Muslim terrorists on their own turf.

We are too concerned with political correctness to properly profile Muslim terrorists.

We are too politically correct to call out the Muslim community for not doing enough to prevent their own people from becoming radicalized or reporting those who have become radicalized--or are doing so.

We have a vocal, misguided, liberal society that is more concerned with ushering in the Trojan Horse refugees than protecting our borders.

Protecting our borders is not racist.

Profiling predators is not racist. 

We've been under Muslim attack for decades.  This is not our war, it is their war against us and our way of life.  We just aren't fighting to win and end it.

On 10 September 2001, there were no credible, known terrorist threats against the United States.  There were none in Madrid, Paris, Brussels, Benghazi, London, Mumbai, Bali, Jakarta, and a host of other places.

How'd that work out for us?

"We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists.  We invite terrorism by ignoring them."    ~ George W. Bush 






Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Domestic Terrorism 101

Just because you don't like what I say, doesn't mean I'm a racist or a bigot. Just because you don't like what I say doesn't mean you get to react violently.  When you commit an act of violence, that was your choice. When you vandalize other people's property, that was your choice.  

The paid protestors and crazed Bernie and Hillary supporters are using the threat of violence and the acts of violence to silence the freedom of speech of others to bring about social and political change.  There is a word for that: terrorism. 

The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

That definition perfectly describes what the George Soros-backed protestors are doing.  All of the violent protestors should be charged with terrorism.  ALL of them.  We are in the middle of a Presidential election and the Left is systematically trying to stifle free speech and intimate conservatives through terrorism.  Period. 

Trump is not to blame for the violence.  He is not promoting hate.  When he says we need to stop refugees from coming into the country so we can get a vetting system into place, that isn't racist, it's being responsible.  When Trump says we are going to build a wall on the border, that's not racist, it's a security measure.  When Trump says illegal immigrants will be deported, that's not racist. It's enforcing laws and ensuring national security and economic stability.   

Limiting immigration is not racist, it's common sense, and we have done it before, despite liberal proclamations of "that's not who we are."  In 1924, we passed legislation that lasted through 1965, limiting the annual number of immigrants to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States. The law restricted the immigration of Africans and outright banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians.  It was passed to allow for the immigrants already in country time to assimilate to the United States--to allow them to become "American."

Just because you don't like what Trump says, that doesn't make him a racist or give anyone the right to commit acts of violence or property damage.  I don't like a single thing Sanders or Clinton is saying--so can I go on a violent rampage?  

You want someone to blame for the violence?  Blame the Left--and blame yourself if you support these activities, because your a terrorist supporter.  If you have engaged in these activities--or plan to--you are a terrorist.

"If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."  -George Washington

Sunday, March 6, 2016

The Scapegoat of Socialism

A recent poll indicates that Democrats rated socialism and capitalism equally.  Not that shocking, but I am surprised that more didn't favor socialism.  What was shocking to me was that the only demographic that rated socialism more favorably was Millennials.

What the hell are these kids being taught?  I guess since today's high school graduates and college students can't even name who won the Civil War, who the Vice President is, or who we won our independence from, I really shouldn't be shocked that Millennials are so ignorant that they would favor a failed economic and social system.

Name one country where socialism worked or is working.  Nazi Germany? Soviet Union? Cuba? Venezuela? Czechoslovakia? The list goes on.

Yet, here we have Democrat Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders advocating socialism, despite the history of failure.  According to him, apparently it just hasn't been done right yet, and he's the man who can finally do socialism successfully.  I don’t think so.

Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior.  While socialism promises prosperity, equality, and security, it only ever delivers poverty, misery, and tyranny driven down upon society by a small elitist upper class.

In order for socialism to work, a large percentage of an individual's income is taken by the state.  This practice diminishes the incentive of the individual to work.  But of course Bernie and other socialists always promise that "the rich" are the ones who will pay.  However, at a certain point, the rich will just leave, taking their wealth with them, and resulting in less money being available to provide all the "free stuff" that socialism promised.

Don't believe me? Just look at Maryland's recent exodus.  Under the Governorship of now failed Democrat Presidential candidate Martin O'Malley, Maryland added 24 new taxes and fees.  Subsequently, a net 31,000 residents left the state between 2007 and 2010, the tenure of a "millionaire's tax," which imposed an additional rate hike of 6.25 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year.  That new tax cost Maryland $1.7 billion in lost tax revenues, and the state’s wealthiest counties had the largest population outflows.  O'Malley imposed additional, retroactive income tax hikes 2012, affecting another 450,000 Maryland households, for individuals earning over $100,000 and couples over $150,000.

So why are Millennials so enthralled with the idea of socialism?  Because they are the ultimate "victim" generation.  They've been taught by their liberal teachers and professors that they aren't responsible for their own failures; other people are responsible for their failures--the rich are to blame.  Socialism doesn't empower individuals by encouraging ambition and success, instead it finds a scapegoat and in this case it's blaming the rich for all the problems.

Liberals don't want to believe that others have found success and prosperity due to hard work. They want to believe that it was luck or corruption, this way they don't have to face the reality of their own failures--they can believe they were just not as fortunate or as "corrupt, or as privileged.

In the words of Frederick Douglass--former slave turned free man, author, abolitionist, suffragist, and Republican--"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else.  The lesson taught at this point by human experience is simply this, that the man who will get up will be helped up; and the man who will not get up will be allowed to stay down...I know of no other rule which can be substituted for it without bringing social chaos.  Personal independence is a virtue and it is the soul out of which comes the sturdiest manhood.  But there can be no independence without a large share of self-dependence, and this virtue cannot be bestowed.  It must be developed from within." 

Friday, March 4, 2016

Free Stuff Part Two - The Promise of More to Come

Why stop at the myth of free health care?  What about free college?

Much like the housing bubble that so famously burst in 2008, the education bubble is another manufactured crisis that has an all too predictable ending.  In both cases, the borrowers took on loans they couldn’t afford to pay back.  In the case of housing, the government encouraged banks to lend money to people who could not afford it because quasi-governmental agencies—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--were formed to guarantee loans and reduce lenders risk.  In the case of education, the government is actually the biggest lender of student loans, and is essentially subsidizing schools!  

In both cases, big government, liberal policies created the mess and then big government, Democrat candidates running for office promised Americans they could fix the problem.

All the little Occupiers out there are upset with the “evil banks” who lent them tuition money, even though in most cases it was actually the government who loaned them money.  Now they have their worthless degrees in such magnanimous fields as Philosophy or 16th Century French Literature, and they are stunned when they can’t find work, aren’t making six figure salaries, and can’t pay back their loans.  Like good little indoctrinated liberals, who believe they are victims, they think someone else should be held resposible for their decisions.  The rest of us should pay.  So now Democrats are promising to provide free college for all!

Taxpayers already graciously offer public education for Kindergarten through 12th grade.  This education is an investment that we, as taxpayers, make in our youth in hopes of helping to educate and shape young people into mature and responsible adults who will grow up to take jobs that continue to run our towns, cities, and this country. 

I have to say, I’m not impressed with my investment--nor am I willing to invest more of my taxpayer dollars into a system where I’m seeing very little bang for my buck or return on my investment.   When high school graduates and current college students cannot correctly answer who fought or won the Civil War, who the current Vice President is, who the Untied State’s gained our independence from...why would I want to continue to invest in their so-called “education?”  They didn't learn some of the very basic fundamentals in the first 12 years of school, so why would four more years at our expense be any different?  These are simple facts every American who has been provided a taxpayer-funded education should have learned in elementary school. 

And how would providing taxpayer-funded college work?  If these little Occupiers, with their misplaced anger towards the banks, really wanted to get angry at why their tuitions are so high, they need only to look at their college athletic programs and the salaries the coaches, trainers, dean’s, and professors are raking in.  That’s where their money is going.  Are taxpayers going to be expected to pay Jim Harbaugh’s over $7,000,000 salary?

Furthermore, does everyone need a college education?  Does every job require a college education?   No.  This myth that everyone needs a degree is doing more harm than good.  It’s all about supply and demand, and now degrees are nothing more than overvalued assets.  The additional supply of graduates leads to a decrease in wages if there is not a correlating increase in demand for labor.  Since Obama took office, the number of full-time positions in energy, mining, construction, manufacturing, white collar professions, business management and services, information technology, transportation, distribution, finance, insurance, and real estate, is 1.7 million below what it was in December 2007.  That means there are nearly 2 million less jobs available now than before he took office!  We have more available workers than we have jobs.

We now have a sub-population of young people with ridiculous degrees in fields where there are no available jobs, who refuse to work “lesser jobs” because they are “college educated” and "too good" to take any job offering less than six figures.

In the words of Mike Rowe, “We are lending money we don’t have, to kids who can’t pay it back, to train them for jobs that no longer exist. That’s nuts.”

Yes, Mr. Rowe, that is nuts.  The only thing nuttier would be to provide tax payer-funded college education to kids to train them for jobs that no longer exist, who can’t or won't join the work force, and don’t pay taxes.

Health care and education are not rights.  They are services.  When you demand someone else provide you a service for free, that is generally considered slavery.   

It's not exactly shocking that the same Democrat Party and voters who established the KKK and elected and re-elected Senator Robert Byrd from 1959 through 2010 (which, if you don't remember, was the KKK's Grand Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops and he filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964) would want to bring back slavery.  But, that's a topic for another blog post.