The Hangover Continues

November 7, 2012 Leave a comment

Obama won.  America lost. 

America deserves better than this media mollycoddled divisive passive-aggressive politician. The hangover from election night 2008 still has America off her feet.

****

 This morning I bumped into our office’s cleaning lady.  I’ll call her Dushanka. 

Dushanka asked if I had watched the election coverage last night.  I answered sadly that I did.

 I never knew Dushanka’s political inclination before this morning.  We previously had only talked before about our families and about work. We often talk when we arrive to work at 6:30 in the morning.  We sometimes see each other during the long work day and then we also chat.

 Dushanka came to America from Romania. She came to America because America was hope and change long before Obama came on the scene.  Dushanka works long hard hours just as I do.  We both pay our taxes and we obey the rules.  But after watching the election results and the crowd at McCormick Place and on the street she told me, “America is now broken.”  She could not fathom why those young people were standing there paying homage to Dear Leader, economic reality held in abeyance.  Nor could I.

 Dushanka told me something that I am no longer shocked about in Obama America:  another cleaning women working with D cheats the “system” – you and me.

 This woman, a foreigner, is using some else’s social security number. This woman has a child from a boyfriend. This woman registered the child at a Chicago Public school and received $200.00 (for what Dushanka didn’t know).  This woman who works with Dushanka also receives food stamps.  This same woman wrote on her job application that she had graduated from high school though she never graduated.  All of these things and more this woman related to Dushanka in a rather smug way: “Look, I am getting away with this.  You can too.”  In other words she is “cleaning up” at our expense.  That is Barack Obama’s America. And that is status quo for Chicago.  It is quickly becoming so for the nation. This is Social Justice Obama style but is this going forward in a morally right direction?

 Dushanka told me that she does not cheat the system:  “That would be cheating God.”

 Where is the Social Justice for people like Dushanka, for people like me?  Where is the social justice when people steal from other Americans? And where is the social justice when people forcibly take your property and give it to someone else though taxation? Where is social justice in class warfare?  In dividing the country racially?  There can be no social justice when men are not given their due, when materialism trumps the justice due human dignity and worth.

 Did you notice that our American ambassador and his aides were slaughtered in Benghazi?  The Obama White House is covering up their decided lack of involvement.  American citizens were killed but Obama played golf, campaigned and had another cigarette.  Could it be that there is now in place “a U.S. government policy of “engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East,”? This is the biggest scandal in American History.  The Obama regime wants to stonewall the whole business so that time will pass and people will forget.  But we won’t forget.

Did you notice Fast and Furious – AG Eric Holder sends lethal weapons to narco-terrorists in a scheme to teach America a lesson about owning guns?  The scheme backfired and a US border agent, an American citizen, is killed with the same guns along with hundreds of Mexicans. This is Social Justice Obama style.

Religious liberties are now being deleted for the new religion of political correctness. Moral relativism is replacing absolute truth.

 Millions of people are out of work.  Yesterday people voted for more of the same!

This is what fear of the state looks like<< click here

Asstounding!  People voted for more uncertainty, more unpredictability, more taxes, more regulation, more tight money, more policies that undermine business confidence and block economic recovery. They voted for more incompetence from Barack Obama!

Today’s children want socialism.  And it is the very people who want socialism who bring nothing to the table.  That is why they want redistribution of other people’s money – they have nothing to offer themselves.

 People now want the government to be their insurance company and their vending machine for everything from birth control to abortions to health care.  People now want government to cover all their bets and to give them other people’s money to play. The majority of people voted for the indentured slavery of big government and the Boot placed on their neck!

****

 Obama’s Hope and Change cocktail has put our country on its back.  The only cure for the “Goddamn America” hangover from the 2008 and 2014 election nights is “God Bless America.”   The cure didn’t happen the last four years and it is not going to happen these next four years.  The narcotic effects of atheism, nihilism, materialism and antinomianism (lawlessness) – an elixir of evil gulped down on those election nights will now spread rapidly through your system. Liberty won’t know what hit it.

Just ask D.

*****

Read The Forgotten Man – those who supply jobs and resources – requirements for human flourishing – are not the academics.

*****

Media Bias and the other Great Overlooked Stories of this Election Season

Filed under commentary, Political Commentary, Politics, Writing Tagged with , , , , , ,

There’s A Call For You

November 5, 2012 Leave a comment

Media Blackout On Black Chicago Protestors Marching against Obama

Filed under 2012 election Tagged with , , ,

The Hand That Feeds You

September 24, 2012 Leave a comment

Photo added, H/T LegalInsurrection

“You didn’t build that.” We’ve all heard those dismissive words in the news recently.

 Luckily, for all I involved, when I heard those words I didn’t jump up run out and burn an effigy of BHO or stampede my local DMV.  I guess that’s because I didn’t inherit the Islamist strain of thin-skinned believer DNA that makes one go berserk at the mere thought of someone trivializing what they hold to be true.  I did yell at the TV, though: “You’re full of yourself BHO.”

 I am an ardent believer in the constrained view (see below), the view that incentives, individual hard work and prudent trade-offs builds houses on stone foundations.   The unconstrained view of good intentions, big government and “divined” solutions builds houses on sand.  And we all know what happens to each house when torrential rain comes.   And, we all know what Liz Warren’s government built road to hell is paved with.

 There is a reason why BHO diminishes the individual effort.  BHO, of the central planning view, wants joy-stick control of the “invisible hand.”  And I am not talking about “Thing” from the Addams Family comic or the other-worldly operator of the Ouija board.

 The “invisible hand” of the market is a metaphor used by the father of modern economics and capitalism Adam Smith.    Simply put, the metaphor describes the self-regulating behavior of the market place.  Individuals seek to maximize their own gain in a free market society where goods and services are traded in a free exchange between both parties.  For Smith the” invisible hand” guides individuals into mutually beneficial exchanges.  Moral and socially beneficial behavior is evoked through the process. Fairness is part and parcel of market practices.  Obeying the rules (i.e., standard weights and measures) is the order of the day in the market place.  Contract laws were developed to help enforce agreements. If an agreement was broken a resolution in a court of law would be required. This is just and fair to everyone involved, because everyone is involved in protecting their own interests. Free market capitalism offers “The possibility of cooperation without coercion” as Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize winner in economics once said. Regarding one-on-one resolution Jesus did say, “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.

 Adam Smith theorized that the self-interest of individuals acting independently will lead to a socially optimal outcome.  From Smith’s Wealth of Nations, Book IV, Chapter 2:

“As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other eases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. [emphasis added].”

Free market exchange encourages a man to, let’s say, go fishing.  The man may eat the fish he caught or he may trade for something that will benefit himself.  The fisherman is not coerced into doing either.  He is free to do as he pleases with his fish. And another is free to trade with the fisherman – say, bread for fresh fish and both parties therefore benefit from the trade-off.    The second party is also free to simply say “No, I don’t want your fish. I want to make tacos al pastor today.”

 Again Adam Smith,

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.”

 On the other very visible hand, the well-intentioned-solutions hand, the government confiscatory and coercive hand taxpayer money is simply thrown at problems.  Data abounds showing that well-intentioned-solutions (i.e., food stamp programs, Obamacare, minimum wages laws, etc.) never ever ever fix problems they were intended to solve. The “solution” is never a mutually beneficial exchange.  Rather the solution is a one-way, one-time meal ticket that will always end up requiring more taxation, more regulation and less of your liberty.  The only fishing taking place is in the mail box for the food stamps. BTW: The hand that provides the food stamps is an iron fist – “Do as I say or you will end up hungry,” “Buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty.”

Now, Adam Smith, and later Noam Chomsky invoking Adam Smith, warned of an unrestrained free market society where the “vile maxim of the masters can be pursued without undue interference.”  In other words they thought government regulation (Smith much less, Chomsky much more) would hold the free market in check.  One example:  the fisher folk would not be allowed to restrict the wee folk from fishing, thereby preventing a monopoly on the fish market.

From what I can tell, both BHO and Chomsky see big corporations and Capitalism in general as behemoth American Devils who suck the air out of the world leaving societal corpses in their path. In each their own measure they see the free market, left on its own, turning into unconstrained selfishness. Yet, they see themselves as altruistic.  And as a result of such myopic views of the free market and of themselves they are eager to throttle the life out of the free market with very visible “hands”, the hands of government regulation, taxation and confiscation – the hands of coercion.  They truly believe that an unrestrained socialist statist (central planning) government under the guise of a (small “d”) democracy would be superior to an unrestrained free market within a big “D” democracy.  But government, if you haven’t already noticed, is a monopoly.  It is an all-powerful, ready-to-inflict pain monopoly. Who is holding the tyranny of government back?  Not good intentions.  Not nebulous open-ended “social justice” solutions. Not the voters.  Take a look at congress – there are a lot of visible hands in the pie, grabbing at taxpayer money. They’ve want their clutches on your property because controlling redistribution is a means of staying in power.

 The so-called “unrestrained super-national corporations” are in reality restricted to what the markets will accept.  Countries all around this world invite corporations into their realms because they see the benefits. These corporations are not coercive like government is. And don’t think for a moment that your vote will restrain government.  Those in power like to stay in power and to wield that power.  They pass laws to keep themselves in power as State CEOs.  Good intentions and redistribution solutions are simply “goodies” thrown out during the campaign parade. The public is left with the big mess after the parade.

 My answer:  Laissez-faire – a “hands-off” economic environment made possible by a majority vote for smaller government (big D, small g), less regulation and fewer hands in the pie.  Vote for the person and party that will let you keep your money and control your life.  You know what I am saying– restore LIBERTY. The end result will help generate the dynamic green energy needed for human flourishing.  Human flourishing will then enable people to not have to think so hard about scrapping together an existence or worry about whether the hands of government will snatch away your property.  Human flourishing will also allow more time for the sublime.

So, put your hand in the hand, the “invisible hand,” and let conscience be your guide, not the government.

 “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  (A free will-free market exchange moved by the Invisible Hand of love.)

“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.”  Proverbs 10:4 (A statement of fact from the wisest man who ever lived – Solomon.)

Sally Paradise:  “I built it with my own two hands.” Invisible hand:  “And I helped.”

Definitions:

 Laissez-faire (i/ˌlɛseɪˈfɛər–/, French: [lɛsefɛʁ] (listen)) is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from tariffs, government subsidies, and enforced monopolies, with only enough government regulations sufficient to protect property rights against theft and aggression. The phrase laissez-faire is French and literally means “let [them] do”, but it broadly implies “let it be,” “let them do as they will,” or “leave it alone.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire

 Constrained view:  The constrained vision sees man as he really is:  self-motivated. This realistic vision sees man as selfish and greedy but also willing to respect tradition and rules and certainly able to make prudent trade-offs based on knowledge gained from centuries of accumulated knowledge and wisdom, knowledge and wisdom not confined to an omnipotent Decider. One with a constrained vision doesn’t have all the answers. He or she must operate with humility, tolerance and cooperation in order to support the freedom and liberty within which they seek to live.

Unconstrained view:  The unconstrained vision relies heavily on surrogate decision makers, men or women of “superior” intelligence and virtue, to make our decisions for us.  The implication of this vision is that the common man does not know what is good for himself and for those around him.  But those with super-rational intelligence and sincerity do.  And because of our lack of “fair and just” decision making, we the people need an over-arching Decider – someone to rein in society.  (Recall Obama’s statement:  “You didn’t build that.”  He’s trying to rein in economic activity and attribute a man’s own blood, sweat and tears to government largesse!)

See my post What’s Left?  To Be Decided for more information on the Constrained and Unconstrained Views, terms derived from Thomas Sowell’s book Conflict of Visions.

Statism/centralized government: Course Correction Needed 2012

Things to ponder:

Michael Boskin: Obama and ‘The Wealth of Nations’

Thomas Sowell:  The Fallacy of Redistribution

Obama “Goodies:”  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio&feature=player_embedded

“You didn’t build that.  Yadda, yadda, yadda.”

Filed under 2012 election, Article, commentary, Conservatism, Political Commentary, Progressivism, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Par For My Course

August 31, 2012 Leave a comment

For fifteen years I was one of three partners in a manufacturing business, a business that I helped start from scratch, a business that when I left had sales revenues close to twenty million dollars. 

 Before starting the company I met with two friends.  Each of them wanted to leave the company we were all working for.  The three of us knew that the company we were at would soon fold.  The owner had mismanaged the company into the ground, causing many to be fired.  Soon the owner would take the assets out of this failed company and go start another business.  We saw what was coming and so we decided it was time for us to set our sights higher and take care of our futures.

 In the failed company the three of us soon-to-be partners were the three people who knew how to make the equipment being sold.  And, though only one of us had a BS degree there were plenty years of experience between the other two partners. Each of us had met with customers and we knew manufacturing.  We didn’t know all there was to know about running a business but we did want to find out for ourselves. 

 My own experience developed from many years of electrical engineering and design in the manufacturing sector. Over time I managed groups of designers and electricians.  There were also many times when I was a welder, a fabricator, an electrician.  I taught myself how to use AutoCAD and Microstation CAD design software.  I taught myself how to program PLCs and computers.  I went to night school to learn accounting, economics and business.  I took math course, physics and welding. In order to commission equipment I traveled thousands of miles to customer sites across America, Mexico, Canada, and as far as Korea, Poland, Saudi Arabia and Brazil. I learned by applying myself to the task, by learning what I needed and simply by doing.

 After several after-hours discussions at a local bar the three of us decided which day we would leave the troubled company to start our own business.  Being integral to the functioning of the business our concurrent departures would mean that the company would rapidly fold. The company did close within a year.  We went off on our own with no nets beneath us and just our own will to make things happen.

 We began our business in a basement. We invested $3000.00 in start-up capital. We each claimed a share of equity in the new firm, incorporated as a Delaware corporation.

 Now I have to tell you, starting a business with nothing but sheer determination is not easy.  The risk of no immediate sales and therefore no paychecks for weeks and months is ever before you. With this in mind we began to solicit business by sending out business letters telling a broad spectrum of customers about our new venture. We even begged for business, often drastically discounting the sale just to get our foot in the door and to keep it there.

 While we advertised I also set up the computers and the accounting system using what I learned at night school.  I set up the accounts:  Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, Assets, Revenue,  W-4s, etc.   

 Over time (almost a year after starting) we received our first purchase order.  I had developed a small position indicating device that could be readily used in the plastics industry to control plastic sheet gauge – a necessary requirement for thermoforming companies. We sold one and then two. I was then sent to California to install the later-to-be patented device. I had to make sure that our product did what we promised it would.  Once it was proven we invoiced our first receivable.

 We slowly gained sales momentum from customers who knew our reputations and knew of our capabilities.  We sometimes over sold ourselves just to get in the door.  There were many quiet anxious days along the way waiting for something bigger to break.  When things did start happening we rented a small industrial building and set up what little we had. As orders came in and invoices went out we were then able to buy computers, software, drafting tables, welders, paint equipment, hand tools and a truck with our company name.

We soon hired staff:  a fabricator. As business continued to grow over a time , a seeming eternity for us with our shoe string budget, we added more and more people.  When I left the company there was over fifty employees on the payroll.  This company, currently housed in a 325,000 sq. ft. building with large overhead cranes, is now doubling it size, building an expansion on the same site.

 The reason I left the business and cashed out was simply the fact that the work of starting a new business is a 24/7 job.  This intensive venture took a toll on me and my family.  There were many nights away from my family.  There were many intensive phone calls with clients.  As the Vice president of Engineering I spent many hours trouble shooting customer problems in person or over the phone from home.  I spent a lot of time interviewing people and then hiring and firing as needed.  I supervised design work and managed over a dozen people, all engineers. I was on call constantly.

 In the early days of our company I multitasked.  There were only three of us and one of us had to go on the road to do the cold calling.  I stayed with my other partner and we did what was needed.  As an order came in I would create the electrical schematics on a drafting board, I would then order the parts. I would receive the parts, sort out the paper work, input accounts payable, print out checks on a line printer and then send out the checks to vendors. I would assemble the large-scale equipment by hand:  I welded half-inch plates of carbon steel to create structural frames; I assembled control panels and wired the instrumentation.  I also spray painted the finished products.  Before that I would power up and test the equipment.  I was front office, plant, truck driver, assembler, engineer and tired but excited.  I was working for myself and creating growing equity.  My piece of the pie was growing.

 Until you’ve done something like start a business from scratch you would have no idea how intense, exhausting, scary and pleasurable it is to make your way in this world with just the work of your own hands.  But the excitement doesn’t stop there.

 As the company grows you hire people.  But it is a scary proposition.  You know you need more help but you don’t know where or when the next order is coming from.  You bite your nails and finally say “OK, we need someone. Place the ad.”

 When you hire someone and train them you’ve given them hope.  At the same time your own stomach is wrenching with the fear that someday you may have to lay that person off if business drops off.  It is all risk, calculated risk and that is what entrepreneurs do best:  find a venture and put themselves and their money at risk in order to create something successful and to gain a return on their investment – an investment of dollars and tons of sweat equity.  Obama knows nothing about what I talking about.

 Obama risks nothing.  He finds safety in numbers, in government. He is the child of safety nets. His absent father gave him no guidance whatsoever about business. It is apparent from Obama’s biographies that Obama learned to hate anything which might smack of colonialism.  And Obama has wrongly conflated capitalism with colonialism.   Obama’s only claim to success is his community organizing.  We can see now that his organizing is nothing more than organizing taxpayer money to the benefit of his political gain.

 No government built our business.  Government with its ever-present paper work and regulations was ever the impedance to growing our business and hiring more people.  Government now, in effect, hinders human flourishing. And I don’t have to tell you that Barrack Obama wants more government and less independent success.  You’ll have to ask him why he hates business and demonizes success.

 Sweat equity built our successful business not government.  And it was not Obama, not Elizabeth Warren, not roads and bridges, not the IRS, not organized labor and not the three thousand dollars of start-up capital back in 1988. We built it with our own hands while paying corporate taxes up to 30%! Obama can kiss my sweaty ass!

 Listen Obama (I know I am speaking to deaf ears) – “There is no sweat equity in golfing.”

******

Filed under 2012 election, © Sally Paradise, commentary, Political Commentary, Politics, Short Story, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Real Deal

August 30, 2012 Leave a comment

Paul Ryan calls out the blame shifters and political grifters, talks about his widowed mom’s success, gives small business at shot in the arm – “You did build that” –  and tells the Obama poster generation that there is hope beyond Obama:

“College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.”

Update:  Here’s Clint Eastwood making my day as he speaks to the empty chair at the RNC.

Filed under Politics Tagged with , , , ,

The Taxonomy of The No-Class Warrior’s Obamanomics

August 23, 2012 Leave a comment

Hyperboleconomics: the promotion of the Keynesian fallacy that increasing the national debt by spending trillions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars to create a handful of “not-so shovel ready jobs” is money well spent. Keynesian economics can easily be described as the economic stimulus theory whereby your wife tries to spend her way out of her depression.  Sound familiar?  It’s deny side economics.

Cronyeconomics:  The channeling of billions of dollars to fund green projects and then rerouting the money to the pockets of those who know how to spend your money.  Bailouts for supporters of the Obama regime: big unions, big auto manufacturers, big banks, etc..  No bailouts for the little guys – the small businessmen and women struggling to make payroll.

Feareconomics:  “Republicans will push granny over the cliff.  We must live for today.  We promise that there will be no death panel for Medicare.  (That’s reserved only for Obamacare patients.)  Medicare will die soon of natural causes anyway.  Besides, your grandkids are young.  They can fend for themselves.”

Hopeychangeyeconomics:  year one – pass no budget, spend, demand higher taxes; year two – pass no budget, spend, demand higher taxes; year three – pass no budget, spend, demand higher taxes; year four – pass no budget, spend, demand higher taxes

Fairshareconomics: the proposition that even though half the nation pays taxes and the other half who does not pay taxes benefits from the revenue is considered not fair enough.  The proposition that those who pay taxes pay 100% more in taxes than those who do not is considered not fair enough.  The proposition that even though there is a progressive tax structure in place which rises in percentage as you earn more, this is not fair enough.  “Fair share” economics ultimately is where you pay until there is no more to pay and then its still not fair because you don’t have even more to pay.   Adam Corolla on taxes and fairness (caution:  language).

BlameBusheconomics:  “It’s not my fault.”  “We were handed a raw deal – the Presidency and the Senate.  We will need more time and all your money to throw at this.  Just look how much has been accomplished since we came into office.  We need four more years to pass no budget, spend your money and demand higher taxes.”

Nocarbonfuelseconomics:  wind turbines and solar are the best energy sources to transmit renewable campaign money through companies like GE, Solyndra and others. Besides, with EPA regulations we will make it impossible to generate fossil fuels in this country because we want the world to like us.  Government regulations are key to snuffing out any enterprise which uses natural resources.  “The loss of jobs and homes along the way is collateral damage in our socially conscious war against big oil, big coal and big gas. Remember we hate Imperialistic America abroad but it is OK, though, to be thoroughly imperialistic about green energy here at home.  Our righteous ends demand it. Buy the light bulb we tell you to buy or else.”

Chomskyesquesconomics:  The Industrial-military complex is evil.  America is Satan.  America is a terrorist.  Capitalism is colonialism.  Helping poor nations flourish increases Americanism around the world.  America is to blame for the problems in the world. America should be like Mahatmas Noam, the swami of “universal grammer” and peaceful denial.

“Youdidntbuilthat”economics: :  the presumptuous economic theory that says that because the government has taxing authority over you this same government can take credit for your hard work.  This economic theory assumes that roads and bridges were all it took to create Apple – no human initiative whatsoever is necessary either to create tax revenue or to create products for consumption.  The machinery of government “allowed” Apple to create the iPods, iPads, the Mac Book Pros.  In other words, government is the kid next to you in class, the kid who didn’t study for his finals and who now looks over your shoulder for the answers that will eventually propel him on to greater opportunities to take credit for other’s hard work.

Nannystateconomics:  government is to be your provider, your parent, your priest and your panacea. You should be thankful to be another brick in the wall. “Trust me.”

Obamacare:  receiving political “clap” from Big Brother.  “The time has changed for come.” (at 2:58)

    Antidotes:  Romney-Ryan Tea –  great taste, less filing

Click here for the The Broke Party

Filed under commentary, Economics, Life As I See It, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Teed Off

July 16, 2012 Leave a comment

Imagine a candidate that seeks to make you utterly dependent on the largesse of government.  Such a candidate goes way beyond promising to maintain our Constitution’s mandates, mandates which provide national security, national sovereignty and transportation networks. The rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have all been guaranteed in writing but, as we have increasingly seen, Obama the Candidate wants the pursuit part to be paid for out of money confiscated from those who have earned the money.  In other words, Obama is telling people you don’t have to do anything to receive what he is offering. You just show up with a ticket (your vote) to play and then its lotto time.

 If you’ve seen the “Julia” video (see my previous post) then you already know that Obama’s campaign promise is for government to be involved in every aspect of your life:  from what you do in the bedroom (contraception and abortion) to your diet to your fuel to your health care to education to retirement.  Cradle-to-grave you will be at the mercy of what government deems good for you.  Imagine the intrusive TSA on steroids.  Imagine waiting in line at a DMV for your privileges to be dispensed by a government worker. This is what Obama and the main stream media are campaigning for. Do you hear me?

 Now imagine a campaign that seeks to divide a nation along racial and income lines, and along a state’s sovereignty right and immigration lines, a campaign that uses the main stream media to daily infect the nation with discord and discontent?

 Obama is the direct opposite of Abraham Lincoln – keenly divisve Obama is intent on reshackling you to the likes of slave-owning fiefdoms circa pre-Civil War South.  He will do this by using government programs with czars but the effect will be the same.

 According to Obama’s political ideology, his characterization of you is that you are too stupid to carry on with your day-to-day life without government intervention.  He wants you to want government.  How odd, shortsighted and how hopeless this vision is for the American people. He wants you to go “Forward” down the aisle placing your hope and trust in him and government. He wants to hear your supplicant “Amen” loud and clear.

 Obama and progressives envy Europe. They want America to emulate a socialist-democracy like Sweden.  Yet, the economies of scale are vastly different between America and Sweden. It would be better if a person of such persuasion would move to Sweden in order to make their utopian dreams come true.  That is until the country’s money runs out. Greece. Spain. Portugal.  The European financial dominos are falling and falling fast and hard. If re-elected Obama would bring that type of ruin to America. He is in denial about the financial implications of endless open-ended government as are the heads of these European countries

Obama plays both ends against the middle:  he lambastes Wall St. money makers will taking contributions from them. He baits Hollywood and homosexuals to gain votes and campaign monies while courting the black vote even though most blacks do not endorse homosexuality. Middle class values don’t matter to Obama. He has a higher vision for them – “Trust me.”

 Obama discounts free enterprise most notably because it is not government.  And his version of government is an organized community centered on him.  Having had no experience with the free enterprise system whatsoever, Obama will still use capitalism as another weapon in his radical bag of tricks. It is common knowledge that people generally dislike, fear and perhaps hate what they do not know. Obama love-hates capitalism.  Capitalism pays for his campaign but capitalism is too free-wheeling for Obama. Capitalism doesn’t need Obama so Obama ebraces government. Government loves it some Obama.

 Obama’s book Dreams of My Father discloses his hatred of colonialism.  Even though colonialism is non-issue in the world today Obama conflates free market enterprise expansion with colonialism.  The fact that free market enterprises create jobs, choices and wealth in poor nations is lost on Obama. His anti-colonialism bent, formed in childhood, has stunted his growth, obscuring any other view of the free market.  Obama doesn’t want business competing with government.  Obama wants government to be a monopoly.

Imagine a President who is decidedly punitive towards those who make money, to those who create jobs, wealth and, of course, generate tax revenue along with all the good they do.  Business is under attack by a two-bit President.  People who do not have two nickels to rub together need businesses and jobs.  But Obama is determined to undermine any free market option through imposing regulations and by doing nothing otherwise.

 Imagine a President who would rather send our troops into harm’s way by sending them to the Strait of Hormuz to protect oil supplies instead of tapping into the wealth of carbon fuels readily available right here at home. Obama is against the north-south oil pipeline and off-shore drilling.  Renewable energy programs such as solar and wind power generate a minute supply of energy to this nation. I know. I work in the industry.  This president doesn’t have a clue about energy. He just knows that “green” is popular at the moment so he panders to the little “green” people most of whom are alien to common sense solutions.

 Now imagine a candidate that has no record of positive accomplishment whatsoever.  He has, though, created the biggest tax increase in history, Obamacare! Any pot smoking dead-head could have done that.  Considering the relative financial backing of each candidate Mitt Romney has done more in a year to create jobs (and tax revenue along with the jobs) as a private citizen than Obama has in almost four years as POTUS.

 Imagine a campaign that has no sense of history, a campaign ready and eager to repeat socialism’s blatant disasters, disasters both historic and current, simply because there is no risk to Obama or the Democrats.  It is not their money on the line.

 If you are clueless don’t vote for Obama. If you are in denial don’t vote for Obama. If you are desperate don’t vote Obama. If you are undecided don’t vote Obama. If you do, then hold out your wrists.  Your master has shackles with your name on them.

Do you really want your wagon shackled to this?:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/07/okay-mr-president-we-can-talk-about-the-past/

 OBTW:  In between golf games and campaigning you will find Obama working hard at what he does best:  selling the American people into slavery so he can buy another round of office.

Update:

Filed under 2012 election, commentary, Life As I See It, Political Commentary, Politics, short piece, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , ,

All Bets Are Off

July 7, 2012 Leave a comment

Barack Obama is “Betting On America.”  That’s right.  Like most Democrats (Illinois Democrats are a prime example) BHO has made America his favorite slot machine.  The gambling analogy is very apropos. He wants to gamble away our earnings, our future.

People,  just keep giving BHO your money (or other people’s money) and he will keep pulling the lever for you until something good comes out. Expectations are big. Hope and Change are full tilt. This is Progress for Democrats: spend more, tax more, build more casinos.

But what comes out when the lever is pulled?  Excuses. Joblessness. Cronyism.

 Have you heard of the person who keeps doing the same thing while hoping for a different result? Insanity accounts for the actions of BHO the politician. Insanity also accounts for the votes of those people who continue to elect Democrats:  “We keep hoping something good will come out of this – that we will win big in this Grand Casino of life.” “If only we could win without putting any of our money in.  That would be all the better.”

 Has our good money been thrown into the government slot machine?  It wasn’t your money to lose?  Oh well, there’s more where that came from right?  Heard at the buffet table:  “The 1% need to do their fair share so we can keep playing the slots.”

 Your vote matters. 2012:  Vote insanity and excuses out and reality in, if not for yourself then at least for your children and grandchildren. Don’t gamble with our future.

When you wish upon Obama…

On higher plane:

Filed under 2012 election, commentary, Political Commentary, Politics, social commentary, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Just, Fair and Equal: the Stooges of Progressivism

June 3, 2012 Leave a comment

“Creating a world that is just, fair and equal.”  This Progressive mantra was recited again yesterday. I heard it during a television interview of two historians at a history writer’s convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The black historian’s words sounded so right, so full of righteous human endeavor but in reality his words were the sounds of empty utopian piety deficit of any moral context.

 A world that is just is a world where every man gives the other his due.  Yet government’s redistribution of wealth does the opposite. It takes away from the taxpayer what is due him, his earnings and property and gives to someone else that which is not due him. This confiscation and redistribution of personal property is for no other reason than to turn unequal incomes into equal outcomes.  This highway robbery is currently termed “social justice” by progressives today who were yesterday’s socialists. 

Here is Josef Stalin, a murderous dictator, talking about his desire to see socialism dominate the world (meaning you and me):

“…Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence, the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country alone. After expropriating the capitalists and organising their own socialist production, the victorious proletariat of that country will arise against the rest of the world …”

St.Thomas Aquinas in his On the Book of Job (8,1) said:

 “Justice is destroyed in twofold fashion:  by false prudence of the sage and by the violent act of the man who possess power.” 

 As we see our nation become increasingly secular we see its structure being pulled away from its Judeo-Christian cornerstone.  And in so doing we the ‘homeowners’ are becoming displaced and disordered much like furniture during a house relocation.  Without realizing it we are becoming objects devoid of human nature, becoming the un-created or the walking dead.  Removed from life’s foundation man is devoid of God-given inalienable rights as well. And with out individual inalienable rights there is only left to mankind the justification of totalitarian power, a totalitarian power that promises a “just, fair and equal world.” This secular utopian promise is not new to mankind:  Hitler and Stalin among others promoted such ‘worlds’.

 Justice can rightly be discussed only within a complete moral context that includes prudence, temperance, fortitude, charity and a host of other God-derived virtues.  To replace that moral context with a secular humanism is to presume that God did not create humans.  It presumes that God did not create man as a person, as a whole unto himself as a spiritual being that exists for itself and of itself and that wills its own proper perfection.  On these grounds secular humanism denies individual God-given inalienable rights in favor of the general ‘good.’ This denial is imposed on us today in our democracy by majority rule – voters enthralled by the secular humanism advocated by the main stream media, by our president and by Democrats in particular are voting to empty man of his individual nature through law and fiat.  They are doing so in the name of communal “social justice.” No one seems to notice except a few on the right.

 Because of human nature there will always be those in a small camp who think to themselves “every man for himself” and “screw the other guy so I can get ahead.”  And likewise, on the other hand, there will always be those who believe that each of us should give up our person, our property and our individualism for the good of the whole. Neither of these political philosophies should ever be put in power.  And yet with high-sounding, pious jingoism pumped out by the main stream media propaganda machine the left is now succeeding into promoting the latter.  We already know who the willing recepient is:   “a sucker is born every day.”

 As individuals each of us should act with justice toward our neighbor giving him his due.  What is his due?  My neighbor is due his inalienable God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  I owe him truth.  I owe him the same love I give myself.  I owe him freedom from coercion. Beyond that the mantras of “social justice,” fairness and egalitarianism become the Godless mind control pumping the ever marching jackboots of rank and file humanism.  Once a sufficient numbers of useful idiots and stooges have succumbed to humanism’s opiate effect a sure and complete enslavement of our nation under a totalitarian regime will occur. Welcome to the world of the godless if Obama’s regime is re-elected in 2012.

 For a world to be “fair” someone in power has to determine what is fair.  Do you really want to use your vote for that kind of self-subjugation?  Certainly there is no Biblical a priori for demanding that life must be fair. Where does this understanding of the need for fairness come from?  Is there a philosophical argument for fairness?  A moral one?

My guess would be that much of the “fairness” allure comes from popular psychology and socialist rhetoric both which absolve people of personal responsibility and seeks to rectify a person’s losses and hardships by pointing blame at others.  Class warfare rhetoric is a prime example, as it defines others as being the reason for your lack.  More devastating to our culture and its preoccupation with fairness is our nation’s increasingly secular nature, a secular nature of envy and jealousy actively promoted by president Obama in his many “fair share” speeches.  Obama is a secularist wolf in Soros’ bought sheep’s clothing.

  A world that is “equal” is a world that removes difference for the sake of bringing every one down to the same low common denominator and nothing more.  Imagine our government choosing your husband or wife, your doctor, your food, your home and your words based on what is thought to be equal for everyone. Equal-outcome based thinking destroys incentive, destroys each man’s uniqueness, his God-given differences, his inalienable rights and eats away at civic life-like a flesh-eating disease feeding on its host. 

According to Allan Bloom in his book The Closing of the American Mind: How Higher education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Soul’s of Today’s Students in the chapter entitled Values “Egalitarianism is conformism…Egalitarianism is founded on reason, which denies creativity”

 Imagine a world where there is no creativity and no aspirations only sameness.  Imagine being a citizen of North Korea.

Without moral-based justice as an inoculation against greed and envy people would constantly be looking at others to compare themselves with their neighbor. Forget contentment in a world that is egalitarian.

 Finally both fairness and egalitarianism, as laws enacted via secular humanist congressmen and presidents voted for, remove individual moral choice (justice) along with charity, fortitude and temperance from life. If the government does your thinking and makes your choices for you then you as an individual are absolved from any moral duty whatsoever.  What than is the purpose of the individual?  Without you the state becomes the all-powerful meat grinder and you along with everyone else become the human sausage extruded into the casings of humanism. Digest that if you will.

“A government big enough to give you everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have….” President Gerald Ford

Filed under 2012 election, Christianity, commentary, Human Interest, Liberalism, Life As I See It, Political Commentary, Politics, Progressivism, social commentary, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Joseph and the One Percent

June 2, 2012 2 Comments

You should know that jealousy and envy disguised as “fairness” and “equality” play important roles in a liberal’s political drama.

 Remember the Bible story of Joseph and the coat.  Joseph’s eleven brothers, assuming that Joseph was their father’s favorite son, became extremely jealous when Joseph received a beautiful coat as a gift from his father.  So jealous were they in fact that they plotted to kill Joseph.  But after much hand wringing and intervention by the oldest brother they sold Joseph into slavery.  This was deemed a more humane solution.

 The brothers in order to deflect their guilt gave their father a bloodied garment as proof of their ‘sincere’ lie that Joseph had been killed by a wild animal.  The brothers then considered their “problem” to be out of sight and out of mind.  What mattered most to them was to maintain status quo – everybody was to remain equal.

 From a mature point of view the brothers should not have been jealous. Joseph’s father Jacob had every right to give the coat to whomever he wanted.  But the brothers grumbled and cried foul amongst themselves as do liberals today whenever there is a perceived breach of societal equity.

 Today’s popular psychology helps feed the popular jealousy by reverse thinking.  Instead of providing a positive unselfish viewpoint Freudian based psychology points the finger back at dad the authority figure:  “you feel that you didn’t get your fair share of love from your father.” “Your father treated your brother with more love and affection. “Your father should have given you more.  He should have been fair with you so let’s help you figure out how to get your fair share.” This nonsense is played out day after day in the liberal media and by president Obama with “fair share” rhetoric. 

 These liberal folks will tell you as they have been counseled that life has not given you your fair share so you must demand fairness: “Look at your life.  Do you have what he has?  No?” “Then demand it.” “Demand your right to healthcare. Demand your right to force the 1% to pay higher taxes. Demand your right to live off another person’s property.” This type of debilitating psychology streams from media outlets day and night promoting jealousy, envy and unrest in the people who hear it.

 Co-opted, high-sounding and sanctimonious words hide the real motivation behind the left’s policies:  jealousy and envy hiding in the wings waiting for the chance to ‘correct’ the unfairness.

 Consider this assessment of the Left’s use of innocuous language to achieve their ‘righteous’ ends. Here is Thomas Sowell, economist :

 “The left has a whole vocabulary devoted to depicting people who do not meet the standards as people who have been denied “access.” Whether it is academic standards, job qualifications or credit requirements, those who do not measure up are said to have been deprived of “opportunity,” “rights” or “social justice.”

 The word games of the left – from the mantra of “diversity” to the pieties of “compassion” – are not just games.  They are ways of imposing power by evading issues of substance through the use of seductive rhetoric.

 “Rights,” for example have become an all purpose term used for evading both facts and logic by saying that people have a “right” to whatever the left wants to give them by taking from others.

 For centuries, rights were exemptions from government power, as in the Bill of Rights.  Now the left has redefined rights as things that can demanded from the taxpayers, or from private employers or others, on behalf of people who accept no mutual obligations, even for common decency.”

 Joseph was one of twelve brothers.  He was 1/12th or 8.333 % of the whole.  8.333% had something the 91.667 % didn’t have.  Rounding off, the 92% were envious of the 8% so the 92% decided to bring the 8% down to zero, thus making things fair in their eyes. Removing Joseph from the picture also meant that their inheritance was now larger, divided only eleven ways instead of twelve.  Because of envy and jealousy the 92% proceeded to sell the 8% into slavery and bondage, though murder was considered.  Think about that before you vote for Obama and the Democrats. Think about that when you hear them demanding that the 1% should dish out their shovel ready wealth for your benefit.

 Being your brother’s keeper is so much more than keeping him around and keeping him in his place by only giving him his “fair share.”  It is dealing justly with him by giving him what is due him.  So if a man has been given a gift or has a talent bless him and do not curse him.  If a man receives more than you be thankful to God for what you do have and for his gain. But,  if you by jealousy and envy, in order to make yourself feel better about yourself, your situation and the world at large, confiscate another man’s property,  if you subjugate his person and sell him into slavery or if, when envy has matured into its final state you seek to murder the man better off than you then know that his blood will cry out for justice. Know that God will avenge those treated unjustly.

Filed under 2012 election, commentary, Liberalism, Life As I See It, Progressivism, social commentary, Wisdom, Writing Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts