32 posts tagged “politics”

Recently, John Mackey - CEO of Whole Foods - wrote an op-ed expressing opposition to the President and Congress's health care plan(s) and offering some alternatives instead (it's well worth the read - regardless of where you stand).  Shortly thereafter, the UFCW decided to pick a fight with Mackey and Whole Foods.  They are handing out fliers similar to the one below:

What incredible irony!  Ironic that no one on the left is expressing outrage at the blatant lie being spread about Mackey in an attempt to ruin him and his company.  Ironic that he doesn't oppose "reform" - but specifically he opposes the President's 'reform'.  (Is it only "reform" when Congress or the President propose it?)  Ironic in that these people have no idea who Mackey is nor the values he's instilled in his company.  They're just being mindless drones (which both parties seem to have, apparently) - blindly following 'their guy' as if he (or they) could do no wrong.

So - who is Mackey?  I pulled this from the Whole Foods forum:

• Mackey lectures at Universities about the horrors of factory farming
• He says "Right now, Americans have to pretend factory farms don't exist. They turn their eyes away, because there's no alternative, there's no choice.  Once there is a choice, we will allow ourselves to be outraged."
• He makes $1 a year and donates his stock portfolio to charity.
• He set up a $100,00 [sic] fund to help his employees with personal problems.
• He's a vegetarian and his company will not buy from producers that treat their animals unethically.
• He flies commercial, rents the smallest cars, and stays in the cheapest hotel rooms - not because he's cheap, but because he has no need for largesse
• He and his wife participate in yoga
• He gives over $1 million a year to animal welfare groups, education, relief work, and spiritual movements.
• Employees have full say in who they work with - a new employee must receive a 2/3 vote in order to make it past probation.
• Employees also vote on all company-wide initiatives
• There's a salary book in every store - "no secrets" management believes everyone should know how much everyone else is making
• Executive salaries are capped at 14 times the lowest workers salary - If they want more money, everyone else has to get more money first
• Non-executive employees hold 94% of company stock options
• Pay is linked to team performance - profit sharing
• At least 5% of annual profits go to local charities
• Full-timers get 100% of their health care costs paid for - under plans the employees have selected
• "They just have a lot more respect for you as a person here" says an employee

 And because he had a different idea about how the United States can fix it health care situation, none of this matters?  He's a caring person and many of you want to treat him like a monster.  Why?  Not because he opposes reform, but because he's bringing more ideas to the table.

I was actually surprised after I read that list.  My respect for him and his company grew tremendously, even if I don't agree with everything he says.  That a company would index executive salary based  the lowest worker's salary is astounding in and of itself.  I absolutely love that Mackey shatters the typical "political categories" - on both sides of the aisle.  The post from which I pulled that list closes with the following:

"If the country had more CEO's like Mackey, this country would be a greater place."

To which I wholeheartedly agree and would add "Let's not stop at CEOs.  Can we get some politicians with character and ideas like this?!"

In a recent White House blog, this was posted:

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care.  These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation.  Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

Not to bore with you the labyrinth of legality (which I don't even fully understand), but if the White House commences with such a "data gathering" program, the information collected will be kept secret - and that information will be around a long time, if not permanently.  This amounts to an enemies list being kept at the White House!  Enough is enough, people - this nonsense has got to stop.  Anyway, being the concerned citizen I am, I felt compelled to report myself to the White House, here is my message:

 

To Whom It May Concern:

 

     Hello, I'd like to report on some "fishy" information regarding Health Care.  Apparently, someone has been promising that we can keep our private plans, but this is clearly fishy and false.  On page 16 of the House's health care bill, it plainly states "Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" that the bill becomes law.  Want to know what's fishy about that?  That the President says "First of all, if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan.  Nobody is talking about taking that away from you.", when that's clearly a lie.  The House bill would make private insurance illegal.  If I chose to leave my job, or change my plan, or buy a private plan outside my job, this bill would make that illegal.  The President has claimed that his health care plan would "be paid for" and that his budget "reduced federal spending over the next 10 years by $2.2 trillion".  However, the CBO says that it projects a $2.7 trillion increase, not cut.  Since a majority of Americans elected President Obama, I find it odd that his health care plan would go against that majority - which is pro-life, by the way - by making abortions part of the government option.  That certainly sounds fishy.  Will the President's plan also cover the grief & suicide counseling for the abortive mothers since, of course, the suicide rate among women who've had abortions is at least 6 times higher?  Will the government plan also cover breast cancer treatment since the argument has been made that abortion raises the risk of breast cancer anywhere from 2-4 times for women who've had abortions?  In fact, doesn't abortion coverage actually cost the country more in health care costs since 65% of women who've had abortions experienced multiple symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, 31% had health complications afterward, 42% have experienced major depression in the last 4 years?  Fishiest of all the fishies is General Electric's involvement in this process.  GE stands to be the major beneficiary from both Cap and Trade (should I email another White House address to report fishy behavior on that?) and Health Care.  What's fishy is that while there was justifiable outcry at Haliburton having no-bid-contract-access to the former administration, no one is acknowledging GE's back-door involvement with this administration, nor are the names of pharmaceutical & health care companies that have met with the administration being released.  The lack of transparency is really fishy.

 

     But the biggest fish in the pond seems to be the fact that the President, himself, said "I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody."  Could you be so kind as to pass this on to the President?  Here's a couple of reasons why, Mr. President:  We, the people, do not want a government option.  We, the people, favor private competition, and we think the best reform would start with tort reform and a move away from a 3rd party payment system to direct payment where patients pick their own providers, have the choice of insurance companies that can cross state lines, have wider range of flexibility in MSA/HSA accounts.  We, the people, want you and Congress to address the more than $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities our nation is facing in our national debt, Social Security and Medicare alone (and address it without inflating the value of our dollar via printing trillions more).  Enough with the bailouts, enough with talk of making us the cleanest Third World country (via Cap and Trade) and enough with the lies about how much "universal" health care will cost, keeping our own plans, and it all paying for itself.  Enough with hiding the reality of comparative effectiveness research, which would empower you to deny treatment and ration care under a universal plan.  Please go ahead and add my name alongside the other 75% of Americans who oppose the plan, since surely we must be basing our views on "fishy" information as opposed to our own intelligence and experience.

 

Sincerely,

Jim

Rant alert.  I'm livid and not likely to be so kind.

No offense to the supposed 'millions' of people devastated by Michael Jackson's death.  Believe me, but I don't think anyone's death should be belittled.  However, enough is enough.  The world is on fire with changes that will have terrifying consequences for us and our children, and yet we want to watch washed up has-beens sing at the ticketed funeral of a pop-icon who, while arguably a musical genius, was also obviously conflicted, tortured and misguided person.  Enough doubt lingered over his life to convince many that his relationship with children was anything but appropriate.  <Cue screeching halt and screaming fans />  WHY did I mention that last item?  Because political figures with more power and influence have had their lives destroyed on the basis of mere accusations less controversial than what Michael Jackson was accused of, and yet we have members of the lowest rated Congress in history proposing House Resolutions to honor him??!

Yes, that's right.  Our Representatives - who apparently don't have time to read a 1200 (oh, wait, they added 300 more pages only hours before the vote), make that 1500 page Cap and Trade bill that will literally transfer our wealth to other nations simply by making us pay offsets in a sham-of-an-energy-derivatives market - but they have time to write and bring to the floor a bill honoring Michael Jackson.

Meanwhile, North Korea fired 7 more missiles on our Independence Day - a clear sign of defiance by a rogue state who has a proven history of bullying and bombast (albeit, now backed up by nuclear capability).  Japan - clearly concerned about North Korea, will most likely build up its military capabilities (and some have hinted at a nuclear option).

Then there's Iran.  Simultaneously aiding raids against our forces in Iraq, ruthlessly crushing the people's hopes for freedom (warning: graphic) and still working to build a nuclear weapon, Iran has made utter fools of the US in the eyes of the world.  Some believe that other states, like Saudi Arabia, will seek to arm themselves with nuclear weapons if Iran succeeds in building one.

And....Honduras.  The situation is not as cut and dry as the US Administration says.  Zelaya is not a "good guy" - and the people there are begging for prayer and assistance.  They don't want their government to become yet another pawn of Hugo Chavez.  So, we ignore the cries of Iranians for assistance as they are beaten and shot in the streets, and yet we immediately side with Chavez and Zelaya on Honduras.  "Dude - where's my country?!"

Our government is racked with corruption - from sweetheart mortgages for Senators, to increased pleasure travel on taxpayer money (while condemning auto executives for flying their private jets), to Argentinian affairs - all the while the Federal government has extended its power beyond anything ever intended (and beyond what our system can actually sustain)....and yet, here we are with wall-to-wall coverage of Michael Jackson.

My God, America, get a grip.  You now owe a minimum of $516k per household with our current debt....and that debt is growing (thanks to interest) at least $1.2 BILLION PER DAY.  Oh, and all that money we've been printing?  Is it any wonder that China, Russia and India are just the latest in a line of nations calling for the dollar to no longer be the 'dominant' (i.e. - reserve) currency?  Does ANYONE get what this means?  If our treasury "debt auction" sales drop, we have no way to finance the out of control spending....and we'll be left with an inflated currency, insane interest rates and the inability to fund all the entitlements so many hold dear (social security, medicare, etc.).

But that's ok.  Go watch the Michael Jackson memorial and memorize every fricking detail - because you better be able to describe in utter detail to your children and grandchildren what you were doing when you sold them into peasantry and slavery.

 

Pulled this from Beck's newsletter:

Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence:

Five were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes burned to the ground. Two lost sons serving in the Revolutionary Army, and two more had sons captured. Nine fought and died in the Revolutionary War.

If you ever feel like your lone voice can never be heard, that the political system isn't set up for "regular" Americans to change the course of history, remember: The signers were flesh and blood, mortal men with a divinely-inspired aim.
 
Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, eleven were merchants, and nine were farmers and large plantation owners. They were well educated, smart enough to know that by signing the Declaration of Independence, they were signing their own death warrants. They did it anyway, and God bless them for it.

Some Edmund Burke for reflection:

Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites,in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity,in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption,in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.

And in a day where our politicians seem to be forcing upon us a government that does everything for us, we should remember Thomas Jefferson's warning:

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.

I would only add to Jefferson's warning that history has no shortage of examples proving him correct, and absolutely no examples of a government that strong not taking liberty from its citizens.

Finally, it's popular to throw around the terms "republic" and "democracy" in an interchangeable fashion these days.  It would do us well to recognize how this came to be.  Since the start of the Progressive movement, its adherents have elevated the needs of the "collective" (embodied, of course, by the state) over individual liberty.  Our founders amazingly foresaw this danger and crafted, as best as they could, the structure of our government to resist a push towards centralization/consolidation of power.   Progressives have viewed these checks on power as an annoyance at best, and despised them at worst.  The terms "democracy" and "socialism" were fairly interchangeable during the pre-WWII era (and "democracy" was often a code word the New Left used for so-called "democratic-socialism" even post WWII), since Progressives assumed the people wanted socialism and that if they could just bypass the 'old' and 'antiquated' republican system and move straight towards direct democracy, then they'd get their way.  Our founders realized that where a monarchy meant tyranny, direct democracy meant mob rule.  So while we are a democratic nation, we are specifically a representative republic.  We should beware of any leader that dismisses that core attribute of our national character - for without that foundation our nation would ultimately crumble into the special place of history reserved for victims of "useful myths" (as Sorel called Marx's theories).

When Benjamin Franklin left Independence Hall on the last day of deliberations on the Constitutional Convention, a lady asked him, "Well Doctor, what have we got - a Republic or a Monarchy?"

Franklin's response:  "A Republic, if you can keep it."

A 53-year-old woman by the name of Janet Contreras wrote this letter, and it's definitely worth a read.  She sums up how so many are feeling so well:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN OPEN LETTER TO OUR NATION'S LEADERSHIP:

I'm a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I'm not a racist. This isn't to be confused with legal immigration.

Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don't you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why ‑‑ what do you have against shareholders making a profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band‑Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try ‑‑ please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.

Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let's just slow down and get some input from some nonpoliticians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I'm busy. I'm busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington. Our president often knows all the right buzzword is unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don't want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we're morons.

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented. You think we're so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work , pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone and we are now looking up at you. You have awakened us, the patriotic spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office. We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn't ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us when hewill rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you. If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent? Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming.

 

As many of you already know, the Obama administration forced Chrysler into its current bankruptcy, and into the sale to Fiat.  While Chrysler had serious problems before the federal government stepped in, what the Obama administration has done should raise the hair on all of our necks.  There are so many things wrong with this situation, but the primary issue at stake for all of us is how Chrysler's secured creditors are being treated.

Investment 101 teaches us that bonds are a safer investment than stocks (albeit lower returns, etc.).  So, if you were the state of Indiana, and you invested in secured Chrysler bonds as part of your state's pension plan, then you have become a secured creditor for Chrysler.  This means that if Chrysler ever files for bankruptcy, you are first in line to get your money back.  However, with the Obama Administration, not so much.  Chrysler's secured creditors were owed roughly $6.9 billion, and the Obama administration put them in the back of the line - behind the UAW - and has told them they will have to deal with $.29 on the dollar.  This is such a devastating, short sighted and "cronyistic" move.  Indiana took their case to the Supreme Court (after the 2nd Circuit punted the ball), and it appears the Supreme Court is not going to hear the case (even after issuing a temporary stay).  Complicating this picture even further is the fact that members of Obama's team called the lawyer representing Indiana a "terrorist", they've taken other abitrary actions such as mandating a huge cut in their marketing budget, and the funds poured into Chrylser originated from the TARP bailout passed under Bush - which neither administration has used to buy up "toxic assets" as they were intended.  It's arguable that the use of TARP funds for auto bailouts its illegal (and the authority granted to the Treasury unconstitutional).

Aside from TARP being the biggest government finance sham in our history (and aside from it basically granting the executive branch their very own slush fund), the rule of law is being arbitrarily discarded in favor of special interests and political paybacks.  If this sale goes through as is, and the secured creditors get royally screwed (as it now appears they will), we are going to see investment capital flee our country at an alarming rate.  After all, who wants to invest in so-called "safe bonds" (whether it be a state or company) if the federal government can step in and 'dictate' that you will only get $.29 on the dollar as a secured creditor, but non-secured creditors who also happen to be big donors to your party will get much more?  Those investors will take their money to countries that actually honor private agreements.  As the situation with Indiana demonstrates, the flight of that investment capital from our nation, and the "rule by fiat" attitude on the part of our federal government will hurt the pensions, retirements, state & local government funds (and more) where each of us live.  The sad thing is, we've done all this before - in the 1930's.  We prolonged the Great Depression by "economic experimentation", protectionism and "punish investors" policies.  All three ingredients are present today as well, so buckle up and hold on tight.

Oddly enough, one definition for the word "fiat" reads: "an arbitrary decree or pronouncement, esp. by a person or group of persons having absolute authority to enforce it"

A good opinion piece (with many stats and facts) on this issue can be seen here.

At the heart of the Civil Rights movement was the demand that people be judged NOT by the color of their skin, or whether they were male or female - and most importantly that our government had no right to explicitly single out a race or gender for special treatment.  The genius of Martin Luther King, Jr. gave the modern Civil Rights movement the voice it needed to press hard for the goal of equal treatment under the law, and what takes the cake is he led the movement to non-violent protest and it worked beautifully.

Contrast that to today.  "Civil Rights" leaders today have been pushing for "hate crimes" legislation (which, in fact, singles out a particular group for special treatment under the law).  Phrases like "social justice" and "judicial empathy" are the verbal soup du jour....when the implementation of those aims perverts the purpose of law in a vain and destructive attempt to guarantee "equal results" instead of "equal treatment under law".  In a recent post on NBC regarding President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Judge Sotomayor, the writer's even questioned "would Republicans dare vote against the first Hispanic?"  What happened to judging someone by their merits and abilities?  If a Republican or Democrat in the Senate votes against this nominee, that somehow makes them racist/anti-Hispanic?  And if that Senator is listening to a majority of constituents who happen to say "no" to her confirmation, does that make those citizens racist?  I contend that the elitists in our culture are still looking down their nose at the average American as ignorant and racist.  How dare they label anyone racist when they, apparently, are the ones obsessed with categorizing everything along racial lines.  How ironic that these elitist racists pine for days or real equality, when they are the very ones labeling anyone with a legitimate difference of opinion as racist.

Don't get fooled by all this talk of "empathy" and "caring" when it comes to judicial appointees.  What we need are people who will interpret the law with (pardon me for yelling) IMPARTIALITY!  Our executive and legislative officials can conjure up all the tears and empathetic responses they want.  However, once the law is written, it needs to be interpreted in a consistent and impartial manner.  The fact that our courts have strayed far away from this view of the law (especially since the "Warren Court") is a direct culprit of the capricious nature of court decisions today.  Ask yourself, why do businesses not want to take most cases to trial, and instead prefer to settle even if they are 110% sure they are in the right?  They have no idea what kind of judge they will get - and since law is not being interpreted consistently and impartially, they can't gamble their fortunes (literally and figuratively) on the whims of someone who may think it's their job to right all the real or imagined wrongs of society instead of simply applying the law to a concrete situation.

It is incredibly dangerous for judges to embed & entrench their own bias in the law.  It undermines both the reliability and predictability of our judicial system, as well as erodes the democratic process by drowning out the voice of the people and their elected officials who made the law to begin with.  A judge that wants to "make policy" is in the wrong job.  They should have become a legislator...or a lobbyist.

I call it a much needed British tongue lashing for the House Ways and Means committee.  This is Lord Christopher Monckton testifying before the committee:

"I warn this honorable House that any proposal to inflict billions of dollars of new taxation on all citizens by charging selectively-disfavored industries for arbitrarily-rationed permits to emit a harmless and beneficial trace gas that is necessary to all life on Earth and has little effect on its surface temperature will fall cruelly and disproportionately upon the poor, will threaten their very lives, will gravely diminish the liberty that is the glory of your great nation, will render difficult if not unlawful the pursuit of happiness, will raise little net revenue if the poor are adequately compensated by subsidy, will damagingly distort the labor market by widening and deepening the unemployment trap that already gives millions of your most helpless citizens a better income on welfare than in work, will imprison the poorest earners in a perpetual poverty trap by inflicting upon them a crippling marginal taxation and benefit-withdrawal rate that powerfully deters them from increasing their earnings, will be complex, extravagant, and costly, will savagely compound the adverse effects of recession, of excessive public and private indebtedness, of fiscal incontinence, and of monetary laxity on industries and employment, will create soi-disant “green” jobs by the thousand while destroying real jobs by the million, will establish an unstable and artificial derivatives market in hot air that will enrich a handful of portly middle-men while impoverishing the people, will automatically and ineluctably defeat its own objective by so depressing economic activity that the “market” price of carbon dioxide will tend rapidly to fall as close to zero as it has done in both of Europe’s attempts at a cap-and-trade scheme, will directly encourage fraud by incentivizing not only both parties to every transaction but also the regulatory authorities recklessly to overstate the magnitude of that transaction, will set your enterprises at a profound competitive disadvantage against nations that steer wisely clear of purposeless restrictions on or taxation of the very air we breathe out, will accelerate the transfer of wealth from your citizens’ pockets to other nations’ governments by way of boondoggles such as the UN’s “Clean Development Mechanism”, and will appreciably increase global carbon-dioxide emissions by transferring US jobs and manufactures to less efficient nations whose emissions per unit of production are many times greater than your own, and by increasing poverty and consequently birth-rates and consequently carbon-dioxide emissions worldwide, thereby exerting at prodigious and tragic cost a double influence on the global climate that will be precisely the opposite of that which was, however piously, intended.

Any restriction on the emission of carbon dioxide is unnecessary. It is simple to establish theoretically, and has been so established, that the UN’s climate panel has exaggerated the true effect of carbon dioxide enrichment on global temperature sevenfold. To confirm that theoretical result it is simple to verify empirically, and has been so verified by direct and repeated satellite observation, that the diminution over time in the outgoing long-wave radiation from the Earth is one-seventh of that which the UN’s computer games had been instructed to predict. Carbon dioxide is accumulating in the air at less than half the rate the UN had imagined. Not one of its games had predicted the rapid global cooling of the past seven years. Sea surface temperatures have fallen for five years. Sea level has not risen for three years, and is predicted to rise by little more than a foot this century. Worldwide hurricane intensity in October 2008 was at its least for 30 years. Global sea ice shows little trend in 30 years. The ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica are thickening. The Sahara is greening. There is no “climate crisis”. The correct policy response to the non-problem of “global warming” is not to cap or tax carbon dioxide emissions. It is to have the courage to do nothing."

Ironically enough, our "do-nothing" Congress has no courage, and certainly not enough courage to actually do nothing.

Having just read two books on the history of the Great Depression, covering Hoover and Roosevelt's administrations in a fair amount of depth, I was both shocked and yet not surprised to hear that the infamously ignorant and arrogant Chuck Schumer recently said this about Herbert Hoover:

"Those on the hard right say, “Cut government spending, let’s go back to the old Reagan days.” Well, the last president who did this when we were in this type of situation was Herbert Hoover.  Herbert Hoover said the government should do nothing when we were in a recession, not a depression.  We did nothing and it related [sic] to a depression."

His ignorance of history and economics is astounding.  The recession we're currently in is just now approaching the severity of the early 80's recession.  Reagan cut spending, and cut taxes.  Federal tax revenues doubled under Reagan's tenure, and we launched the longest period of peacetime growth in the 20th century.  JFK also cut taxes, and tax revenues went up as a result as well.  Hoover did anything but "nothing"!  Dear Lord, if only he had done nothing.  Instead his programs were merely substantial appetizers for the anti-business, anti-wealth, heavy tax burden, politicized "stimulus" of Roosevelt's failed New Deal.  I wonder if Schumer is even remotely aware of the role the Fed played in the Great Depression?  Fed policies contributed directly to the deflation so rampant in the 30's, and many economists have argued that the Depression would have still occurred without the 1929 stock market crash.  In fact, Fed policies on the money supply contributed heavily to so much money being used in speculation...a key ingredient leading up to the crash.

Once again, the blame for much our current fiscal crisis lies at the feet of both our government and the Fed.  Looking back, sobered-up economists now realize that the 'easy money' policy of Greenspan's Fed was a bad idea.  So was the strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act under Clinton.  So was the ability to sell mortgage debt as securities on the world market.  So was the relaxing of loan qualifications - all under the guise of advancing a socio-economic agenda, and not actual market common sense.

The thing that's so sickening is how our politicians grandstand, beat their chests and pour on the holier-than-thou act.  They'll attack the banks, the oil companies, the stock market investors - and ubiquitously - the "rich".  How hypocritical and odd that they've forgotten that we middle class folk are heavily invested in the stock market as well via retirement funds.  Please do not buy into the myth of class warfare.  We are ALL Americans here.  You do not make the poor rich by making the rich poor.  You do not increase the quality of life for anyone by attacking someone who has more material possessions than you.  Crooked CEOs, while a popular news image, do not represent the whole of the wealthy.  We've GOT to face the facts - wealth redistribution is not only immoral, it will drive permanent wedges between sections of our nation who depend on one another, and truly NEED one another.  We've got to STOP being petty and whining about subjective fairness, and do what is JUST.  Justice is blind for a reason.  Our founders intended small and limited government for a reason!  With Progressive ideas and "plans", government spending is the guarantee, and your tax rates will bend (upwards) long before spending drops.  With the largest national debt and deficit in history, does anyone truly think that the higher tax rates for those making above $200k will stop there?  You do not have the right to take someone else's money, whether it be at gun-point or via the IRS.  This is one bed we don't want to make, and we definitely don't want to lie in.

And by the way:  New York, look, I get that you want liberal Senators in office. Ok, fine.  But could you PLEASE elect someone with a brain?  And a moderate grasp of our nation's history?  And at least a basic understanding of business and economics?  Sheesh.

And to all politicians:  Please stop preaching hope out one side of your mouth, and class warfare out the other.  You are a disgrace because you are feeding on divisions in our nation (that you created to begin with) to further your own power and pocketbooks.