And I feel fine

Government shutting down.

National debt exploding.

Default looming.

Genetically modified food is poisoning us.

The government can’t even run a website.

There’s an island of garbage floating in the Pacific and nobody smart enough to exploit it.

Syrians at war because Bashar Assad can serve until 2014 under the new constitution.

Hives are collapsing.

The fourth largest city in the US has a gay mayor. Still.

Health insurance is cancelled.

Ice caps are melting…then freezing again when winter hits.

Chris Christie was re-elected.

There are hormones in the milk.

Deadly superbugs and the end of antibiotics. Period.

The next President of the United States is Hillary Clinton.

The Chinese own us, but want to nuke us.

The next President of the United States is Ted Cruz.

No more Astrodome.

Seventy percent of the earth is covered by water, but we’re running out.

And apparently, I’m not the only who feels fine. Stocks closed at record highs today.

Is a 27% cut really a “shutdown”?

A lot worth considering in this, most noteably that the much feared “shutdown” only involves 27% of federal spending and barely balances the budget.

 

 

Libertarian Party calls for permanent government spending slowdown, defunding Obamacare

There is no impending government shutdown — only a government slowdown. The threat of a “shutdown” is designed to scare voters while avoiding scrutiny of reckless government overspending.

If federal lawmakers do not pass a budget or a “continuing resolution” (CR) by Oct. 1, a government spending slowdown will take effect. This could halt almost $1 trillion in annualized spending that the CR would authorize, which is the size of the current federal deficit. If made permanent, this would cut annual federal spending by approximately 27 percent to $2.7 trillion — the current level of revenues coming in.

In other words, a federal slowdown — if allowed to take full effect — would balance the federal budget. This would greatly benefit the U.S. economy.

“Elected Republicans in the House can stimulate the productive private sector by slowing down Big Government,” said Geoffrey J. Neale, chair of the Libertarian National Committee.

“Why?” Neale asked. “Because a government-sector slowdown equals a private-sector growth speedup of small businesses and jobs. Americans should welcome a government slowdown — and fear the opposite: allowing politicians to continue irresponsible, reckless government overspending.”

Do politicians properly prioritize spending cuts when a slowdown takes effect? Yes and no. Functions that affect life or property generally remain funded, but many needed cuts — such as lucrative government perks, Obamacare, and large volumes of waste marbled throughout government spending — remain intact.

Furthermore, lawmakers have made numerous exceptions to the slowdown. Only a portion of the $1 trillion that would be authorized by a CR will be blocked if a slowdown takes effect.

While the particulars of the impending slowdown are far from perfect, any serious spending cuts are a welcome change from wildly irresponsible government overspending and growing government debt.

Every American should ask himself one question: Is my family better off with a government slowdown that cuts federal spending by 27 percent? Or is my family better off with another trillion dollars in federal government debt?

Transferring wealth out of the government sector and into the private sector creates jobs. Every government-funded job loss is matched by roughly two private sector job gains — a panacea for jobseekers.

“The Libertarian Party calls for a permanent government slowdown,” Neale said. “Cutting taxes, removing regulations, ending failed Big Government programs, andcutting total government spending is the only way to revive the American economy and save it from further decline.”

“Americans should be very afraid every time politicians pass another ‘continuing resolution,’” he said. “It’s their latest method for keeping government spending high, adding to government debt, devaluing the dollar and putting the American economy at risk.”

Republicans tie less spending with more spending

The U.S. Constitution requires all spending bills to originate in the House of Representatives. Members of the U.S. House can vote to veto any spending of which they disapprove. They can reject all “continuing resolutions.” They can also fully defund Obamacare.

But Republicans in the U.S. House have refused to defund Obamacare, despite having a majority in the House since 2010. On Sept. 20, they finally passed a bill to defund it — but at a very high price to taxpayers and jobseekers. The bill also authorizes a “continuing resolution” through Dec. 15.

Republicans were willing to fully defund Obamacare only when coupled with a permission slip for continued reckless spending at an annualized rate of almost $1 trillion.

The U.S. Senate leadership and President Barack Obama vow to reject the House bill and protect Obamacare.

The solution: reject both overspending and Obamacare

As it stands, Obamacare will go into effect on Oct. 1 even with a government slowdown. It will be funded by new taxes and cuts in Medicare that are not stopped by a slowdown.

Does this mean that House Republicans are forced to accept either Obamacare or a “continuing resolution?” Are they powerless to stop both of these dangerous and destructive government policies?

No.

At any time, the Republican-controlled House can do the right thing: Both fully defund Obamacare and refuse to pass a continuing resolution. They control the federal purse strings.

All that House Republicans need to do is debunk phony “shutdown” talk and pass a new bill.

“Lawmakers do not need to concede to either overspending or Obamacare,” said Neale. “Instead, we must move in the opposite direction: dramatically cut government spending and remove existing health care mandates, taxes, and regulations that stifle human progress.”

Voters are becoming increasingly aware of the exorbitant cost of Obamacare and the damage it will do to their family’s health. If it takes effect, it will force Americans to buy unwanted and grossly unaffordable medical insurance policies that provide poor coverage — or pay a fine. It will result in higher medical costs, more red tape, and more rationing of health care services.

Voters are also deeply concerned about high government spending and government debt.

The Libertarian Party runs candidates for federal, state, and local office to cut spending, lower taxes, and balance budgets — and to nullify, defund, and repeal Obamacare.

obamameme

 

Barack Obama: Thinks Americans can’t be trusted with small arms; gives small arms to al Qaeda affiliates in Syria.

Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus

Editorial Page, New York Sun, 1897

We take pleasure in answering thus prominently the communication below, expressing at the same time our great gratification that its faithful author is numbered among the friends of The Sun:

I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, “If you see it in The Sun, it’s so.” Please tell me the truth, is there a Santa Claus?
Virginia O’Hanlon

Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a sceptical age. They do not believe except what they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men’s or children’s, are little. In this great universe of ours, man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus! It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The external light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies. You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if you did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You tear apart the baby’s rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived could tear apart. Only faith, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, Virginia, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus? Thank God he lives and lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay 10 times 10,000 years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!!!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Irony, History and the Road to Serfdom

The American Revolution was born of disobedience to lawful authority, destruction of the property of monopolists, violence against public officials and ultimately a bold act of outright treason when the signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to throwing off the yoke of their lawful King and his of touch parliament in London. Today, the ideological descendants of the signers and the Sons of Liberty flippantly throw around the phrase “Tea Party” as if that means attending a quiet meeting where tea is served. They act as if these meetings can compare to the bold and lawless action of throwing a cargo worth roughly $1.4 million current dollars in Boston Harbor or signing nothing more treasonous than a check to a candidate for the equally out of touch Congress in Washington could possibly mean as much as signing a pledge of their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.

Meanwhile a band of Americans, unfortunately led by statist ideologues with more in common with King George and Lord North than with the Signers or the Sons of Liberty, are reacting to the American government’s excesses in the finest traditions of the American Revolution. These young people were saddled with an average debt per citizen of $174,266 by a Congress every bit as out of touch as the Parliament of 1773. This debt is owed mostly to the Communist Chinese government and the US Federal Reserve member banks – a monopoly that dwarfs the East India Company in size and completely eclipses it in its audacity. The consequences of the myriad blunders of Congress, from creating the monopolist Fed to nearly 40 years of pandering to the monopolists of OPEC, is that they face the daunting task of paying back that debt on the wages they can earn with a job asking, “You want fries with that?”. Of course, that is only if they’re one of the lucky 75-80% that can find one. Is it any wonder that these protesters might think it’s time for action a little more in line with December 16, 1773 instead of writing another check to a hack of either party?

The shame is that the so-called Tea Party has been co-opted and watered down to nothing more than a group of PACS by big government conservatives, more concerned with law and order than with the fight to preserve America’s freedoms, while the vigor of the Occupy Wall Street protesters has been diverted from opposing the monopoly socialism that caused the current crisis to promote further socialism as a solution. But then, such is the The Road to Serfdom

Democrats and Civil Liberties

Pardon any minor errors, I am not pleased at the moment. This is a rant, not a policy paper.

This 100% Democrat run county has decided it has the power to make the drug pseudoephedrine prescription only, because as liberals they don’t have the gonads to just tell their own children not to make meth out of it. I’m fairly certain that’s an interference with interstate commerce far beyond the legitimate power of a county government. Considering that an hour after taking the “PE” version, I now can’t breathe through my nose at all it may also qualify as denying me life or at least liberty without due process ($10,000 for denying civil rights under color of law, last I checked). I’m considering which is cheaper – a trip to the emergency room for a prescription at several hundred dollars *with insurance* or a trip to federal court for injunctive relief. The latter would certainly be more satisfying and just as likely to offer relief given the general incompetence of the medical profession that we pay so highly.

While there, I might also have to file something for the ridiculous city ordinance that requires all renters to submit to a background check by the city, regardless of the wishes of renter or landlord. Let’s talk interference with contract, regulatory taking, violating the privileges and immunities of a citizen (the right to take up residence anywhere in these United States being the main confirmed meaning of that phrase, even if it was in dicta).

Democrats and their utter disregard for civil liberties never fail to amaze.

Missouri voters say no to…wait for it…

Romneycare.

Yesterday Missouri voters passed Proposition C, amending Missouri statutes to prohibit the government from requiring people to buy health insurance. While the GOP has made much noise about this being a provision of the national health care law passed by Reid, Pelosi and Obama, those GOP officials and conservative pundits would do well to remember that this was the centerpiece of Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts healthcare reform.

A good pick

It should probably come as no surprise that I was glad to see that General James Mattis was picked to take over US Central Command. Five and a half years ago I was glad to learn that he liked his job killing “guys who slap women around for five years.” Now he’s been picked to do a job that’s previously been done by guys like Stormin’ Norman Schwarzkopf, Tommy Franks and David Petraeus. Unless there’s been an excess of sensitivity training in the intervening years, this guy should have no trouble filling those shoes.

%d bloggers like this: