2 Big 2 Succeed

My Blog Has Moved, and there's a new post

2010-10-24T02:14:00.001-07:00

Check out my new blog home, and read my lastest post on how we restore America's prosperity
http://www.2big2succeed.com/

Why Seniors Can Preserve America's Greatness

2010-10-11T20:28:00.000-07:00

Our seniors are our county’s greatest asset. The tragedy is that many young people do not see them for the treasure that they are.

Our older generation is the wisdom of our nation. They have worked, built business, immigrated from other lands, married, had kids, had grand kids and watched the world change around them. There is no greater earthly source of wisdom than experience.

To those who are in their retirement years, let me say: please speak up. We need the stories you tell and the lessons you learned. We need to know what you saw that worked, what did not work, and why. Please take the mantle of the responsibility of sharing your wisdom.

To those in their middle years, show your parents respect and your kids will respect them as well.

And to the younger generation (am I still in that group at 33?), you may think that you know, and your passion is essential for life, but make sure that you ask questions of those who have done it before you. They have learned more than a thing or two. If you don’t have a senior role model in your life, find one: an aunt or uncle, neighbor or friend of the family. We need their voice of experience.
Our seniors are so precious that I cringe at the idea of some on the far, far left that believe that lives have a monetary value, and seniors and babies are at the bottom of that list. Seniors often cost too much to keep alive and babies require many years of investment before they start producing in society. You can read all about the “Complete Lives System” here. It’s scary stuff. First of all, every human life is priceless. Second of all, the idea that a person’s value is based on their productivity is disgusting. But what happens, the authors argue, when there is a shortage of healthcare or funding for healthcare and care has to be rationed? Who do we pick to get the care?

I know, that’s just crazy “death panels” stuff, I am not saying that is what the Democrats want, only some loons.

What’s more disturbing is a college student that I saw interviewed during the education cuts protests here in Los Angeles. The student was asked what the government should cut to pay for education and he responded that the government should cut Medicare or Social Security because the seniors “had their turn” and it is the younger generation’s turn now.

Protect our seniors, they have the most to lose if the economy worsens and severe cuts must be made. We owe them the promises that were made. Younger generation, you may have to make some sacrifices to honor our commitments to our seniors. I am not counting on any of the $80,000 in SSI money I have paid over the years. I must take responsibility for my own retirement. But I can leave my children and my grandchildren a better, more free, more prosperous America, because that’s the sacrifice that the “greatest generation”, the WWII era, did for their kids and grandkids. That is a legacy: something that you leave on to future generations. Our seniors' wisdom is their legacy. Let’s make sure we inherit it.

A Passion Born of Necessity

2010-10-05T13:02:00.000-07:00

I was talking to a coworker today about the upcoming elections. "I don't really follow politics," he said. "I rarely even vote." Of course my colleague is not alone. Voter turnout is usually around 60% of those eligible to vote, and traditionally below 50% in a midterm election. Compare that to Iraq, where under threat of death, over 90% of eligible voters turned out to vote. Could it be that we don't appreciate our democracy in America?

It is amazing to me that people will follow football with a passion bordering on fanaticism and yet remain uninvolved in their elections. Not that there is anything wrong with a passion for football, fashion, or fishing, but who represents us in the White House and Congress (and, by extension, the judiciary) is the most important thing. We the People get to decide what kind of country we want to be and what kind of government we want to have. The answers to those questions will affect our liberty, our prosperity, our everyday lives and our posterity's future. Our founders embarked on a grand experiment to see if a government could be of, for and by the people. In order for that to happen, the people have to pay attention, and they have to vote.
I am not suggesting compulsory voting. Those who don't want to vote probably shouldn't vote as they are less likely to be informed on the candidates and issues. But why don't people want to vote? Are they cynical about the impact that a citizen can make?

Some of my friends may see me as overly obsessed with politics and issues. It really has become a passion of mine in the last couple years. However, it is a passion born of necessity. I would rather live in a world where I can focus on swing dancing, Ultimate Fighting, or heck, even dating, while having utmost confidence that our elected officials are free of corruption, faithful to our constitution, and looking out for their constituents above all.

The reality however is that power corrupts, our constitution is often subverted or downright scorned, and elected officials are bought and paid for special interests and big business. We the People are the only line of defense against the failure of this grand experiment. Our Declaration of Independence asserts that government gets its just powers from the consent of the governed. Don't we need to know what we are consenting to?

The reality of human history is that freedom is in a constant battle for its existence against the forces of despotism, the quest for power, and the tendency of that power to centralize. Our founders believed that all powers not expressly given to the federal government should reside with the states and the people. But they were not unaware of the challenge of maintaining that decentralized power:

"How prone all human institutions have been to decay; how subject the best-formed and most wisely organized governments have been to lose their check and totally dissolve; how difficult it has been for mankind, in all ages and countries, to preserve their dearest rights and best privileges, impelled as it were by an irresistible fate of despotism."
- James Monroe, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 10, 1788

It is not just our right to preserve liberty and the "last, best hope of the world" that is America, it is our duty.

Right after the ratification of the US Constitution a lady asked Dr. Benjamin Franklin, "Well Doctor, what have we got a republic or a monarchy" — "A republic," replied the Franklin, "if you can keep it."
- Anonymous, from Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention of 1787

I Want to Talk to Democrats. Please Help Me Understand

2010-09-29T23:47:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I think that our country has become so polarized and so emotional in that divide that we can't even have conversations anymore about principles and, hopefully, find common ground. It's so much easier to only discuss politics with people that we know agree with us. There are opinion programs on cable news to reinforce whatever view we already hold. So we live in bubble where we only hear the echo of our own voices.

I try to watch some opposing viewpoint program at least once a week, read the progressive blog sites, etc. But even then I come away baffled. Recently I tried to engage in a dialog online on a college webite comparing Beck to Maddow. There were a lot of comments on the blog about how Glenn Beck is a hate-spewing, misogynistic, unhinged demagogue. So I tried to ask, "but why do you think that?". You can see the dialog for yourself here. I didn't really get any compelling answers. I can understand why some people don't like Beck because they disagree with his principles on how the country should be run, his ideas on what the founders wanted America to be, or his criticism of this administration or congress. I told a liberal friend of mine once that I liked Beck and he acted like I told him I was joining the KKK and in jeopardy of losing my soul. I am pretty sure he never watched Beck though. I was at Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally in DC and I saw a group of people uniting around the principles of faith, hope and charity, honor, sacrifice, and personal responsibility. Republicans do not own those principles. They are American principles. They have been the principles of great leaders and individuals around the world.

I digress though, my question isn't really about Beck, O'Reilly, Olberman or Jon Stewart. I want to find the things that unite us. And for that I need to understand what misconceptions I might have about liberals and what misconceptions they may have about conservatives. So I am going to list a few things that I think define conservatives and a few things that I think define liberals (or at least progressives, because I think that progressive policies are what many in the country are rejecting). But I want my Democrat friends to tell me what they think. Are progressives taking the Democrat party too far into progressive? Am I mistaken about what I believe defines conservatism? Many of things that I did not like about George W. Bush were the areas where I thought that he lost fidelity to conservative principles. So this is more an exercise in exploration on the "battlefield of ideas".

My conservative principles:
• We are all created equal and endowed by our creator with the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our Rights come from God. Or said another way, they are natural rights. The government does not give us rights, they are there to make laws to protect our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If the government gives us our rights, the government can take them away.
• While we all want a safety-net to protect those that cannot help themselves, we don't want a nanny state to protect those who will not help themselves. Americans have produced more, invented more and created more wealth than any other nation because of the "American Dream". The idea that anyone willing to work hard, learn from their mistakes, and keep reaching for their dreams can make it in America.
• When entrepreneurs succeed in America their wealth creates more prosperity for others: employees, vendors, and consumer purchases, those recipients spend that money on their employees and vendors and purchases and so on and so forth. It's called trickledown economics. Wealth is not a single pie for the government to slice up and hand out. We can all bake our own pies, and keep baking. Wealth is not finite and the "bakers" create more pie for everyone, even as they keep the biggest slice for themselves as reward for their risk, work and talent.
• All citizens should be treated equally under the law
• I am responsible as an individual for my health, my happiness, my wealth.
• It is my duty to care for others who need help. Charity in America is a concept intrinsic to our values and also intrinsic to the success of our nation. How do we care for others? When the government takes our money and hands it out to those they feel deserving we lose the "charity" and move to collectivism.

Progressive principles (as I hear them expressed)
• America is not a fair and just nation. There are the oppressors in power and the oppressed working class. The elite few will make it, but often at the expense of "the working class"
• The government needs to work towards "social justice" to make the country more equal and income distribution fairer.
• The "wealthy" or upper middle class only care about their own self-interest and will not (unless forced) take care of the unfortunate or victims in society
• We have the right to health care, housing and employment. The government must make sure that we get those rights.
• America has too much of the world's wealth - more than our "fair share". We are succeeding on the backs of developing nations and destroying the planet by using more than our fair share of consumption, energy, etc.
Where am I getting it wrong? What do you think are the differences between "conservative" and "progressive"?

There is little common ground in the two philosophies above. But I am wondering whether "progressive" represents many traditional Democrats. Maybe there are Democrats out there who won't be at the "One Nation" rally in DC this weekend. The list of sponsoring organizations reads like who’s who of organized labor, environmentalists, anti war activists, socialists, and even the "Communist Party USA". You can see more about the event and its endorsements on the event website. In some cases the local unions are even making attendance compulsory. Is this who the Democrats are now?
Have we become polarized because we have become a nation of polar opposites? Where is the middle anymore? The place where we all share the same American principles, even when we sometimes disagree on the details.

The Wisdom, not the Right: What Do Building a Mosque and Burning a Koran Have in Common

2010-09-07T23:00:00.000-07:00

The President felt compelled to comment on the mosque developers right to build a mosque at ground zero, but said that he would not comment on the wisdom of that decision. I don't think anyone questions the developers' constitutional right to build the mosque 2 blocks from where the Twin Towers fell. However, many agree that the decision is provocative and disrespectful to the emotional scars that tie that area to the Muslim extremists who took down those towers and killed thousands of innocent Americans. We are clear that those building the mosque are not the same as the Islamic fanatics who commited that horrible terrorist act. The builders of the mosque do not by their Muslim faith share the name twisted, perverted vision of Islam and Jihad that terrorists use to justify their senseless acts of violence and murder. But to claim the goal of the mosque to to foster understanding and build a bridge across faiths rings hollow when the selected site has proven to cause less unity and more emotional turmoil among New Yorkers and Americans towards Islam.
So can we all agree that the mosque is legal and permitted, but nonetheless unwise?

Likewise, I don't understand what point that this church in Florida is trying to make by burning a Koran on the anniversary of 9/11. Sure, they have the legal and constitutional right to burn the Muslim holy book. But where is the wisdom? Burning a book that is sacred to others is likewise provocative and fosters disunity. The fact that a church that is supposed to represent the love of Jesus would make a statement so antithetical to Christ's message, is even more disgusting.

There are scars and fresh wounds between Americans and Islam because it is radical Muslims perverting their religion that have targeted America, "the great Satan", for destruction. We should not hold non-radical Muslims accountable for the actions of those fanatics. And the majority of Muslims, who do not believe in the Jihad against America, should be the loudest voices in opposition to the perversion of their peaceful religion.

Both Muslims and non-Muslims can react in visceral, damaging and provocative ways that keep those wounds open and bleeding, or we can all practice a little bit more wisdom in the exercise of our constitutional freedom to build a mosque or burn the Koran - by not doing it.

Me and Half a Million Friends in DC in Support of Faith, Hope and Charity

2010-09-01T20:28:00.001-07:00

My mom and I and about 500,000 friends went to Washington DC last weekend for the "Restoring Honor" rally on the Mall.
(picture from the event to the right)
To be at the Mall in DC between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial surrounded by half a million people celebrating the greatness of America, the heroism of our men and women in uniform, the message of Martin Luther King Jr and the faith, hope and charity we strive for was an experience I have trouble putting into words . Friends of mine who wanted to attend but could not asked me to try to describe the event and what it was like to be there. I find the only word that fits is "epic".
ep•ic /ˈɛpɪk/ –adjective Also, ep•i•cal.
1. noting or pertaining to a long poetic composition, usually centered upon a hero, in which a series of great achievements or events is narrated in elevated style.
2. resembling or suggesting such poetry.
3. heroic; majestic; impressively great.
4. of unusually great size or extent.

I looked around at the crowd of families, patriots and average Americans and I felt the "faith, hope and charity" that were the themes of the event. I struggle to describe the atmosphere, except to say it was the nobility of regular people challenging themselves to be better people. It was the collective belief that America is only great if her people are great. It was Ghandi's exhortation to be the change that we want to see in the world.

Military heroes were honored for their bravery and sacrifice. Over 5 million dollars was raised for the Special Operations Warrior Fund, an organization that provides support and college tuition to children of slain special forces. Baseball great Albert Pujols was awarded the "hope" medal for the extensive time and money that he gives to charities for down syndrome. Alveda King, extolled the message of her father and uncle that it is through love and divine guidance that we bring people together. Hundreds of thousands of Americans made a pledge to restore God and honor in their own lives. Glenn Beck paraphrasing Lincoln's Gettysberg address reminded us all that it mattered not what was said that day, but what we did going forward that would be remembered. So what is it that the event asked of us?

Get back to God. Hard times are here and difficult challenges lie ahead, for us as individuals and for our country. We don't ask God to be on our side. We change as individuals and get on God's side. God's "side" is not the left side or the right side. It is the side of integrity, honor, faith, generosity and sacrifice.
Take care of your family, friends and neighbors. Lead by example by being a person of character and values, even when it is not easy, especially when it is not easy.
Fight for the founding principles that have made this country the freest, most prosperous, most generous and most ingenious nation on earth. This experiment in liberty and self-governance has been the citadel of freedom and beacon of hope to the world. Our founders all too well understood that for the principle of limited government and self-regulation to succeed, Americans have to hold themselves to the highest standards with "firm reliance on divine providence" pledging our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to those American ideals. Those words are the closing of the Declaration of Independence, and of the declaration of the "Restoring Honor" rally.

I came out of the event inspired to make commitments towards these principles in my own life and daily interactions. I left with a new dedication to draw closer to God and His will for my life. I also found a new belief in the American people and our ability to unite around those things that all Americans revere. We should be able to join together in the answer to all our nation's ills: God, honor, faith and charity. These are not just words to inspire the spirit or paste on a campaign slogan. They are the only characteristics that will save this country from the seemingly insurmountable economic, moral and spiritual challenges that face us.
Watching the main stream media's coverage of the event was baffling. I can't think of a single theme at the event that all people along the political spectrum of good faith and love of America could not unite behind. But I am no longer disheartened by partisan politicking and disparaging of this movement. I saw a righteous movement based on the dream of MLK, the peace message of Ghandi, and the divine plan of God for America if we submit to His will. I saw represented in the multitude who attended the millions more who will hold this country together through our most difficult times.
This movement is not Democrat or Republican. This movement is George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Frederick Douglas, and Harriet Tubman. This movement is Alveda King and Albert Puljos. The heroes honored at the event seem larger than life. Those heroes are not the sum of our nation though. The sum of our nation is the dads, moms, entrepreneurs, soldiers, neighbors and volunteers that follow the path these heroes have illuminated. This movement is me. This movement is you. The greatness of America and the future of that exceptionalism is based on the actions that we take on a daily basis to walk that path so "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." (Gettysberg Address)

It won't do it justice, by I encourage you to view videos from the event yourself. Then, if you concur, make your own pledge to faith, hope and charity.
http://www.youtube.com/results?uploaded=w&search_query=restoring+honor&search_type=videos&suggested_categories=25%2C29&uni=3

Thank God the Government is there is there to Help Us Eat Better; Too Bad We Have to Pay for It.

2010-08-19T21:45:00.000-07:00

I was just surfing the news before bed and I ran across a story that demonstrates in a few hundred words exactly what is wrong with the policies of our current elected leaders.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/19/feds-try-stimulate-healthy-eating-produce-incentive-cash/
The gist of it is that the U.S. Agriculture Department is spending 20 million of tax payer dollars on a 7,500 person pilot program to provide a 30% subsidy to poor people who buy fruits and vegetables.

Let that sink in.

Our country is so far in debt that our kids will probably have to work 3 days of the week just to pay their taxes on the income that they get to keep for working the other 2 days. Irregardless, the all-knowing, all-meddling federal government thinks it wise to spend money we don't have on fruit subsidies for food stamp recipients.

The proponents argue that bad food is cheap and good food is expensive, so the reason so many poor people are fat is because the healthy food is too expensive for them to afford.

Uh huh. You can get a chicken breast and a fruit cup at Jack-in-the-Box for the same price as a burger and fries. Yesterday my step dad bought whole cantaloupes at the store for $0.49 each.
It is more challenging to eat healthy on a budget. I know that to be true. It is also irrelevant. Lots of things are more challenging when you are poor then when you are well-off. That's a big part of the incentive to earn more money.

Next week perhaps we will read an article that the government wants us to subsidize gym memberships for those who can't afford them. It's the same logic.

What about the kids? The Super Nanny government wants to know. How about this crazy idea? Let's pretend that the parents are responsible for their kids. It's a wacky idea, I know, this personal responsibility thing. Especially since we read recently that food stamp cards (they're like ATM cards) were being used at casino ATMs. There are a lot of slot machines with fruit on them...

Let me save the government 20 million of our money: this pilot is not going to work. I guess that money is spent already though.

Our "Leaders" Need a Trip to Comic Con

2010-07-28T21:53:00.000-07:00

I admit it. I am a little bit of a geek. The word "terabyte" turns me on. I do own the 10-Disc Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition DVD box set. (That's the one with the version of Superman II that Richard Donner didn't make). No, I didn't go to Comic Con in San Diego last week. I was too busy looking for real superheroes, and finding so very few in our elected offices willing to stand for "truth, justice and the American Way".

Weekly recap from the "heroes" elected to lead us

1. White House fires someone for being racist only to discover that she wasn't racist and they didn't even bother to get her side of the story or investigate the evidence first.
2. Federal Government suing Arizona for having the temerity to enforce the laws that they themselves are derelict in enforcing.
3. Charlie Rangel is a corrupt politician who lied and cheated on his taxes
4. We find out the Financial Regulation Bill exempts the SEC from public scrutiny under the "Freedom of Information Act" (It's okay, we can trust them, right?)
5. The elected officials of the City of Bell, CA (pop 37,000) are exposed as having given themselves huge salaries and pensions. The City Manager was making nearly $800,000 and the police chief was making nearly $500,000. The average salary in Bell, CA is just over $30,000.

I need a hero.

Everyone familiar with the movie Spider-Man knows the famous line intrinsic to the idea of superheroes: "With great power comes great responsibility." Our government has certainly attained the power, but where is the responsibility? They have a responsibility to "We the People". They have a responsibility to "support and defend the Constitution the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic". They have a responsibility to not use their office for their own corrupt, political or financial gain. They have a responsibility to enforce all the laws as if "law" means something and enforce the border as if "border" means something. They have the responsibility to be accountable and transparent to the people that they represent.

It's no wonder that Congress ranked last on a Gallup poll last week on "confidence in institutions". A whopping 11% of Americans trust Congress. Top on the list was the Military with 76% of America's trust. Maybe that's because the Military still believes in things like "Duty, Honor, and Country".

I'm not a doe-eyed, naive believer that we can have 100% honorable people representing us 100% of the time. Still, I can't be only one that sees that corruption, arrogance and pride have become a disease in our government. That's not partisan. Ir's an apolitical disease that affects both parties. The reason that the Republican and Democrat's approval ratings are dismal and dismaler is because Americans don't really trust either one. The only reason there's a 10 point spread in favor of Republicans on the generic ballot is that the Democrats have made a routine of looking at the polls and doing the opposite of what the majority of Americans want. The Republicans are just standing still; only slightly better than going in the wrong direction.

Meanwhile, I look for the heroes that should be there, making the hard choices that are right for America, listening to the people, and watching out for our security, but never at the expense of our liberty. Superman could have ruled the world. He had that much power. Instead he helped others without deciding for them, expecting nothing for himself. He had that much responsibility.

The reason that I am a conservative is because I believe that we are all capable of being superheroes. We as individuals have the chance to make our world a better place, make our country a better place, make our town a better place. Every human being is capable of that, we are just blessed enough to live in a country that was founded on the idea of that. It is our right and our responsibility to shape our own destiny and live our own purpose.

What is your cause?

Live it.

- Jamie A.K.A. Defender of Freedom

Why Are We Discussing Racism?

2010-07-23T12:12:00.000-07:00

Why Are We Discussing Racism?

And They Called it Racism... The Tea Party Protest, Part 3

2010-07-19T21:09:00.000-07:00

What is the Real State of Race in America?

2010-07-19T20:28:00.000-07:00

By now most people are aware that the NAACP came out this week and accused the “Tea Party” of not doing what it should to weed out or disavow the racist elements in its midst. I have been to 3 Tea Parties and have seen zero evidence of racism. Matter of fact, what I see in the Tea Party nationally is a loose coalition of Americans concerned about out-of-control government spending and debt. Tea Parties are also generally alarmed by the radical expansion of the power and scope of the federal government and the resulting loss of liberties. None of these uniting principles have anything whatsoever to do with the color of the president’s skin or anyone else’s skin for that matter. There isn’t any proof that the Tea Party has any real “racist” element to it beyond the possibility of a few fringe loons that can show up and latch their message onto any group. I haven’t even seen examples of these alleged racist loons successfully infiltrating the Tea Party. I have seen a handful of protesters with signs that I feel are over the top or inappropriate, such as signs comparing the administration to Nazis in their totalitarian policies. When people use hyperbole to make a point or get attention they ruin their credibility and diminish the legitimate message of the Tea Party. However, as many have pointed out, the NACCP is hypocritical in that they don’t seem concerned enough to pass a resolution condemning the racist, violent rhetoric of the New Black Panther Party when some of its leaders say they hate all white people and want to “kill cracker babies”. If any person at a Tea Party rally had ever said anything remotely as horrific it would be a national news and widely condemned by everyone. There is no evidence of racism in the Tea Party and yet the NACCP feels the urgent need to pass a resolution claiming the opposite at their annual convention. This leads me to believe that an organization with a great and important history in the civil rights movement in this country is becoming nothing more than a progressive, political shill. The NAACP has a PAC that they use ostensibly for “the advancement of colored people” but I wonder how many black conservatives they are donating to in this year’s primaries.

Ironically, I could count on one hand the number of times I even thought about race in my life, politics and relationships until people started accusing me (as part of the Tea Party) of being racist for opposing President Obama’s legislative goals. Even though I didn’t vote for Obama, based on differing policies, I was proud that America has come so far in race relations that we elect a man to the highest office in the country based on what he says and not the color of his skin.

Can we take an honest look at the state of race in America? Am I somehow unqualified to give my observations because I am white? I heard a dark-skinned immigrant from India say the other day that if you leave your house in the morning expecting to be discriminated against you will find evidence to support that belief because any rude treatment or bad things that happen to you will be considered a result of the color of your skin. He also said that if you see America as a generally non-discriminatory country, then that is what you will likely experience. On a side note, did you know that in India a popular product is a topical cream used to lighten the hue of Indians with dark skin? I challenge anyone to find any other country whose movement past wide-spread racism happened as quickly and thoroughly as in America.
Does racism exist in America? Sure. Racism is a human problem that has existed from the beginning of time. You can find actual racism in the rants of Mel Gibson or in the hate speech of a New Black Panther. America also has a shameful past of racism with slavery and segregation

Here is what I see: the vast majority of Americans are abhorred and ashamed of America’s past racism. Most white people today truly embody Martin Luther King Jr’s dream of judging a person on their character and not the color of their skin. Likewise, most black people don’t hold today’s white generation accountable for their ancestors’ obscene ignorance or racial malice. Rather most blacks today judge a white person based on the content of their character and not the color of their skin. I am ashamed of America’s past of slavery and segregation, but I am also so proud of how, as a country, we have achieved equal rights for all and equal treatment under the law in only a few decades. Those racists that still exist in all ethnic groups in America such as the white-power skinhead or the black-power Black Panther are remnants of past bigotry and ethnocentrism, but they in no way represent American at large or even a significant percentage of Americans .

I am angry and frustrated by those who play the “race card” or try to trump up racial divisions for their own power or political gain. We have come so far. Can’t we celebrate that? Real racists in America are unaccepted, ostracized and outcast. If a person showed up at a Tea Party with a sign saying “Lynch Obama” as the NAACP claims, or if someone called a black congressman the “n-word” as others claim, I can guarantee you that the Tea Party members witnessing or hearing such hate would be the first ones to throw the kooks out of the party. I was once at a Tea Party in Los Angeles where two guys showed up with white supremacy signs. Everyone at that Tea Party made sure that those hate mongers were not allowed in our midst and we let them know exactly what we thought of them and their repugnant ideology. A few fringe racists might try to give the illusion of legitimacy to their messages of hate by associating themselves with mainstream groups, but that doesn’t mean that the Tea Party wants them there or would even allow them there.

Let’s all remember that our founders, although personally imperfect as all humans are, founded this country on the perfect principle that all men are created equal. The principles that America was founded on belong to all people, of all shades of skin color. Martin Luther King Jr, also an imperfect human being, brought forward the perfect message of equality and judgment on character, not color. His message belongs to all people as well and he is a personal hero of mine as much as Washington or Adams because all, flawed in their humanity, were transcendent and divinely inspired in their alchemy.

It's Not About Parties, its About Philosophies

2010-06-12T15:22:00.001-07:00

I love the political season. So ripe with possibility. I get that patriotic feeling when I go vote. I feel proud and grateful to be an American and to have been blessed to be born in the most free nation on Earth. I feel empowered by a sense that "We the People" can make a difference because our founders blessed us with the best and longest enduring constitution and form of government on the planet. It is the closest thing that the world has to "self-government" and has changed the world for good in so many ways in the last 250 years.

I hate the political season. Just as my hope soars eternal, I get bombarded by all the "politics" of politics: name calling, finger pointing, scandals and accusations, political hacks unwilling to enter into real debate on issues, the usual. For the most part it's not the people - the average democrat or republican voter - it's all the paid politicians and strategists out there who make a living off of constantly creating "bad guys" and "good guys" for the people to respectively blame and give power to.

I just want us to have an honest discussion in America about what kind of country we want to be.
Do we want bigger government with more control of our lives, business and finances? Do we believe that it is the duty of the federal government to solve the world's ills? How about our own personal ills? Am I responsible for providing myself food, clothing, shelter, health care and employment? Is that the government's job? Or is it the government's job to protect my rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? See the Declaration of Independence didn't say that we had a right to happiness. That would mean that the government would be responsible for making sure that everyone was achieving happiness. No, we have the right to pursue that happiness. The dictionary describes it as "to strive to gain or accomplish". That word pursuit tells us that our founders understood that it is the individual's right and responsibility to strive for and gain, or not gain, happiness. The outcome of that pursuit is not guaranteed.

The founders understood something that so many seem unwilling to admit today: government does a poorer job at almost everything than the private sector, local governments and individuals. With the exception of the US Military (which is the finest in the world), the federal government has failed at every other large undertaking and expansion of its role in history.
Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are so broke and unsustainable that all 3 systems will completely fall apart in the next few decades if not drastically cut, changed or funded. The "funded" option would require tax increases up to 88% of income for top earners and the bottom percent income tax payers would go to 37%, up from 9% today. The trustees of the funds for these failed policies say that if drastic change does not occur now, chaos may ensue later. Very few courageous politicians are even willing to be honest with the American people about the situation and the need to phase out or restructure these programs, but the American people are figuring it out anyway. I won't be counting on a dollar of the 80K+ I have paid into Social Security. I don't even know how much I have paid into Medicare and Medical.

Europe is flashing us a big ol' sign right now. It says "Warning! Danger Ahead!" The reason that countries in Europe like Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal are collapsing under the weight of their own government and spending is because they promised their people more than they could ever provide. Sound familiar? They are just a bit further down the road than we are. But guess what? California's economic situation is actually worse than Greece. It won't be long until California petitions the federal government for a bailout because we are "too big to fail". And New York's government may shut down completely on Tuesday because they can't pass a budget because no one is willing to make the cuts necessary to balance the budget and the people are over taxed as it is. New York spends nearly $15,000 per year on every child attending a public school. What do they have to show for it? Drop out rates continue to increase every year. Average Private school in New York is just over $6,000 per year. I guess that's just another case of the private sector doing it better. So why did DC shut down the widely successful school voucher program last year? In a fight to keep the program, Senator Joseph Lieberman said "There are some powerful forces allied against this program. We happen to have the facts on our side. We also have justice on our side." The facts: 1700 low income students in DC were given $7500 in vouchers to attend private schools. Less than the average $14000 per student DC was spending on public school. The "power forces" that Lieberman mentioned? Public Employee and Teachers unions who do not have the stronghold on private schools that they do on public schools. Who won? Obama and the democrats in Congress sided with the unions. Of course, the unions are their biggest single contributors, so maybe that's why. Or maybe they just really believe that those 1700 low income students gained nothing from being able to attend private schools.

I could make a 200 page blog on the failures of big government and it's programs. We can talk about how the government banned DDT 1972 against the testimony of experts who said it was safe and at the behest of environmental groups like Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club. I could explain how that ban cost the lives of hundreds of millions, especially in Africa where Malaria is the number one killer of children. In 2006 the UN finally reversed it's policy and endorsed DDT as an tool in the fight against Malaria and other Mosquito borne illnesses again. Too little, to late for the victims of the diseases.

How different from that is a cap and trade bill that will harm humans economically (Obama said electricity rates would "necessarily skyrocket") and which even environmental scientists admit will have no discernible effect on the environment?

Let's put a real end to "politics as usual" and decide what kind of country we want to be. Let's bring the debate out in the open. Far-left progressives from "Code Pink" recently shouted down and threw things as Nancy Pelosi during a speech because they don't think that she is progressive enough. Those kinds of Progressives who want to transform America into more European style social democracy can make their arguments as to why that is a good idea and what will keep us from falling into economic catastrophe like the countries in Europe that serve as the model.
More moderate Liberals can make their arguments for some growth in government size and power, such as what we have seen in this administration with health care reform, financial regulation, nationalizing student loans and government majority ownership of banks and auto makers. Moderate conservatives can make the argument for "compassionate conservatism" with some safety nets, but reduced scope of federal government provision, intervention and control. Libertarian type conservatives can make their argument that the federal government has far exceeded it's constitutional bounds and that we shouldn't have 90% of the government programs and agencies that we have today. Then they can explain how they plan to wean people off all the existing government programs without the chaos that austerity measures are creating in Europe today.

Ironically, based on my reading of the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and other writings by our founders, they fell on the far conservative side, not in the middle.

So let's have the debate. Let's bring all sides in to argue the merits, historical support, and execution of their designs and see who America chooses. That is the power of the people. You give us the facts and lay out your argument and we can make the right choice. We don't need government making our choices for us. The government does not know better and nor can they do better than the America people. That is why our Founders gave the power to "We the
People".

Response to President Calderon

2010-05-25T14:06:00.000-07:00

Si se puede ser un pais de leyes (Yes we can be a nation of laws)

2010-04-30T16:10:00.000-07:00

I know I said I was going to write about flushing my Social Security Insurance savings down the drain or the effect that power has on government, but I can't remain silent on the Arizona craziness. I was fuming most of the last 2 days as "friends" of mine on Facebook compared the new law in Arizona to Nazi Germany and called those who support it racists. I guess the term "racist" is the go-to slander now for all things not in alignment with Progressive thought. But be warned race-baiters, the more you throw that term out willy-nilly the less effective it will become and the less attention people will pay to actual instances of racism, a la "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".
But it's not just lefty kool-aid drinkers on Facebook hurling these slanderous and fallacious comparisons. Here's just a few gems that I picked up from news stories this week:
* "There is now a racial reign of terror spreading across the country and it has to be stopped," Joshua Hoyt, director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights and one of those arrested, told the Chicago Tribune.
* "We cannot go back to the slave trade, slave patrol era, where ... free men or African Americans that were free were arrested, put in jail and then sent back to the plantations," said Juan Carlos Ruiz, advocacy director of the Latino Federation of Greater Washington. - Reuters
* Even some Republicans joined the bandwagon: "This law of 'frontier justice' – where law enforcement officials are required to stop anyone based on 'reasonable suspicion' that they may be in the country illegally – is reminiscent of a time during World War II when the Gestapo in Germany stopped people on the street and asked for their papers without probable cause," said Rep Mack (R) Florida. - The Hill

I feel like I woke up in the Twilight Zone (not the one with Edward Cullen), where a law that makes something illegal a crime is suddenly the same thing as slavery and the Jewish Holocaust.

So let's all calm down, take a deep breath, and look at the facts.
1. The new AZ law does not allow for race to be a determinant in asking to verify someone is here legally. Matter of fact, it expressly forbids it.
2. The officer has to have had some other lawful reason for coming into contact with the person before asking to verify legal status (i.e. pulled over for a traffic violation or detained for another crime).
3. The vast majority of illegal immigrants in Arizona are from South of the border. So therefore the majority of illegal immigrants affected by this law will be from south of the border. It doesn't mean that the law targets Hispanics, it means that the majority of the people being affected are Hispanic. A HUGE difference. If I was pulled over and couldn't provide a driver's license, green card or visa and spoke little English, I would expect the officer to inquire on my legal status as well. Equal justice means that nobody is too white, black, brown, rich or poor to be subject the law equally.

Roughly 65% percent of Americans support this law according to a Rasmussen Poll. But Rasmussen found in another poll this week that also 65% favor "a welcoming immigration policy".
Let me 'splain.

We want our laws enforced. We want all people to be equal under the law. The white, brown, black, or polka-dot person here illegally needs to be treated the exact same way. It has nothing to do with the hue of their skin.

If we are not going to apply the law equally to all people and expect our laws to be enforced, then what the heck do we have laws for? I want people from Mexico and anywhere else in the world who want to be able to come here and pursue the "American dream" to do it legally and I want a system that makes that possible. Illegal immigration hurts EVERYONE - both citizens and illegal immigrants. I have seen it first hand with my good friend who is here illegally. She lives a restricted life because of her illegal status. She can't fly home to visit her family in Guatemala. I can't even take her on a plane trip with me because she has no proof of US Identification. She is also one of the hardest-working, self-reliant, driven people I know and she would make a welcome addition to the melting pot of heritage that we call "Americans".

Arizona was driven to this law by a federal government that for decades has been unwilling to address the politically tenuous topic of border security and immigration. Republicans and Democrats alike have done nothing because either they don't want to upset millions of potential future voters or millions of current voters. Drug and border violence is out of control and our borders are a weakness that terrorists, criminals, and drug traffickers use against us. Did you know that Arizona is now 2nd largest kidnapping capitol of the world, behind Bogata Colombia. Phoenix averages 1 kidnapping per day. An Arizona Rancher was killed on his property by an illegal. Just today, a sheriff's deputy was shot in the stomach with an AK-47 by illegal human or drug traffickers along a corridor known be be used for both. What racists we are for wanting to put an end to the insanity!

So when you see rallies this Saturday with signs that say "Si se puede", let's ask "yes we can.... what?" Ignore the law? Call people who support the law racist Nazis?
I say Si se puede to being a nation of laws applied equally to all and enforced for all. Si se puede secure our border and keep the criminals, vagrants and terrorists out. Si se puede create a welcoming system of legal immigration to allow the law-abiding, hard-working people of the world aspiring to become Americans a better, easier path to that goal.
1. Secure the border, 2. enforce the law, and 3. have a good legal way for people to enter our country that are decent, hard-working people wishing to become Americans. That is the proud heritage of this country: people coming from all over the world to join our land and culture of freedom, hard work and values begetting success and happiness. That is what it means to become an American. The more the merrier.

Yes we can.

Who's your daddy?

2010-04-20T20:06:00.000-07:00

My mom just called me on her way to sign paperwork with a new tenant in a building that we own together. She was calling me to vent. Let me introduce her new tenant to you. We will call her "Alice" since I think we have all gone down the rabbit hole...

Meet Alice:
Alice is a 40-something year-old single mother of two daughters. My mom said she is sweet and well-spoken and friendly. Alice is renting our 3 bedroom apartment in Huntington Harbor. It's a very nice place. I used to live there. We remodeled the kitchen. Spared no expense. Alice is moving in with her two daughters, age 15 and 23 and her two grand kids (from the 23 year-old). Alice's "proof of income" statement for my mom showed her and her older daughter getting a combined $1000+ in welfare, $600 per month in food stamps and $2100 per month in housing (that's $3700+ total if you are counting). By the way, Alice has been receiving housing subsidies from the government for 12 years.

My step dad Gil noticed a wedding ring on Alice's hand and asked her if she was married. "We don't live with our men," she replied, "because then we wouldn't get government assistance anymore." So Alice chooses not to get married or live with her long time boyfriend because then she and her husband would have to start taking responsibility for their own financial needs.

And the reason they are moving? When her 23 year-old daughter had another baby a few months ago, Alice qualified for a 3 bedroom apartment instead of a 2 bedroom apartment. By the way, the daughter that has two children by two different men chose not to live with or marry either of her baby daddies either.

Before my mom called me, I was watching a show called "Life" on the discovery channel. A mama orca was teaching her baby how to hunt for seals in shallow water and avoid getting beached. The commentator mentioned that one of the things that makes mammals unique is how we pass down information from generation to generation; teaching our young by example. It then is easy to understand how Alice never graduated high school and neither did her daughter. Alice never married the father of her children, and neither did her daughter. Alice has lived more than a decade on government assistance. What should we expect from her daughter?

So then I read today that the FDA wants to outlaw too much salt in foods. (Stay with me here, I promise it's connected). The government can now mandate that we buy health insurance. Maybe they should mandate that we all buy gym memberships too?

Here's my point: The government cannot legislate good decisions. All they succeed in doing is stripping away at the sense of personal responsibility and accountability that teaches good decision making through positive and negative consequences. The federal government got involved in providing school lunches decades ago because kids were malnourished. Now the government wants to try to fix the fact that kids in school are obese because the government has been feeding them processed food high in fat, salt and calories. How about this? Let the parents feed their kids and take responsibility for their weight. Let local government fill in any gaps in a smaller community setting where parents can get involved in the decisions of what foods are provided to their children.

Now back to Alice. The government cannot legislate common sense or good decisions. But the government can and does encourage bad decisions though enabling those behaviors. The government inadvertently encouraged Alice and her daughter not to get married to the fathers of their children by providing them a financial incentive not to. The government made the decision not to graduate high school easier by providing a means of income that requires no diploma and no work. And the government encourages people everyday to not go look for a job when they extend unemployment benefits from weeks to years.

My money, your money is being involuntarily collected to enable unproductive and unhealthy habits and behaviors. Even worse, we are creating a class of people dependent on the government for their every need, regardless of ability or desire to better themselves.
I believe in charity. I believe in giving to those less fortunate. I give to causes and organizations all the time that support people (and animals, because I'm a sucker for animals) in need. Every dollar that the government takes out of my paycheck and wastes in their misguided attempts to help "Alice" is a dollar that I don't have to donate to a charity that gives a hand up out of a bad situation. The government's hand holds people in a bad situation: dependence and lack of responsibility.

Next blog (you pick):
Why I will never see a dollar of the $80,000 I have paid into Social Security Insurance
or
What happens as government's power grows?

Choose your own adventure.

Why the government thinks that Americans suck

2010-04-11T13:08:00.000-07:00

You will have to excuse the hyperbole in the title of my blog this week, but allow me to explain. The policies of this administration and progressives in general are based on an idea that Americans need the government to take care of us, tell us right from wrong, and protect us from ourselves. The foreign policy of this administration holds the hint of the suggestion that America doesn't deserve to be the largest military super power on the planet. The growth of government entitlement programs infer that Americans cannot be counted on to take care of the needy in our society unless the government takes our money and does it for us. Let's look at each one of these things individually, shall we?

1. We need the government to take care of us:
There's a video circulating around schools taught as part of the curriculum called "The Story of Stuff". In this video the narrator says that "it's the government's job to take care of us." Do you believe that? Is that the government's job? When did we move from our founders' principle that the government is the protector of our freedoms, not the provider of our needs? Matter of fact, it was Thomas Jefferson who said "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

2. The government needs to help us make the right decisions:
With freedom comes personal responsibility. That liberty is the freedom to make good choices and reap the rewards, or to make bad decisions and pay the consequences. I don't need the government outlawing trans fats or alcohol (as progressives did in the 20's). If I eat or drink things that are bad for me, then I will pay the consequences. If I become an obese, out-of-work alcoholic who then expects the government to pay all my health care costs and treatment options along with my housing and food stamps, then the government has sheltered me from the consequences of my actions and I will never learn.

Another aspect of this lack of confidence in Americans is seen in environmental policy. I bet that one day in the not too distant future all cars will be hybrid of some sort. That is because the demand for fuel efficiency and the public's awareness of energy conservation and the environment drives us to be more "green". Give people the facts and an affordable solution like compact florescent light bulbs or hybrid cars and people will buy them. When solar energy reaches that sweet spot where the benefit outweighs the cost, people will adopt en masse. We don't need government nanny to force us towards environmental friendliness, people will move there on their own.

3. America is not deserving of military dominance:
Since the early 20th century America has been a military super power with little rivalry. We have used our power to defend and protect but never to colonize or destroy. We haven't been perfect in all our military decisions, but we have a core principle that America's might would not be abusively used for imperialism or terrorism. We live in a world that includes some evil people. Unfortunately some of those people hold positions of power in the world. Some have and would use military power to colonize or terrorize. Others would like nothing more than to see "the great Satan" wiped off the map. Obama's new nuclear policy for America limits our options for defending ourselves and our allies and reduces the deterrent created by nuclear weapons. In a time where nations with very dangerous leaders, like North Korea and Iran, stand on the cusp of nuclear armament, why on earth would we chip at America's status as the country willing and able to do anything to stop threats to ourselves and the world? I wonder if Iran actually believes at this point that we will do anything to stop them besides the last 6 years of resolution begging and bartering in the UN and with Russia and China.

4. Nowhere is the government's lack of faith in Americans more evident than in the transition from charity towards entitlements as a source for the needy. Americans have proven time and time again that we are the most generous people on planet earth. We take care of our neighbors, our family, our friends, our community, our country and even other countries' needy and desperate.
While some safety net is good to catch those who fall through the cracks, we are moving from a safety net to a government harness on each and every one of us. The government will take our money and use it to help with the causes that they see deserving. And since huge bureaucracies are never good at nuance, the government will offer enormous entitlement programs that will act as the teat that the American public will nurse from. Did you know that a baby mammal will nurse far longer than it needs to if their mother does not forcibly wean it?

My real concern about this unconstitutional shift away from personal responsibility to government care and control is that people become what others expect of them. We all know the kid who was told by abusive parents that he would never amount to anything. Then when the kid turned into a loser or a criminal the parent would say "I told you so". It's a self fulfilling prophesy. We are losing the generation that truly understood personal responsibility - the "up from your bootstraps" generation. We are raising a new generation that believes that the government will take care of them and that it's "the government's job" to do so. Our liberties will disappear as politicians realize that they can buy the votes of the lazy and entitled with the money of the hard-workers.

We must be vigilant to never believe the lie that government can or will take care of us. We must live the principles of charity, military might with honor, self-reliance and acceptance of the consequences. We must never become the people that the progressives expect us to be.

You don't know me

2010-03-28T17:22:00.000-07:00

I was astounded to read an opinion piece by Frank Rich of the NY Times last week claiming that Tea Partiers are not really upset about the growth of the size and power of the federal government, or out of control and unsustainable spending. We are apparently really upset that a black man is president, a woman is speaker of the house and the openly gay Barney Frank holds a position of power. (You can read the outrageous claims for yourself here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html ).

Likewise I have heard those on the left opine that people who watch Glenn Beck must just agree with what they call "his doomsday hate speech". It had me completely confounded. We are absolutely spending at a rate that will lead to economic disaster if drastic measures are not taken. Moody's has warned that we are in danger of losing our AAA credit rating as a country. The CBO said last week that within 10 years our debt will equal 90% of GDP.

Nobody can deny that the process used to pass this health care bill was shady at best and unethical at worst. And even if you believe that health care is a right of all people in America and that it is our government's job to ensure that "right" for all, where does that end? Will it be the government's job to provide housing? Food? Clothing? Transportation? This is the model that has been widely accepted in Europe. However, this model runs counter to everything that this country was founded on: personal responsibility, limited government, and private charity.

For every suffering person in America without adequate food, shelter or medicine, there are private charities, generous individuals and businesses looking to help our neighbors and fellow countrymen. Private donations to Hatti from US business and individuals topped 1 billion within a matter of weeks. That is the strength of the United States of America and that is the spirit that you will kill if you try to run all people's needs through the breadline of the federal government.

Giving not only blesses the recipient, it blesses the giver. How much blessing and sense of community do we get out of having the government stick their hands in our pockets and then redistribute to the less fortunate as they see fit?
On the other side, if a person receives assistance from the government, some will come to see it as their due and never pick themselves up and move forward the way they might after getting a helping hand from a neighbor, friend, colleague or private company.

The company that I work for does more philanthropic work then anywhere I have ever worked. That makes me proud to work there and my associates and I feel a sense of team and community when our company hosts drives to raise money for causes and charities. The government taking money from my paycheck and giving to similar needs lacks all those benefits of giving that inspire us to want to give more and do it again.

Add to that the fact that everything the government does the private sector does better, cheaper and more efficiently and I think you have a strong argument against growing the scope of government in people's lives.

People are mad. Not because a black man is in the white house. I rarely think about the president's race unless someone is accusing me of not liking him because he is black. I could care less that Pelosi is a woman or Barney Frank is gay - never even crosses my mind. I have enough to think about with trillions in new debt, bailouts of "too big to fail" car companies, banks, Fanny and Freddie, government run health care, privatization of student loans, government subsidized mortgages, and, well, I could go on and on.

So Mr Rich, smart guy NY Times writer extraordinaire, you don't know me at all - not one little bit. I am hard working, and I want to keep what I work hard for and I choose to give to those in need and causes I believe in. I am deeply proud of my country, especially those men and women who put on the uniform of our country and lay their lives on the line for my freedom. I am involved in politics now as never before because I hope to be a mom someday soon and I want my children to have the exceptional America that I grew up in. But Mr Rich thinks I am protesting our government actions because I am a racist who fears losing the white man power structure in this country. I have decided that I don't care what Frank Rich thinks. I am done defending myself and my fellow Tea Party patriots against ridiculous labels of racist, misogynistic red neck. The truth is on our side and more see it every day. Mr Rich's argument holds no water, because he doesn't know a thing about me.

What's the real debate here?

2010-03-21T13:20:00.000-07:00

I have been thinking about who the people are that make up the 35%-40% that support this health care bill. I think One group will never have their minds changed because they understand what they are supporting and it is exactly what they want. The other group is sincere, but what they think they are supporting is not really what they will be getting. Let's be honest here, this a massive new government entitlement program, any way you slice it.
Here's what I think: 15%-20% of those who support this bill have been burned by an insurance company, or frustrated by rising health care costs. They just want the problem fixed and they either don't understand or don't care that this 2700 page bill is like treating a broken finger by amputating the entire arm and replacing it with a 2.5 trillion dollar mechanical arm to which the government holds the remote control. The other 20% genuinely want the USA to be more like the social democracies of Europe with more federal government control of our lives. They believe that government taking care of citizens' every need is more important than the individual freedom and responsibility and that this country was founded on. It honestly does not bother them in the least that this bill adds 16,000 new IRS agents to the government payroll to inforce insurance mandates on individuals and businesses. These are the progressives that want to see America transformed into a new kind of Nation where the collective is valued above the individual. Having spoken to many of these people, I believe that they are sincere in their belief that the United States, collectively, will be better for this transformation. Individual freedom and free market economic success may suffer for it, but they believe that it is all for the greater good of America as a whole. The problem is that they are dead wrong.

America has been the most prosperous and free nation since our founding because of the very differences that progressives seek to eradicate. As yourself, what are we "progressing" towards? What are we "progressing" away from? I suggest a new course for America, a u-turn back towards the principles that we were founded on and that have made us so strong. The same principles that have been slowly muted, diluted, and refuted by progressives since the turn of the 20th century.

You have all heard the adage that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. If you look at history you will see that the further a country moves towards socialism, the less free and prosperous it becomes. From extreme examples like Stalin and Mao, Castro and Chavez to the more subtle slide towards socialism like what is currently happening in places like Greece and Spain, bigger government has always led to economic turmoil at best and mass murder at worst. So the question is, which direction do we want to slide down that scale? Remember, government power is only as good as those wielding the power. So ask yourself, what happens when the wrong people get that power, even if it's 50 or 100 years from now?

Also, if private enterprise is the horse pulling the economic engine and social welfare program recipients are the cargo, what happens when the cargo outweighs the horse by 100 fold? Who will pull that cart?

The hypocracy of politics

2010-02-20T14:16:00.000-08:00

Maybe it is human nature to pick a side in a "battle" and then view facts through the foggy lens of that side of the debate. There are ideologues and Kool Aide drinkers on both sides of the political spectrum. Our leaders in the White House and Congress need to start being intellectually honest with the American People. The reason that many Americans and Tea Party participants are distrustful of politicians on both sides of the isle is that we see that many Republicans standing up for fiscal responsibility now that did not do so when it was their congress and their president with the excessive spending. Democrats that whined about the irresponsibility of the budget under Bush are now unable to find the political courage to cut spending themselves and have in fact increased spending.

Well the game is over. Our debt and our deficit are now at levels that are not only unsustainable, they are dangerous. Medicare and Social Security are unfunded and going to be out of money in the next decade. Also in the next decade the interest on our massive debt will take up more of our budget than national defense. The amount of money that we owe China could compromise decisions for our national interests as we become beholden to the will of our lenders.
The wisdom of our founding fathers has long been ignored by both parties. And it is these founding principles that have made America the strongest, most prosperous country on Earth for generations.
Thomas Jefferson said "We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...[we will] have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers... And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for[ another]... till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery... And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."

Leaders from the right or left or both need to find the courage to admit to the American people that our course of Government taking care all aspects of citizens' lives is not only unsustainable, it puts our country in danger. No politician wants to take on the albatross of Social Security or Medicare reform. No leader hungry for re-election and approval points wants to cut government programs that have promised money and financial security to future generations. But it is a lie. The money will not be there. The same is true of unions in the public and private sector. They have promised billions in pensions that have no source of funding.

The responsibility also lies with the people. We have to be willing to stand up and say that we will take care of our own futures, our families and our communities and relieve the government of the perceived and and unfulfillable promises that were given.

We have to start now. We cannot cut healthcare or Social Security support for those already reliant on the failing system. So my generation and those not yet in the systems have to be willing to say that we will cut the cord that is strangling our budget, our economy, and our future.

If political leaders will not have the courage to tell Americans the truth then regular Americans who see the path that we are will stand up and yell from the mountaintop until we are heard. Movements like the Tea Party are just a reflection of the fact that many Americans have not been fooled into believing that bigger government can or will keep this nation prosperous and free. We have read the history books and we know what happens when government tries to be all things to all people. We can do math and we realize that America is truly in danger and on a path that leads to national bankruptcy. If yelling from the mountain top does not work then we will excise through the ballot box those politicians who refuse to speak the truth or follow the courage of their convictions. We will replace them with leaders who will do the hard thing, the right thing. I don't care if those leaders have a (D) or an (R) next to their names. I only care that they care about America more than their own political power.

Can't we all just get along?

2010-01-31T15:12:00.000-08:00

Something jumped out at me as I watched the President's State of the Union address last week. It was the line where President Obama said that the reason that the healthcare bill had hit roadblocks is because it is very complicated legislation and he hadn't explained it well enough. While I admit that healthcare reform can be complicated, the president gave over 40 speeches on the subject last year. So the reality is that the American people didn't like what was being explained, not that it wasn't explained well enough. Polls show that only 38% of Americans supported the specific plan that was being debated even though a majority of Americans want some kind of healthcare reform to bring down costs and help those who are falling though cracks in our imperfect system.

Then the president said that he wants to nationalize student loans because he doesn't like banks making profits of educational lending. Furthermore he said that the government would then forgive any outstanding student loan debts after 10 years if you went to work in the public sector and after 20 years for those who work in the private sector.

There are so many things backward about this kind of thinking that I almost don't know where to begin. First of all, profits are a good thing. Profits are what drives our economy, business growth, jobs, competition, supply and demand and innovation. Wherever there is a profit to be made there will be people stiving to make that product or service better for consumers and therefore capture larger marketshare and more profit.
Secondly, we want to give people a financial incentive to work for the government instead of the private sector? Because what we need in this country is more beaurocracy? It has always been the private sector that brings innovation, new products and technologies and that revitalizes the economy. Not so in this "recovery". This adminstration is pumping money into the public sector like never before. According to USA Today "Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time in pay and hiring during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector. And to add public-sector insult to private-sector injury, data from the Office of Personnel Management show the average federal salary is now roughly $71,000 - about 76 percent higher than the average private salary."
[http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-12-10-federal-pay-salaries_N.htm]
So what progressives like our president do not understand is that Americans don't want the government to run everything nor do we think that the federal government can run anything (except the military) better than the private sector. That is the fundamental roadblock that this administration's agenda is running up against. And I do not think that the president or his advisors or Senator Reid or Congresswoman Pelosi understand that distinction.

This country was founded as a "grand experiment" on the principles of a very limited federal government. It was an experiment that has succeeded for over 200 years in a way that no other government philosophy has. One has only to look to the words of our founding fathers to see how they felt about a large or powerful federal government:
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." - Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson trusted the people to take care of their own lives. Progressives think that we need government to take care of us. But as Ronald Reagan pointed out, "as government expands, liberty contracts."

So maybe we can't all just get along when fundamental differences exist in the view of the role of government in America. Maybe one philosophy has to win the day. My vote is for liberty.

Handicapping the Economy

2010-01-22T15:03:00.000-08:00

Everyone is frustrated with how little progress (if any) we have seen in the US economy in the past year. I have to wonder if the current White House and Congress has any common sense in regards to economic policy. I am not an economist, but even I can see that the kind of "stimulus" that we are currently attempting at the cost of hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars is doomed to fail.

Here's the math:
The Obama Administration claims that the stimulus program has saved or created 640,329 jobs since it was enacted back in February through the end of October. This number is updated and posted on the Administration’s recovery.gov web site. That amounts to $246,436 per job based on the $157.8 billion that has been awarded so far. Total compensation earned by the average payroll employee during October, on an annualized basis, was $59,867. If the government had simply used the funds awarded so far to pay for a year’s worth of labor, that would have paid for 2.6 million jobs.

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that the government start funding payroll. They are already doing that anyway. According to a USA Today article from September 2009, the stimulus program was responsible for 25,000 new federal jobs year-to-date.
[http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-09-23-stimfed_N.htm]And that's just federal jobs, that doesn't include state and local tax payer-funded jobs. So really the main thing that the federal government is stimulating is the size of the federal government.

Here is the basic reason why this type of distribution of tax payer dollars to stimulate the economy has not worked and will not work: it is not the job of the government to create (or save) jobs... and they stink at it. The government is not a good manager nor spender of money because it is not their money. I like to tell the story of my first job working for a PR firm where we had mostly corporate clients but also the state agency of Cal Trans as a client. Or corporate clients pushed us to give them the best return on their investment for public relations services. Cal Trans meanwhile paid our public relations firm $80 - $100 per hour to pass out fliers in neighborhoods announcing upcoming construction projects. Government agencies have a "spend it or lose it" mentality that would never fly in the private sector. I see it all of the time in my current job responding to government bids that have to be awarded by a certain date so that the funds will be allocated again the next year, and the next year, and the next year....

Besides the gross mismanagement of funds, the Government also hurts the economy by artificially handicapping the market. The government picks winners and losers in industries, sectors and among competitors that have no basis in economic Darwinism or supply and demand.
Examples:
1. Cash for Clunkers succeeded in getting some people to buy a car a few months or a year sooner, but they were going to buy a car eventually, so we get growth in the auto industry one month followed by a slump the following months. And maybe that car buyer was incentivized by Cash For Clunkers to buy a new car that month instead of a new washer and dryer, thus taking the money away from the washer and dryer company and the stores that sell washers and dryers. And since when is destroying good working cars and all of their parts a good idea? Gas guzzling cars are incrementally being replaced by more fuel efficeint cars because of demand and fuel savings. When the government tries to artifically speed up that process, the unintended consequences outweigh the positive effects.

2. Demand, not government intervention, creates lasting growth in an industry. If the government wants to grow "green jobs" they may prop up a product that is simply not in demand yet due to the cost / benefit ratio. Consumers have proven with hybrid cars, compact flourescent light bulbs and programable thermostats that when the cost of a product or technology produces relative benefits, we will adopt that green technology. As soon as solar panels on houses becomes affordable, the technology will be adopted in mass. But if the government subsidizes that technology to artificially boost the sector they will slow down the timeline for that to happen.

3. Government economic gerrymandering leads to cronyism. Case in point: there was only one energy-efficient window company in the US to get stimulus dollar tax breaks. What do you know, the window company’s policy director is married to Cathy Zoi, Asst. Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in the White House. Zoi is the administrations “weatherization boss.”
[http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2010/20100115161050.aspx]
What effect does the money and promotion given to the hand-picked Serious Materials window company have on its competitors that might make as good or better windows? This is not capitalism.

I fear that this administration and congress will continue to play these stimulus games in lieu of doing what is proven to stimulate the economy. Give across the board tax breaks to the small and medium businesses that create jobs in this country and remove any burdensome regulation that hampers business growth. Then let the private sector do the rest. In essence: get out of the way.

One more thing: let companies that make bad decisions go out of business. Better companies will take their place. artificially propping up bad companies just leads to more bad companies. I don't want to own a car company, and if I did, it wouldn't be one destined to fail because labor unions have driven legacy costs to unsustainable levels. But that's a blog for another time.

The Awakening

2010-01-15T14:08:00.000-08:00

I spent awhile this morning talking to a business contact about the state of our Union. He was less optimistic that I am that the corruption and back room deals that have ruled Washington for decades can be changed back into what our founding fathers envisioned: a republic ran by the people and for the people.
I read yesterday that the White House made a deal with labor unions to exempt them from the health care taxes proposed in the current legislation. And I thought, why aren't more people outraged by this? Are we accepting the premise now that if you contribute money and help get a candidate elected then you will be cut sweetheart deals down the road? How is that "for the people and by the people"?

Then today I read that Scott Brown is statistically tied with Martha Coakley for the MA Senatorial race. Scott Brown has campaigned on being the 41st vote necessary to stop this travesty of a health care reform bill. The bill is so bad that even Democrats with a filibuster-proof majority have to cut deals with Democratic Senators and Representatives just to get it passed. Add to that the fact that Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 in Massachusetts and it is really remarkable how well Scott Brown is polling.

So yeah, I am optimistic that there is an awakening in this country. People see 14 plus trillion dollars in debt and realize that we are indebting our children's children with liabilities that can't be paid. People see that it is no longer the will of the people, but rather the agenda of the large pocket book special interests and big business that are shaping policy. It is interesting to note that Scott brown has raised nearly 1 million dollars a day from small online donations from individuals across the country. Martha Coakley held fund raisers this week with lobbyists from health insurance companies and big pharmaceutical companies.

But the people are catching on. We saw government getting too big to succeed under the last couple presidents and it seems to only be accelerating. We don't want cradle-to-grave entitlement programs that keep people dependent on the government for everything from food to jobs to health care. This country was founded on individual freedoms, responsibility and opportunity. That is who the United States of America is. Good morning America. Rise and shine. We have a country to take back; not from Democrats or Republicans or from a particular politician. Once removed, those powers will sneak back in. We must remove the culture of Washington that has been perverted over the decades into something George Washington would not recognize. We must replace it with people who share the values that we hold dear as Americans. As a fan of Superman, I like to call it "Truth, Justice and the American Way".