Thursday
When speaking to your elected officals is made illegal
Head over to Will Griggs' site and read about Chris Pentico and what was done to him for merely attempting to deliver a letter of protest to his state governor.
Labels:
Current Events,
Nanny State,
Resistance,
Rotten Politicians
Wednesday
Written in 1851
...by Pierre-Joseph Proudhoun:
To be governed is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so…. To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under the pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, trained, ransomed, exploited, monopolized, extorted, squeezed, mystified, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, despised, harassed, tracked, abused, clubbed, disarmed, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and, to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.
So I’m in a Jamaican airport right? And I’m doing the shakedown-for-security bogey. As required, I’ve removed my shoes, and been scanned, sniffed, x-rayed, commanded and prodded. I breathe a sigh of relief that the goons haven’t pulled me aside for some extra tender loving care. Having made my face into a mask of ambivalence, I’ve successfully hidden my seething fury at being treated this way.
Reaching the end of the x-ray line I put my shoes on and then I place first one foot, then another, up on the low counter in order to tie my shoes. With both hands occupied I have my passport and boarding pass jammed in my mouth. One of the Gubmint apparatchiks attending the sheep-herding says something to me about taking my foot down.
Now there is NOTHING even remotely related to a degraded state of national or airline security associated with me having my foot up on the edge of her counter! I ignore her and continue tying my shoe. Now she places her hands on her hips in a display of impatience while taking another breath in preparation for strengthening her command. I finish at that precise moment and rather dramatically make a show of taking my passport out of my mouth, leaning forward and with all the fake innocence I can muster saying “Did you say something to me?”
“Yes” the bureaucrat says. “I told you to take your foot down.”
“Oh… well I’m already done now” I mockingly said with a big sh*t-eating grin all over my face.
It was at the same time a tiny meaningless gesture, AND the source of deep personal satisfaction for me to flout the order of the Gubmint’s drone on the scene.
To be governed is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so…. To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under the pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, trained, ransomed, exploited, monopolized, extorted, squeezed, mystified, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, despised, harassed, tracked, abused, clubbed, disarmed, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and, to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.
So I’m in a Jamaican airport right? And I’m doing the shakedown-for-security bogey. As required, I’ve removed my shoes, and been scanned, sniffed, x-rayed, commanded and prodded. I breathe a sigh of relief that the goons haven’t pulled me aside for some extra tender loving care. Having made my face into a mask of ambivalence, I’ve successfully hidden my seething fury at being treated this way.
Reaching the end of the x-ray line I put my shoes on and then I place first one foot, then another, up on the low counter in order to tie my shoes. With both hands occupied I have my passport and boarding pass jammed in my mouth. One of the Gubmint apparatchiks attending the sheep-herding says something to me about taking my foot down.
Now there is NOTHING even remotely related to a degraded state of national or airline security associated with me having my foot up on the edge of her counter! I ignore her and continue tying my shoe. Now she places her hands on her hips in a display of impatience while taking another breath in preparation for strengthening her command. I finish at that precise moment and rather dramatically make a show of taking my passport out of my mouth, leaning forward and with all the fake innocence I can muster saying “Did you say something to me?”
“Yes” the bureaucrat says. “I told you to take your foot down.”
“Oh… well I’m already done now” I mockingly said with a big sh*t-eating grin all over my face.
It was at the same time a tiny meaningless gesture, AND the source of deep personal satisfaction for me to flout the order of the Gubmint’s drone on the scene.
Labels:
Nanny State,
Personal remembrances,
Resistance
Tuesday
Street scenes in Jamaica
Somewhere in St. Elizabeth, far back in the hills, a curvy country road passes an old walled-in cemetery.

Morning traffic, not for the faint of heart!

A section of the new Jamaica superhighway...rumored to be a private enterprise spearheaded by some French firm.

School children in Kingston, Saint Andrew
Morning traffic, not for the faint of heart!
A section of the new Jamaica superhighway...rumored to be a private enterprise spearheaded by some French firm.
School children in Kingston, Saint Andrew
Labels:
Personal remembrances
Sunday
The Obama Coverup
If even one tenth of these things are true, then America is doomed....utterly doomed
Labels:
Rotten Politicians
Blogging From Jamaica
Well I'm at my Mother-In-Law's house in Kingston Jamaica getting ready for Mother's Day dinner, but I just read something good I wanted to share with you:
Sixty million armed Patriots ... and counting
Mark Alexander
From Patriot Post Vol. 09 No. 04; Published 30 January 2009 Print Email PDF
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." --Thomas Jefferson
Currently, large sectors of the U.S. economy have collapsed, consumer confidence is at a historic low, Democrats control the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, and they're poised to print "bailout and infrastructure" money on the theory of "trickle up poverty" -- risking a prolonged recession followed by hyperinflation and/or a protracted depression.
Or does the latter "risk" constitute their real plan?
If there is an economic recovery any time soon, it will be the result of private sector initiatives and a consumer confidence recovery, not the redistribution of a few trillion dollars among friends as directed by the "community organizer" in the White House.
But can consumer confidence overcome Barack Hussein Obama's agenda? Clearly, he and his congressional cadre are using the current crisis as cover to further undermine our constitutional rule of law -- in fact, they may just spend liberty out of existence -- leaving the masses dependent on the state for subsistence, thus rife for the radical "change" that Obama and his ilk ultimately seek.
Yes, Obama and his Demo colleagues in the Senate and House have taken a sacred oath to "support and defend" our Constitution, but they have no history of honoring their oaths.
So where does that leave "The People"? Well, if the politicians don't honor their oath, why should we honor their office? That is a question for another day.
At no time in our history has the future of American liberty been secure without a vigorous defense of the plain language of our Constitution, opposed to the adulterated interpretation of the so-called "Living Constitution" promoted by Barack Obama and his gang of judicial activists.
And there is no more important place to start at this moment in our history than with the Second Amendment to our Constitution.
In 1833, Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by our Constitution's principal author, James Madison, wrote the following in his "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States": "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
That was never more true than today.
Obama claims: "I believe in the Second Amendment. Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. ... We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions. I think there's a lot of room before bumping against a constitutional barrier."
Lots of room, if you are talking about that "Living Constitution."
However, Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder (formerly Janet Reno's Deputy Attorney General), who faces Senate confirmation next week, reaffirmed in the recent DC v. Heller Supreme Court case his long-held position that the Second Amendment affirms no right of individual gun possession by private citizens.
Holder insists that the Second Amendment "does not protect firearms possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia," which he interprets as a military unit. Of course, our Founders understood "militia" to be synonymous with "the people," but Holder must have skipped his law school's elective on "original intent."
Holder's remarks seem to conflict with his boss's statements about gun ownership, but Obama is not referring to the rights assured by the Second Amendment: "I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms." That's the same subterfuge his mentor John Kerry propagated back in '04.
Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso understands what's at stake: "Given Holder's career of attacks on the Second Amendment, his nomination continues to be of great concern to me. ... Our nation's highest law enforcement officer must be committed to protecting and defending our individual rights to keep and bear arms."
Other conservatives also get it, like Louisiana Sen. David Vitter: "[Holder has] clearly advocated near-universal licensing and registration, and he joined and filed an amicus brief in the District of Columbia v. Heller U.S. Supreme Court case arguing that the Second Amendment was not an individual right. That's deeply disturbing."
Statistically, those who are not "deeply disturbed" by the implications of Holder's appointment are likely residing in one of those blue urban centers which typically elect liberals to national office.
I came across an essay from one such misguided urbanite this week -- Fred Lebrun, who writes for the Albany (NY) Times-Union.
Fred wrote of the unprecedented number of gun sales since Obama's election: "Otherwise sensible people seem to completely lose their marbles when it comes to the loaded question of handgun ownership, and what rules ought to apply. I'm not sure why that is. The latest example of mass paranoia at work for no discernable reason is a rush to gun shops across the country to buy sidearms. The rationale, or vague impetus, is that with the election of Barack Obama as president, we're heading for the confiscation of our guns, for sure. ... Well, if it's true, why in the world would you go out and buy something the government is going to take away from you anyway?"
Fred, those of us who still uphold our Constitution and honor our oaths, as have generations of Patriots before, understand that, in the words of James Madison, "The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
Madison's words are truer today than when he wrote them in 1787. (Our adversaries at the time of that writing, the British, are learning that gun confiscation leaves one defenseless against tyranny -- and they are now protesting ... with cardboard placards.)
As for why some folks "go out and buy something the government is going to take away from you anyway," well, the only guns that will ever be taken from my hands, or those of tens of millions of like-minded gun owners, will be seized posthumously, and with empty magazines -- which is the only reason Obama and his congressional Leftists have not completely discarded that venerable old Constitution.
Fred concludes: "For the first time since 1935, with an all-Democratic national government, we are in a position to finally institute some meaningful and sensible gun control measures that will help mightily in regaining our cities from gun terror, street by street. Gun control doesn't have to be a dirty word."
What Fred doesn't seem to understand is that there are already some 20,000 -- TWENTY THOUSAND -- gun laws on the books. The argument that more laws will make America safer is ludicrous at every level, and to suggest that somehow such laws justify undermining the Second Amendment's clear intent is to undermine the strongest pillar of our Constitution.
Y'know, Fred, old Ben Franklin had a word of advice for folks like you: "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
And to those for whom such a struggle proves too much an encroachment on their comfort zone, Sam Adams said, "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"
Fortunately, millions of gun owners subscribe to Thomas Paine's opinion: "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace."
Currently, some 80 million Americans are gun owners, and it is estimated that 60 million of them own guns for purposes other than hunting. If you are not among them, you might thank God for the ranks of us who are, because as our Founders knew, we are the vanguard between liberty and tyranny.
Sixty million armed Patriots ... and counting
Mark Alexander
From Patriot Post Vol. 09 No. 04; Published 30 January 2009 Print Email PDF
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." --Thomas Jefferson
Currently, large sectors of the U.S. economy have collapsed, consumer confidence is at a historic low, Democrats control the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, and they're poised to print "bailout and infrastructure" money on the theory of "trickle up poverty" -- risking a prolonged recession followed by hyperinflation and/or a protracted depression.
Or does the latter "risk" constitute their real plan?
If there is an economic recovery any time soon, it will be the result of private sector initiatives and a consumer confidence recovery, not the redistribution of a few trillion dollars among friends as directed by the "community organizer" in the White House.
But can consumer confidence overcome Barack Hussein Obama's agenda? Clearly, he and his congressional cadre are using the current crisis as cover to further undermine our constitutional rule of law -- in fact, they may just spend liberty out of existence -- leaving the masses dependent on the state for subsistence, thus rife for the radical "change" that Obama and his ilk ultimately seek.
Yes, Obama and his Demo colleagues in the Senate and House have taken a sacred oath to "support and defend" our Constitution, but they have no history of honoring their oaths.
So where does that leave "The People"? Well, if the politicians don't honor their oath, why should we honor their office? That is a question for another day.
At no time in our history has the future of American liberty been secure without a vigorous defense of the plain language of our Constitution, opposed to the adulterated interpretation of the so-called "Living Constitution" promoted by Barack Obama and his gang of judicial activists.
And there is no more important place to start at this moment in our history than with the Second Amendment to our Constitution.
In 1833, Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by our Constitution's principal author, James Madison, wrote the following in his "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States": "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
That was never more true than today.
Obama claims: "I believe in the Second Amendment. Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. ... We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions. I think there's a lot of room before bumping against a constitutional barrier."
Lots of room, if you are talking about that "Living Constitution."
However, Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder (formerly Janet Reno's Deputy Attorney General), who faces Senate confirmation next week, reaffirmed in the recent DC v. Heller Supreme Court case his long-held position that the Second Amendment affirms no right of individual gun possession by private citizens.
Holder insists that the Second Amendment "does not protect firearms possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia," which he interprets as a military unit. Of course, our Founders understood "militia" to be synonymous with "the people," but Holder must have skipped his law school's elective on "original intent."
Holder's remarks seem to conflict with his boss's statements about gun ownership, but Obama is not referring to the rights assured by the Second Amendment: "I'm a strong believer in the rights of hunters and sportsmen to have firearms." That's the same subterfuge his mentor John Kerry propagated back in '04.
Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso understands what's at stake: "Given Holder's career of attacks on the Second Amendment, his nomination continues to be of great concern to me. ... Our nation's highest law enforcement officer must be committed to protecting and defending our individual rights to keep and bear arms."
Other conservatives also get it, like Louisiana Sen. David Vitter: "[Holder has] clearly advocated near-universal licensing and registration, and he joined and filed an amicus brief in the District of Columbia v. Heller U.S. Supreme Court case arguing that the Second Amendment was not an individual right. That's deeply disturbing."
Statistically, those who are not "deeply disturbed" by the implications of Holder's appointment are likely residing in one of those blue urban centers which typically elect liberals to national office.
I came across an essay from one such misguided urbanite this week -- Fred Lebrun, who writes for the Albany (NY) Times-Union.
Fred wrote of the unprecedented number of gun sales since Obama's election: "Otherwise sensible people seem to completely lose their marbles when it comes to the loaded question of handgun ownership, and what rules ought to apply. I'm not sure why that is. The latest example of mass paranoia at work for no discernable reason is a rush to gun shops across the country to buy sidearms. The rationale, or vague impetus, is that with the election of Barack Obama as president, we're heading for the confiscation of our guns, for sure. ... Well, if it's true, why in the world would you go out and buy something the government is going to take away from you anyway?"
Fred, those of us who still uphold our Constitution and honor our oaths, as have generations of Patriots before, understand that, in the words of James Madison, "The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
Madison's words are truer today than when he wrote them in 1787. (Our adversaries at the time of that writing, the British, are learning that gun confiscation leaves one defenseless against tyranny -- and they are now protesting ... with cardboard placards.)
As for why some folks "go out and buy something the government is going to take away from you anyway," well, the only guns that will ever be taken from my hands, or those of tens of millions of like-minded gun owners, will be seized posthumously, and with empty magazines -- which is the only reason Obama and his congressional Leftists have not completely discarded that venerable old Constitution.
Fred concludes: "For the first time since 1935, with an all-Democratic national government, we are in a position to finally institute some meaningful and sensible gun control measures that will help mightily in regaining our cities from gun terror, street by street. Gun control doesn't have to be a dirty word."
What Fred doesn't seem to understand is that there are already some 20,000 -- TWENTY THOUSAND -- gun laws on the books. The argument that more laws will make America safer is ludicrous at every level, and to suggest that somehow such laws justify undermining the Second Amendment's clear intent is to undermine the strongest pillar of our Constitution.
Y'know, Fred, old Ben Franklin had a word of advice for folks like you: "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
And to those for whom such a struggle proves too much an encroachment on their comfort zone, Sam Adams said, "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"
Fortunately, millions of gun owners subscribe to Thomas Paine's opinion: "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace."
Currently, some 80 million Americans are gun owners, and it is estimated that 60 million of them own guns for purposes other than hunting. If you are not among them, you might thank God for the ranks of us who are, because as our Founders knew, we are the vanguard between liberty and tyranny.
Labels:
Nanny State,
Obamanations,
Political theory
Tuesday
I'm supposed to be packing but ...
This guy got my attention BIG TIME!
"I escaped the democrat plantation"
"I escaped the democrat plantation"
Labels:
Economics,
Obamanations,
Political theory,
Socialism
I realize economic topics cause eyes to glaze over, but this is good stuff...
May 04, 2009
The Top Ten Reasons Obamanomics Won't Work
By Mikiel de Bary
A brute inflationary monetary policy of the kind we are experiencing today can hardly avoid leading to a growth in GDP that, after all, is largely a record of consumer spending. But we cannot judge an economic policy to be "working" simply by detecting such an increase in GDP. Nor may we say policy has "succeeded" just from increases in government jobs or government-subsidized jobs. An economy's success, properly speaking, is one that increases long-term levels of production with robust private sector employment. In short, inflation and public sector growth do not mean a policy has "worked." As the essence of Obamanomics is easy money and government aggrandizement, there are lots of reasons for pessimism. Here are ten of them
10. The Obama economic team really does not know how we got into this mess. For example, Christina Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, claims that the "fundamental cause" of the current economic downturn is the decline in asset prices from the levels reached in 2006 and 2007, i.e., from the peak of arguably the biggest and broadest asset bubble in history. In other words, she believes that the retreat from absurd valuations is giving us problems.
9. Obama himself follows the scapegoating line initiated by Bush. He blames both the general asset bubble and its collapse on insufficiently regulated companies, rather than on fiat money and central banking -- the sacred institutions of the failed macroeconomic establishment -- which financed every aspect of the Great Bubble.
8. Larry Summers and Ben Bernanke consider credit and liquidity to be the "lifeblood" of the economy. So they will supply untold quantities of it to somehow "restart" financial markets. They are unaware that economic freedom -- let's call it the "oxygen" of the economy -- makes possible credit, liquidity, and financial markets.
7. The Administration tries to meddle with private contracts -- see its attempts to pre-empt the bankruptcy courts and undercut the functions of mortgage foreclosure clauses. For a few cosmetic results, it chills confidence in all future investments.
6. The federal government burdens what is now left of free markets by raising its own spending and borrowing and, of course, by planning to increase taxes and regulation.
5. Government creates a new welfare system for union members when it preserves zombie auto companies in order to save "jobs." It creates a sham "financial system" when it bails out "systemically important" banks and insurance companies -- those that are too embarrassing to fail.
4. The Administration's efforts to manipulate prices upward (as in the markets for residences and "toxic" securities) are irrelevant, at best, and are more likely to delay a return to normal functioning in those markets.
3. President Obama apparently believes that increasing taxes on some of us and then redistributing the money to favored groups and promoters somehow "stimulates" the economy. Who besides macroeconomists (and their former students) believes this?
2. The Federal Reserve Board has transformed itself into an obedient appendage of the Executive Branch of government. Few seem aware that it is managing our monetary system more recklessly than ever in its history. The historic quattuordecupling of bank reserves in the last six months (that's a multiplication by 14) sets the stage for a doubling or more of the money supply. (The Fed has never before dared to promote annual money supply increases of more than around 10 percent.) When and if a bogus "recovery" does actually begin under these conditions, remnants of sanity will force the Administration to reverse its easy money policy. (Reluctantly, to be sure. Romer recently warned of the dangers of reversing too soon.) That reversal, of course, will bring on still another economic relapse. So, American entrepreneurs, are you feeling brave?
And the number one reason Obamanomics won't work:
1. You can't push off the costs to our descendants. Many Americans worry that their "children and grandchildren" will suffer the economic hardship of repaying the Bush-bama trillion dollar deficits. But they won't. (The little darlings will repudiate the debt one way -- monetary depreciation -- or the other. Explicit repudiation. They will, that is, if the present generation doesn't do it first.) The current follies of economic policy are not an extravagance for which we can charge someone else in the remote future. We are the ones who, passively allowing this conversion to a command economy, will experience the deprivations it supplies to all but the politically connected. The transition starts now, with the private sector mired in paralysis and Washington, D.C., beginning to flex its muscle in earnest.
Mikiel de Bary works in the financial services industry and is a freelance observer of macroeconomics in contemporary society.
The Top Ten Reasons Obamanomics Won't Work
By Mikiel de Bary
A brute inflationary monetary policy of the kind we are experiencing today can hardly avoid leading to a growth in GDP that, after all, is largely a record of consumer spending. But we cannot judge an economic policy to be "working" simply by detecting such an increase in GDP. Nor may we say policy has "succeeded" just from increases in government jobs or government-subsidized jobs. An economy's success, properly speaking, is one that increases long-term levels of production with robust private sector employment. In short, inflation and public sector growth do not mean a policy has "worked." As the essence of Obamanomics is easy money and government aggrandizement, there are lots of reasons for pessimism. Here are ten of them
10. The Obama economic team really does not know how we got into this mess. For example, Christina Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, claims that the "fundamental cause" of the current economic downturn is the decline in asset prices from the levels reached in 2006 and 2007, i.e., from the peak of arguably the biggest and broadest asset bubble in history. In other words, she believes that the retreat from absurd valuations is giving us problems.
9. Obama himself follows the scapegoating line initiated by Bush. He blames both the general asset bubble and its collapse on insufficiently regulated companies, rather than on fiat money and central banking -- the sacred institutions of the failed macroeconomic establishment -- which financed every aspect of the Great Bubble.
8. Larry Summers and Ben Bernanke consider credit and liquidity to be the "lifeblood" of the economy. So they will supply untold quantities of it to somehow "restart" financial markets. They are unaware that economic freedom -- let's call it the "oxygen" of the economy -- makes possible credit, liquidity, and financial markets.
7. The Administration tries to meddle with private contracts -- see its attempts to pre-empt the bankruptcy courts and undercut the functions of mortgage foreclosure clauses. For a few cosmetic results, it chills confidence in all future investments.
6. The federal government burdens what is now left of free markets by raising its own spending and borrowing and, of course, by planning to increase taxes and regulation.
5. Government creates a new welfare system for union members when it preserves zombie auto companies in order to save "jobs." It creates a sham "financial system" when it bails out "systemically important" banks and insurance companies -- those that are too embarrassing to fail.
4. The Administration's efforts to manipulate prices upward (as in the markets for residences and "toxic" securities) are irrelevant, at best, and are more likely to delay a return to normal functioning in those markets.
3. President Obama apparently believes that increasing taxes on some of us and then redistributing the money to favored groups and promoters somehow "stimulates" the economy. Who besides macroeconomists (and their former students) believes this?
2. The Federal Reserve Board has transformed itself into an obedient appendage of the Executive Branch of government. Few seem aware that it is managing our monetary system more recklessly than ever in its history. The historic quattuordecupling of bank reserves in the last six months (that's a multiplication by 14) sets the stage for a doubling or more of the money supply. (The Fed has never before dared to promote annual money supply increases of more than around 10 percent.) When and if a bogus "recovery" does actually begin under these conditions, remnants of sanity will force the Administration to reverse its easy money policy. (Reluctantly, to be sure. Romer recently warned of the dangers of reversing too soon.) That reversal, of course, will bring on still another economic relapse. So, American entrepreneurs, are you feeling brave?
And the number one reason Obamanomics won't work:
1. You can't push off the costs to our descendants. Many Americans worry that their "children and grandchildren" will suffer the economic hardship of repaying the Bush-bama trillion dollar deficits. But they won't. (The little darlings will repudiate the debt one way -- monetary depreciation -- or the other. Explicit repudiation. They will, that is, if the present generation doesn't do it first.) The current follies of economic policy are not an extravagance for which we can charge someone else in the remote future. We are the ones who, passively allowing this conversion to a command economy, will experience the deprivations it supplies to all but the politically connected. The transition starts now, with the private sector mired in paralysis and Washington, D.C., beginning to flex its muscle in earnest.
Mikiel de Bary works in the financial services industry and is a freelance observer of macroeconomics in contemporary society.
Labels:
Economics,
Nanny State,
Obamanations
I am going for a vacation
I'm heading out for awhile to recharge my mental batteries. For the next week or so I'll be somewhere in Jamaica, either on a beach or running the hills in a 4wd jeep. I'll post some pics when I return, but here are some pics from past trips to tide you over.





Mr & Mrs GunRights4US









Mr & Mrs GunRights4US



Labels:
Personal remembrances
Monday
Head over to Sipsey St...
for one of the most moving things you'll ever read. We can all do well to be reminded of the stench of tyranny...regardless of what flag it's wrapped in.
Labels:
Historical,
Resistance,
Socialism
It must be nice to have a "friendly press"
The things you don’t read about Barack Obama
Will Rogers famously pleaded that all he knew was what he read in the papers. If all a person knew of Barack Obama’s first 100 days as president was what they read of them in this newspaper, it would seem to be a very charmed young presidency.
The Chronicle Herald recently made space for an urgent Associated Press dispatch from Washington informing readers the Obamas had chosen a Portuguese water dog. Not original reporting, of course, but an AP rephrasing of a White House-arranged scoop in the Washington Post online.
That was followed by a crack Canadian Press report, drawn from such gumshoe news-gathering as reading the Huffington Post, on the "hillbilly" Republican governor of Alaska: her "family and political theatrics that would do Jerry Springer proud," like "the arrest and indictment of her sister-in-law on break-and-enter charges" and "the sordid revelations of her daughter’s ex-boyfriend."
The Portuguese water dog and Alaskan "hillbillies" news beats apparently leave little time for anything remotely skeptical of the president of the United States. And they wonder why folks aren’t buying the papers like they used to.
So here is a small selection of news on the most powerful man on Earth which has been deemed unfit to print:
•Obama’s first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years – $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit – not counting bailouts – being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush.
•Obama’s objective in his first G20 summit – commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 – was rejected out of hand.
•Obama’s objective in his first NATO summit – commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things – was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token.
•Obama’s Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile.
•Obama’s economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama’s highest economic credential.
•Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.
•Obama’s "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January – as compared with President Bush’s 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama.
•Obama’s campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers – repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election – was discreetly retired even before inauguration day.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won’t work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-
defining his appointees’ past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them.
•Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 – over $100,000 – and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama’s own legislation.
Why should these points, and many more like them, have to be made by some obscure contributor to The Chronicle Herald’s opinion pages?
Fox News Channel is the butt of jokes and the target of attacks like no other media outlet in the English-speaking world, not least by people who fancy themselves the guardians of a free press.
But Fox News is today the lone television news service in the English-speaking world capable of serious skepticism and scrutiny of the sitting president and the Congress of the United States.
Fox News is also the second most-watched channel in all American cable television. It long ago became by far the most-watched cable news channel; more Americans watched Fox News than CNN and MSNBC combined in every time slot from 6 a.m. to midnight in April. Now, while The New York Times is $1.3 billion in debt, Fox has expanded its operations with a business channel and a juggernaut Internet presence.
There’s a lesson there, though Fox News will be just as well pleased if the impeccably "mainstream" news business remains clueless about it.
The people need a Fourth Estate, not yet another adulator of Barack Obama, yet another smearer of Sarah Palin, yet another patrician editor to keep out anything disagreeable to progressive sensibilities, yet another laptop-and-latte journalism-schooler to spit on everything pre-dating 1968. And they wonder why the news business has come on hard times.
Andrew W. Smith, from Cape Sable Island, N.S., writes and resides in Tulsa, Okla.
Will Rogers famously pleaded that all he knew was what he read in the papers. If all a person knew of Barack Obama’s first 100 days as president was what they read of them in this newspaper, it would seem to be a very charmed young presidency.
The Chronicle Herald recently made space for an urgent Associated Press dispatch from Washington informing readers the Obamas had chosen a Portuguese water dog. Not original reporting, of course, but an AP rephrasing of a White House-arranged scoop in the Washington Post online.
That was followed by a crack Canadian Press report, drawn from such gumshoe news-gathering as reading the Huffington Post, on the "hillbilly" Republican governor of Alaska: her "family and political theatrics that would do Jerry Springer proud," like "the arrest and indictment of her sister-in-law on break-and-enter charges" and "the sordid revelations of her daughter’s ex-boyfriend."
The Portuguese water dog and Alaskan "hillbillies" news beats apparently leave little time for anything remotely skeptical of the president of the United States. And they wonder why folks aren’t buying the papers like they used to.
So here is a small selection of news on the most powerful man on Earth which has been deemed unfit to print:
•Obama’s first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years – $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit – not counting bailouts – being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush.
•Obama’s objective in his first G20 summit – commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 – was rejected out of hand.
•Obama’s objective in his first NATO summit – commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things – was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token.
•Obama’s Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile.
•Obama’s economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama’s highest economic credential.
•Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.
•Obama’s "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January – as compared with President Bush’s 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama.
•Obama’s campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers – repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election – was discreetly retired even before inauguration day.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won’t work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-
defining his appointees’ past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them.
•Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 – over $100,000 – and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama’s own legislation.
Why should these points, and many more like them, have to be made by some obscure contributor to The Chronicle Herald’s opinion pages?
Fox News Channel is the butt of jokes and the target of attacks like no other media outlet in the English-speaking world, not least by people who fancy themselves the guardians of a free press.
But Fox News is today the lone television news service in the English-speaking world capable of serious skepticism and scrutiny of the sitting president and the Congress of the United States.
Fox News is also the second most-watched channel in all American cable television. It long ago became by far the most-watched cable news channel; more Americans watched Fox News than CNN and MSNBC combined in every time slot from 6 a.m. to midnight in April. Now, while The New York Times is $1.3 billion in debt, Fox has expanded its operations with a business channel and a juggernaut Internet presence.
There’s a lesson there, though Fox News will be just as well pleased if the impeccably "mainstream" news business remains clueless about it.
The people need a Fourth Estate, not yet another adulator of Barack Obama, yet another smearer of Sarah Palin, yet another patrician editor to keep out anything disagreeable to progressive sensibilities, yet another laptop-and-latte journalism-schooler to spit on everything pre-dating 1968. And they wonder why the news business has come on hard times.
Andrew W. Smith, from Cape Sable Island, N.S., writes and resides in Tulsa, Okla.
Labels:
Current Events,
Nanny State,
Obamanations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
