Why the Shared Lies?

Why are the rest of us sane people allowing lies to stand?

I’ll give you an example or two.

Big Sis Says Patdowns to Become the Norm

Why have we allowed security to be tightened on every single person when we all know damn well that followers of Islam have a much higher percentage of folks willing to engage in terrorism?  Setting underwear on fire, explosives in body cavities, toner cartridge bombs, flying planes into buildings, car bombs, homicide bombers, beheadings, torture (and please don’t even try to equate waterboarding with burning, sledgehammers, and woodchippers, that’s another lie I won’t be a part of)

Illegal Immigrants Aliens

1. Why call them immigrants?  Immigrants come here legally.  Aliens do not.
2. Why do we not say “With the legal avenues to get a green card, why sneak in?”  The answer being that there are not enough green cards given out isn’t a valid excuse.  It IS WHAT IT IS.
3. Why have we allowed voting, licenses, rentals, medical, etc. for people who are breaking the law?
4. Why do we tolerate the statements “We’ve been here for years and been good citizens, kids in school, pay our bills” when the real question is “Why are you here illegally?”  I don’t much care about your life here because you’re here illegally.
5. Why do we allow people to make the argument that “These are jobs that wouldn’t get done”?  That’s bullsh*t.  That’s totally ignoring the fact that they’re still here illegally.

Know why we live in such a peaceful society?

Because our moral code generally doesn’t allow for violent lawlessness.  We don’t require bribes at every single level of our government as “that’s just the way we do things” such that it costs people twice as much just to go get groceries or travel in certain areas.  We don’t generally do whatever notion takes our fancy because our religion says we can.

Pick whatever exception to that you’d like, but it’s just another shared lie when people try to draw moral equivalence to genital mutilation, shootings/beheadings/dismemberments, honor killings, retribution, and generally we frown on targeting innocents, women, and children.

Don’t bother to tell me that we bomb families in Afghanistan – that happens because Taliban forces hide behind the skirts of women and little children like cowards.   I defy you to find me one country that puts as much emphasis on making sure there isn’t collateral damage.

Health care.

Tell me all the reasons why we should have universal health care, tell me sob story after story.

The lie is that we owe it to others.  NO we DON’T.  You can’t fix everyone’s problems like politicians (and a lot of people think).  If we could do that then we would have the resources to make this a perfect world and I assure you, we do not.  Not close, and it would never be equal – some would pay lots and others would pay nothing.

In the final analysis two questions must be answered:  (1) Is there anything at all in the Constitution that says one citizen must be taxed to pay for another citizen’s health care?  (there are many many things that could be substituted in for “health care”, and (2) Assume that the answer to #1 was “yes”, is there any way you can pay for it and Social Security – itself unconstitutional – and Medicare/Medicaid?

The third question is a bit harder, colder, but still a valid one.  What moral imperative do *I* have to care for *you*?   Seriously.   Walk into a restaurant and say “I don’t have a nice car and can’t hardly afford a bad one either, so I want you all to take $20 out of your wallets and put the money in the bag I have here.”  You wouldn’t get very far.  So why is it ok to tax people to pay for other people’s Cash for Clunkers, or First Time Buyer’s Credit, or TARP/bailout money… the list gets quite long.  If you go back to the restaurant example, how many people would say “I don’t know you, go screw yourself?”

They would be completely within their rights to do so.  But apparently not if the Federal Gov’t decides to make that transaction on your “behalf”.

Lie #4:  Progressive taxation is anything but unfair.

Where’d the idea come from that success should be penalized?  Who came up with the idea that rich=evil?  Ten percent across the board is almost never heard.  Think about why that is.  Pressures come from both top and bottom to stop that kind of thinking but it’s really the only one that makes a lick of sense.

Read Full Post »

Yeah, But Again… Is It Art?

Ok, here is Another Rant About Our Taxes.

In the art world, money flows freely from public funds without your knowledge.  Picture states A-E.  Each state has a varying number of people that pay taxes.  Of those taxes, they go to a person or multiple people who are artists or very close to them who dole out the money.  Often their values are radically different from the taxpayers.  That money then goes to still other artists in each state (blue) who get it without the knowledge of the people in other states (unless they are art lovers themselves).

Now, lets look at the “local” model, as it should be.  Note how the people really responded to the art in question.

See the difference?  TAX money to those artists can ONLY come from within the state they live.  Now those other people in their state are the ones scrutinizing those funds and their uses.  It could be from tax money but it could also be free market.

In State A, only one person thought that was a worthwhile use of their money – maybe, and there is some accountability, shown by the question mark.

In State B, several people felt the same way.

In State C, people found that the artist in question was a pervert/pedophile and he was treated as he should have been, a pariah.

In State D, there was one person that was cautiously supportive but others didn’t care for the art and chose not to support it.

In State E, lots of people bought art directly with varying degrees of value placed on the works of art.

IT IS CAPITALISM, NOT FEDERALLY DISBURSED LARGESSE THAT SHOULD DRIVE DEMAND.

Most of us don’t care about art enough to want our taxes going to pay for something we don’t even consider art.

Why should a select group decide that art is vitally important and then run the whole show?

My values run more towards fiscal responsibility, not handouts to those who could not survive if their art was rated on it’s own merits.

Art won’t die if federal funds dry up, there will just be a whole lot less really crappy art.

As a parting shot, here are some of the funded arts in that link above…

• $400,000 for an exhibition “exploring the importance of plants as a source of inspiration for noted American poet Emily Dickinson” [You. Must. Be.  Joking.]
• $350,000 to explore the “cultural significance of the circus poster”  [Over a quarter million dollars to answer a question that has no answer?]
• $725,000 to produce a two-hour documentary on the history of American whaling.  [I can look that up in the library, thanks.  Three quarters of a million dollars to make a video of a lot of old photographs.  Yeaaaaaaahhhhh.  Right.]
• $130,000 for 16 professors to study the “truth and meaning” of life according to Aristotle [Mental masturbation.]
• $50,000 to build a computer model of an ancient city in Pakistan complete with “animated and interactive ‘inhabitants'” [I. Don’t. Care.]

Read Full Post »

Don’t tax me, Bro!

Creativity runs rampant when it comes to budgeting, only political budgeting never starts with “How much do we have that we can responsibly spend?” or “What do we need and can we afford it?”   No, political budgeting starts with “Here’s what we want, get a ballpark cost on it and then we’ll raise taxes by whatever is required as we know more.”

House Democrats Have “Lots Of Potential Targets For Higher Taxes” To Pay For Government-Run Health Care. “House Democrats have lots of potential targets for higher taxes as they aim to expand health care coverage to reach the roughly 50 million that experts say are uninsured. Also under consideration are higher alcohol taxes, increases to the Medicare payroll tax and a value-added tax, a sort of national sales tax, of up to 1.5 percent or more … The [other] tax options include: increasing the price of soda and other sugary drinks by 10 cents a can, applying a potential 2 percent income tax increase to single taxpayers earning more than $200,000 a year and households earning more than $250,000, a new employer payroll tax could target 3 percent of employers’ health care expenditures, taxing employer-provided health insurance benefits above certain levels … House Democrats planned to unveil a draft of their sweeping health care bill Friday … The draft, being released at a news conference … was not expected to mention the potentially unpopular tax options.” (Erica Werner, “House Eyes New Taxes As Senators Pare Health Bill,” The Associated Press, 6/19/09)

A “sort of national sales tax, of up to 1.5 percent or more”.  Well, that pretty much hedges the bets, doesn’t it?  I guess even if you do a 6% national sales tax it still is a true statement.

This is a cheap shot but raising the price of soda by 10¢ a bottle is… a regressive tax!  Yahoo!

NBC’s Chuck Todd: “The honeymoon is coming to an end for President Obama, but it’s not personal. It’s professional, as now the public appears to be judging the president on some of his actions.” (NBC‘s “Nightly News,” 6/17/09)

They’re JUST NOW judging him on his actions?  Oh yeah, they’re in bed, all right.

****

THAT’S the religion of peace I know so well!

Neda Soltan, Iranian innocent bystander, shot to death next to the car she had been riding in.  Bled to death on the street.

Why shot?  Because the peace-lovin’ religious leaders in Iran decided that people demanding some level of self-determination was a Bad Thing.  So they shot these criminals, these lovers of freedom and peace.

Her family scheduled a memorial service to be held in a mosque in northern Tehran, but the government forbade ceremony. She was buried quietly at Tehran’s Behesht Zahra cemetery on Sunday with only her family present, says Soona Samsami, executive director of the Women’s Freedom Forum, who has been relaying information about protests inside Iran to international media.

All mosques were given a direct order from the government barring them from holding any memorial services for Neda, and her family was threatened with grave consequences if anyone gathered to mourn her, said Samsami.

In all but the rarest of instances, look for religion to be used as a tool to control people.   I am not anti-religion.  I’m anti-humans-controlling-religion.

****

Speaking of taxes, apparently her brain was fairly taxed just keeping her body breathing.

A teenager who claimed 56 stars were tattooed on her face while she slept has admitted she lied and was awake the whole time.

London’s Daily Telegraph reported Kimberley Vlaminck, who said she fell asleep after asking for only three stars, lied because her father was “furious.”

“I asked for 56 stars and initially adored them,” Vlaminck told a Dutch TV crew. “But when my father saw them, he was furious. So I said I fell asleep and that the (he) had made a mistake.”

Let this be a lesson kids.  If you’re thinking of getting a tattoo on your face, think about what people will say.  Then get one of a naked lady.

****

Boxer gets all the respect she deserves.  It was in the PatriotPost today.

****

Here’s a rosy picture of California’s plight.

When you hear Gov. Schwarzenegger say something like this… it’s… not good.

Our wallet is empty.  Our bank is closed. And
our credit is dried up.  – Gov. Schwarzenegger

Read Full Post »

Will post later but read this tripe first…

Alan Colmes says we’re unpatriotic for not wanting to pay more taxes.  One of his silly arguments was that lots of European countries have higher taxes than us.

My response on the foxnews blog post where he dribbled his drivel was thusly:

Making the argument that European taxes are higher and thus validates our tax rate  is nonsensical.

This is akin to the argument that says “It is ok to beat your children!”…. “Why?”… “Well, because it could be worse… it could be like some countries that allow 8 year old girls to be married to 58 year old perverts.”

Pointing to an example that is worse than the topic at hand is not a valid argument.

Showing gratitude or patriotism have nothing to do with my willingness to pay higher taxes in the face of waste.

Another commenter had this to say in response to my comment:

Ihatehypocrisy says:

April 15, 2009 at 1:09 pm

At last….common sense prevails!!! It will be interesting to see how many posters have valid counter arguments as opposed to snarky posts filled with name calling because they realize they don’t have a valid counter argument.

And Lemur King, other than your strange objection to him pointing out the tax rates for other industrialized nations, I am curious to know what valid dispute you have with the rest of the article.

His remark about common sense was in regards to Colme’s article, not my witty stuff.  Damn.  I do have to agree with that commenter on one thing – way too many comments were filled with hate and no rational counterpoints.

My dispute with the rest of Colme’s article comes under several headings.

One – Colme’s skirting the ragged edge of ad hominem… “bitter election losers, while clinging to their guns by buying them in greater numbers”   He’s got enough talent to not need to do that.  I do it because I’m a blogger and talk trash mostly out of the spotlight.  He’s bigger time than that.

Two – it ignores the 10th Amendment.  The government ought not be assuming so very many powers.  The government was set up so that we had support for commerce, military defense,  common currency, etc.  Congress has turned themselves into a body that is quite a bit more powerful than states are supposed to be.

Most power is supposed to reside in the states.  The flip side is that if the power is in the states, then the fed does not have the power to run so many federal-level offices.

Three – Federal taxation is wrong in that it turns the Federal to State tax ratio on end.  They should be swapped. If I pay the lion’s share of my taxes to my state I have control over where it goes because I and every other voter in my state know right where to find those who are doing what they are elected to do.    Move the money/taxes/power a distance away, remove access, and create a complex system (an elected aristocracy that the electorate cannot reach), and you will have pork-barrel policies and little way to influence anything.  I have no control whatsoever over anyone other than my personal representatives who will be stacked up agains representatives from entirely different states … the odds are quite high that any legislation is going to have very little to do with things that are important to me or get it right.  Face it… from Michigan, do I care if Arizona is awarded $3M to study shrimp farming?

Texas Gov. Perry told the crowd at Austin City Hall — one of three tea parties he was attending across the state — that officials in Washington have abandoned the country’s founding principles of limited government. He said the federal government is strangling Americans with taxation, spending and debt.

(source:  http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D97J48IO2.html)

Frankly, I don’t mind a 25% tax all that much – if I have some say over where it is going – in my state.  Why should my taxes go to help New Orleans, California Fires, and Flooding in the Midwest?    Texas Governor Perry has it right.

Colmes smirks:

Another argument we hear when there is talk of tax dollars being used for items like national health care, alternative energy development, or improving our public education system is that the government can’t do anything right, that it can’t run anything, that in every instance private is always better.

Social Security is the best argument for killing sweeping social programs – it can’t remain solvent and is being tapped for any and all purposes “deemed necessary” along the way.  National Healthcare is a pipe dream – a boondoggle of paperwork and red-tape  so unpersonalized and so abstract that it ceases to be about people anymore. Our public school systems are trashed  – get rid of bloated teacher’s unions and give merit-based pay.

The only place The Fed ought to be given total precedence over private is the military.  Private sector has no business being in the business of running mercenary companies.

Read Full Post »

Want to Leave You with this, if NOTHING Else.

Wall Street Journal on Obama’s policies:

New and expanded refundable tax credits would raise the fraction of taxpayers paying no income taxes to almost 50% from 38%. This is potentially the most pernicious feature of the president’s budget, because it would cement a permanent voting majority with no stake in controlling the cost of general government.

This is important, so I’ll post this again:

“A government that robs Peter to pay Paul
can always depend on the support of Paul.”

– George Bernard Shaw

Got that?

A VOTING MAJORITY WITH NO STAKE IN CONTROLLING THE COST OF GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

This should make you feel queasy.  Essentially we’ll be turning an additional 12% of us into members of congress, or something close in terms of ideology, which is to hell with those paying the taxes, we are getting ours.

Moving on.  I would highlight certain parts of the next quote but there’s no one part more important than another… it is all terribly vital.

Unfortunately, our history suggests new government programs, however noble the intent, more often wind up delivering less, more slowly, at far higher cost than projected, with potentially damaging unintended consequences. The most recent case, of course, was the government’s meddling in the housing market to bring home ownership to low-income families, which became a prime cause of the current economic and financial disaster.

But, since the aura around Obama is still rainbows, unicorns, and puppies, the law of unintended consequences will be ignored yet again.  Delivering less, more slowly, and with more indirect damage than ever before, into the breach we will ride.

HTOVWOFY?

****

How is your free speech these days?

According to Martin, an unidentified “senior White House aide” has been given the responsibility of “helping to guide the Limbaugh strategy,” a very scary thing indeed.

A political operative, based inside the White House, employed by the president of the United States and receiving a salary from the American taxpayer, goes to work every day to help direct a strategy against a broadcaster whose opinions are supposed to be covered by every protection the First Amendment can provide. To quote Shakespeare, “Something is rotten.”

Again, HTOVWOFY?

****

Obama is hurting the DOW?  Whoa.

How about those policies?  RealClearPolitics:

And yet with our financial house on fire, Obama makes clear both in his speech and his budget that the essence of his presidency will be the transformation of health care, education and energy. Four months after winning the election, six weeks after his swearing in, Obama has yet to unveil a plan to deal with the banking crisis.

What’s going on? “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” said Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. “This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before.”

Things. Now we know what they are. The markets’ recent precipitous decline is a reaction not just to the absence of any plausible bank rescue plan, but also to the suspicion that Obama sees the continuing financial crisis as usefully creating the psychological conditions — the sense of crisis bordering on fear-itself panic — for enacting his “Big Bang” agenda to federalize and/or socialize health care, education and energy, the commanding heights of post-industrial society.

Yet again, HTOVWOFY?

****

In keeping with unicorns, puppies, and rainbows, why choose substance over style?  Godhood must look good, after all.

Read Full Post »