PreviewThe people shape their own destiny
-- either as free people or as slaves.

If they remain self-reliant, they stay free.
Ever expanding state power destroys lives.

Government panacea is a defective idea.
Email our servants:

President
Representative
Senator

Saturday, July 4, 2015

Independence Day, 2015

I believe in the United States of America, as a government of the people, by the people, for the people;

whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed;

a democracy in a republic;

a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable;

established upon these principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.

I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.”
     
— William Tyler Page, The American's Creed

~~~~~~~~

I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one Nation under God,
indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.

Friday, July 3, 2015

The Party Strategist

A "Democratic" Party strategist was saying on television that the economic problems in the US are caused by big corporations (generally oil) not paying out their record profits, but 'sitting' on them. This is the anti-business lie the Obama Administration has been putting out.

Yes, a lie. Obama and the big-government politicians know that a company with record profits don't hoard that money in a closet, they put it in the bank. What does the bank do with the money? They lend it out, if anybody wants it.

Have you looked at the record low interest rates?

2014 to 2015 interest rate, flatline
From www.tradingeconomics.com/

Very few people are interested in borrowing those pools of cash, so the interest rate stays very low. The reason is investors, who would build the economy, are not borrowing, is the Democrats and Obama Administration's hostile attitude toward business.

Corporate tax rates in the US are very high, up to 35% of corporate income: Keep in mind that corporate income is also used to pay investors; over half the people of the US are involved in investment, generally through their retirement accounts. Corporate income gets taxed when the corporation gets it, and taxed again when the private investor receives a distribution. Because of this double taxation, the effective corporate tax rate is higher than the official tax rate as set by law.

~~~~~~~~

The Democrats have more than doubled the personal capital gains tax rate, a move the Democrats knew would greatly damage employment. The current capital gains rate for most people is 15%; it can be as high as 28%. Anyway, this makes the potential tax rate on US corporate earnings 63%, which has flatlined employment.

Labor Force Participation Rate, bls.gov

But didn't president Obama announce the unemployment rate was 5.3%?  Actual employment has not been this low since the Carter depression of 1977.  The use of the term "unemployment rate" is a smokescreen.  Given the unhealthy Obama economy, many Americans have simply opted out trying to work.

~~~~~~~~

Okay, what about the rich people, shall we tax them hard? Will that fix anything?   What do the rich do with the income, stick in a closet (muffled laughter)? No, the rich invest; investment provides employment, unless the government is business hostile (like the present administration). Then the rich just put their extra cash in the bank.

That is unless the rich use their extra money to corrupt the government.. This is happening in Washington state, where Bill Gates put at least $1 million in the 2014 election cycle to enact a gun registration scheme (I-594). The darling of the rich left, Mr Gates was a successful liar, lying to the people that I-594 was only about 'background checks and saving women's lives' when in fact it was about repressing the people's right of self defense.

Watch for more slick lies from the well funded Left as they continue to blind us to steal both our property, income and freedom in the upcoming election cycle. The best defense for our country is a informed and thinking electorate which votes for freedom personal liberty.

Friday, June 19, 2015

Proving Nietzsche correct

"G0D," Friedrich Nietzsche famously declared, "is dead."

G0D, it has been noted, made a similar yet more lasting pronouncement about Nietzsche.

But before the German philosopher departed this mortal coil, he had some interesting things to say. Nietzsche argued that one of the most powerful forces in society was "ressentiment." Similar to the everyday word "resentment," ressentiment lay at the heart of new kinds of morality. In ancient times, nobility was associated with power. The downtrodden, the poor, the weak, the enslaved were ignoble.

The masses of have-nots, to use a more modern language, resented their plight for understandable reasons. But they were too weak to launch a real, armed revolution. Instead, the powerless resorted to a moral revolution, assaulting the concepts of nobility, goodness and morality and rendering them evil in the popular imagination.

Wrote Nietzsche in his "Genealogy of Morals": "It was the Jews who, with awe-inspiring consistency, dared to invert the aristocratic value-equation (good = noble = powerful = beautiful = happy = beloved of G0D) and to hang on to the inversion with their teeth ..., saying 'the wretched alone are the good; the poor, impotent, lowly alone are the good; the suffering, deprived, sick, ugly alone are pious, alone are blessed by G0D ...'"

Nietzsche wasn't a historian, but a literary philosopher. He didn't rely on many primary sources -- and it wouldn't have occurred to him to cite actual data of any kind. And he certainly had the devil's gift for quoting scripture. So one needn't agree with all he said, never mind take it as authoritative, to see that he was on to something about the cycles of civilizations. One can reject his writings completely while still acknowledging his impact on our society.

In 2015, our society is shot through with Nietzschean ressentiment. Today it is a great sin on college campuses -- and elsewhere! -- to make anyone other than the "privileged" feel uncomfortable, challenged or otherwise psychologically threatened by the use of the wrong words or concepts.

The University of California recently issued a set of guidelines about the terrible danger of "micro-aggressions" -- small, usually unintended slights that allegedly hurt the feelings of the newly anointed classes of victims. One must no longer say that America is a "melting pot," for to do so is to suggest that minorities should "assimilate to the dominant culture," according to the new moralists at the University of California.

And one mustn't say anything that advances "the Myth of Meritocracy." Saying "America is the land of opportunity" or "everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough" is now a form of bigotry.

Of course, the surest way to guarantee that America is not a meritocracy is to teach young people not only that it isn't one, but that it's evil to say it is, or should be, one.

Ressentiment is first and foremost the psychology of blame. It surveys the social landscape and blames the failures and hardships of the alleged have-nots on the successes of the haves. It is more than envy, which is a timeless human emotion -- and one of the seven deadly sins. It is a theory of morality that says the success of the successful is proof of their wickedness.

Such is the allure of ressentiment today that it produces creatures like Rachel Dolezal, the blue-eyed white woman who had to invent an entire narrative around her stolen fictional identity as an oppressed black woman.

Such is the political power of ressentiment that Hillary Clinton, who earns in a one-hour speech five times what the average American makes in a year, feels compelled to campaign as a "champion" for all those who feel micro- (or macro-) aggressed by a system rigged by the very same institutions she is happy to shake down for donations. (When asked to explain the contradiction on "Fox News Sunday," a Clinton spokeswoman pointed to the fact that Clinton's mother had been downtrodden in her youth.)

When Nietzsche said "G0D is dead," he meant that there was no longer an ideal outside of ourselves to which we're all answerable. Everything was a contest of power and will. America isn't there yet, thank G0D. But it surely seems like that is where we are heading.

By Jonah Goldberg, originally posted here.

Thursday, June 18, 2015

How the Left misses what it means to be human.

Here's a difference between Left and Right that is rarely noted despite the fact that it is at least as important as any other and even explains many of the other differences.

At the core of left-wing thought is a rejection of painful realities, the rejection of what the French call les faits de la vie : the facts of life. Conservatives, on the other hand, are all too aware of these painful realities of life and base many of their positions on them.

One such example was the subject of my first column on Left-Right differences: whether people are basically good. When liberals blame violent crime in America on poverty, one reason they do is that liberal beliefs since the Enlightenment have posited that human nature is good. Therefore, when people do truly bad things to other people, liberals believe that some outside force — usually poverty, racism and/or unemployment, lack of government controls — must be responsible, not human nature.

Liberals find it too painful to look reality in the eye and acknowledge that human nature is deeply flawed. This is especially so because left-wing thought is rooted in secularism, and if you don't believe in God, you had better believe in humanity — or you will despair.

Another fact of life that the Left finds too painful to acknowledge is the existence of profound differences between men and women. There is no other explanation for the rejection of what has been obvious to essentially every man and woman in history. It is certainly not the result of scientific inquiry. The more science knows about the male and female brain, not to mention male and female hormones, the more it confirms important built-in differences between the sexes.

Why then would people actually believe that girls are as happy to play with trucks as are boys, and boys are as happy to play with dolls and tea sets as are girls?
Because acknowledging many of those differences is painful. For example, feminists and others on the Left do not want to acknowledge that sex between two people who are not committed to each other usually means much more to women than to men. It is too painful to acknowledge that men are far more capable of having anonymous, emotionally meaningless sex than women. Therefore, feminism has now taught two generations of women that they are just as capable of enjoying emotionless sex with many partners as are men.

That the great majority of women yearn to bond with a man — more than they yearn for professional success — is another fact of life that the Left wishes not to acknowledge. Thus, feminism posited the silly false motto, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle" — because the reality is that most women without a man feel a deep hole in their soul. And that is too painful to acknowledge. (This hole also exists in men, but most men have no trouble acknowledging it.)


The entire concept of "political correctness" emanates from the Left's incapacity to acknowledge painful truths. The very definition of "politically incorrect" is an idea or truth that people on the Left find too painful to acknowledge and therefore do not want expressed.

Why are so many young black males in prison? The reason is politically incorrect, meaning too painful for the Left to acknowledge: Black males commit a highly disproportionate amount of violent crime.

Why are there speech codes on virtually all college campuses? Because Leftists — who control most campuses — do not wish to hear discomforting facts or opinions with which they differ. That causes them pain.

That is the Left's own language. Leftists constantly speak about people being made "uncomfortable" and about feeling "offended" (conservatives almost never react to an idea with which they differ by saying, "I'm offended"). If a man has a "cheesecake" calendar hanging in his car repair shop, the Left regards him as having created a "hostile work environment" — meaning some women might find it painful to see a woman presented as a sexual object.

Avoiding pain at almost all costs is at the heart of left-wing ideas and policies. That's why kids can no longer run around during recess at so many American schools. They may get hurt. That's why child protective services take children away from parents who allow their children to walk home alone or even play alone in the family backyard for 90 minutes without a parent at home.

Or take the left-wing bumper sticker idea: "War Is Not the Answer." Of course, war is often the answer to great evil. Nazi death camps were liberated by soldiers fighting a war, not peace activists. But having to acknowledge the moral necessity of war is too painful a truth for many on the Left.

One might say Leftism appeals to those who wish to remain innocent children. Growing up and facing the fact that life is messy, difficult and painful is increasingly a conservative point of view.

Dennis Prager

This article originally appeared here.

Friday, March 13, 2015

Palcohol - powered alcohol

Palcohol is legal to be sold in the United States, as far as the federal government is concerned.  The  Federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau finally figured out how to tax its distribution.  Several states have not figured out how to regulate or tax Palcohol, and instead have moved to ban the product.

The Palcohol people insist Palcohol is getting banned because "Big Alcohol" is using all their influence to stop the spread of Pacohol.  Not likely.  The only part of the market "Big Alcohol" might risk is the inexperienced, young drinker, who doesn't care about flavor. "Cheap Alcohol" market share is slightly threatened, if they lose the market for those who prefer their booze in kit form.

Palcohol is not particularly appealing.  It will come in flavors, which right away tells you that it needs flavoring to be palatiable -- kind of like the bathtub gin in the days of Prohibition.  A fine, aged whiskey or cognac will still be the choice drink for the discriminating gentry.  Big Alcohol is pretty safe.

~~~~~~~~

Palcohol's website makes some arguments why state governments should let the people stir, then drink.  They confess, "... there is not one shred of evidence that it will be used or abused any differently than liquid alcohol."  I'm not sure I would have said that.  

They point out that, "Prohibition doesn't work."  If Palcohol LLC is the only supplier, they ought to careful of painting a target on their own back. 

They say. "Palcohol has so many positive uses in medicine, energy, the military, industry, recreation, etc."  They can be sure about recreational uses, and no others, yet.

Its anybody's guess if Palcohol will make it to Washington State.  SEIU objected to losing control of the beverage industry here.  They may fight tooth and nail to prohibit Palcohol.  But if the people win, I'll give you a taste test update.