An economics lesson delivered in an entertaining way. Enjoy.
Archive for October, 2009
I found this quote from David in today’s NewsReal Blog. I think it is an enlightening view of the mindset of Progressives and their goals. Of course, it is just his opinion. But since David is a former liberal Progressive, I believe he has significant insight that should not be ignored. I am reprinting the entire post here.
“But Bill Clinton is not like those who worship him, corrupting himself and others for a higher cause. Unlike them, he betrays principles because he has none. He will even betray his country, but without the slightest need to betray it for something else – for an idea, a party, a cause. He is a narcissist who sacrifices principle for power because his vision is so filled up with himself that he cannot tell the difference.
But the idealists who serve him — the Stephanopoulos’s, the Ickes’s, the feminists, the progressives and Hillary — can tell the difference. Their cyncism flows from the very perception they have of right and wrong. They do it for noble ends. They do it for the progressive faith. They do it because they see themselves as gods, as having the power — through correct politics — to redeem the world. It is that terrifyingly exalted ambition that fuels their spiritual arrogance and justifies their means.
And that is why they hate conservatives. They hate you because you are killers of their dream. You are defenders of a Constitution that thwarts their cause. They hate you because your “reactionary” commitment to individual rights, to a single standard and to a neutral and limited state obstructs their progressive designs. They hate you because you are believers in property and its rights as the cornerstones of prosperity and human freedom; because you do not see the market economy as a mere instrument for acquiring personal wealth and stocking political war chests, but as both means and end.
Conservatives who think progressives are misinformed idealists will always be blind-sided by the sheer malice of the left — by the cynicism of those who pride themselves on their principles; by the viciousness of those who champion sensitivity; by the intolerance of those who call themselves liberal; and by the ruthless disregard for the well-being of the poor on the part of those who preen themselves as their champions.
Conservatives are surprised because they see progressives as merely misguided, when they are, in fact, morally – and ontologically — misdirected. They are the messianists of a false religious faith. Since the redeemed future that justifies their existence and rationalizes their hypocrisy can never be realized, what really motivates progressives is a modern idolatry: their limitless passion for the continuance of Them.
– How to Beat the Democrats
After you recover from ROTFLYAO from reading the prior post (FYI, that means rolling on the floor laughing your #@& off), then you must zip on over here and read this report on the H1N1 flu progress.
It seems that sometime last night, in the night, or whenever, Barack Obama issued a national emergency report about the swine flu, declaring that it is now a national emergency. I have been wondering when he would get around to that and I find it intensely interesting that he did it last night, in the night, or whenever. You know what they say about those Friday afternoon news releases….well, they just don’t get much notice. I mean this sounds really big and scary. Most of the reporting I have heard this morning is that this is really just preparatory to bypass some Federal requirements so that things can run smoother and quicker.
But if you go read the item I linked to above…CBS news and the CDC are contradicting each other. Huh? I find this to be an interesting little conundrum. You read it…then you decide. Who do we believe? I’d like to know what is really going on.
Everyone needs to see this. Barack Obama is poised to sign a treaty and it sounds like it will give away the whole country.
“On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton, a noted climate change skeptic, gave a presentation at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN. In this 4 minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty, scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009. A draft of the petition can be read here:
Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.”
Huh? The Telegraph U.K. has report of an interview with BO’s adviser on Muslim affairs. Read it and weep here. Can we really say the president’s sympathies don’t lean in a Muslim direction? Let’s hope his daughters don’t ever have to go through female genital mutilation as a result of their daddy’s policies.
I have no problem with reaching out to Muslims and being inclusive. I do have a problem with moving into their camp of radical laws and proclaiming them good, then forcing that on the rest of the country. We already have a Constitution of laws in our country that no one seems to be paying attention to any more…at least not in Washington, D.C.
Is there any doubt that our own elected representatives want to hide things from the American people? Watch this video as Michelle Bachman, representative from Minnesota exposes their newest con job concerning defunding and the re-funding of ACORN with taxpayer money. This is outrageous.
Looks like the White House got nervous when info about Lech Bajan’s post on their blog page came out, even though the post has been up since December 2008. I did a bit of snooping and found a cached page available, so here is a snapshot of the offending post that I linked to in my prior post. Just so you know I wasn’t making it up. :=) I’m just sayin’…
This snapshot was taken with a wonderful little piece of software called SnagIt. It’s got a bunch of bells and whistles.
I have the complete text of the post by Lech Bajan. It’s a long article. I’m not going to reprint it because of copyright issues, but if anyone is interested in reading the views of an avowed and unapologetic anti-Semite, contact me and I will send it to you.
To be entirely fair, the my.barackobama.com site has a disclaimer which states: Content on blogs in My.BarackObama.com represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.
However, one wonders why the article, which has been posted since December 2008, has now been removed since public attention has been called to it. Does the administration not monitor the site for content they find objectionable? Or…perhaps they do…and find nothing objectionable.
Yes, really…first go read the article from IsraelNationalNews.com here, then check out the post they reference here at my.barackobama.com. It’s a blog post written by one Lech Alex Bajan from December, 2008, but the blog is paid for by Organizing For America, a project of the Democratic National Committee.
UPDATE: Upon checking my links it looks like the IsraelNationalNews.com article has been scrubbed, like almost immediately upon my posting this. Strange. But you can still go to the Obama website and read what was written in the original blog post they referenced.
Second UPDATE: On a whim several hours later, I checked the IsraelNationalNews.com link again….and the article is back up! Let’s hope it stays that way.
UPDATE 10/07/09: Upon checking the Obama blog link this a.m. it seems that post has now been scrubbed. Maybe it will show back up in time.
More from The 5000 Year Leap…
Redistribution of the Wealth Unconstitutional
In earlier years the American courts held that the expropriating of property to transfer to other citizens was unlawful, being completely outside the constitutional power delegated to the government. It was not until after 1936 (the Butler case) that the Supreme Court began arbitrarily distorting the meaning of the “general welfare” clause to permit the distribution of federal bounties as a demonstration of “concern” for the poor and the needy. Before that time, this practice was prohibited. The Supreme Court had declared:
No man would become a member of a community in which he could not enjoy the fruits of his honest labor and industry. The preservation of property, then, is a primary object of the social compact…The legislature, therefore, had no authority to make an act divesting one citizen of his freehold, and vesting it in another, without a just compensation. It is inconsistent with the principles of reason, justice, and moral rectitude; it is incompatible with the comfort, peace and happiness of mankind; it is contrary to the principles of social alliance in every free government; and lastly, IT IS CONTRARY TO THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION. (2 Dall 304, 310 [Pa. 1795]; emphasis added.)
Caring for the Poor Without Violating Property Rights
But, of course, the nagging question still remains. If it corrupts a society for the government to take care of the poor by violating the principle of property rights, who will take care of the poor? The answer of those who built America seems to be: “Anybody BUT the federal government.”
Americans have never tolerated the suffering and starvation which have plagued the rest of the world, but until the present generation help was given almost exclusively by the private sector or on the community or state level. President Grover Cleveland vetoed legislation in his day designed to spend federal taxes for private welfare problems. He wrote:
I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that though the people support the Government the Government should not support the people.
The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood. (“Why the President Said No,” in Essays on Liberty, 12 vols. [Irvington-on-Hudson, N.Y.: The Foundation for Economics Education, INc., 1952-65], 3:255; emphasis added.)
I think the Founders were very smart…would that our leaders of today were.