We here in Utah just sent a BIG message to Washington Republicans: Be a true, principled conservative, or you may be done.
Utah's Republican State Convention was held today and Bennett, the incumbent, failed to make the primary ballot. Bennett garnered only 27% against Mike Lee's 35% and Lee Bridgewater's 37%. Bam! In 2008 when TARP was being discussed I remember watching as Chris Dodd and Barney Frank announced an agreement on a financial bailout and standing there was Bob Bennett. I said to myself right then, "Bob, you are done! The people of this state will never forget the image of you standing silent beside Barney I-didn't-know-my-"friend"-was-running-a-male-brothel-out-of-my-basement Frank and Chris I-only-included-those-executive-bonus-in-the-bill-because-Timmothy-Tax-cheat-Geithner-made-me Dodd in support of that atrocity of a bill, TARP." (You'll notice Chuck Schumer there as well; why would you ever want to be seen in that group?) He also co-sponsored a failed bill mandating all citizens to carry health coverage. He was also a big ear-marker.
Bennett was mostly conservative, but not conservative enough. Many wanted to keep him around because of his seniority status in the senate. My response was always: nobody in Washington is so important that they can't be replaced. Besides if it takes the sacrifice of one Republican to wake the party up, than hand me the knife.
I say, "Bennett, you had your chance and you squandered it. You spoke like a conservative west of the Rockies, but somewhere between the Rockies and the Appalachians you morphed into a moderate. Goodbye and good riddance. But don't cry. I'm sure your taxpayer funded lifetime pension and premium health insurance will soften the blow. We're not interested in politicians who merely slow the march to socialism. We need people willing to stand against it at all costs. You should have worried more about what we thought of you than of what your fellow Senatorial Country Club members thought. So long, farewell, auf weidersehen, good-by."
(Look at that picture. Boy is that worth a thousand words. Looking back, he may wish he weren't so tall.)
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Friday, December 11, 2009
Those Rich, Greedy, Conservatives!
Here's a few articles (some old) that you might find interesting.
Charity: Who Cares?
Who Really Cares? By Thomas Sowell
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
Facts are stubborn things. Luckily there is a way around them. Ignore them completely. This appears to be the case in Washington D.C. and the main-stream-media, where class warfare never ceases. They've mastered the art of repetition. Just say it over and over again, ad infinitum, and never investigate your statements. People will believe anything if they hear it enough times, especially if it is from people they respect. Since most of what is happening in D.C. has to do with "redistributive change", perhaps some facts regarding income and income disparity are in order.
I've had this discussion with liberals before. They do not, and cannot, fathom that Republicans are the party of the working class, the working poor. Just take a moment and list the richest people you know of in the U.S. and look up there wealth status. Then look up their political leanings. You might be surprised.
Anyway, the following articles bring in to question the need for all this government largess. If the free market produces more charity then why the need for government redistribution. I see these articles as why elitists favor Big Government. Just look at the number one recipient class of charitable funding: Churches. Ouch! That can't be good. Compare the amounts religions receive to the kinds of funds received by humanities and environmental causes. See liberals are right! Government IS better at using your money than you are. Giving your money to churches . . . What are you thinking?!
I suppose liberals would respond to these accusations by saying that the reason they don't give as much to charity is because government is their charity. They REALLY believe in their cause. After all, it's a good thing liberals are richer, they like to give the most to the government. Right? I'm sure it's a tribute to altruism when they meet with their accountants:
"Do you have any dependent children?"
"Yes. Two. But I'm only claiming one. My partner claims the other child on his taxes."
"Okay. . . Any other dependents?"
"Yes, six."
"Six?"
"Yes, six. Five homeless people and a humpback whale."
"Uhh, you can't claim a whale."
"Figures. Probably a Bush law."
"Uhh, no. Just a law"
"Oh, well, five then. But I don't want to claim any of them as actual deductions. In fact, you can just rip up that Schedule A. I want my taxable income to be as high as possible. I really like what Congress is doing these days with welfare legislation. Oh, and make sure you mark that box that gives money to political campaigns."
Wait, you don't think that's how it goes? Cynic!
Charity: Who Cares?
Who Really Cares? By Thomas Sowell
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
Facts are stubborn things. Luckily there is a way around them. Ignore them completely. This appears to be the case in Washington D.C. and the main-stream-media, where class warfare never ceases. They've mastered the art of repetition. Just say it over and over again, ad infinitum, and never investigate your statements. People will believe anything if they hear it enough times, especially if it is from people they respect. Since most of what is happening in D.C. has to do with "redistributive change", perhaps some facts regarding income and income disparity are in order.
I've had this discussion with liberals before. They do not, and cannot, fathom that Republicans are the party of the working class, the working poor. Just take a moment and list the richest people you know of in the U.S. and look up there wealth status. Then look up their political leanings. You might be surprised.
Anyway, the following articles bring in to question the need for all this government largess. If the free market produces more charity then why the need for government redistribution. I see these articles as why elitists favor Big Government. Just look at the number one recipient class of charitable funding: Churches. Ouch! That can't be good. Compare the amounts religions receive to the kinds of funds received by humanities and environmental causes. See liberals are right! Government IS better at using your money than you are. Giving your money to churches . . . What are you thinking?!
I suppose liberals would respond to these accusations by saying that the reason they don't give as much to charity is because government is their charity. They REALLY believe in their cause. After all, it's a good thing liberals are richer, they like to give the most to the government. Right? I'm sure it's a tribute to altruism when they meet with their accountants:
"Do you have any dependent children?"
"Yes. Two. But I'm only claiming one. My partner claims the other child on his taxes."
"Okay. . . Any other dependents?"
"Yes, six."
"Six?"
"Yes, six. Five homeless people and a humpback whale."
"Uhh, you can't claim a whale."
"Figures. Probably a Bush law."
"Uhh, no. Just a law"
"Oh, well, five then. But I don't want to claim any of them as actual deductions. In fact, you can just rip up that Schedule A. I want my taxable income to be as high as possible. I really like what Congress is doing these days with welfare legislation. Oh, and make sure you mark that box that gives money to political campaigns."
Wait, you don't think that's how it goes? Cynic!
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Investor's Business Daily
I just thought I'd take a moment and recommend the free newsletter from Investor's Business Daily.
Here is a sample (I hope you can read it.)

Here is a sample (I hope you can read it.)

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Axis Of Evil: So who mourns when a terrorist dies by his own bomb? Apparently the U.S. and the U.N. do, given their condolences to Iran after Sunday's attack on its Revolutionary Guard. Iran is the father of this terrorism. READ MORE
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
First Amendment: Diversity czar Mark Lloyd's FCC votes Thursday on the issue of net neutrality. Advertised as providing access to all, it will do to the information superhighway what Lloyd proposed for talk radio. READ MORE
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Spending: According to two separate Government Accountability Office scenarios, America's long-term fiscal outlook is "unsustainable." No surprise, since Uncle Sam is spending like a drunken sailor. READ MORE
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Media: As newspapers and TV networks struggle and the administration presumes to define a proper news organization, what does the journalism establishment demand? No fair if you guessed a government bailout. READ MORE
By SVETLANA KUNIN
USSR, 1959: I am a "young pioneer" in school. History classes remind us that there is a higher authority than their parents and teachers: the leaders of the Communist Party.
By MAX SCHULZ
Oil's surge to $82 a barrel in intraday trading Wednesday is significant for two reasons.
By IVAN OSORIO AND F. VINCENT VERNUCCIO
Disgraced former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer went on a rant last week. Hurling half-truths and red herring arguments in an article for Slate, he advocated jeopardizing public workers' retirement security for political ends.
.
On The Right
By BRAD O'LEARY
There are a few humorous "top 10 reasons why Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize" lists making the rounds these days. My personal favorite is: "It's his consolation prize for losing the Olympics."
.
On The Left
By E.J. DIONNE JR.
Is there room in the Republican Party for genuine moderates? Truth to tell, the GOP can't decide. More precisely, it's deeply divided over whether it should allow any divisions in the party at all.
.
Please do not reply to this newsletter as responses will not be read. To contact IBD Editorials and Investors.com customer support, email us at help@IBDeditorials.com.
(c) 2009 Investor's Business Daily. All rights reserved. Investor's Business Daily and IBD are registered trademarks of Data Analysis, Inc., an affiliate of Investor's Business Daily, Inc. Terms of Use | Copyright Notice | Privacy Policy
|
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
In Case You Haven't Seen This
If you haven't seen this SNL sketch on Obama, here it is. Really funny. Of course they're criticizing him for exactly the opposite reasons that I criticize him for. Nevertheless, it is quite humorous, and somewhat shocking considering the bluntness of the attack.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
On Weimar Hyper-inflation
Here's a short piece on our future, I mean, the Weimar Republic. Note the last two paragraphs and tell me if it isn't a harbinger.
I'm from the Federal Government and I'm Here to Help!
If you want a small example of the good the federal government can do when it becomes interested in promoting your welfare, and thus seeks to increase its nanny responsibilities, here you go:
In 1965 a report came out warning that 1 out of 4 black children were born out of wedlock*. In 2007, after over 40 years of LBJ's Great Society, a mere 71+% of black children are born out of wedlock†. By the way 50% of those children will live below the poverty line**.
Obviously what we need is a government that is looking to help even more people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)