FederalistBlogs's blog

I saw two very interesting stories on the environment yesterday made me stop and think.  One was about the UK, and a projected need for their population to shrink by half to be sustainable in a green manner.  This recommendation was made by one of the Prime Ministers leading Green Advisors.  The other story was about Oregon and how they have lost jobs due to green regulations shutting down the lumber industry.  In attempts to recover some jobs, they had also attempted to put wind mills in those areas which were also shot down by the green movement because the power lines would be an eye sore and the windmills can kill birds and bats. 

At first I reacted to these stories with a narrow minded indignation on the government and action groups getting involved in issues where they should not be.  How can you have liberty where a government advocates population control?  How can green groups oppose replacing a non-green industry with green power?  Then I had an epiphany.  My thought process was not Conservative at all.  I was locked into a narrow mindset based on past, false assumptions.  My eyes opened to a way that we can reduce government impact to boost the economy and save the environment.  By letting natural forces run their course we can achieve a truly Conservative approach to solving these issues.  This is my modest proposal on how this can be accomplished.

It is all over the headlines about various Democrats in Congress strutting about threatening to take back the AIG Bonus money through passing special taxes.  I guess it is no surprise that the media is not raising any red flags on this issue.  I have a few points I want to raise here about why this action frightens me.

First and foremost is the fact that I do not even think this is legal.  I know the Democrats are really not that into the whole Constitution thing unless it is convenient.  In case any do want to give the Constitution a glance they should look under Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 where it is stated  "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."  Now I never took Latin in school, but I thought “ex post facto” basically means “after the fact.”  These bonuses are from contracts for last year, and were paid out last week.  Passing a bill this week or later would seem to me to be “after the fact.”  Aren’t our elected officials supposed to uphold the Constitution, not break it when it makes a nice sound bite?

Another issue is having Congress propose a law against such a narrow group purely because they are mad at them.  Doesn’t that seem like an abuse of power?  Sure the bonuses make lots of us mad.  We hate to see people rewarded when it looks like they did the wrong thing.  Once Congress starts passing laws to so narrowly punish people that they are mad at, where will it stop?  We know the Democrats hate conservative talk radio.  Forget the Fairness Doctrine, why not pass a tax or other bill to specifically punish nationally syndicated conservative talk radio hosts?  Since we are also punishing things that already happened, why take this another step?  Senator Schumer, remember that guy who beat you up in grade school?  I think we need a “Kicked Schumer’s Butt Personal Income Tax Penalty Bill of 2009.”  I feel pretty confident that this kind of abuse of power is what the Founder would have called “Tyranny.”

Last time I checked, one of the driving issues behind the American Revolution was taxation.  How do we think our Founders would feel about a 90% to 100% income tax being imposed on people for any reason?  I am guess they would not be big fans.  Nobody receives representation worth that much in taxes.  If Congress is allowed to pass such a bill this time, where will they start looking next? 

These are just a few issues that have entered my mind since hearing about this new proposed legislation.  I am more than a little concerned that people are not raising concerns of whether this move by the Senate is legal, or moral.  People are just hopping onto the mob mentality of punishing the AIG employees.  Congress needs to be careful in fueling a mob mentality.  Such a torches and pitchforks mentality could turn against them next.  Of course, this may be a moot point.  Treasury Secretary Geihtner is proposing to deduct the amount from the latest $30 billion that is going to be paid out.  If he does that, Congress may back off on their little tax.  For the curiousthe amount of the bunuses is 0.55% of this latest cash infusion.  I don’t think my calculator will carry the decimal far enough for how much it is in terms of the whole bail out!  Why not stop the posturing, and just make sure things like this are not done with future money.  Or here is a radical thought, realize these bailouts are a bad idea and stop them totally.

http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com

There is lots of talk about what needs to be done to fix education.  The big push is that we need to spend more.  I do not totally disagree, nor do I totally agree.  The bigger problem right now is not how much we spend but how we spend it.  To me it is like a trip to the grocery store. 

Lets say you are on the way home from work when your spouse calls.  They need you to stop by the store on the way and pick up toilet paper and light bulbs.  You have got $20 on you, so it will be no problem.  As you pull in to the store you realize you forgot to ask what type of bulbs are needed, but figure it is OK because you have enough to get both regular 100 watt and 3 way bulbs.  When you get there, you grab a cart and head in.  On your way to the TP and light bulbs, you pass the beer aisle.  Mmmmmmm…. Beer.  You turn down there first, like we said there is plenty of money so we can splurge.  You see a 12 pack of Federal Beer for 12 dollars.  It is a nice premium beer with a fancy package and great advertising.  No problem, you still have plenty left for what you need so you grab a case.  As you turn out of that row, you see chips.  You can’t have beer with no snacks, so you turn again.  You see a display of State Pretzels.  They are more expensive than other brands, but go perfect with beer.  They are also in a nice fancy package.  You grab a bad for $4.  You are almost to your destination when you see an end cap of Local Donuts.  You know after a night of pounding pack beer and pretzels you are going to need something for breakfast.  These things like Krispy Kreme too, so you can’t pass them up and grab a box for $3.  Finally you are where you need to be, light and TP.  Light bulbs are $4 per pack for the 3-ways and $3 for 100 watt.  With only $3 left you don’t have money for both, plus you still need that darn TP.  You see that $60 watts are only $2, so you pick that up instead.  Light is light, who cares how bright it turns out to be.  You turn around to the toilet paper.  You need at least a 4 pack, and would love something nice and fluffy.  Nice paper is at least $5.  Even if you buy the stuff that is like sandpaper it is $3 for a 4 pack.  All you have left is $1.  You grab the single roll of single ply sandpaper-like product.  Again, it does the job even if it is not very good.  You will buy something better next time.  Now you could go and put back some of that other stuff, but by now you have time invested and have convinced yourself that all the rest is just as important as what you originally came in for.   

That is the problem in a nutshell.  The purpose of the spending is education, the light bulbs and toilet paper.  We waste a lot of the money that should be paying for teachers, class rooms, books and other materials is wasted as it trickles down from Federal to State to Local Education boards.  We have teachers in trailers, or what they call portable classrooms.  The people in Washington, state capitals and county headquarters are not in trailers.  They are in beautiful buildings with huge staffs to push paperwork and discuss why the children are not learning.  We do not need more money, so much as we need to spend it on what it is intended for. 

http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com

There is already talk of the Presidential election in 2012.  I have seen PACs formed for Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney advertised on various websites.  I felt the last election was just a tiny bit long at two years of constant campaigning, four will really be a bit overboard.  More importantly, we have 2010 to worry about.  If there is anything vital to the survival of Conservative politics and the health of our country it will be the 2010 mid-term elections.  I sincerely believe that that party needs to start looking at locations for battlegrounds to take seats away from Democrats now and begin selecting and grooming potential candidates.  Here are my top reasons why the political landscape will be ripe for change.

Economy

As James Carville once said “It is the economy stupid.”  Current optimistic projections say that the economy will continue to slide a while longer and finally skid to a stop at the bottom next year.  Once we hit bottom I do not see any of this administrations plans brining us screaming back out of the valley.  I see it far more likely that by the mid-term election we will be still sitting in an economic ditch.  As long as current Republicans show they have been working against the bad decisions they can hold their seats.  A new generation of Reagan Conservative Republicans can then swing in to bring about change and recovery.

War

Many people in the middle voted to get us out of Iraq.  People were tired of the war, and still are.  John McCain was honest about it taking time to get out, and it cost him.  Now President Obama essentially is saying the things that lost McCain the election.  We will still be in Iraq and Afghanistan in force come the next election.  That is a big promise to have broken for some people.

Leadership

The only leadership principle I have seen so far is blaming current problems on the last administrations leadership.  The current Administration was elected despite their total inexperience and lack of leadership background, and it shows.  A fresh batch of new faces with a clear set of goals and objectives like the Contract For America will be able to show the kind of leadership people will be craving.  I have been repeating over and over and over here my own desire for the GOP to establish a new list of Principles and Objectives for the future.

New Conservatives Will Not Have Baggage

To be honest, the Republican Party has had our hats handed to us the past few elections.  I do not believe that this has been a mandate against Conservatism, but rather against a lack there of.  During the Bush years many Republicans took up the spending and government expansion habits of Democrats.  I believe that the party paid the price for this reckless abandonment of its core values.  New candidatse will not have the baggage of past mistakes and can hang their hats on their desire for change.

I know where I am in South Florida the two Democrat congress people are underwhelming.  I do not think I have heard a comment our of my congresspersons mouth that does not involve “For the past 8 years.”  To make it happen, I believe that the party needs to get a running start now to be ready to make gains again soon.  Perhaps the blogs are a starting place to find the kind of charismatic, energized leaders needed .... I'm just sayin'. 

http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com

If anybody knows Tim Giethner, feel free to send him a copy of this.  In one of the flashes of Jeffersonian brilliance, I think I have it figured out why he is having a hard time staffing up Treasury.

We all agree that the economy is in dire straits right now.  Just stabilizing the problem, more or less turning it around, is going to take a herculean effort.  To accomplish this we need a group of near geniuses.  We need people with a strong grasp on the problems that we have allowed into our free market system, and how to manipulate the market to fix them.  We need people from the private sector, but those from the public sector with a strong background in the issues before us are also great.  We need men and women with a firm grasp on the principles of a free market democratic system.  So we all agree that this would describe what we need?  If you do, that is why Giethner can not find anybody to join him.

Why would a strong believer in the strength of our free market system want to step into this group?  This week Geithner lashed out at the Petroleum industry and indicated he think we need to tax the living crap out of them.  Punishing success while propping up failure is not free market anything.  How do you build a successful system based on punishing success?  How can somebody who wants to see industry flourish join a government what wants to nationalize and centralize everything?  Then look at the push to nationalize healthcare.  Look at tax plans that start by punishing even the moderately successful ( $250k does not make you Donald Trump, just good at what you do ).  Listen to the talk of taking control of banks and stepping up control of the auto industry.

There is the problem.  Administrations come and go.  While many of us hope the Administration does not succeed at some of their goals ( I won’t say fail because I don’t want Gibbs to make fun of me next ), we also know that if they do it can be undone.  Anybody with a great background and strong career knows this.  Once you go over to perform these ruinous acts, you will be branded as one of the people who committed these damaging moved long after this administration is relegated to history.  Decades building a career based on industry and economics will be flushed down the toilet.  If you join this administration, you will deserve the punishment for betraying the principles that built this nation.   That is why we can not get anybody qualified to join this team.

http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com

By federalistblogs

Sure all the media attention over the feud between President Obama and Rush is entertaining.  It brings great ratings ( and page views ) too.  However, for the long term success of the Conservative movement we need strong leaders who are following a clear set of Principle to live by and Objectives to be accomplished. 

I have already done two entries here on what I feel are vital Principles that the Conservative movement needs steer itself by.  If you missed those stories, they are here and here.  I am also including them at the end of this entry.  I consider these the start of a sort of Declaration of Conservatism.  On top of Principles we also need to start building some Objectives to accomplish and turn the country back on course.  Today I will start my own little list of Objectives.  It is my hope that these Principles and objectives will be picked up by the GOP, or somebody else, to get the country back on track.

To my mind any Objective needs to be short and simple to be accomplished.  It you need a 1,000 page bill to explain it you are on the wrong path.  Here is my start of Objectives for Conservative politicians to accomplish.

• The current tax system has got to go.  We need either a flat tax, sales or value added tax, or some combination of the above.  The current system is built to encourage people to see what they can get away with ( see recent WH nominees ) and so complex that otherwise honest people often do make mistakes.  Any system this large and complex needs to go.
• We are a nation of people who are endowed with certain inalienable rights by our Creator.  Stop trying to take references to our Creator out of everything.  Leave alone money and the Pledge of Allegiance.
• Education is vital to our long term success.  We spend too much money for too little reward.  The biggest problem is that most the money is wasted on administration at the Federal, State and County levels.  The government has to push a top down restructuring of the expense structure just like a business would do to get more money to the students and the teachers who educate them.
• If you are an illegal alien and you get caught committing ANT crime, the punishment is simple.  You go back home.  No need to waste money on a trial, jail anything.  The biggest crime is being here illegally so we will take that money to send you back on the next commercial flight.
• We need to address all aspects of our energy policy.  We have to drill now to make it through.  We must subsidize and Manhattan Project or NASA like push to develop clean affordable renewable energy to transfer to private industry for implementation.
• We need a single uniting language by law.  English has been the standard thus far, so get over it. 
• Anybody left in a position of power for too long becomes more concerned with retaining that power than fairly exercising it.  We need a system of term limits for all elected officials.  It does not have to be a lifetime limit like the Presidency.  The Articles of Confederation limited service to no more than three out of any six years. 

That is my start for now.  I will update this again in a week or two.  I would love to hear input.  I would REALLY love to hear from an elected official or party official who wants to do something like this, but that may bee too much to ask.

And finally, the list of Principles.

• The principles set forth by our founders are just as valid and current today as they were then.  While they have been amended, the basic concepts are as simple as the natural laws like gravity.  They created a framework to allow for a level of liberty never before reached, and never since surpassed.  It is our role as Americans to learn and understand these principles first.  Then we must all strive to carry them on lest we allow something truly inspired to disappear from the earth over petty wants.
• We live in a nation that provide for truly limitless opportunity to succeed.  The flip side of that is that we also have an almost equally limitless opportunity to not succeed.  Success is not an entitlement, but rather a product of focus, work, dedication and on occasion some good fortune.  Every time you make a change to raise the bottom and “protect” some from failing, you take an equal amount off the top and deny some of their right to achieve greatness.
• We are all bound equally by the laws of the land regardless of race, sex, sexually orientation, national origin, or station in life.  We all have to play by the same rules for the system to work.  We can certainly never create rules exempting some to protect their position.  If a law requires one group to be exempted, then all must be exempted.  An example of this in particular is laws passed by our Congress that they choose to not apply to themselves.
• All political power rests first with “We the people.”  As a republic, we choose to lend that power to the officials who we elect.  We demand that they represent the principles that we put them in office for.  We can, and must, take back the power we have granted them when they fail to uphold our principles.  It is also important to remember that the power is for ELECTED officials.  Career bureaucrats may be there to help implement, but they do not truly posses that power.
• Power has a tendency to collect and pool, much like water.  It has to be moved and stirred periodically or it grows stagnant and becomes foul.  The founders created a system of differing term lengths for the different offices to encourage that constant change.  Nobody should be in a single office for 20 or 30 years, as often happens now.  When water keeps collecting in the same spot, you make structural changes like raising the grade or putting in a pump to permanently fix the problem.  We need voluntary and/or Constitutional term limits to make this kind of structural change now.
• For a truly just society to thrive, you need a set of higher ideals and a stronger moral compass then simply the laws created by man.  Our forefathers created our nation based on the principle that we are guided by “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” and that we are we are endowed by our “Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”  We as a people require tolerance and understanding to support all others in their personal beliefs of a higher authority.  We do not have to always agree, but accept.
• No government will ever be able to legislate people to be good or do the right thing.  Laws try to prevent bad behavior by providing penalties.  Laws to prevent wrongs are simple.  Laws that try to control and mandate behavior, which are impossible by design, become even more useless due to their intense complexity.  While most people will try to be good ( some do not need laws at all to do the right thing and some will just follow the laws ), others will do wrong no matter how you try to stop it.
• We may on occasion look to government to provide a helping hand, but should never look for a safety net.  A helping hand gives you a push or pull in the right direction if something goes wrong.  It keeps you going by providing a little help and encouragement.  A net is used to catch and trap things, and has that exact effect on people when the government provides one for them.
• A free and civil flow of ideas is indispensable for the strength and survival of a democratic society.  No expression of ideas, no matter how alien they may seem is un-American even if the ideas seem anti-American.  The obvious exceptions are speech that cause or encourage harm to others.  How you say things can also limit the time and place it is appropriate to say them.  In other words if you cannot express you pleasure or displeasure without dropping the F-bomb you can not express those ideas in an Elementary school.

I was wondering when and if Rush Limbaugh would come up with a strategy to deal with the increasing push against him from the left.  Today he did, and what a great approach he came up with!  They call him the leader of the Republicans.  They call him brash.  They call him arrogant.  Today his strategy takes all those accusations and wraps them up in a neat package to put back on their door stop. 

Today private citizen Rush Limbaugh challenged President Obama to a debate. 

Of course the President would never do a broadcast debate with a private citizen.  It is not what Presidents do.  Really, Presidents do not debate much out of election cycles.  Their misstate is that this time they have elevated Rush to the level of the leader of the opposition.  They have challenged his opinions and views.  They have challenged him personally.  The only way to set such issues aside would be a public debate. 

Either way Rush wins.  Obviously the President is not likely to agree to any sort of debate.  To that end now Rush can begin to rally that they are scared.  If he does agree to a debate, Rush wins no matter the outcome for calling out the President.  Now Rush and others need to get this information pushed out into the media and force the Democrats hand. 

http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com