An American

Government Can't Make Us Happy By John Stossel

2012-02-08T05:32:00.002-06:00

Government Can't Make Us Happy

By John Stossel

In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson called the pursuit of happiness an unalienable right. This was a radical idea. For most of history, most people didn't think much about pursuing happiness. They were too busy just trying to survive.

Then came the liberal revolution based on the idea of individual freedom. Only then did they start thinking that happiness might be possible on earth.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, the right to pursue happiness has been perverted into a government-backed entitlement to happiness.

British Prime Minister David Cameron says, "There's more to life than money. ... It's time we focus not just on GDP, but GWB -- general well-being."

Well-being sounds good. But is that something that government programs promote?

Philip Booth, an economist with London's Institute of Economic Affairs and editor of "... And the Pursuit of Happiness," says no. I spoke recently with Booth and economist Christopher Coyne of George Mason University, who contributed to that volume.

Since the country of Bhutan got all kinds of publicity by using a measure it calls "gross national happiness" instead of gross national product, and The New York Times says it's a "new measure of well-being from a happy little kingdom," I asked them if there is anything to it.

"It's not a model that most Western societies would want to copy," Booth said.

I didn't think so. In Bhutan, people can get locked up for criticizing the government. Yet one study ranked the United States 23rd in the list of happy places. Bhutan was higher on the list.

That's nonsense, said Coyne. It makes more sense to judge a country's ability to make its citizens happy by whether foreigners want to move there. Clearly, more people want to move to America than to Bhutan. "The way to think about this," Coyne said, "is the fact that so many people want to come to the United States indicates that they at least perceive there is the opportunity to pursue what makes them happy."

What does make people happy? People fantasize about leisure and luxury, but the best data show that such things don't create lasting happiness. What does make for happiness is obtaining work that allows you to move toward goals that you find meaningful. In other words, what's important is not just employment, but purposeful work. So is having control over your workplace. Chrysler found that if workers have more control on the assembly line, they are happier. The freedom to decide your own goals is crucial.

Other things that make people happy are religion, having family and friends you care about, giving to others (face to face or via charity) and money.

Actually, money makes you happier if you're miserably poor. But once you have a certain amount -- maybe enough that you no longer have to worry about your family's well-being -- more money doesn't make much difference. Lottery winners report that, a year after their windfall, they were no happier than they were before.

That's counter-intuitive. Instinct tells us that wealth brings happiness. It's a reason why some people envy the rich and why income inequality causes lots of angst today. One left-wing journalist writes, "Every model shows the most unequal societies are the least happy."

"There's no evidence that this is true," Coyne said. "Even the staunchest proponents of government intervention to increase happiness admit that there's no relationship."

You wouldn't know that reading The New York Times.

The mainstream media claim that the way to make people happy is to have government protect them from misfortune and give them stuff. The research doesn't bear that out, says Booth.

"In fact, the bigger government is, the less happy societies tend to be. There is a direct relationship, stripping everything else out, between the government allowing people more freedom and well-being increasing."

Yet politicians move in the other direction. The socialist likely to be France's next president wants to lower the retirement age from 62 to 60 and institute a "maximum-work" law.

When will they learn that you don't make people happier by taking their options away?

Mas y Mas- Kinky

2012-02-04T09:29:00.001-06:00

We've Figured Him Out - Ben Stein

2012-02-04T09:29:00.000-06:00

Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?

Because he and his cunning circle realize some basic truths:

The American people in their unimaginable kindness and trust voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted so much to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from other ultra-leftists that they simply took him on faith.

They ignored his anti-white writings in his books. They ignored his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister, Jeremiah Wright.

They ignored his refusal to explain years at a time of his life as a student. They ignored his ultra-left record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and Senator.

The American people ignored his total zero of an academic record as a student and teacher, his complete lack of scholarship when he was being touted as a scholar.

Now, the American people are starting to wake up to the truth. Barack Obama is a super likeable super leftist, not a fan of this country, way, way too cozy with the terrorist leaders in the Middle East, way beyond naïveté, all the way into active destruction of our interests and our allies and our future.

The American people have already awakened to the truth that the stimulus bill -- a great idea in theory -- was really an immense bribe to Democrat interest groups, and in no way an effort to help all Americans.

Now, Americans are waking up to the truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured, you will have a clerk from the Department of Motor Vehicles telling your doctor what he can and cannot do.

The American people already know that Mr. Obama's plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and bureaucracy is a myth, a promise of something that never was and never will be -- a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away.

These are perilous times. Mrs. Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State, has given Iran the go-ahead to have nuclear weapons, an unqualified betrayal of the nation. Now, we face a devastating loss of freedom at home in health care. It will be joined by controls on our lives to "protect us" from global warming, itself largely a fraud if believed to be caused by man.

Mr. Obama knows Americans are getting wise and will stop him if he delays at all in taking away our freedoms.

There is his urgency and our opportunity. Once freedom is lost, America is lost. Wake up, beloved America.

Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes "Ben Stein's Diary" for every issue of The American Spectator.

A Quiet Man

2010-07-02T20:44:00.002-05:00

Standing on the brige of a German Sub captured by Commander Irvine's battle group.

A Quiet Man

My father was a quiet man.
He didn't speak of his adventures, he didn't brag of his triumphs.
My father was a graduate of the Naval Academy.
The Naval Academy at that time was one of the most difficult of schools to get into. It is by invitation only, only the best of the best. It was by congressional appointment to the sons of the best and brightest our country had to offer.
My grandfather was instrumental in the cure for syphilis during world war one.
Back then; it killed almost as men as the Germans. Therefore earning the placement for my father to attend the Naval Academy to pursue a engineering degree.

Now, after graduation my father was denied his commission as an officer because he wore glasses and at that time before our entrance to the war the armed forces could still be kind of picky who they wanted commanding their ships.
When my father was called to active duty, he was 24. he was to fight in World War II, as the commander of a destroyer in the north Atlantic.

The German submarines at that point had decimated allied shipping, navies and ruled the seas.
There was no radar, there was no sonar, and you knew a submarine was around when its first torpedo hit you or your colleague.
My father watched as ship after ship went down around him. He rescued all the men he could but he watched many others die; the surviving ships often turned and headed home, battered and beaten.

My father, his best friend, and a group of other ship captains came up with the combat convoy formation they still use today. One that would offer some protection to some of the ships and they went out yet again, to avenge with murderous intent.
The war was starting to turn by then, but the German navy still dominated the seas.
The Nazis decided to launch a huge winter offensive; they were counting on the weather, Mother Nature to assist them.
They were relying on weather reports from a submarine in the north Atlantic to launch and to facilitate their attack and victory.
Equipped with their new combat formation and our newest technology, a most basic radar and sonar my father detected the nazi sub.
For three days they hunted the sub, playing cat and mouse or "search and attack" off the coastline of Europe, then a sister ship reestablished contact with the new underwater sound equipment.
Commander James M. Irvine directed his ship into the field of fire and launched his depth charge attacks. The sinking of this sub was a key part in our victory in "The battle of the bulge", contributing materially to sealing our victory in WW2,
My father was awarded the Legion of Merit with the combat V, the third highest award of our navy.
The war for him was not over yet, on his last mission, he forced the surrender of another nazi sub, and escorted it back where it is on display in the Chicago museum of science and industry.
Dad never told me these stories, like a said he was a quiet man. I caught up with a young (back in WW2) man who had served under my father, he was kind enough to give me the picture above

My dad died July 4th weekend in 1988,
My son was 9 months old, and my father never saw his only grandson.
I was a different man back then. My ego, my pride, the anger of a young man had driven a wedge between my dad and I.
So we had not spoken for a while, July 4th weekend meant I was working. July 4th weekend meant nothing to me, except work and everybody complaining we had to work on a holiday. I liked the fireworks and the parties even though I worked through most of that too. But I never thought about the true sacrifice for freedom, his sacrifice for freedom, the ultimate sacrifice thousands have given.
My mother gave a call that weekend to let us know my father had died.
Mom gave me his medals, the letter from the President and Secretary of the Navy for his legion of merit, and the navies "action report".

As the years have passed I have grown, I have come to better understand my quiet father by reading those letters of award, by gazing at his medals, and the memories of a quiet man who sacrificed along with the tens of thousands before and since. The tens of thousands who paid the ultimate price for our freedom that I so carelessly enjoy.

The fourth of July is a day of parades, fireworks and celebration in the United States.
Someone in your family, or the family of someone you know are grieving for every freedom we enjoy.

Please share a moment of remembrance for the cost of our freedom.

Slow Motion Rider

2009-12-12T11:37:00.003-06:00

Hero: Gy Sgt. Ralph Scott

2009-12-08T20:46:00.003-06:00

Ralph Scott

Like hail during a thunderstorm, the bullets landed all around the Marine as he simultaneously fired two M-16 service rifles, one in each arm. Staff Sgt Ralph Scott was using his own weapon and the weapon of his platoon sergeant, who was busy carrying another wounded Marine on his back to safety. Both rifles continuously erupted as he methodically emptied magazine after magazine into the insurgent position.

It was November 12, 2004, and Scott was in the middle of his seventh deployment. He was the platoon commander for the 1st Platoon Company C, Battalion Landing Team 1/3.

On this particular day, Marines Sgt Jack Foster and LCpl Robert Carter were pinned down in an open field in Fallujah, Iraq, with no cover. Foster had gone to get Carter, who had been hit in the arm and was severely wounded.

Soon Foster ran out of bullets. That’s when Scott, along with his platoon sergeant Sgt Michael Chambers and Cpl Jason Bennett ran into the open field to retrieve them.

“Bennett and I stood up in the field to draw the enemy fire to give the others a chance to run for a covered position into of a school house full of Iraqi Army soldiers,” Scott said. “In order to help Chambers lighten his load, I took his rifle and used it with mine. That is how I came to have two rifles to fire at the enemy.”

It was later called a miracle that any of them survived, especially considering that two rocket-propelled grenades had also been fired upon them, the shrapnel going every which way but inexplicably missing their flesh.

“Anybody from that platoon, seeing what he did,” started Chambers, “My words can’t do him justice.”

Scott, who has served in the Marine Corps since enlisting at age 17 in 1989, earned a Bronze Star Medal with Valor for his actions that day and other combat he saw between November and December of 2004.

He is a man with an unyielding sense of duty toward his fellow Marines, according to Chambers.

“When Staff Sergeant Scott first came to us in Charlie Company, all he said to us was, ‘My whole entire job — I don’t care if it takes my life — is to bring you all home,’” said Chambers. “I’m here to tell you that he stood behind his word.”

“All I can say is you won’t meet another man like him,” Chambers said. “Every battle we were in, while Marines would naturally and instinctively hit the deck when the first barrage would hit, Staff Sergeant Scott would be there standing, already simultaneously returning fire. We would follow his lead. There’s no finer man, no fiercer warrior that the Marines have ever sent into battle than that man. I would go back to combat with him in a second.”

“In my heart, I’m still with Charlie Company,” said Scott. “Whatever job the Marine Corps gives me, I will do it to the best of my ability, but I’d be lying if I said I’d rather be here than back with the grunts.”

“I wake up every morning, and I come to work,” said Scott. “Whether work happens to be behind a desk in Hawaii or on a battlefield in Iraq isn’t really the point. The point is to do your best and give your best effort at all times and in all situations.”

Hero: Navy HM2 Joshua Simson

2009-10-30T11:59:00.001-05:00

In 2007, Navy HM2 Joshua Simson was embedded with a joint U.S. military and Afghan National Army patrol to conduct key leader engagements in the village of Saret Kholet. Simson was serving as an advisor on how to be a medical first responder.

On July 27, Simson demonstrated what committed first responders do when he repeatedly placed himself in the line of fire from machine guns, AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades to single-handedly provide aid to more than a dozen wounded U.S. and Afghan National Army soldiers during an attack.

“After talking with the elders, we pushed further east to establish an observation post to watch a certain river crossing. A squad of Afghan National Army had pushed across the river to clear two houses and spotted bad guys,” Simson explained. “The Afghans fired at them, causing the Anti-Afghan Forces to initiate their ambush prematurely.”

“We were in the kill zone, but since we hadn’t pushed as far down the road as we had intended, we weren’t entirely surrounded,” said Simson, who joined the Navy in September 2005 out of a sense of obligation and ‘to pay back a small part of the debt towards the cost of freedom.’

“I knew about the heritage of corpsmen before I joined and the job appealed to me…taking care of my brothers on the battlefield,” Simson stated.

The ambush led to a seven-and-a-half hour battle. At one point, Simson pulled a wounded soldier into a nearby bunker to provide cover. Immediately after entering the bunker, it suffered a direct hit. Dazed, but undeterred, Simson finished treating the Afghan soldier.

“We were caught in a very deadly crossfire. We took a lot more casualties during this phase of the movement.” Simson said. “I was taking care of casualties as best I could during the march out without becoming one myself.”

Throughout the ordeal, Simson said he repeated a sequence of tasks over and over. “See or hear somebody need help, put out suppressive fire, move the man to cover if possible, and render lifesaving aid.”

Eventually the unit got to a clearing where it was safe to evacuate the injured.

“I was just trying to help out,” Simson recalled. “We were all a little exhausted by the end of the day.”

Simson was awarded the Silver Star for his actions on the battlefield; his willingness to expose himself repeatedly to potential injury or death coupled with his composure under fire was exemplary and inspiring to his fellow servicemen and the Afghan soldiers.
“There are many, many other sailors out there who perform incredible acts but fail to get properly recognized,” he said of the medal. “It feels weird to have the attention for just trying to do the job that was required of me. The men with me that day displayed great courage and determination in the face of withering fire. This is what gave me the strength to do my job…my buddies who were right there with me.”

Excerpts from an article by Loren Stanton, Sun Publications, Sept. 23, 2008

2009-10-30T11:57:00.001-05:00

National Job Approval: Pres. Barack Obama - Economy

2009-10-28T08:55:00.001-05:00

National Job Approval: Pres. Barack Obama - Health Care

2009-08-05T19:57:00.001-05:00

National Job Approval: Pres. Barack Obama

2009-08-05T19:55:00.000-05:00

Soldier explains constitutional republic to cheering audience

2009-07-29T08:11:00.001-05:00

Obamacare: It's Even Worse Than You Think

2009-07-27T10:01:00.001-05:00

President Obama's strategy to pass sweeping health care legislation rested on stealth and speed. The idea was to fill the conversation for months on end with vague talk about expanding coverage, "bending the cost-curve," improving quality, and rooting out waste, without showing the public how the plan would actually work or what it would cost. Legislation, meanwhile, would be composed behind closed doors, and the bills would be introduced as close as possible to when they might come up for a vote to minimize the time in which they could actually be read and thought about by those who would vote on them and those who would live under them. By the time the details emerged, maybe momentum and being "closer than ever before" would be enough to overcome the torrent of objections that were sure to be raised when people got a real look at the nuts and bolts.....

Rove v. Biden...What could be said?

2009-07-27T08:13:00.003-05:00

TALKER -- THE VICE PRESIDENT HAS AN OP-ED IN THE TIMES -- “What You Might Not Know About the Recovery,” by Joe Biden: “The actions we took — passing the Recovery Act, stabilizing the banking system, pressing to get credit flowing again and helping responsible homeowners — brought us back from the precipice. … The Recovery Act is not the cure for all our economic ills — no single piece of legislation could be. But how many government initiatives can point to both large numbers of projects coming in under budget and a Government Accountability Office finding that we are ahead of schedule in key areas? … [T]he way I see it, our balanced approach recognizes that there is no silver bullet, no single thing, that can address the many and complex needs of America’s vast economy. We need relief, recovery and reinvestment to cope with our multifaceted crisis — and only 159 days after it was signed by President Obama, the Recovery Act is already at work providing all three.” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/opinion/26biden.html

BREITBART: Obama's accidental gift on race

2009-07-27T08:02:00.000-05:00

Heart of the Matter

2009-07-25T11:59:00.000-05:00

Has Liberalism Jumped the Shark?

2009-07-25T09:29:00.000-05:00

by Leigh Scott
The term “Jump the Shark” has been with us for a while. The clever metaphor is used for the moment when something of cultural significance begins to lose its luster, and descends into lameness. It is a reference to the T.V. show “Happy Days,” specifically the episode when Fonzie water skied over shark infested waters. This is the precise moment where the show began to decline.

Republicans and conservatives are dancing with glee every time a new poll comes out showing Obama’s poll numbers going down faster than a Hilton (Perez or Paris) after a nice dinner and a couple of cocktails. The support for things like Universal Health Care, closing Gitmo, and Cap and Trade are sinking even faster. Yet, that’s not the whole story. Something else is going on here. Something that begs the question: Has Liberalism “Jumped the Shark”?

Over the last sixty days or so, we’ve seen some amazing things. We saw a “wise Latina,” a self-described “affirmative action baby” claim that her statements were taken out of context or merely “meant to inspire,” and that race has nothing to do with her job performance. The White House has re-branded the $787 billion “stimulus package” a “stabilization package.” Our Vice-President, devious genius that he is, stated that we need to, “crazy as it sounds,” spend like lunatics to avoid bankruptcy. A gay blogger and gay civil rights champion called a black guy “the worst thing [he] could think of…a faggot.” We saw our government allow Iranian protesters, who peacefully challenged a rigged election, get shot in the street. Concurrently, we demanded that a tin-pot dictator be reinstated after his government got wise to his schemes and legally booted him.
All of these little vignettes, as well as countless others over the last month or two, do not bold well for our little leftist friends. They are examples of liberalism in action, naked and unfiltered. They are the equivalent of an “unforced error” in tennis. There is no opposition baiting these mistakes and revelations. This is in their own voices, not through the analysis of a Rush Limbaugh “teachable moment,” a Glenn Beck meltdown, or Hotair.com “quote of the day.”

It is liberalism unplugged, on display for all to see.

Identity politics, when viewed in its purest form, is racism. Keynesian economics, when distilled to its basic concepts, flies in the face of common sense. Re-branding political policy doesn’t change its ultimate effectiveness. Hypocrites are hypocrites regardless of the causes they support, or claim to champion. The U.S. should not be about “nuance” when it comes to foreign policy. We must always stand on the side of freedom and democracy.

For the first time in a long time even a casual observer can clearly see what modern liberalism is all about.

In an episode of “South Park” the boys encounter the Underwear Gnomes. They are a society of magical little creatures who steal your underwear in the middle of the night. When the boys ask the Gnomes about their motivation, they explain that they are doing it for “profit.” The first step is to steal underpants. The third step is profit. When pressed about the second step there is only silence. The Gnomes don’t know how to transform the stolen underwear into profit, but they continue to steal it anyway. They work tirelessly, stealing underpants in their quest for profit. But without that second step, they will get nothing. Hmmm, what does that sound like? Great goals, but no solid plan of getting there? That’s modern liberalism. It’s an ideology that lacks principles No step two. To make matters worse, most of the very mechanisms of liberalism (unions, racially segregated interest groups, attacks on capitalism) act counter intuitively to its goals.

I say its “jumped the shark” because, without a strong set of timeless principals to guide it, this political ideology is a fad. It’s had a lot of great, good looking, and popular spokespeople. Last November it had an awesome ad campaign (one so good, Pepsi apparently felt the need to steal it). It’s all style and no substance. And like the Spice Girls, Beany Babies, Cabbage Patch Kids, and the leisure suit it is destined to fade into obscurity.

Young people, you know those folks who haven’t lived as much as you but know better than you, have always been the bread and butter of hippie liberalism. But they have a very short attention span, especially the kids today. During the election, they were all about it. But now they are really into Adam Lambert and “Twilight”. Obama and Co. had hoped that the kids would stay in the mix, using the twitter and the Facebook to keep it real and spread their positive message of nationalization of private industry and wealth redistribution. Sadly, the kids have chucked Obama into the virtual trash bin, right next to the video of the Ally McBeal dancing baby.

Troll traffic on conservative sites is down. Look at Facebook, MySpace, YouTube etc. The number of political postings supporting hippie liberalism is almost non-existent. Even more remarkable, the message boards and postings on non-political sites is trending libertarian and conservative when political topics come up. Perhaps most humorous of all, the State Run Media has failed to make any recent conservative “scandals” or “revelations” stick. People just don’t care to hear it. They want results not more talk. Bush isn’t the president, Sarah Palin resigned, Rush Limbaugh isn’t backing down. Dare I say that people want to “move on”?

Make no mistake, they aren’t going to evaporate right away. Even “Happy Days” went on for 100 episodes after the infamous moment (and we got two seasons of “Joanie Loves Chachi”), but the end is nigh. At some point in the near future (probably in the lead up to the 2010 mid-terms) the pundit class is going to have to ask “can the Democratic Party relate to voters?” Can the party of Howard Dean, the Daily Kos and Keith Olbermann remain relevant?

With the kids bouncing onto the next big thing, and without any real successes to point to, the hippie liberals are left with their usual crew: trial lawyers, race hustlers, and unions. There are a few hard-core ideologues out there, but the true, honest liberals who are all about those lofty goals will soon abandon the freak show assembled in Washington.

With hippie liberalism “jumping the shark”, people are going to need a new fad. It has to be bold, fresh, and at least on paper, original. A new form of “pop politics” will emerge. The good news for everyone, is that the Republicans “jumped the shark” at some point in 2005. We are heading towards a whole new era in American politics.

Hopefully it will be more effective than this whole Pepsi, I mean Obama thing.

You Stay Here While I Swim and Get Us Some Universal Health Care - Iowahawk

2009-07-25T09:19:00.000-05:00

Special Guest Commentary
by Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)

The statistics are sobering: the cost of American heath care is rising almost as fast as the cold, briny water bubbling up from our floorboards. So far we have already lost the 8-track player and several Vic Damone tapes, and if allowed to continue these trends threaten to engulf all of us within the Oldsmobile. We must quickly wake up and face the facts: inaction is no longer an option. That is why it is critical for the future of all the occupants that one of us swim off and get us some kind of free health care program. I nominate me.

2009-07-21T15:22:00.000-05:00

Let It Roll

2009-07-20T14:37:00.000-05:00

Don Henley-I Will Not Go Quietly

2009-07-04T14:35:00.000-05:00

My Hero: James M. Irvine

2009-07-04T08:26:00.000-05:00

A Quiet Man

My grandfather was instrumental in the cure for syphilis during world war one. Back then; it killed almost as men as the Germans. Therefore earning the placement for my father to attend the Naval Academy to pursue a engineering degree.

Now, after graduation my father was denied his commission as an officer because he wore glasses and at that time before our entrance to the war the armed forces could still be kind of picky who they wanted commanding their ships. When my father was called to active duty, he was 24. he was to fight in World War II, as the commander of a destroyer in the north Atlantic.

The German submarines at that point had decimated allied shipping, navies and ruled the seas. There was no radar, there was no sonar, and you knew a submarine was around when its first torpedo hit you or your colleague.

My father watched as ship after ship went down around him. He rescued all the men he could but he watched many others die; the surviving ships often turned and headed home, battered and beaten. My father, his best friend, and a group of other ship captains came up with the combat convoy formation they still use today. One that would offer some protection to some of the ships and they went out yet again, to avenge with murderous intent.

The war was starting to turn by then, but the German navy still dominated the seas. The Nazis decided to launch a huge winter offensive; they were counting on the weather, Mother Nature to assist them. They were relying on weather reports from a submarine in the north Atlantic to launch and to facilitate their attack and victory. Equipped with their new combat formation and our newest technology, a most basic radar and sonar my father detected the nazi sub. For three days they hunted the sub, playing cat and mouse or "search and attack" off the coastline of Europe, then a sister ship reestablished contact with the new underwater sound equipment. Commander James M. Irvine directed his ship into the field of fire and launched his depth charge attacks. The sinking of this sub was a key part in our victory in "The battle of the bulge", contributing materially to sealing our victory in WW2, My father was awarded the Legion of Merit with the combat V, the third highest award our navy awarded. The war for him was not over yet, on his last missions, he forced the surrender of two other nazi subs, and escorted one of them back where it is on display in the Chicago museum of science and industry.

Dad never told me these stories, like I said he was a quiet man. My dad died July 4th weekend in 1988, My son was 9 months old, and my father never saw his only grandson.

I was a different man back then. My ego, my pride, the anger of a young man had driven a wedge between my dad and me. So we had not spoken for a while, July 4th weekend meant I was working. July 4th weekend meant nothing to me, except work and everybody complaining we had to work on a holiday. I liked the fireworks and the parties even though I worked through most of that too. But I never thought about the sacrifice for freedom, his sacrifice for freedom.

My mother gave a call that weekend to let us know my father had died. Mom gave me his medals, the letter from the President and secretary of the navy for his legion of merit, and the navies "action report".

As the years have passed I have grown, I have come to better understand my quiet father by reading those letters of award, by gazing at his medals, and the memories of a quiet man who sacrificed along with the tens of thousands before and since. The tens of thousands who paid the ultimate price for our freedom that I so carelessly enjoy.

The fourth of July is a day of parades, fireworks and celebration in the United States. Someone in your family, or the family of someone you know are grieving for every freedom we enjoy. Please share a moment of remembrance for the cost of our freedom.

Jan Hammer Group "Oh Yeah" One to One

2009-07-03T13:11:00.001-05:00

Virgin-Americans Vow Fight Against Cap-and-Trade's Blood Sacrifice Amendment - Iowahawk

2009-07-02T11:18:00.001-05:00

WASHINGTON - The President's landmark 'Cap and Trade' bill faces an uncertain fate this week, as congressional backers of the carbon-limiting legislation face mounting opposition from a myriad of interest groups angered by its controversial ritual virgin sacrifice provision.
"We are asking our members to send a strong message to Washington that this bill is wrong for America's energy future, and wrong for the virgin community," said Bret 'Aslan' Crawford, a spokesman for the Action Figure Collectors of America. "Power virgins, activate!"
The 87,492 page bill -- official designated as the American Patriotic Renewal Act of 2009 for Carbon Reduction, Energy Independence, Heathy Climate, Sustainable Job Growth, Adorable Puppies, and Earthly Paradise -- is a keystone in President Obama's first year legislative agenda, and was originally anticipated to get swift congressional passage. Instead, it faced a unexpectedly tough vote in the House last week after coal state Democrats complained it would place an unfair economic burden on their home districts.
"I am as interested in reversing global climate change as anyone, but I fail to see how increasing taxes and random machete attacks on Ohio coal producers alone will solve the problem," said Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). "Come on people, there are plenty of other industries who deserve machete attacks too."
In order to secure the votes of wavering Democrats, House leaders Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman inserted several last minute amendments to the legislation, including provisions for national oxygen rationing, witch burnings, dousings, and phrenology research. But the one that has seemingly stoked a grassroots backlash is the controversial Sexually Inexperienced Citizen Environmental Volunteer Amendment. The wording of the amendment calls for all American virgins over the age of 21 to register with the Selective Sacrifice Board, for possible use as victims in nationally televised vivisections intended to "supplicate the Earth-Spirits."
Reaction, in some quarters, was swift and harsh. Robert 'Shadowfyre' Jardocki of the Wizard and Warlocks Guild called it "an affront to all Virtual America, from Second Life to World of Warcraft," and vowed his group would cast the "most powerful lobbying spell the country has ever seen." Denise 'Lady Gwynnethynn' Kelly of the American Society of Renaissance Faire Royalty decried it as "a unconstitutional attack on our members and their ladies in-waiting." The National Association of Space Fantasists made an impassioned "call to light sabers," while the Brotherhood of Sports Bar Regulars vowed a "million replica jersey march" on Washington to stop its passage. Other groups uniting to oppose the bill include MENSA, the Society for the Identification of Motion Picture Continuity Problems, and the American Association of Anonymous Comment Thread Trolls.
"Congress and the Administration really stirred up a hornet's nest of virgins with this bill," said longtime Washington-watcher Michael Barone. "The response really caught them flat-footed. I don't think they realized just how adept the virgin community is at computers, and how much time they have between ComiCons or SpaceCons or whatever-cons. Instead of calling into sports radio shows, now they're calling the capitol switchboard."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) defended the bill, saying that "it is critical that we do something immediately to show we are serious about solving this climate crisis. Without burnt offerings of taxes and virgins, Gaia will smite us all in her angry burning wrath. So let me just say to the corporate and virgin special interest groups -- don't come crying to us in 400 years, when our temperatures are up almost 1 degree celsius."
Pelosi denied the bill was anti-consumer, pointing out it contains specific infrastructure and job creation funds. It specifies 500,000 unionized positions to construct a planned 300-foot tall National Eco Pyramid and Virgin Sacrifice Altar in Youngstown, Ohio, as well as funds to train over 20,000 youth volunteer earth-priests in live beating heart removal.
House Energy Committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-CA) defended the bill's controversial 'virgin exclusions' rider, which specifies sacrificial exemptions for certain religious orders, members of Congress, and Keith Olbermann.
"The rider simply recognizes that virgin members of Congress are often so busy doing the work of the people that we have little opportunity for actual sexual intercourse," said Waxman. "For example, were I not focusing on this crucial legislation, I would totally be porking some sexy, sexy ladies. No, really, I'm serious. I would be. Stop laughing."
Bill co-sponsor Edward Markey (D-MA) said that even if enacted into law, the bill allows a 9 month grace period for current virgins to change their sacrifice eligibility status.
"Easy for him to say," complained Kevin Warren, a 34-year old Green Bay Packer fanatic from Fon du Lac, Wisconsin. "You try getting laid with a foam rubber cheese hat, green face paint and Favre jersey."
Whether Warren and other Virgin-Americans have the clout to scuttle the bill remains to be seen. It is scheduled for Senate deliberations as soon as the House Sergeant-at-Arms can locate a crane powerful enough to move the entire document to the Senate chamber. If passed there, it is expected to be quickly signed into law by President Obama.
Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs, himself a well-known virgin, sought to allay fears about the bill.
"Look, I know this bill has been the subject of wild rumors and speculation, but let's all just sit back and see how it plays out," said Gibbs. "The bottom line is that the virgin community has nothing to worry about. Believe me, if this thing passes, I promise everybody's going to get screwed."

Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich

2009-05-18T12:37:00.000-05:00

With states facing nearly $100 billion in combined budget deficits this year, we're seeing more governors than ever proposing the Barack Obama solution to balancing the budget: Soak the rich. Lawmakers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Oregon want to raise income tax rates on the top 1% or 2% or 5% of their citizens. New Illinois Gov. Patrick Quinn wants a 50% increase in the income tax rate on the wealthy because this is the "fair" way to close his state's gaping deficit.
Chad Crowe
Mr. Quinn and other tax-raising governors have been emboldened by recent studies by left-wing groups like the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities that suggest that "tax increases, particularly tax increases on higher-income families, may be the best available option." A recent letter to New York Gov. David Paterson signed by 100 economists advises the Empire State to "raise tax rates for high income families right away."
Here's the problem for states that want to pry more money out of the wallets of rich people. It never works because people, investment capital and businesses are mobile: They can leave tax-unfriendly states and move to tax-friendly states.
And the evidence that we discovered in our new study for the American Legislative Exchange Council, "Rich States, Poor States," published in March, shows that Americans are more sensitive to high taxes than ever before. The tax differential between low-tax and high-tax states is widening, meaning that a relocation from high-tax California or Ohio, to no-income tax Texas or Tennessee, is all the more financially profitable both in terms of lower tax bills and more job opportunities.
Updating some research from Richard Vedder of Ohio University, we found that from 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts.
Did the greater prosperity in low-tax states happen by chance? Is it coincidence that the two highest tax-rate states in the nation, California and New York, have the biggest fiscal holes to repair? No. Dozens of academic studies -- old and new -- have found clear and irrefutable statistical evidence that high state and local taxes repel jobs and businesses.
Martin Feldstein, Harvard economist and former president of the National Bureau of Economic Research, co-authored a famous study in 1998 called "Can State Taxes Redistribute Income?" This should be required reading for today's state legislators. It concludes: "Since individuals can avoid unfavorable taxes by migrating to jurisdictions that offer more favorable tax conditions, a relatively unfavorable tax will cause gross wages to adjust. . . . A more progressive tax thus induces firms to hire fewer high skilled employees and to hire more low skilled employees."
More recently, Barry W. Poulson of the University of Colorado last year examined many factors that explain why some states grew richer than others from 1964 to 2004 and found "a significant negative impact of higher marginal tax rates on state economic growth." In other words, soaking the rich doesn't work. To the contrary, middle-class workers end up taking the hit.
Finally, there is the issue of whether high-income people move away from states that have high income-tax rates. Examining IRS tax return data by state, E.J. McMahon, a fiscal expert at the Manhattan Institute, measured the impact of large income-tax rate increases on the rich ($200,000 income or more) in Connecticut, which raised its tax rate in 2003 to 5% from 4.5%; in New Jersey, which raised its rate in 2004 to 8.97% from 6.35%; and in New York, which raised its tax rate in 2003 to 7.7% from 6.85%. Over the period 2002-2005, in each of these states the "soak the rich" tax hike was followed by a significant reduction in the number of rich people paying taxes in these states relative to the national average. Amazingly, these three states ranked 46th, 49th and 50th among all states in the percentage increase in wealthy tax filers in the years after they tried to soak the rich.
This result was all the more remarkable given that these were years when the stock market boomed and Wall Street gains were in the trillions of dollars. Examining data from a 2008 Princeton study on the New Jersey tax hike on the wealthy, we found that there were 4,000 missing half-millionaires in New Jersey after that tax took effect. New Jersey now has one of the largest budget deficits in the nation.
We believe there are three unintended consequences from states raising tax rates on the rich. First, some rich residents sell their homes and leave the state; second, those who stay in the state report less taxable income on their tax returns; and third, some rich people choose not to locate in a high-tax state. Since many rich people also tend to be successful business owners, jobs leave with them or they never arrive in the first place. This is why high income-tax states have such a tough time creating net new jobs for low-income residents and college graduates.
Those who disapprove of tax competition complain that lower state taxes only create a zero-sum competition where states "race to the bottom" and cut services to the poor as taxes fall to zero. They say that tax cutting inevitably means lower quality schools and police protection as lower tax rates mean starvation of public services.
They're wrong, and New Hampshire is our favorite illustration. The Live Free or Die State has no income or sales tax, yet it has high-quality schools and excellent public services. Students in New Hampshire public schools achieve the fourth-highest test scores in the nation -- even though the state spends about $1,000 a year less per resident on state and local government than the average state and, incredibly, $5,000 less per person than New York. And on the other side of the ledger, California in 2007 had the highest-paid classroom teachers in the nation, and yet the Golden State had the second-lowest test scores.
Or consider the fiasco of New Jersey. In the early 1960s, the state had no state income tax and no state sales tax. It was a rapidly growing state attracting people from everywhere and running budget surpluses. Today its income and sales taxes are among the highest in the nation yet it suffers from perpetual deficits and its schools rank among the worst in the nation -- much worse than those in New Hampshire. Most of the massive infusion of tax dollars over the past 40 years has simply enriched the public-employee unions in the Garden State. People are fleeing the state in droves.
One last point: States aren't simply competing with each other. As Texas Gov. Rick Perry recently told us, "Our state is competing with Germany, France, Japan and China for business. We'd better have a pro-growth tax system or those American jobs will be out-sourced." Gov. Perry and Texas have the jobs and prosperity model exactly right. Texas created more new jobs in 2008 than all other 49 states combined. And Texas is the only state other than Georgia and North Dakota that is cutting taxes this year.
The Texas economic model makes a whole lot more sense than the New Jersey model, and we hope the politicians in California, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota and New York realize this before it's too late.
Mr. Laffer is president of Laffer Associates. Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal. They are co-authors of "Rich States, Poor States" (American Legislative Exchange Council, 2009).