Capitalist Sooner

Ron Paul at the drugstore checkout line...

2012-02-13T13:44:00.000-06:00

As the father of three daughters and husband to a tolerant wife, the day before Valentine's Day is a critical one for my continued domestic happiness. Failure is not an option! Therefore, during lunch today, I journeyed to the nearest drugstore for cards and candy.

Elbowing aside the horde of other fathers, I succeeded in finding all four cards. From the card aisle I moved on to candy, and collected three identical heart-shaped boxes (which should minimize disagreements among the daughters) and the larger one for my bride. Being the lunch hour, there was of course a line, and I was at the end of it to check out. It's a good thing, since I'm not exactly quick when I start speaking, but today I got a surprise...

After ringing up my purchase, and scanning my discount card, I swiped the card machine, hit "cancel" when it asked for my PIN, and prepared to make my debit transaction a credit one with my signature. I jokingly pointed out to the woman - of roughly my early 40's age - that we could both remember a time when all transactions with a card required a signature. For some reason, she began to point out how our freedoms are disappearing and that she was upset by this. She said she might just become Amish, and then said they were getting persecuted as well.

How stunning is this conversation, I thought! Here is someone I have never met, running the checkout counter at the drugstore, talking about civil liberties! She then floored me by pointing out her friends in California who were raided for raw milk, had their food stores confiscated, their seeds taken, and even their cash. She was visibly upset by this, as we all should be. I told her there was one person who was running for office to fix all of this - and she immediately answered "Ron Paul".

I asked her if she was a Republican, and she said she was. With that information, I gave her the people to contact if she wanted to try and go to the county convention in March (this is in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County). She wrote down both my name and the county chair, and said she'd call him about it. We were both inspired, I think, to randomly run into another lover of Liberty while going about our normal daily activities.

Freedom is a unifying force. It is what bound the peoples of many nations into Americans. I propelled us from a frontier to the pinnacle of human achievement. It is a threat to those of the old world, who would pull us back to class distinctions based on birth, and destroy innovation and liberty in the name of security. There is one candidate for President who embodies the spirit of Washington and Jefferson, who would restore our country and not destroy it.

He was with me at the checkout counter of the drugstore today - Happy Valentine's Day!

Republics, Democracy, Delegates, and Ron Paul

2012-02-11T19:42:00.002-06:00

“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”
“A Republic, if you can keep it.” - Ben Franklin, 1787, Constitutional Convention

Since we are about the business of deciding who is to be the nominee for the Republican Party for President, it might be a good idea to get a few things straight. First, as the (First) Good Doctor noted, we have a Republic. In a Republic - and you would think the GOP would understand this, given our name - we vote for people, who then vote for someone to be the nominee. We also vote for Electors, who make up the Electoral College, and are the only people who actually vote directly for President. Get it? Now, apply that to the Republican Party - which is decidedly not a democracy. Remember, a democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner..

So back to the GOP, and delegates, and not being a democracy, and just who is winning this thing? I'll break this down in a minute by state, but keep this in mind: each state, within the rules of the Republican National Committee, sets their own rules. They're all different. States are supposed to be 50 different laboratories of representative government, and in the delegate selection process they are. There are a few huge points, and you should keep those in mind as you study this, because they are immense in impact for that Other Good Doctor who is running an insurgency Liberty campaign. Here are those points:

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has rules that are agreed to by all the states. There are penalties for violating those rules.

It is arguable that the current rule structure was designed to help Mitt Romney. This is not evil, it is his supporters doing a good job of setting the playing conditions for the selection of the nominee.

Other people can and are taking advantage of these rules, namely Ron Paul. This is also not evil, but it is to the credit of his campaign and/or his supporters around the country.

I will address a few key rules: first you lose half your delegates as a state if you move your primary to before March 6th (also known as Super Tuesday). That includes the State Party Chair, National Committeeman and National Committeewoman. They still get to attend but are non-voting. States impacted are New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Arizona, and Michigan. You are probably wondering why Iowa is not on that list. And Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, and Nevada. We'll get to them in a minute. Second key rule - no contest can be winner-take-all prior to April 1st, 2012. That's a big one, and one not being addressed. Let's look at the states.

Iowa - no actual delegates chosen yet. County Conventions are on Saturday March 10th, where delegates are chosen to the District and State Conventions. Saturday, April 21st is the District Conventions, where the delegates at these meetings pick who the State Convention Delegates will vote for, for President, by Congressional District. So, the 4 delegates from a Congressional District going to the State Convention are instructed to support whoever wins at the Congressional District Convention. On Saturday, June 16th is the State Convention, where the actual delegates to the Republican National Convention are elected. In addition to the District Delegates, there are Statewide Delegates (13 of them) and 3 Super Delegates (State Chair, National Committeeman, National Committeewoman). I should point out that today, 2/11/12, a new State Chair was elected, and he is publicly a Ron Paul supporter. Also of note, you may have caught that Iowa is not penalized for going early. As you may have also figured out, that is because they haven't actually selected any delegates yet.

New Hampshire - lost half of their delegates. Proportional delegates, meaning based on the popular vote you get delegates. Romney got 7, Paul 3, and Huntsman 2, for a total of 12. The two for Hunstman are now "unbound" since he dropped out.

South Carolina - lost half of their delegates. Proportional delegates, winner of each Congressional District wins 2 delegates and statewide winner gets 11. Total of 25 delegates, it appears Newt Gingrich won 23 and Mitt Romney won 2 delegates.

Florida - lost half of their delegates. They have decided all 50 delegates will be to the at-large winner, who was Mitt Romney. This appears to violate the April 1st rule, so we'll have to see what happens. There are reports of Gingrich challenging the winner-take-all aspect at the RNC level, but this won't be settled till August.

Nevada - no actual delegates chosen yet. March 10th and 17th are the County Conventions, attended by delegates chosen at the first Caucus. The County Convention delegates choose delegates to the State Convention (May 5-6), where the actual delegates to the National Convention are chosen. They are bound by proportional vote percentage to vote on the first ballot, 14 for Romney, 6 for Gingrich, 5 for Paul, and 3 for Santorum. They are unbound - or free to vote their conscience - if there is a second or later ballot.

Colorado - no actual delegates chosen yet. February 7th Caucus is to pick delegates to County Assemblies and District Conventions, so there is no delegate penalty. A non-binding poll is conducted at these caucuses. In March and April, there are County, District and State conventions, where the actual delegates are elected, by those who became delegates at the prior convention or caucus (21 District, 12 State, 3 Super, for a total of 36 delegates).

Minnesota - no actual delegates chosen yet. February 7th Caucus is to pick delegates to - well, I think you know by now - District and State Conventions, where the actual National Delegates are chosen. April 14/21 District Conventions - 8 of them - get to elect 3 delegates each to National, and tell them how to vote there. State Convention (May 4th/5th) elects another 13, and tells them how to vote, as well. Additionally, there are the 3 usual Super Delegates, for a total of 40 delegates yet to be picked.

Missouri - no actual delegates chosen yet. Saturday March 17th is the County Caucuses / green beer day for the rest of us, Saturday April 21st the District Conventions to choose the 24 District Delegates, and June 2nd the State Convention picks the rest of Missouri's delegates (24 District, 25 State, 3 Super for a total of 52 Delegates).

Maine - no actual delegates chosen yet. Most counties have had their caucus, but some stretch into March (3rd, Hancock County). Delegates chosen for District and State Conventions at these caucuses, a total of 24 - all officially unbound. District and State Conventions are on May 5th and 6th.

And there you have it - you are officially an expert on the delegates so far. Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Minnesota, Missouri, and Maine have not chosen delegates yet. New Hampshire and South Carolina have, and it appears Romney has 9, Gingrich has 23, Paul has 3, and Santorum has 0. Romney may have 50 delegates from Florida, and Florida may have to split them up, but we won't know until August most likely.

To sum up - whoever has the most delegates at the District and State Conventions will win the nomination. Guess who has the most grassroots support?

A Moment of Inspiration

2012-01-28T23:00:00.000-06:00

In the darkest days of the assault on Liberty, there is occasionally a glimmer of hope. A ray of sunshine, peeking through the cold winter sky, with promise of a renewed spring for the Republic. Today was such a day for me.

There are four candidates for the nomination of the Republican Party for President. Of the four, three have serious and possibly fatal faults. Mitt Romney can correctly be buried for his part in "Romneycare", as well as his legacy of liberalism from his term as governor of Massachusetts. This is not to disparage his successes, which are many and documented, but to point out he fails to inspire the bulk of conservatives. He is not "our" guy. Newt Gingrich, as I pointed out in my previous post, is fatally flawed in both character and perspective (can you say Progressive?). Rick Santorum not only does not have the infrastructure or support to run a national campaign, he has serious issues with big-government Republicanism. This leaves the man the media loves to ignore, Congressman Ron Paul.

It is rare for someone who has had a passion for politics, such as myself, to analyze a candidate for office and not come away at least a little bit disappointed. There is usually some aspect of said candidate that falls short: it could be ethics, or voting history, or that one position that is just somehow wrong, but the rest of them seems ok. We spend our time supporting the least worst, or lesser of two evils, or evil of two lessors if you prefer. Once in a generation a candidate emerges that is truly unique. I believe that candidate for my generation is Ron Paul.

This is a big claim to make. A transcendent candidate that moves the country in a different direction is truly rare. The last to do so was Ronald Reagan. It turns out that only four Congressmen endorsed Reagan in 1976 for President - one of which was Dr. Paul. There is a truly remarkable record behind this man, of consistency in standing for the Constitution, Liberty and the Rule of Law. He is frequently alone, fighting against the entirety of Congress. I will not go into his record at this time, since you can find that information anywhere. I will insert a short list of reasons to vote for him from his website:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

The above should make him the consensus candidate for all Republicans, but those same facts threaten the powers that rule. He believes the people should rule - and so do I.

Here we come to the reason for my Moment today. Today was a warm winter day, with light winds and bright pale sunshine. It was a great day to go to the park, or the mall, or do any number of things. It was not the kind of day people like to waste - and most people consider politics a waste. I journeyed an hour south of where I live, to Norman (BOOMER SOONER) Oklahoma and the HQ of Ron Paul in my state. There was to be a meeting about how to participate in the precinct and delegate process. Very dry stuff. I expected 10-15 people. Of the people there, about 6 had been to a precinct meeting before. I'm guessing those same ones had been to County, District and State conventions as well.

Over 50 people showed up, and more came in when I stopped counting. Stunning.

These people have never been active before. They have not volunteered, nor contributed, nor attended meetings. They come from all walks of life, and are all ages. They love Freedom. They love Liberty. They are willing to stand for Ron Paul and be counted. They inspire - and they will change the world.

The fire of Liberty has been lit again!

The Case Against Newt

2012-01-19T10:39:00.000-06:00

I stood in a Washington, DC hotel ballroom, shortly after the great GOP takeover of 1994. On the stage was Newt Gingrich, author of the Contract With America, along with other notables such as Dick Armey, soon to be the Majority Leader, and Lee Greenwood was blasting "Proud to be an American" while laser lights danced across the walls and over our heads. Surrounding me was a standing room only crowd of College Republicans. It was a moment of triumph, for all of us. It was the pinnacle of Newt Gingrich's long insurgency against the 40 year reign of the Democrats. He was to be the new Speaker of the House - and his downfall was about to begin.

You would think, after such a scene, that I would be a raving fan of Newt's. I was, but I am not now. He has proven himself to be of low character, with enormous ethical lapses and a tendency to big government progressive policies that many of us missed, due to his engaging professorial speaking style. Eventually, substance shows, and style fades. The bloom is off this rose.

Character is one of those things that we are all uncomfortable addressing, since we all fall short of perfection. If you've been divorced, you hate to judge others who have been divorced. If you have ever cheated on a spouse or girlfriend, who are you to judge that behavior as well? Pick any "sin", or behavior that goes against our society's loosely defined standard of acceptable lifestyle, and you'll have plenty of people that are guilty of transgressing. This does not excuse the behavior, however. It is a fact that Newt cheated on his first wife with his first mistress, who became his second wife, who he cheated on with his second mistress, who became his third wife, who never leaves his side - gosh, I wonder why that is?

Part of the process of primaries and caucuses involves vetting the candidates - exposing their weaknesses before you pick your nominee, since you know the other side is sure to attack when you've picked. We are all sick of corruption. We are all sick of a lack of ethics. Any candidate who has a history of both is doomed from the outset. Newt Gingrich has both flaws, and they are public, and they are provable. From Wikipedia:

"Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Gingrich during his term as speaker. After extensive investigation and negotiation by the House Ethics Committee, Gingrich was sanctioned $300,000 by a 395–28 House vote. It was the first time in history a speaker was disciplined for ethical wrongdoing."

Second, there is the whole lobbyist/historian thing with Freddie Mac. You know, one of the companies at the center of the collapse of the housing market, and responsible for massive taxpayer bailouts as well as insanity in the financial sector? From Bloomberg:

"Newt Gingrich made between $1.6 million and $1.8 million in consulting fees from two contracts with mortgage company Freddie Mac, according to two people familiar with the arrangement."

Finally, his progressive big government past is catching up to him. Many conservatives such as myself, and most libertarians, will not vote for a progressive - we'll vote third party, or we won't vote at all. We see no difference in the parties any more, if they stand for the same things. So, lets go to Newt for confirmation of his idiocy:
Newt loving FDR: (Video link, click here)
Newt loving Nancy Pelosi: (Video link, click here)
That should be enough, but here's an article about Glen Beck's criticism of Gingrich from Yahoo (link).

To sum things up, Newt Gingrich (and all progressives) believes government is the solution to many of societies problems. Conservatives believe government is the cause of many (or most) of those problems.

I rest my case.

October Surprises

2010-10-05T13:19:00.000-05:00

An October Surprise is an event just before an election that is designed to sway voters to support the party in power. Americans have a tendency to rally to the President, and his party, when it is clear there is a crisis. There are two possible October Surprise events that are possible on the horizon.

Military: A time tested military strike or crisis is the most well known and easiest to see event. There is a lengthy history of such events, and I'm not going to recount them, so here's the link to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise. At this time, the rumors of terrorist attacks are high (look up "Mumbai type attack" on your favorite search engine)and there are both the active wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) and the inactive or undeclared wars (Pakistan, parts of Africa), as well as the potential wars (see Iran and North Korea). I don't think I would be surprised to see any one of these, or more than one, flare up in the next month, would you? If something happens, question the official story.

Economic, Unemployment: This is a much more difficult one to pin down. It helps to put things into perspective. A frequent measure of economic health is the unemployment rate. This number is released on a continuing basis (both weekly and monthly). Not only is the way this number calculated fraudulent, the fraudulent number is itself pegged too low. For detailed information about this, go to www.shadowstats.com. What the BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) does is report how many unemployed there are, then revise the prior month to a more accurate number. Since March of 2009, they have revised up how many are unemployed by EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND people. This means the stock and bond markets are reacting to bad numbers, but the revisions have a much lower impact on things.

Economic, Housing: Consider the fraud that is ongoing in the foreclosure process: GMAC, Chase and Band of America are all in some state of suspension of foreclosures due to outright fraud. It seems banks, who don't actually own the mortgages they collect payments for, have illegally filed for foreclosure on thousands of homes in states all over the place. Banks originate (or create) the loans, then package them up and sell them as Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS). They retain part of the interest as a fee to collect the payments and forward them on to the actual owner of the mortgage. Here's the catch: the MBS was divided up into "tranches", or pieces, and sold to investors and institutions all over the world. Since only the actual owner can file for foreclosure, and can be required to produce the original mortgage (signed at closing), the bank taking payments - also called the Mortgage Servicer - can't file for foreclosure in 23 states. If the mortgage deed can't be located, the person paying the mortgage and about to be foreclosed on can stop the process, and possibly live in the home mortgage free, until the actual owner is located. This could be one entity like a retirement fund, or dozens, or hundreds - nobody really knows at this point. They could all potentially be required to designate legal representation to foreclose, or a majority - I'm not sure, and neither is anyone else. It gets worse, since the poor sap who bought a foreclosed property might not actually own it, and might get stuck with a mortgage without the house. Or not, nobody really knows yet. Bottom line, the fraud is on a scale never before seen, possibly in world history. I haven't even addressed the liability of the title companies, real estate attorneys, mortgage brokers, bank officers, and everyone else involved in residential transactions - nor have I touched on commercial transactions. Keep in mind that in many cases, the banks loaned out the money, then sold the MBS off to investors, getting their money back and the servicing fees. This crisis, which has been a long time in the making, has no historical precedent and began to bubble up on September 20th with GMAC. Yesterday the Attorney General of Texas, a non-judicial foreclosure state (one of those not impacted by this yet) asked the banks to cease foreclosures until October 15th in an attempt to figure this out. The problem is spreading.

What can be done?

I personally think the odds of a military/terrorist event are rather low. A military event is too predictable, and would not have the desired effect on the voters. Although a terrorist event is unpredictable, it would badly reflect on the current leadership, and so the government will do all it can to prevent this from happening.

The odds of an economic Surprise are, in my opinion, extremely high. The thing that would have the most impact would be a national moratorium on foreclosures, by Executive Order, to figure out the mess. This would make a lot of people happy that are losing their homes, but would delay the pain for those who are benefiting from the collapse, who are also much fewer in number. Ultimately, I think the Obama Administration will propose a write down of principle, a corresponding recalculation of payments at today's interest rates, and a means test for eligibility. They will couple this with a profit clause. Here's an example: a $200,000 mortgage gets cut to $100,000, the interest rate goes from, say, 6% to today's roughly 4.25%, and there are no tax penalties for the homeowner. If the homeowner sells the property in the future, any profit up to $200,000 goes back to the mortgage holder, if they can be found. If they can't be found, it will probably go to either the bank servicer, the city or state, or the feds, or be divided up among them. Any profit over the $200,000 sale price would revert to the home seller. The mortgage holder would be given some sort of tax credit for the immediate loss that would be repaid if there are future profits. They would declare - illegally - that nobody is liable for the "mistakes" that have occurred, and try to prevent lawsuits (which would totally destroy most of the financial system). They would probably not go after many bankers or mortgage brokers, other than some very public examples. They would screw everyone that has faithfully paid and followed their contracts, as well as anyone who has any equity in property, anywhere in the country. That won't matter, because those people won't vote for Obama or the democrats, anyway. They will announce this in mid-October, so it has impact on the election, and it will be very light on the details, but you can be sure they'll tell people how much they're giving away. Of course, they're giving away assets that are mostly owned by the taxpayers (via Fannie, Freddie, FHA, VA) or the Federal Reserve. Or they're giving away something nobody can collect on anyway, in those cases where a clear chain of title cannot be established.

This is, of course, all speculation. Scary speculation, which is appropriate for October in an election year. I hope none of this happens, but I fear some of it might. Happy Halloween!

Chaining the Beast - Four 4 Freedom

2010-08-01T16:35:00.001-05:00

The Beast continues to grow. It expands and devours all in it's path, creating nothing but dependence. How do you limit the Beast, when it rules and runs so much of your life? Go after it's heart. THE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO SECURE THE LIBERTY AND PROPERTY OF THE PEOPLE. Here in Oklahoma, there are two ways this can be enhanced - legislatively, or via initiative petition. Let's hope the former acts, so the latter becomes unnecessary.

ONE - LOBBYING - Ban all lobbying efforts and legislative affairs departments and positions at any state or taxpayer funded institution or group. If the laws need "reviewing" then they're too complicated. If the agency needs to testify at the legislature, there are plenty of department and division heads - and supervisors for that matter - that are capable of answering questions in a committee. If an agency

TWO - TERM LIMITS - Cap all ELECTED positions at 12 years, statewide. Cap all APPOINTED terms at 12 years. Implement four year "cooling off" period between holding ELECTED OR APPOINTED office and holding another ELECTED OR APPOINTED office.

THREE - COMPENSATION - Cap all ELECTED positions at the average working individual's annual pay from the year before. Cap all APPOINTED positions at double the average working individual's annual pay. Calculate pay on an hourly basis, and require all elected and appointed personnel to clock in and out - like the regular people do. Ban all other forms of compensation (per diem, travel vouchers, etc.) that any other state worker would not get. Eliminate any retirement benefits not funded 100% by the ELECTED OR APPOINTED officeholder.

FOUR - BENEFITS - Replace defined benefit pensions with private individual accounts. Reduce vacation, sick leave, health care and other compensations to comparable private sector employers.

Bonus - BAN all red light and/or traffic enforcement by camera, and ALLOW citizens to video or audio record ANY interaction with law enforcement.

We don't need you anymore

2010-04-02T10:18:00.000-05:00

How much is enough? It's a question that seems to never be asked of the government. Whether at the federal, state or local level, it is the question every politician should ask themselves. It is the question you should ask yourself before you vote.

At all levels of government, we have such a myriad of laws, regulations, statutes and codes, that there is no possible way for a reasonable person to know them all, much less live within their bounds. We are all criminals now. Can you honestly say you follow every rule laid down from on high? Are your taxes in order, or would an audit worry you? Do you even know every traffic law? If you cannot know the law, you cannot follow the law. If the mass of the public is unable to know and follow the law, how can those laws be remotely legitimate? This logically indicates we have too much, and more than we ever needed, of law and government.

What then is the answer? Consider the massive rise in the cost of a college education since the advent of subsidized government loans. Note the massive price inflation of medical care from the beginnings of Medicare and Medicaid. How much more expensive have automobiles become with increased regulation? Take residential homes - have you considered that the rise in home prices of the last few decades can be directly laid at the feet of governmental policy and subsidy? This is not to say that there are not legitimate reasons for governmental involvement and regulation. We need police, to patrol our neighborhoods and protect our individual liberties from being violated. We don't need a national security apparatus creating a police state, forcing travelers to submit to full body scans, pat downs and even strip searches. We have traded liberty for security.

The end result is a massive federal, state and local apparatus designed to enforce the unnecessary. Interestingly, we don't need all of this - we need to remove it. Such a drag is created on our economy and our lives that we are no longer truly free. It is time for us to elect those who would repeal laws, not create new ones. It is time for us to elect those who place liberty above security. It is time to elect those who would scale back the power of government in favor of the sovreignty of the individual. It is time to send a message to the governmental bureaucrats and political whores:

we don't need you anymore.

Video of me on KWTV discussing health care

2010-03-19T12:10:00.002-05:00

A Conservative Position on Health Care Reform

2010-03-17T14:45:00.000-05:00

Congress is prepared to pass so-called Health Care Reform, perhaps today, perhaps this week. Specifically, the House is going to pass "corrections" to the Senate bill, and "deem" the Senate bill as having passed. This means the House will not be actually voting on the Senate bill. Twisted rule making and legislating, if I've ever heard of it. Today, I was asked what the Conservative solution would be. Here's a few answers.

First, competition is at the core of our free market system. We don't have the type of competition we should have, since you can only buy health insurance in your state. Congress has the Constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce, so this is something they are empowered to address. By introducing national competition into the price of health insurance, costs would go down, in a big way.

Second, legal reform is critical to controlling costs. Ask any doctor how much malpractice premiums are, and you'll begin to understand why they cost so much. A balance must be struck between the rights of the individual to seek legitimate damages for malpractice, but reason should rule in the amount of awards, particularly punitive damages. Punishing fraudulent litigation with attorney fees paid by lawsuit losers would help - but Congress should only address federal cases. State cases and state tort law is the province of each of the states to decide for themselves.

Finally, who is paying the bill? At this time, most people receive health insurance as a benefit of employment. This introduces a whole host of issues, including portability (losing your insurance when you change or lose your job). Employers are allowed to deduct the cost of insuring their employees, but individuals who choose to purchase insurance outside of the scope of employment cannot. When your only visible expense is a co-pay, you don't really see how much things cost, and you aren't policing your expenditures. The simple act of allowing health care insurance and all health care expenses to be deducted from your income tax would help lower costs, while at the same time introducing much more competition into the mix.

These are just a few things that could be done to "fix" health care. The truth is that health care is not broken, it's just expensive. Congress does not have the legal authority to mandate we all purchase health insurance, nor does it have any legal standing to regulate commerce within any state. It has authority to regulate commerce between the states, only, and should focus it's attention there. Then again, that is not the goal here. The goal is to further socialize more of our country and its economy, at the expense of individual freedom and for the benefit of the few.

Congress will pay this bill in November.

Introspection on the Meaning of Life

2010-02-20T12:14:00.000-06:00

At various times of my life, I have looked deeply inward. We all do this - we have to daily evaluate what direction we are going, and occasionally take a big giant hard look to see if our overall path is the one we want to be on. Nothing brings this home like the death of someone close to us. I have recently had two deaths close to me - one a relative, one a friend. Both had productive lives, both followed a very clear path obviously chosen because of the passions burning inside each of them. As individuals, we should all be re-evaluating our paths, and as a state, and as a nation.

As an individual, where are your priorities? Do you chase wealth and success, or faith, or family? Is ambition your driving force, or freedom? These are all important questions. I can safely say at various times all of them would have received a yes from me. Moving through life causes change, and with experience flows wisdom. About the only wisdom I'm going to claim is that there's a lot out there I'm not wise about, but I pay attention. Single burning passion for wealth once consumed me, and faith has consumed me, the desire for success, and above all a desire to be free of debt and servitude. If I could sum up what I have learned on the individual level, it would be this: change and death are inevitable, so balance what you must do with what you wish to do, but don't neglect your faith, your family, or your friends in servitude to your job and your ambitions. The more self reliant you are, the better your balance of life will be. Probably not as profound as it could be, but it's a work in progress.

How about the state? In my case, that state is Oklahoma. Where is Oklahoma going? This question is fundamental to all political actions, as well as business decisions. Right now, there appears to be a continuation of doing the same things we have always done, and not upsetting the apple cart. That's not going to work. The severe shortfall at the budget level is forcing change, and just cutting things down is a good start, but not a long term solution. It lacks the "vision thing". Our vision should be on the future - how can we create an environment where people want to live here, move here, and work here? How can we create an environment where businesses want to live here, move here, and start here? The answer is not more government services. It's not more tax credits. It's not favorable treatment for favored businesses or industries at the expense of their competitors or the rest of us. The vision that should move Oklahoma forward should endeavor to create low and simple taxes, effective but minimal regulation, equal treatment before the law and the government, small and responsive state agencies, and social services that, to quote Benjamin Franklin, "I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

Our nation is in upheaval due to an introspective look. What are we doing, where are we going, and to what ends? So scream the left, so shout the right. It is right and good that this discussion occur, and indeed it is long overdue. The role of our national government has changed dramatically in the past 90 years, from limited and minimal intervention to the nanny state, from a mind-your-own business foreign policy to a make-the-world-safe-for-democracy foreign policy, and from a government-that-governs-least-governs-best to a too-big-to-fail over-regulated non-competitive economic policy. That we are having this discussion - some would argue shouting match - about our goals and our governance is a tribute to the Founders, as well as our own temperance and tolerance. The alternative to a discussion would be a civil war. I have an obvious agenda - capitalism (replaced with crony-ism and socialism for a long time now) and individual liberty (being replaced with group rights and rule of the majority). We shall see how things shake out this year. The Tea Party Movement encourages me and has inspired me to remember those things I fought and campaigned for in years gone by. Perhaps the time has come to return to greatness by remembering what made us great in the past. I have hope.

Self, State, and Nation - introspection does all three good. My relative was my Uncle Jack, who lived a long (89 years) life of golf and family. He once played Sam Snead and lost in match play 4 to 3, and he is the only person to win the Oklahoma Senior Open four years in a row. He had a loving and happy family around him. He was respected and loved by many around the nation and state, and everyone who ever met him liked him. I will miss him, and his stories, and his joy. My friend was Tim Pope, who led a life full of both political controversy and family. Politically, he was a State Representative for 14 years who fought every day on every issue to stand up for what is right. Of course, his idea of what is right might differ from yours, but that's OK - he stood on principle. His family here consisted of three daughters, all of whom have married and produced grandchildren. Often he would point out he knew what I would face in the years ahead, since I too have three daughters. He was only 52, yet he too lived a full life. Both of these men balanced their passions with family and faith - a great lesson for us all. Our State and Nation have other things to balance - the demands of those who wish for more government, versus the desire for those who seek liberty and freedom from government. It's going to be an interesting year for us all, so make your voice, as an individual, heard by those who would lead.

My friend Tim Pope - RIP

2010-02-14T21:18:00.000-06:00

I have just learned that my friend, former State Representative Tim Pope, has passed away of an apparent heart attack. His was a difficult road as he fought for what he believed in: God, country, his state and it's rights, and most of all his family. He faced persecution for his belief, yet he persevered in his battle for what was right. He will be greatly missed by me and many others.

Tim Pope came into my life when I was in high school, in Yukon, Oklahoma. He helped get me started in politics, and showed me how to direct my energy and enthusiasm for what is right into productive action. When ACT UP - the Aids Coalition to Unleash Power - attempted to hand out condoms, dental dams and pamphlets on how to use them in both homosexual and heterosexual ways - at Yukon High School, in 1988, Tim led the fight to stop them. Partly as a result of meeting him at this time, I became a GOP Precinct Chairman and delegate to the Canadian County GOP Convention, and then to the State Convention. Tim became hated by the homosexual activist community because he always stood up to their agenda, and never wavered. He received death threats for many years for his stand.

By 1992, I had gone to college and was living life - but I was very, very mad at the level of taxation, regulation, and idiocy that I saw from our government. One day, I woke up and decided to quit my job, and make a difference. The person I called for some advice was Tim. He suggested I come help him out - Pat Buchanan was running for President, and was about to be in Oklahoma City. I showed up, and the next thing I know, I not only get to meet Mr. Buchanan, but I'm leading the national press around to all the OKC campaign stops. From the Capitol, to the Petroleum Club for a fundraiser, on to a packed house at the Student Union in Norman, and then on to the airport to see the campaign off. The Secret Service had to give me a ride back to my car, since I was stranded on the tarmac, and it was long left behind at the Petroleum Club (I had ridden on the bus with the press). Buchanan lost, but had an important role in shaking up the establishment. His speech at the National Convention that year on the culture war then taking shape will always stay with me. Now, I had nothing to do - so I asked Tim, what do you suggest? He said I might want to meet this guy named Ernest Istook who was running for Congress.

I walked into State Representative Istook's legal office looking for some information. I didn't know how much my life was about to change. Istook was a long-shot candidate with little money but a great state record and dynamic legislative mind. He was up against a 16 year incumbent - and his former law professor - as well as another challenger, who had been the state GOP nominee for governor just a scant two years earlier. Not only was my friend Tim right, that this was the guy to back, but I met him and right away he put me to work. After a very short time volunteering for Mr. Istook, he asked me to be his Finance Director. From that point forward, the next nine months were consumed with raising money for this voice of intellect and conservatism that I had found. I was 21 years old.

After Istook won, I was one of two people from the campaign staff who went to DC with him. This was never a goal of mine, but it was an opportunity I would have been foolish to pass up, and I was very honored. During the year I spent in the hell that is Washington, DC, Istook was faithful to his principles and campaign promises, and good to me. He never deviated from the man he was in the campaign. I saw many things during this year of my life, and always had Tim available at the other end of a phone when I needed to keep my head up. I survived with my soul intact, but I knew early on that I didn't want to become a staffer. I actually gave notice in August that I would be leaving just before Christmas. At that time I returned back to Oklahoma.

When I arrived back in OKC, Glenn English had decided to resign from Congress (6th District) and become CEO of the National Rural Electric Coop Association. Enter again Tim Pope. At the urging of a number of influential and very conservative activists, Tim entered the race. A group of them asked me to become his campaign manager, and I accepted. While not going into a blow by blow account of the campaign, let me say that Tim was consistent in his conservative belief in the family and the Constitution, the role of limited government and the Rule of Law, the right to Life and the right to keep and bear arms. He even got in trouble over that last one - he had been deputized by the County Sheriff so he could carry a firearm due to the death threats, and got in trouble for doing so at the Capitol. The Sheriff backtracked after this all became public, but it was valid. Unfortunately, Tim lost to the eventual winner (and still Congressman, and a good one - Frank Lucas). I dived back into college, helped a few other campaigns that year, led a College Republican chapter, and winded up 1994 by going to DC to celebrate the take over of the House of Representatives. I'll never forget standing in a hotel ball room with hundreds of other young activists while Lee Greenwood sang Proud to Be an American - a great night!

Since these days of political activism, I have made a strong effort to live the life of a regular person. I found my wife, have three wonderful daughters (Tim is a guy who knows about daughters!), and was lucky to have Tim at my wedding. He has remained a faithful friend to me for a long time, and I have never seen him change.

The saddest chapter I have witnessed in Tim Pope's life is the one of the last few years, or as I like to call it, the Great Tribulation. The battle the Attorney General has waged against Tim was, in my opinion, an effort to financially destroy him with the power of the state. He sued Tim for not identifying who paid for a robo-call - for ELEVEN MILLION DOLLARS. He sued him in civil court, since Tim didn't break any laws. Oh, and the calls were pointing out that Jim Roth is a homosexual and was going to be speaking, and gave the location he was speaking at. I would have advised Tim that maybe the wording could use some polish, and maybe not in very good taste, but to sue him for this amount was ridiculous. The AG was forced to accept a $3000 fine - but he wasn't done yet.

Shortly after this happened, Tim became caught up in the Brent Reinhart scandal - by his old friend, the AG. I'm going to condense this quite a bit, but essentially Tim was running Brent's campaign, and he was the executive director of a political action committee at the same time. Some of the contributors that had maxed out to Rinehart had also contributed to the pac, and the pac contributed to Rinehart. So, they both got charged with felonies. Eventually, he plead guilty to make things go away with a slap on the wrist - but not until he was personally bankrupt, and unemployable in the state of Oklahoma in his chosen profession. The Attorney General had prosecuted him repeatedly, making him a pariah - who wants a political consultant with the law trying to take him down? Not the kind of press you want - and so Tim had to find other ways to survive. He had to leave the state at times to work, just to put food on the table. But he never gave up - even holding an annual barbeque at his home every summer, where he fed all his friends. I'm going to miss those, and that time with him.

In all of these years, through all of the ups and downs, Tim Pope never lost his faith in God, his faith in his family, his faith in his state, nor his faith in the people's wisdom and ability to rise up and be Godly Americans. I will miss this man, who inspired me to make a difference, and showed me how. My heart and my prayers are with his family tonight, and although I know he is in a better place, I will miss him deeply. God rest his soul.

Palin, Medina and my advice to the Tea Parties

2010-02-12T12:32:00.000-06:00

Sarah Palin is a NeoCon! No she's not! Yes she is! No she's not!
Debra Medina is a truther! No she's not! Yes she is! No she's not!

Sound familiar? For those of you out there in the Tea Party Movement, this is a familiar refrain. It drives me nuts, and reminds me of my 2 year old daughter (almost 3, maybe she'll change soon). How about a few general statements that I think can accurately describe the Tea Parties:

Government is too big (debt, deficits, spending).
Government does too much (10th Amendment).
Government is corrupt (bailouts).
Government doesn't represent the people (can you hear us now?).
Government doesn't follow the Law (i.e. the Constitution).

There are, of course, a myriad of other issues that are represented in the Movement. I say Movement for a reason - a political party is governed by a platform, and is organized. A movement is much more loose and diverse, and it's very difficult to solidify a movement into a party. Especially liberty based movements, who disdain being put into the box of a political party on general principles, and are fiercely independent. Not only is this ok, it's essential - it keeps BOTH parties honest if the Movement stays independent. They need to FEAR the Movement, not control or corrupt it. That being said, the above statements are, I think, safely representative of the mood of the Movement.

Is Sarah Palin a NeoCon? Quite likely considering her time as McCain's running mate, and the "education" she received during that time. Will she be the GOP nominee in 2012? I highly doubt it. I think you're going to have someone else, not really on the radar right now, pop up and energize people. That is my hope. Frankly, the continued involvement of the United States in military ventures around the world is coming to an end for economic reasons. When the Chinese and other buyers stop buying our debt, or drive the price of it higher, there's going to be forced reductions in the growth of government. Just where, exactly, do you think democrats are going to be willing to cut? That's right, the military. How much money would you recoup if you pulled out of Japan, Korea, Europe, Iraq, Afghanistan, and most of the rest of the world? Do you think there's going to be a reduction in Social Security or Medicare before that happens? You're crazy if you do. There's a whole lot more voters that care about their check and their subsidized medical care than the ones who think we should be involved in overseas adventures. Whether you agree with militarism and global policing, or disagree, is a moot point - we can't afford it any more.

Is Debra Medina a Truther? Well, she says she's not, and that she doesn't check her supporters for that issue. Which is totally understandable, considering she's running for Governor of Texas, and not a federal office, and that 9/11 happened almost 9 years ago, and it's not relevant. For the record, just to hold off all of those who will attack this portion of my post, I'm NOT a Truther. I should define what I think is a Truther here - someone who thinks the USA (or anyone other than Al Queda) had anything to do with the planning and execution of the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Now, do people have lots of questions about how our intelligence services failed, and why they failed, and have we fixed it? Sure they do. Do people have a right to suspect cover-ups? Yep. Is the Truther Movement in any way relevant to the election of the Governor of Texas? Nope. It sure has distracted things away from the poor record the other 2 GOP candidates have on various issues. In my opinion, Glen Beck ambushed her, and then mocked her, because he obviously supports Perry. Very sad, and Beck just lost a ton of credibility with many people. But back to my point - why is this even coming up? Medina is not a crazy loon, she's got some good ideas, and she has a long track record of political activism for conservative and constitutional causes. The only way to stop her is to discredit her with wild accusations and guilt by association - which is just what happened. Don't fall for it - read her statement about this subject.

So, for my summation, go back to the beginning of this post and read the common values most of us share. Stick to those, and campaign on and for those. Quit the in-fighting, it's what the establishment of both parties desire. You know, divide and conquer. Keep the focus on 3 to 5 core issues of fiscal responsibility, and we win. Bring the fear to the politicians. When we fight like this, they just smile.

Failure is the only option.

2010-02-11T09:22:00.000-06:00

The regulator of a free market is failure.

Think about that for a minute. We have many crisis in our national (and state, and city, and family) economies right now. Obviously, the myriad of regulations has not prevented the collapse of real estate, GM, Chrysler, Lehman Brothers and a host of other financial institutions, and the governments themselves. We are, as a nation, arguably bankrupt. Ask yourself how government regulation has failed, and what the answer is.

Legislative and bureaucratic bodies perpetually seek solutions to the problem of failure - and those solutions are called regulation. Whether that regulation is in the form of the FDIC for banks (Federal Deposit Insurance Corportation), the SEC for investments (Securities and Exchange Commission), or the myriad of other federal and state regulators, the goal of protecting the public has failed because the mechanism of that protection is faulty. We have created a false security based on someone else - a governmental agency - coming to the rescue, instead of evaluating the risk of failure on our own. We've gotten lazy, and allowed government to grow into a giant nanny. Time to fire Mary Poppins.

Many ask the valid question, "what about all of those people that would lose jobs if we didn't bail out (insert company or city or state here)?". Well, bailing out those who fail with taxpayer dollars (or more acurately, borrowed dollars that the taxpayers will pay back with interest), we're creating a larger problem and more future job losses. Think of pulling a band-aid off slowly (bailout), or fast. Or pulling a tooth slow, or fast. The pain is unavoidable, it's a matter of how bad it is, and how long it lasts. Politicians are trying to minimize their failure by prolonging and spreading out the pain of systemic failure - but that just makes the failure to come much larger. That means more people will, over time, lose their jobs than would have if we had let the market work, and failed businesses fail.

Don't discount the impact corruption has on the nanny state. Look at the political connections of those who have been bailed out, and ask yourself if influence played any part. I'll give you one example - Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail. Look at their competitors, and the connections they possess, and tell me corruption didn't play a major part. It is bad enough that government is (unconstitutionally) bailing out failed business enterprises, it is criminal that they're doing it selectively. This crosses party lines, and has been going on for years - but the core problem is the idea that government can bail anyone out. In a market economy, the winners and losers are picked by the consumers, not the government.

The Wright Brothers failed many times and went through 7 experimental aircraft, building on the previous failures to achieve sustained flight. From WikiQuote, Thomas Edison said (and there are many versions of this quote, and some dispute as to which one is accurate), "I have not failed 700 times. I have not failed once. I have succeeded in proving that those 700 ways will not work." Without failure - or as Edison saw it, finding ways that don't work - the market doesn't correct itself. Right now, our biggest failure in need of correction isn't, however, in the market.

It's in our Congress.

Basic Principles

2010-02-05T23:10:00.000-06:00

A philosophy of governance should inform every citizens' votes - whether they're voting for the first time, or they're in an actual elected office. Sadly, we don't really teach the philosophy this country was founded on, so we end up with self serving hacks who run after their own agenda. Because the public has had the dubious benefit of a public education, we don't even realize what we're missing. Here's a short guide to political principles. I'll be as brief as possible (for those of you who know me, you know the pain I will go through now).

Principle One - the Rule of Law. The Rule of Law means we don't have a rule of majority - our laws apply equally to all, regardless of position. If one person has the Law on their side, they win. This protects the biggest minority of all - the minority of One. Since we are a nation of individuals, and not one of groups (see European Socialism or various tribal states worldwide), the Rule of Law is critical. Without it, you desend into anarchy. With the rule of majority, you have tyranny.

Principle Two - we are a Republic. We are not a democracy, and the Founding Fathers specifically avoided creating one. Our first national government was so close to anarchy that we had to redo everything (see the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the Constitution). The Articles only lasted about seven years before they were replaced. Specific to a republican form of government is the election of representatives to govern instead of democracy, where everyone votes. Built into this system is a form of checks and balances (the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches are supposed to watch each other and check each other's power). Since the direct election of US Senators became law, we no longer have a State check at the Federal level - and this is a big problem. We also have lifetime politicians, which was a thing Jefferson wished to avoid but he never got his way (term limits), unfortunately.

Principle Three - we are a free market capitalistic economy. This means the marketplace, not the government, should determine the cost and distribution of goods and services. The role of the government is to play referree, keeping the money supply stable and ensuring the free flow of not just goods and services, but capital and labor as well. Individual choice determines who wins and loses - millions of people making millions of decisions. Government control of industry becomes fascism, and government ownership communism. Both fascism and communism are forms of socialism - also called progressivism begining in the early 20th century.

Principle Four - we have a limited government. At the federal level, this means government should not go beyond powers specifically granted to it in the Constitution, or by Amendment. Congress has stretched this far beyond original intent since the 1930's and FDR's victory over the Supreme Court. Specifically, the National Labor Relations Act and the Social Security Act. Up till about 1937, the Supreme Court was regularly ruling his New Deal programs unconstitutional - but he threatened to stack the court, and they caved. Since then, Congress has used the Commerce Clause to regulate everything under the sun. Government has exploded in a mountain of debt and taxes ever since. Because of this, our civil liberties have been greatly eroded, and our freedom compromised. The silver lining may be that government is now so big, the public is waking up - and hopefully, we can return to the law.

This is a long post, so I'll sum things up: the Rule of Law, under a Constitutional Republic, with a Free Market Economy, regulated by a Limited Government. If we can elect politicians at every level that follow just these things, we can clean up the mess that our government at all levels has become.

Starve the Beast - 2010 Oklahoma Budget

2010-02-01T23:03:00.004-06:00

Facing a budget shortfall in the neighborhood of 25%+, the discussion from the Oklahoma state capitol seems to be an argument about how much of the Constitutional Reserve (also known as the Rainy Day Fund) to spend. The Governor wants to spend quite a bit more than the GOP legislative leaders. The low amount is almost $250 million - and yet we're having the wrong conversation.

It's time to Starve the Beast.

Change the argument to how much we're going to cut. Cut agencies, cut boards, cut state workers, cut school districts, take the authority for tuition hikes away from the Boards of Regents and cut higher education. Cut Cut Cut. Cut MORE than 25% of every budget. Quit looking at state government as a jobs program and start looking at government as the drag on our economy and freedoms that it is. Yes, it's necessary. No, it shouldn't be as big as it is, or do all of the things that it does.

Why do we have over 500 school districts when we have 77 counties? Each one has a superintendent, with full administrative and support staff. Time to cut. This doesn't mean we close schools - it means we run them more efficiently. People aren't going to like this - but we can't afford the luxury of doing things the old way. Why does a college education require the average person to go deeply into debt to pay for it? It's too big, it costs too much, and the colleges have too much power. Cut their budgets and take the power to raise tuition and fees away from them - reserve that power to our elected officials. Their job is not to build vast campuses and a great "experience", it's to educate people for their future - not ruin it with debt.

Starve the Beast.

What about programs for the poor? I like Benjamin Franklin's position: "The best way to help the poor is to make them uncomfortable in their poverty." Time for a cold harsh look at all social service programs. Remember, our state was created at the start of the Progressive Era in America - it's littered with socialistic programs and ideas that are getting close to 100 years old. Time for a house cleaning!

I could go on about programs that need to be cut. That doesn't, however, address the real needs to good jobs and growing industry in this state. Oh, and forget about tourism and consumption-related fields (such as retail). Those industries are going to lose many jobs in the next few years. We need to create things for export, not spend ourselves into debt and poverty. We could start by fighting the federal government on each and every mandate the state is forced to comply with. You want jobs for young people trying to get their first one? Eliminate the minimum wage - people will be hired at the rate they produce, plus profit. You'll have a fight on your hands with the federal government - but that's a fight that needs to happen. Watch businesses flock here, and the demand for labor will skyrocket - and so will sales of commercial and residential real estate, and demand for goods produced here.

You want to talk about tort reform and/or worker's comp? Please - address the real issue, the real problem, the real Beast. The Beast is government. It's big, it's mean, it's nasty, and it won't go on a diet. Don't create ANOTHER agency to find ways to cut - stop funding those agencies that should be cut. You already know who they are. Efficiency is not going to fix things - government doing LESS is. Take away their money.

STARVE THE BEAST.

A Comedy of Communists

2009-08-06T14:05:00.004-05:00

Humor for me has always been dark and sarcastic. I'm not the guy to take to any movie showing people acting stupid, or in a slapstick manner. I know Jim Carrey and Ben Stiller are popular, but that's not my brand of humor. That being said, in a dark and sarcastic manner, I'm really enjoying watching the comedy of errors that is the great Obamification.

I'm only going to hit a few highlights here, since there's so much fodder for the mill. Here's my list of things to laugh about:

Bailouts - Automotive
Bailouts - Banking
Bailouts - Insurance
Takeover - Energy (Cap and Trade)
Takeover - Health Care
Foreign Policy - Apologies for Greatness
Foreign Policy - Appeasement of Terrorist Nations
Government - Czars (funny how the commies are now czars, isn't it?)

You get the idea.

As America wakes from the great slumbering nap we've been taking since Jimmy Carter nearly wiped us out, we all owe a giant debt of gratitude to Mr. Obama. (Yes, I know, we all owe a few other giant debts as well). The Progressive agenda - groups over individuals, rule by the elites instead of the people, confiscation of wealth, etc. - would have continued along with cranky white guys like me ranting about it, and most of the country watching TV. Nobody cared a year ago. Nobody cared until we started to crash. How many people do you know that feel like they looked up, and their country was going to hell, all of a sudden? Yes, it's been happening for quite some time - decades in fact - but most people just didn't pay attention.

I'm going to laugh as the communist / Marxist / fascist / progressive / liberal types see their dreams of totalitarianism go up in smoke over the next two and a half years. I'm going to laugh when Congress is thrown out on it's collective asses. I'm going to laugh as hunting for corruption in the public sector becomes a sport for conservative bloggers everywhere.

I just hope I don't have to cry too much in the process.

More, not Less - Now, not Later

2009-07-26T23:42:00.003-05:00

I am amazed at the fear and cowardice of the political class in this country. Since when did the American people decide we were going to cut back - we don't cut back, we expand!

When did it become our opinion that we use too much energy? We use 25% of the world's output of energy - why aren't we shooting for 50%? Some people want us to cut back - what a bunch of pinheads! Build some damn power plants - coal, nuclear, natural gas. Drill off shore, drill in ANWR - all over the place, everywhere, all the time. It takes energy to move things, and things have to move if things are going to grow. Quit listening to the wimps of the world who seem to be running things. They need their asses kicked out of office, just on principle.

Who says health care is broken? It's the best damn system the world has ever seen, and the only thing that's going to make it better is to get the government OUT, not let the government take over. We innovate, we develop, and the world comes to us for the cure. You want an example of government health care? Look at the fine job they've done at the VA, or with Medicare, or Medicaid. Do I need to go on here? If you're an illegal immigrant who doesn't have health care, you can get the hell out of my country. If you're 25 and just don't want to pay for it, that's your call. If you can't afford medical insurance, get off your ass and find a way to make a living. Sell your television, eat at home, get a second job and get out of debt - you're an American, find a way. I don't owe you anything, and neither do your fellow citizens. Sound harsh? Want to help the less fortunate? Donate to a private charity or your church, or volunteer. Stop trying to confiscate my wealth, and the wealth of my fellow citizens, just so you can feel good.

Where are the political leaders pushing for a higher standard of living, instead of "reducing our carbon footprint" or "saving" jobs? Anyone notice we're having record cold in parts of the country? I love the term "climate change". When did the climate NOT change? Ever watch a weather report? It's always changing - that's what weather does. It's also not the responsibility of government to create jobs. We're Americans, we don't want your help - we want you out of our way. Good job on that minimum wage hike, Congress. I hear that's going to put 300,000 more people out of work - why don't you let business hire people and pay them what their skills are worth? You think a bunch of lawyers (i.e. Congress) has any idea about how to run a business? Good luck with that one!

The moral of this post is we're Americans. We build things, we create wealth, and we don't like or need a government telling us how to live our lives. We want a better tomorrow, not your failed experiments in social engineering. We aren't listening to you and your moralizing about how we suck and we're not fair. You're not progressive, you're a bunch of looters. The day will come - and soon - when we rise up and take back our nation.

Watch out on Election Day - we're coming to take our country back.

The Symbolism of Sarah Palin

2009-07-12T01:29:00.002-05:00

It can be objectively stated that politics is perception. This statement, albeit somewhat cynical, is provably true. How we as a society see a candidate or officeholder has a marginal reflection on what that person actually has done, or will do. Which brings me to Sarah Palin.

To the Conservative - starved of a champion and faced with a squish like John McCain to take on the Great Red Menace known as Barrack Obama, Sarah Palin was a godsend. Last summer, which seems like eons ago, a speaker came forth who championed the regular folks (to borrow from O'Reilly), using language anyone could relate to. It's safe to say Sarah Palin had more charisma than any candidate since Ronald Reagan, at least for the Right. We would surely need it against the slickest operator of the left since Clinton - and maybe slicker than him. She had that flair for libertarianism that Alaska is known for, executive experience, a real life with a great story, and yes - there was that whole "she's hot" factor as well. The hotness factor has always helped the democrats - think Kennedy (JFK/RFK, not Teddy), Clinton (Bill, not Hillary), and Obama (or so it seems). Why not a help for the GOP on that score? But back to relevant issues - what did she stand for, resume aside?

You can't put the resume aside? Like hell you can't - the left and the mass media do it all the time. When was the last time you heard about Joe Biden and plagiarism - and withdrawing from the 1988 democratic presidential primary because of it? Isn't he now the Vice President? Good one there, guys. You really did a good job of vetting! How about Obama's past, with all of it's murky friends and interconnected relationships with felons, or Bill Clinton's protests against his country during war while overseas, or Hillary Clinton's defence of - well, you get the idea. Critiquing a resume is sometimes convenient, and sometimes not for the left/press. As I stated before, back to the subject at hand - the perception of Sarah Palin.

To most of middle America, especially those of a Conservative political philosophy, Sarah Palin is one of us. Let me repeat - she's one of us. She's a mom first - lots of kids, most important thing in her life. She loves her husband - he's second on her list (God is so obviously at the top of any list of priorities that for this discussion He is off the table). She would do anything to protect her kids and her husband - so would any regular person. She works hard - whether commercial fishing, dressing a moose, or running for office. So, kids, husband, job - she's got the order right so far, we're with her. She seems to get pissed off when she runs into political cronyism or corruption - check, we do too. She seems pissed off about what is being done to our country - check, we are too. Finally, she was phenomenal at going after elitists with both barrels. Now we like her so much, we'll even vote for McCain.

It has been privately suggested to me, and publicly addressed by the media and the left, that the above description of Sarah Palin is inaccurate. That she's an ambitious opportunistic politician that would sacrifice her family to move up, just like all of the rest of the political hacks. First, this is the position of the media - and any thinking American ignores the mainstream media these days, since we only want the facts and can come up with our own opinion, thank you very much. The more the media establishment spouts off about things - Palin, how bad climate change is, how much we need this that or the other governmental solution - the more we ignore them. They're all going bankrupt, and we're all laughing at them.

The truth is that I, and others like me, don't see Palin in that way. We see her as sincere. We see her as taking on the establishment, not co-opted by them. We see her as a true maverick - not going against a political party, but going against a political philosophy. That philosophy is elitism - the belief that the lawyers and bureaucrats, the Harvard MBA's and Wall Street economists, can plan and run the country. We believe the collective wisdom of 300 million or so American citizens is superior to the supposed experts. History proves us right, and our time will come again.

Whether we advance as individuals under the leadership of Sarah Palin is irrelevant - it's not the person, it's the principles she stands for.

I choose to Shrug.

2009-07-01T00:04:00.002-05:00

I have two jobs. My wife had one. We choose to Shrug.

My wife's job kept her away from our children. She now stays home every day with them, experiencing all of the joy and pain of discovery and growth. We choose to Shrug.

The hundreds of dollars each month we save in child care costs don't offset the thousands of dollars of lost income. Strangers no longer raise our children. We choose to Shrug.

I mow my own lawn, saving several more hundred dollars each month. My arms ache from edging, my sinuses itch and burn, and so does my skin. I have less free time. I choose to Shrug.

Dinner in a restaurant hasn't happened in quite a while. We eat hot dogs instead of steak. Our dog sits under the table at our feet every night. We choose to Shrug.

My newest car is nine years old. It's a Nissan Maxima, and it runs great. It's also paid for. So is the Honda and the Isuzu. I will not buy a new car, nor will I ever buy a GM or Chrysler product again. I choose to Shrug.

The only debt I have is mortgage debt. I will pay it off as soon as possible, so I can quit one of the jobs I have left. It is more important for me to be with my family than to earn more for the looters. I choose to Shrug.

If I don't need it, I won't buy it. There is no more "want". If it's not food, shelter, or energy, I don't need it. I choose to Shrug.

Cash is now king. Credit is dead. My community is five people and will never be larger - my wife, and my three children. Wail for my help. Petition my services and talent. Go to hell. I choose to Shrug.

The letters come, the donations are requested. Help us stand up to the destruction of our country! I will help myself. I will act as one, alone, against all of the petty tyranny in my life. I will vote. My contribution is to survive, and rebuild on the ashes of the destruction being done. I am an entrepreneur, a dreamer, a doer, a worker. I choose to Shrug.

For the last twenty years I have had never fewer than two jobs and as many as four. I have built wealth and spent it, saved it, invested it, and grown it. I will now live on it. I choose to Shrug.

One job of mine is in sales. I will continue to go to work and do my best, as I do every day. I will not, however, climb the corporate ladder. I choose to Shrug.

The other job of mine is in real estate. I am a Realtor. I will only sell the existing listings I have, and only help buyers who seek me out. I will not seek new listings. I will not seek new buyers. I will do my absolute best for my current clients - and I will not acquire any new ones. I choose to Shrug.

I have cut my income and expenses to the bone. I am going to cut more. I don't need to support those who would destroy this country with my taxes, my talent, my labor, my time. I will build wealth in tax sheltered ways, or not at all.

I choose to Shrug.

We're having the wrong argument.

2009-06-30T00:39:00.003-05:00

We don't use to much energy, we use too little.

We should focus on production instead of conservation.

It's not time for new laws. It's time to repeal old ones.

It's not which politician has the right solution. Politicians created the problem in the first place.

If you've been in office more than 10 years, your experience is no longer a plus. Quit now, please.

The illegal aliens are not the problem. They're chasing the dream. The lack of border enforcement and abdication of duty by the political class is the problem.

Racism is a problem - for white people.

Global warming is not caused by man. It's caused by the sun.

Looking to children or celebrities for wisdom and logic gives you neither.

Schools don't need more money. They need less bureaucracy and more local control.

We don't need to rethink how we do things. We need to remember how we did them.

Cutting or raising taxes is not the argument. Eliminating the need for so many of them is.

Government should not promote business. It should get out of it's way.

New Laws 2010 - A suggestion for the OK Legislature

2009-06-03T10:54:00.003-05:00

I find it interesting how many new laws are proposed and passed, argued and adopted each legislative session. Frankly, passing NO NEW LAWS would be a refreshing change. Even better would be REPEALING many of the bad old laws that previous enlightened legislative sessions produced.

If the tax code is too complicated for the average citizen to understand, repeal it and start over.

If regulations are so complex that businesses must hire legal teams to figure out how they can legally operate, get to repealing. You are blocking real jobs and growth.

If you think a new mandate is going to be good for anyone, you're wrong. Stop - let us, the people, make our own choices and negotiate in our own interests. We'll do a better job of it than you will.

Yes, this means I am against mandating coverage for autism - and every other mandate handed down by the legislature. You're driving the cost up - why don't you back off? If I want something covered, it's my responsibility to seek it out, not yours to force me to pay for something I don't want.

See if you can make Oklahoma the state with the least regulation, the lowest taxes, and the smallest barriers to new business. Watch us boom in the middle of the socialization of the coasts. You want to create some new jobs? Figure out how to get rid of as many laws, taxes, mandates, and regulations as possible.

Stop trying to be a parent to adults. Resist the fascist temptation for social engineering. Be bold, and trust the people.

Taxes 2010 - A suggestion for the OK Legislature

2009-06-03T09:33:00.006-05:00

The frequent complaint of statists everywhere - of all political parties - is that "it can't be done". Nowhere is this more apparent than when cutting or eliminating taxes is on the table. As I am fond of repeating, just because it has always been done one way, doesn't mean it can't be done another.

First, let's establish the purpose of taxes. The only purpose of taxes is to fund government spending. If you're using taxes for social engineering purposes, you're unethical. This may seem harsh to some - after all, many people support sin taxes on tobacco and alcohol and argue the cost to society is high for those who use these substances. Blah, blah, blah. That argument would hold water if we taxed sugar and fatty foods at a rate to recover the cost of heart disease and diabetes. If it's legal, it should be taxed at the same rate as anything else. Who are you, in your infinite wisdom, to dictate the habits and lifestyles of your fellow citizens?

Next, let's look at the impact of taxes. To borrow from Daniel Webster's argument in McCulloch vs. Maryland, the power to tax is the power to destroy. Application of this principle indicates the lack of a tax will facilitate growth. So where should taxes be removed? If we look at a few examples, we can see that both Florida and Texas benefit from no income tax, and Nevada and Delaware from the cop orate tax structure there. Shifting taxes from the state income tax and corporate taxes in Oklahoma would be extremely difficult. Most people would say, choose one or the other, and you're still being unrealistically optimistic. I say over-reach and do it right the first time.

Many would rightly question what purpose such a massive change in the way the state picks our pockets would have. How will this impact us? First, you would have a surge in individuals moving to Oklahoma to establish residency. There have been proposals to eliminate income taxes for retired persons - but this is highly unethical and probably un-Constitutional. Can you say equal treatment under the law? The benefit of no income tax is apparent. What about the corporate tax structure? When a state has a tax structure that has little or no negative impact on business, businesses move there. How would you like to see large national companies take advantage of our location, our inexpensive energy and land, and willing workforce? Doing these to things would be a quantum shift in Oklahoma's economy.

Finally, these two things - eliminating the state income tax and state corporate taxes - are goals. It will take years to achieve them, but they should be the stated focus of our conservatives in government. We need a concrete plan with step by step action to achieve them. There will need to be a shift to other tax sources - probably an increase in property and sales taxes. This won't be popular, but the new jobs that come from business and individuals moving to a lower tax state WILL be popular. Learn to sell your message and you'll win that battle. We need massive, drastic and permanent cuts in state government services and employment to offset the drop in tax receipts. Privatize everything possible and have a fire sale of state assets. You have roughly 90 years of statism to reverse, so you've got a lot to do.

Stop telling us what can't be done, and start doing what should be done.

I heard the news today.... oh boy!

2009-06-01T09:02:00.002-05:00

(Tip of the hat to Mark Shannon for pointing out the anniversary of Sgt. Peppers, and giving me a catchy title for today's post - and a relevant one too!)

Abortion doctor in Kansas - one of the worst examples of the medical profession on the planet - has been shot dead, in church. I almost don't know where to begin with this one. If you don't know who this guy is, he's one of a very few - I think 3 - "doctors" who performed abortions after 21 weeks in the entire USA. Couple of thoughts here: is anyone at all surprised this guy was murdered? Is it strange that he was shot in a church? Anyone shocked that Obama is sending out the US Marshall Service to defend other abortionists? Anyone going to be surprised when this is used by the left to go after conservative groups?

General Motors goes bankrupt - thanks to all of you idiot politicians that tried to interfere with capitalism and threw away billions at GM and Chrysler. I look forward to the UAW and the feds - both US and Canadian - to finish the job and totally destroy what is not sold off. Then Obama will use this as part of his pretext for nationalizing health care. All part of the evil marxist / socialist / facsist plot to destroy America.

In International News - North Korea is about to threaten nuclear war with the USA, Japan, China, South Korea, Russia, and/or anyone else who points out their Fearless Leader has bad hair; Israel is about to destroy Iran's nuclear program, igniting WWIII; and Pravda is amazed at our rapid decent into Marxism.

If you're paying attention to Jon & Kate Plus 8, stop. Your appetite for wallowing in other people's drama is part of what's wrong with this country. Pay attention to the first couple of stories I posted here. They impact your freedom, your wallet, and your life. I'd say those are more important.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled Monday....

Transportation 2010 - A suggestion for the OK Legislature

2009-05-30T10:39:00.006-05:00

In the interest of simplicity, I'll go with just two suggestions for state transportation issues and the 2010 Legislature:

Get rid of the damn turnpikes, and the Turnpike Authority.

It's time for them to go. Fold the costs back into the transportation budget where they should be, and make it cheaper for interstate travel and trucking. It will boost our economy, which is what the legislature should be trying to do. The Turnpike Authority currently has 32 projects and estimates it would take $93 million to replace those funds. Considering we divert 24% of motor fuel taxes away from transportation, that shouldn't be a problem. Divert anything left over after maintenance costs to retirement of turnpike bond debt. Turnpikes are a competitive disadvantage to surrounding states. That diverted money needs to be made up with some cuts - if you can't find any, start firing some state workers. Start eliminating some departments. Eliminate some Commissions - here's a few that could be consolidated....

Fold the Aeronautics Commission, the Space Industry Development Authority, the Motor Vehicle Commission, and the Used Motor Vehicle and Parts Commission into the Department of Transportation. Do all of these Commissions and the Authority have valuable and important roles within state government? Of course. Do they really need to be commissions on their own? Hell no!

Let's keep in mind that all of these various departments and agencies don't really serve the taxpayer. They're a great way to deflect blame for problems to another agency/commission/department, they're a great way to give out political patronage jobs, and they're a great waste of resources. They're also the result of one party rule in Oklahoma from statehood until the very recent past. Time to shake things up!

Primary Education 2010 - A suggestion for the OK Legislature

2009-05-26T18:19:00.007-05:00

Education - that giant chunk of the state budget that gets fought over every year. Who gets how much, what are we going to teach our children, and how about retirement benefits? Somehow, what's best for our children gets lost in the battle over money and power. We tinker with a system that really needs to be totally overhauled. Call it a reconstruction.

Let's start with a premise - the people who know what's best for the children of the State are not the educators or the legislators, not the advocates nor the administrators, but the PARENTS. The level of government closest to the parents is the local level - the School Board. The control of money, curriculum, and all standards and policies should be set at this level - not by the state. The state should minimize it's role, which is a function of the legislature. That being said, the state needs to reconstruct the basic structure of operation of the districts, which are antiquated. Let's start with the districts.

From Wikipedia: "The U.S. state of Oklahoma has 537 Public school districts—425 independent and 111 dependent. The independent districts provide education from at least first grade through high school. Most dependent school districts provide education only through eighth grade and a few only through sixth grade." This is ridiculous. There are Superintendents, administrative offices, layers and layers of bureacracy, and duplication of services of all sorts going on all over the place. We need to cut this down to a manageble number - like one School District per county. We could even make it one District per (insert a number) of students. This is ridiculous. Not only that, we can't afford it and having this many districts impacts the quality of education the students receive, by diverting dollars to non-classroom items. For reference, Texas has 1139 districts, Missouri 465, Kansas 308, Arkansas 305, Colorado 178, and New Mexico has 84. Oklahoma averages, as of 1990, 5862 students per district (for some reason that was what I found most recent on the state website links). Does anyone doubt that we can get to the level of Kansas or Arkansas, if not down to the Colorado or New Mexico number of districts? Can't we do better than all of these? We shouldn't be shooting for mediocrity.

Regarding the dollars spent, there's a great article at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, documenting the actual costs of education K-12. It's $11250 per student, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 - the most recent year Steve Anderson, who did the study, could get official data. I think we should push most of this down to the school district level - let each district decide how to best spend the money. Do you really think the legislators and bureacrats can do a better job of allocation these funds? For a while, some needs to be retained to fund the teacher retirement fund - and make it private instead of defined benefit. After all, those of us in the private sector do it that way. Defined benefits are part of the problem bringing down GM and Chrysler, and they'll do the same to the state if we don't head off the problem.

To sum up - localize control of everything - class size, teacher pay, number of administrators, everything - localize the money, and reduce the number of districts to a manageble level.