Mormon On Politics

Contraception...A New Women's Issue?

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 20:10:00 +0000

This latest trek down the women's right to choose birth control and contraception is a desperate attempt by the Obama media complex to create an issue that does not really exist. When you can't run on your record, you need to run on issue that are made-up.

Birth control can have a broad definition. Simply it is the ability a woman has to control pregnancy. Women have done this for millenia. Whether through abstinence, the rhythm method or some form of man-made contraception, women have the means to control pregnancy. (Note, abortion is not contraception.)

There are some organizations, namely religious sects that do not want its members to use any contraception. The points being let nature take its course and increase its likely followers. Even within religious sects, most women/couples make up their own minds.

As far as I know, the LDS Church has never told its members to not use birth control. Rather the guidance has been to make the decision as a couple through prayer and wisdom. There are certainly couples that elect not to use contraception, but this is their decision. If there is a couple where they are in disagreement, then this couple has other issues that should have been worked out prior to marriage. In my mind, this decision is weighted more on the woman's opinion. The male must provide but a greater burden is placed on the woman to raise, nurture and care for the children.

The whole issue being raised by the Democratic media complex / MSM is an effort to divert attention from Obamacare toward some made-up social issue aimed at labeling conservative and religious Republicans as non-mainstream.

The bottomline is that it is not the government's role to provide healthcare for its citizens. It is not something provided in the Constitution. One cannot force someone to provide a service. Likewise, it is not the government's role to provide contraceptive products -- to use taxpayers money to this end. If private insurance companies want to offer this as part of its healthcare coverage options, that is their right. In this model, the subscribers fund this with their fees.

The Republicans had better nail this head-on, not with an argument about the merits of contraception rather the role the government should play in healthcare.

Obama's Make-Believe Fiscal 2013 Budget

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 01:04:00 +0000

Sure, presidential proposed budgets are always wishful thinking, certainly political in nature. But Obama's 2013 fiscal budget proposed this week was pure fantasy.

Just like he said after taking office back in February 2009 that his presidency would be "one-term proposition" if the economy did not recover in three years, he is making a similar claim with this new budget. His claim is that during his second term the $1.3 trillion in deficits will be cut in half.

The problem with his budgets and his presidency is that the policies he and his party espouse are based on a lie they prefer to believe. They believe that by greater government spending and having more people dependent on the government, it is a better political society that the opposite. It is only better for two minute groups: the most destitute and those that are in power. For everyone else, it is enslavement.

Obama's 2013 budget and his four next potential budgets will be just like his past three, disasters. Obama's four years (including 2013) have seen annual deficits over $1.29T each (never happened in our history); revenues will not reach 16% of GDP (has not happened since 1950); annual spending of more then 24% are the highest since 1946; total new deficit is $5T -- over 74% of GDP and heading over 77% next year. Add this to the IOU programs of Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and Obamacare, the picture is Greece, just on a more massive scale.

The economic conditions the Obama Administration has created, will do nothing to get us out of this recession because there are too many barrier to risk assumption and business success, from burdensome taxes to stifling regulation.

If Obama wins re-election, America will have returned to the roots it left centuries ago. We will morph to become nothing more than despotic.

Declining Marriage & Morals in America

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 22:24:00 +0000

"The New American Divide" article in today's WSJ gave me pause about marriage and morality.

Americans are marrying later. Fewer are getting married at all. Divorce is still rampant. Couple that live together prior to marriage divorce at higher rates. Non-married mothers are almost as numerous as married mothers. Abortion still an epidemic.

According to the article, since 1960, marriage for white upper-middle class is down 11% (from 94% to 83%). For white working class, marriage is down 36% (from 84% in 1960 to 48% in 2010).

There are many reasons for this. One impacting all aspects of American society, more than just marriage, is declining morality. How many couples are celibate prior to after being married? Virginity has become a joke in the media -- the mocking of Tebow case in point. Women are too free with their bodies, starting at an increasingly young age.

Blaming it on the media is easy. The real issue is in the home with lack of parental supervision and real parenting. Too many children are unsupervised throughout the day. Human nature dictates curiosity into the world of vices.

Even in towns and neighborhood in Mormon-dominated Utah, we see increasingly poor decisions. Return missionaries taking advantages of young, naive girls. Married men increasingly involved in pornography and extramarital affairs. Overt homosexuality trending up. Mormon culture is not too different than non-Mormon culture, sadly. Too many are not living their religion. Too many lie, cheat and justify unrighteous behavior.

Decisions of a moral nature impact society at it core. Children raised by single mothers is devastating to the woman and to the child. In most cases, there is little chance these children will amount to much. The mothers works, the children are at home. The mothers bring home little income. The children's education is weak -- the public schools stink and education in the home non-existent. The viscous circle continues all because a woman thought that she needed to have sex with a man she was not married to.

It use to be that for a man to have sex, he needed to either be married or he paid for it. Men are made to have sex and to be married. It is what makes humanity work. Women get protection and can minimize economical risk. Children get stability and balance. Certainly it is never perfect but traditional families are still the best way to build a successful and prosperous society. The numbers back this up.

Unfortunately, with the decline in marriage and morality, these problem will continue to spiral in the wrong way. What's right will be spurned; what's wrong will be justified.

Romney Blowing It Over Taxation Issue

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 05:09:00 +0000

Romney either is getting bad advice or is personally unable to take advantage of a teaching moment. When he is confronted over releasing his tax records, he stumbles and mumbles. It has gotten so bad that something as stupid as this is costing him significant primary votes.

Romney, unlike most of us, earns most of his income through dividends and capital gains. Those are taxed at a lower rate (15%) than wages (25%). Capital gain taxes come after corporate taxes (35%). Business owners are effectively taxed in the 40-45% range. From the 1/20/12 WSJ Opinion page -- "How Much the Rich Pay":

The nearby table from the CBO report shows that in 2007 the average income tax rate paid by the 1% was 18.8%, compared to 4.2% for Americans in a broadly defined middle class from the 21st to 80th income percentiles. The poorest 20% on average paid a net negative income-tax rate of 5.6% because of the checks they receive for tax credits that are "refundable." These are essentially transfer payments redistributing income from the rich and middle class to the poor.

The main point is that the average effective tax rate on the richest 1% is already twice as high as that of the middle class. No matter how many times Mr. Buffett asserts it, secretaries and plumbers do not on average pay a higher tax rate or less in taxes than do CEOs. Here is what the CBO concludes: "Taken as a whole, the federal tax system is progressive."

Romney needs to be proactive and educate the American people. He is losing points because Gingrich, a phony to the core, gives the appearance that he is willing to take on the biased MSM. Unless Romney gets tough, he will have wasted 8 years of his life.

SOPA: Battle Over Money Not Ethics

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:40:00 +0000

The House bill (H. R. 3261) referred to as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill, or completely known as the bill "To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of U.S. property, and for other purposes" has pitted the Southern Californian Hollywood immorals against the Northern California Silicon Valley immorals.

The motivation is stop web sites from posting including selling copyrighted material -- music, video, etc. -- without the approval of the artists or content providers. Whereas most of the offending sites are based outside of the USA, the proposed law would require U.S. search engines, advertising networks and other providers to block access to those sites and payments sites could not transfer funds to them. The law also would hold those US firms that facilitate this -- knowingly or not -- responsible and liable.

There are dolts running around who hate the legislature because it impacts their ability to access content for free. In their mind, there is no such thing as copyrighted material. These are those that have never bought a CD in their lives; why should they, music is free.

Others; e.g., the content providers, want to stop all leaks of content and do not want to give away what has value.

Illegal file-sharing via peer-to-peer or file lockers, cannot be justified as being fair to the content providers. For example, Megaupload based in Hong Kong generated around $175 million per year in selling copyrighted material -- material they do not own nor pay rights, royalties or remuneration for.

The problem is real but another massive law is not going to solve this issue. Search engine firms are pro-active and shutting down sites selling or sharing unauthorized materials. Fiddling with DNS by filtering out specific domains on a massive scale does not seem prudent. Content filtering companies offer this service today.

Like most legislation, SOPA (and PIPA) are motivated by specific groups. And the bottom-line is that it is financially motivated. This one sounds like certain Democrats providing paybacks to their Hollywood supporters. it has nothing to do with what is right or best for the nation.

Destiny of the Republic

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 19:29:00 +0000

One of the better books of 2011 is Candice Millard's Destiny of the Republic. It is the story of James Garfield's unlikely rise to the Presidency of the United States, the political factions of the 1880s, a short yet meaningful presidential tenure, a traumatic assassination ordeal, a crazed assassin, backwoods medicine and modern medicine.

James A. Garfield -- a poor Ohioan, raised by a widowed mother who through her prayers and his ability to recognize providence, was able to become a leader, educator, scholar and state politician. He help raise seven children (five survived to adulthood) who all went on to lead productive lives and heritages of their own. Garfield never sought the Presidency but achieve it he did. After taking the office oath in March 1881, he spent the first couple of months with a deathly ill spouse (Lucretia). In July, he was shot. He suffered at the hands of incompetent doctors for nearly 10 weeks before dying. His presidency stood for anti-corruption/anti-spoils that dominated American politics. He also was able to help bring about a national healing; sixteen years after the Civil War, America became less North Vs. South, and more "we."

Charles Guiteau -- a mentally deranged man who lead an interesting life of his own, in a convoluted way, felt it was God's will that he kill Garfield in favor of the Stalwart-style of politics he seemed to prefer. He felt by killing Garfield, fellow Stalwart Chet Arthur would give him a place in his new administration. Though well read, he was a vagrant. He was hung a year after he shot Garfield, after a failed insanity defense.

Roscoe Conkling - he is arguably the definition of corrupt American politics. Though a Senator (NY), he was the man "behind the scenes," but wanted everyone to know how important he was. He was the leader, along with Ulysses Grant, of the Republican Stalwart faction. He liked the spoil system of politics. Few have had a higher regard for themselves than Conkling. Interesting, his man, Chester Arthur, was placed as the VP to be Conkling's puppet. After Garfield's death, Arthur did not fulfill this expected role.

Willard Bliss - the medical doctor that appointed himself President Garfield's doctor following the shooting. His meddling and old school ways of medicine was what killed Garfield. It is likely that if left alone, Garfield would have recovered. (Thousands of soldiers had survived shoots with the bullets still inside.) He did not believe in the septic school of medicine as pioneered by Joseph Lister and his proponents. Garfield's autopsy and post-analysis clearly place a great deal of blame on Bliss. Interesting, this was Guiteau's main defense -- he had merely shot him, it was Bliss' medling with unclean hands and tools that killed him.

Alexander Graham Bell - One of the challenges the medical people were hung-up on was trying to find and remove the bullet in Garfield. Bell we dedicated, oh he was dedicated, at building something that would identify the bullet so surgery would be more precise. He invented the metal detector, a device he called the induction balance. He tried it on Garfield but due to the mind-set of Bliss, he would only allow him to search the area Bliss thought the bullet was lodged. It turned out the bullet was on the left side, not the right side that was the focus of so many probes.

Great characters. New insights and information that few are aware of. This is a great book. Tough to put down. Like all good history, the lessons of the past have direct applications to today's problems. Thanks for the research and good writing Candice Millard.

The Republican Presidential Nomination Process in 1880

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:30:00 +0000

I was fascinated by what occurred in Chicago at the Republican Convention during the summer of 1880. A process long since abandoned.

At the time, the Republican Party was split into two factions: Stalwarts and Half-Breeds. The Stalwarts were proponents of the spoil system and opposed to reconciliation with the South. Key players were Ulysses Grant and Roscoe Conkling. Half-Breeds were reformers spear-headed by current President Rutherford Hayes, John Sherman (brother of General William Tecumseh Sherman), and James Blaine (current Secretary of State).

All of the Republican candidates were well known, part of the established bureaucracy. The Stalwarts' candidate was Grant, targeting a third term after four years off. The Half-Breeds' candidate was less clear.

James Garfield was not a candidate. He disliked the limelight. Although a state politician, he was mainly an educator and scholar. He was there to nominate a fellow Ohioan, John Sherman. After an impressive nomination speech for Grant by one of America's most creepy and repugnant politicians, Senator Conkling (NY), Garfield gave his nominating speech for Sherman.

Garfield was not a fan of Sherman. He thought there were better candidates. However, he gave his speech, and a great one it was. After dozens of ballots, there was no clear victor. The division was too great. The hatred between groups intense. One voice proposed Garfield. Garfield was not interested. After more ballots and backroom jeering, Garfield had 399 votes, 20 more than were required to win the nomination.

Garfield never agreed to become a candidate. Yet in a matter of hours, he became the Republican Presidential nominee. Interesting, over the next few months leading up to the election in November, candidates did little campaigning personally, leaving it up to the Party. Garfield beat Winfield Scott Hancock to become America's 20th President.

Electoral vote 214 (Garfield) 155 (Hancock)
States carried 19 19
Popular vote 4,446,158 4,444,260
Percentage 48.3% 48.2%

The Republican Party nomination process and resulting candidate Garfield is refreshing. They got the right man for the job. Garfield was a great man, served only to honor his Party and country.

In today's political world, this can never occur. Our system is set-up to promote Party insiders and the wealthy. The best man can never win because he would never put himself (and his family) through the process.

If here is one thing I have learned from American political history, any man that seeks the Presidency is not the man (or woman) for the job. Their egos and corruption should automatically disqualify them.

Whomever wins the Republican Presidential nomination this summer and whoever wins the election this November, America will not be better off. Sure, I will vote for the Republican candidate but I know he will be deeply flawed, corrupted and ego-maniacal. At best, we will replace one self-aggrandized puppet with another.

My belief is that a true, conservative Republican will help us realize less government control over our freedoms, less taxes, and more mature fiscal and monetary policies. History has proven that this has rarely been the case and probably will never be again.

Private Equity Investing and Mitt Romney

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 02:39:00 +0000

The harsh truth is that capitalism is not altruistic. Those that manage private equity investing or venture capital firms are not responsible for the average worker in their firm's portfolio. Their mandate is to maximize the return for the investors.

The average American cannot relate to having a surfeit of money. They cannot relate to finding help with identifying investment opportunities for their millions. But there are those that can and do.

Newt Gingrich and "his" PAC are bent on a new form of class warfare. They are trying to build points by attack Romney for the negatives that occurred during his Bain Capital days. As part of its effort to maximize investor wealth, for all the good Bain Capital did, it also shuttered American factories and outsourcing workers’ jobs overseas.

In a competitive world, right or wrong, financial decisions are frequently made without the emotional baggage of worker feelings. Just about every bankrupt business has great, competent workers that get caught up in harsh realities.

Jimmy Stewart made employees and community work in "It's A Wonderful Life." But real life is sometimes not as Hollywood portrays it.

In private equity and venture capital investing, their are more losers than winners. More companies do not make it than do. It is probably 10-20% that actually make money.

If an investment firm has as it objective to maximize investor wealth without the loss of one job, I would bet that firm is not a very profitable one.

Few like the fact the the rich get richer. Few like the fact that when everyone seems to be losing money, others are making it. Few like it when one person loses his job while another gets one (especially if it is in another country).

It will be challenging for Romney to defend his record at Bain Capital because it is not something most Americans can understand and relate to.

Stock Market Wants to Soar

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 19:19:00 +0000

Today's front page story on the WSJ is "Stock Market Hits 5-Month High." For years now the Dow and other major indexes have gone up and down. First getting over that 10,000 point market then for short time in the 14,000 range. The recent global recession saw it fall to the 7,000 point range in 2009 and come back to over 12,000 now. The question is why?

On Friday, the market went up on a pathetic piece of news that Congress passed a two-month stay on the Social Security payroll tax. Equity investors are looking for any news.

-- Unemployment not up as high as anticipated
-- New housing starts not as negative as thought
-- American consumer spending up from all-time lows
-- European central bankers agreeing to massive loans
-- Obama Administration's massive Keynesian spending and unimaginable debts buy us a few years.

If Congress would create positive economic conditions with lower taxes, fewer entitlements and decrease the scope government, this economy would soar.

The Democrats benefit from tough times because the poorer people become the more likely they will vote for entitlement and spending programs -- Democrat policies.

As the masses become more equal in a poorer direction, the few at the top become richer. This is the history of the socialism.

South Carolina Voter Law Blocked By Feds

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:59:00 +0000

The Department of Justice rears is ugly political head by blocking South Carolina's new voter identification law which requires would-be voters to show photo identification.

The feds claim that the law will effect poorer, uneducated people; i.e., African-American, who either cannot afford or do not know how to obtain a legal identification -- state-issued or military photo identification. Current law allows voters to use a printed voter registration card as identification.

This continues to point out the demarcation lines between the class warfare, liberal Obama administration and Republican-led state governments.

The federal Voting Rights Act specifies that states must prove that any changes in voting law don't have the effect of discriminating against minorities. (When I recently voted in Utah, I had to show my ID. I was thankful for that.)

Democrats claim the Republicans are trying to limit the right to vote. Republicans claim the law is designed to avoid vote fraud.

It is clear that the individual that is able to make it to the polls but cannot or does not know how to get a legal ID will only vote Democrat. Politics rules its ugly head for all the wrong reasons.

Payroll Tax Break, Extended Unemployment, Medicare Cut Debacle

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 18:37:00 +0000

After weeks of posturing, Congress approved a two-month renewal of payroll tax cuts for 160 million workers, unemployment benefits for millions and sustaining of current Medicare payment rates. The news is what a joke our Congressional leaders and President are.

The Democrats wanted the 2 month extension for the payroll tax; the Republicans wanted a full year. Neither will address the risk element associated with business in America.

Reid's error is thinking the two month extension will somehow benefit the American economy. What it will do is give the Democrats and President another chance to play class warfare in a few weeks. Boehner's error was thinking that 12 months was somehow better than two months. What it will allow him to do is by caving, he will be able to say he compromised.

Neither party appears to have any interest in solving our national economic woes.

The American people, and more importantly the nation, are not being served by its federally-elected officials. We have not been for years. And it is unlikely that this will change anytime soon.

As long as we allow our politicians to play class warfare games, the real effort to create a viable economic climate in America will never exist.

Citizens Pursuing Their Self-Interest

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:43:00 +0000

Our presidential nomination process is way too long. We know who the Democrat nominee is and what he stands for. For the most part, we know what the Republican candidates stand for. They differ on some things, are similar on most; the main differences comes down to personality, track record and electability.

The 2012 elections, as have the federal elections for the past century, offer a clear path for the nation. I want leaders, e.g., a President, that supports the following simple principles.

I want leaders with a clearly delineated vision, one not beholden to special interests and donors.

I want politicians that believe in a merit-based society, not an entitlement society. I want people to achieve their rewards based on their education, intelligence, work effort, and willingness to take risks.

I want a government that minimizes hurdles and costs businesses and individuals need to incur as they pursue their self-interest.

I want leaders that support an economy where individuals pursue what's in their self interest, not one based on a centralized group of planners who feel they know what is best for all.

I want leaders that follow our Constitution as the Founder intended, not a document tossed about by revisionist judges and bureaucrats.

I desire leaders that believe that America must lead in values, economic development and military, no those that go out of their way to support perversions, non-citizen preferences, ridiculous government hand-outs, and the why-can't-we-all-just-get-along foreign policy mindset.

Republicans as a rule support these principles; Democrats do not. Because of these personal beliefs, I have rarely voted for a Democrat (I did when I was very young...once).

The problem with many of today's candidates is that they are Republicans In Name Only (RINO). The Republican that will beat the Democrat Obama will be the one that best adheres to these "conservative" principles, not the middle-of-the-road, do-nothing posture of the independent.

Yogi Berra Quotes

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:38:00 +0000

Yogi Berra's second claim to fame is for being one of the most quoted figures in the sports world. He is credited with coining the deceptively simplistic observation, "It ain't over till it's over." But he's also known for his flubs. Here is a collection of the most notorious of these.

"This is like deja vu all over again."

"You can observe a lot just by watching."

"He must have made that before he died." -- Referring to a Steve McQueen movie.

"I want to thank you for making this day necessary." -- On Yogi Berra Appreciation Day in St. Louis in 1947.

"I'd find the fellow who lost it, and, if he was poor, I'd return it." -- When asked what he would do if he found a million dollars.

"Think! How the hell are you gonna think and hit at the same time?"

"You've got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there."

"I knew I was going to take the wrong train, so I left early."

"If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else."

"If you can't imitate him, don't copy him."

"You better cut the pizza in four pieces because I'm not hungry enough to eat six."

"Baseball is 90% mental -- the other half is physical."

"It was impossible to get a conversation going; everybody was talking too much."

"Slump? I ain't in no slump. I just ain't hitting."

"A nickel isn't worth a dime today."

"Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded."

"It gets late early out there." -- Referring to the bad sun conditions in left field at the stadium.

"Glen Cove." -- Referring to Glenn Close on a movie review television show.

Once, Yogi's wife Carmen asked, "Yogi, you are from St. Louis, we live in New Jersey, and you played ball in New York. If you go before I do, where would you like me to have you buried?" Yogi replied, "Surprise me."

"Do you mean now?" -- When asked for the time.

"I take a two hour nap, from one o'clock to four."

"If you come to a fork in the road, take it."

"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough in the second half you give what's left."

"90% of the putts that are short don't go in."

"I made a wrong mistake."

"Texas has a lot of electrical votes." -- During an election campaign, after George Bush stated that Texas was important to the election.

"Thanks, you don't look so hot yourself." -- After being told he looked cool.

"I always thought that record would stand until it was broken."

"Yeah, but we're making great time!" -- In reply to "Hey Yogi, I think we're lost."

"If the fans don't come out to the ball park, you can't stop them."

"Why buy good luggage? You only use it when you travel."

"It's never happened in the World Series competition, and it still hasn't."

"How long have you known me, Jack? And you still don't know how to spell my name." -- Upon receiving a check from Jack Buck made out to "bearer."

"I'd say he's done more than that." -- When asked if first baseman Don Mattingly had exceeded expectations for the current season.

"The other teams could make trouble for us if they win."

"He can run anytime he wants. I'm giving him the red light." -- On the acquisition of fleet Ricky Henderson.

"I never blame myself when I'm not hitting. I just blame the bat, and if it keeps up, I change bats. After all, if I know it isn't my fault that I'm not hitting, how can I get mad at myself?"

"It ain't the heat; it's the humility."

"The towels were so thick there I could hardly close my suitcase."

"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours."

"I didn't really say everything I said."

Blame Game with the Federal Reserve

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 22 Oct 2011 04:13:00 +0000

Full disclosure, I am a Ron Paul fan. I loved his book End The Fed. When I read his 10/20/11 WSJ article "Blame the Fed for the Financial Crisis," it made me wonder what the other Republican candidates' opinions are on the worth and value of the Federal Reserve Bank.

This goes to the very core of what we think the roll of government should be. In a capitalistic society, government has no role in picking winners and loser. The markets decide. Unfortunately, politicians and key appointed leaders have a different view in most governments. They all believe in manipulation, that they know better. The fed is not exempt, in fact manipulation is what it is all about.

Arrogance is its Achilles' heel. They believe they know what is best for all. They are smart, we are not. Interesting, central banks are core to Marxist and socialist doctrine. Price manipulation is wrong, whether it be for commodities, interest rates or money supply. Why? Because they get it wrong more often than they get it right. Free markets get it right every time.

The Fed governors are like politicians: they must do something. They want people to know that they are smart and did x, y and z, even though x, y and z either causes the problems or dig us a deeper hole.

Democrats Win By Spin & Funding Local Unions

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 03:41:00 +0000

Elections are won in the so-called center, through voters who really don't know what they believe, rarely study the issues and just want everyone to get along. These are the targets of both parties, however the Democrats tend to do a better job attracting them.

Democrats can never win with the truth. They will never say that government is good, the bigger the better. They will never tell people that if they become more dependent on the government, they will always be mediocre at best.

Take Harry Reid's latest "jobs math." He had the audacity (that word again) to say the following:

It's very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine; it's the public-sector jobs where we've lost huge numbers, and that's what this legislation is all about.

Unfortunately, the numbers do not back this up. Since 2008 when the recession began, federal government added over 250,000 new jobs, a 13.5% increase in two years. Despite the stimulus funds designed to help state and local governments, government employment deceased since 2008.

On the private side, there are still over 2.5 million fewer jobs in America than in 2008. Hence the 9.1 percent unemployment rate. Harry has his facts reversed.

So what are Reid's goals with his (and Obama's) jobs agenda?

1) Put money into state and local governments, namely schools, made up of dues-paying union members who only fund Democrat candidates at the local level -- Senate and House candidates.

2) Claim that only the Democrats care about jobs because Republicans will not pass a bogus jobs bill.

Lies coupled with spin equals Democrat tactics. If it works, why should they care they win? All they want is the power. The mean of achieving it is a footnote at best, than know one really cares about.

Federal Government Continues to Spend Unabated

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:34:00 +0000

The U.S. federal government continues to spend as if it has unlimited revenue.

CBO says that overall outlays rose 4.2% from 2010 (1.8% adjusted for timing shifts), when spending fell slightly from 2009. Defense spending rose only 1.2% on a calendar-adjusted basis, and Medicaid only 0.9%, but Medicare spending rose 3.9% and interest payments by 16.7%.

Government austerity is a myth.

The Obama Administration continues to perpetuate the lie that many groups, including the Occupy Whatever, are buying into: that taxing the rich will go a long way to solving our fiscal problems.

When half of the nation benefits from some form of governmental dole, changes to our national budget is difficult at best. The masses increasingly prefer mediocre to barely sustainable lives. They will certainly vote for the grow-government Democrats. The Republicans are do-nothing fat cats that are unwilling to do the right thing for the nation. They appear oblivious to the slow, self-administered poisons that will relegate America to another fallen republic.

Democrats have no interest is doing what is right for the nation because doing right will remove them from power. Democrats must grow government. Democrats must spend. Democrats must make populous promises it can only dream of realizing.

Republicans have never been able to do what it right because they run on a suite of populous postures of their own. Their debates are unwatchable. The presidential nominee for 2012 will be another Bush 1, Dole, Bush 2 or McCain -- boring, uninspiring and non-conservative.

There is really no hope that America's course to suicide will change. It might be prolonged but it will occur. The system is set-up and perpetuated to grow government. Spending will continue to grow annually. Austerity will never exist by choice.

America as a great nation is history. We are nothing more than a depraved, mediocre nation with limited freedoms. Obama's legacy is firmly written.

Occupy ""Whatever" vs Tea Party

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 04:26:00 +0000

Only a dolt like our inept Vice President Biden could compare the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators to the Tea Party members.

Tea Party members are employed or otherwise contributing members of society. The Occupy "Whatever" participants are not.

Both groups are disgusted with the status quo of the federal government. This could be the Zeitgeist of this present era. Greed rules Wall Street and major corporate hierarchies. Re-election and self-aggrandizement are the norm for politicians.

Obama's Job Bill is a piece of accomplish-nothing rubbish. He is the no-one-is listening-to-you President. When he appears on the radio or TV, I quickly turn the dial or channel. He's nothing more than a lying spin-machine as is his administration.

What is core to Obama administration and the Occupy Whatever groups is their class warfare diatribe. Take all of the unemployed, under-employed, welfare-receiving, union-loving and hate-the-rich jealous voters and you have a critical mass of dolts. It is this class that Obama is counting on.

Protesting symbolizes freedom in society. The irony of what many of these individuals want is the exact opposite of what a free capitalist society provides. The everyone-is-equal-society is pure communist doctrine. Obama and those rich Wall Street types that fund him prefer mass equality -- at a third-world level -- so long as they are in power and living a first-class lifestyle.

Tea Partiers prefer capitalism and freedom it provides. Occupy Whatever prefer communism and its non-freedom.

Occupy Wall Street Is Ignorance At Its Finest

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 03:05:00 +0000

The undergrad student who does not need to work to support his/her room/board/tuition, the too-much-time-on-his/her-hand grad student, the unemployed MS or PhD apparently have jobs across the nation in a city near you: protest capitalism. I support civil protests, but come on... The latest Occupy Wall Street, etc. protests are Hypocrisy defined.

Few think it good policy to see huge bonuses paid out to investment and banking executives after helping cause the recession and afterward being bailed out by tax payers. There is no doubt there is corruption between big corporations and the government. It has been so from our founding. But to assume that this is the domain of Republicans is idiotic.

The Occupy Wall Street crowd, while claiming on paper "to welcome people from all colors, genders and beliefs to participate in [its] daily assemblies," is a 100% liberal entity. Its members want four more years of Obamaism. Nevermind that Obama's 2008 campaign was bankrolled by Wall Street and whose 2012 re-election campaign is reliant on Wall Street to an even greater extent, and whose cabinet is filled with Wall Street operatives.

The men and entities behind the protesters are the same cast of characters we have some to despise: George Soros, The Ruckus Society, the Tides Foundation and the Ford Foundation (never bought a Ford, never will).

The protesters are being lead and funded by rich socialists and communists for their personal gain, not to rectify social inequalities. Capitalism is not the issue here, rather the greed and collusion between large corporate leaders and government power brokers -- elected and appointed.

Dream Theater Live Salt Lake City

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 05:34:00 +0000

I have seen Dream Theater on five different occasions. This year's tour was every bit as good as those in the past, if not one of the best.

The A Dramatic Turn of Events CD/album was released in the US a few weeks ago. It has some excellent songs, tunes that are worth hearing and seeing pefformed live. Although we are not familiar with these newer songs, hearing six songs off the new recording plus a drum solo by new drummer Mike Mangini, made for an epic experience.

What I noticed this time around is that Mangini provides much needed energy to their stage presence. As sad as it was to see Portnoy leave, Mangini has turned out to be a fun and talented musician. It has also given Petruci a greater role as he is now the back-up singer.

The setlist on 9/30/11 at Kingsbury Hall in Salt Lake City, UT was as follows:

1. Bridges in the Sky
2. These Walls
3. Build Me Up, Break Me Down
4. Endless Sacrifice
5. Drum Solo
6. The Ytse Jam
7. The Silent Man (acoustic)
8. Beneath the Surface (acoustic)
9. The Great Debate
10. On the Backs of Angels
11. Forsaken
12. Through My Words
13. Fatal Tragedy
14. Outcry
15. Under a Glass Moon (encore)

The songs including the acustic numbers coupled with the light show made for a great 2.4 hour performance. There were only two negatives: the long line for DT shirts (so long that I chose not to wait in it) and the warm-up band Trivium.

Dream Theater spans three generations. They have a class that many bands lack. Trivium, despite it metalcore roots, just can't seem to help itself by using foul language on stage. Where it might make sense in one setting (sad to say), it did not work here. My wife and I left after a few songs. Not what we paid our money to hear.

Dream Theater has done it again with a masterful album and tour. Well done guys.

Obama's Bus Tour Is A Non-Listening Tour

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 02:54:00 +0000

When has Barack Obama ever listened? His ego would never accept an idea from anyone other than his liberal peers. This midwestern bus tour is nothing more than an opportunistic presidential bully pulpit.

The thing that a sitting president has over his potential opponents is his record. Because Obama's record is pathetic, he needs to lie and decieve his way out of the mess his liberal, socialistic policies have placed us in. What Obama is trying to do is the only thing he can do: shift blame onto the evil Republicans.

When Obama talks of broken politics, that is code for: "if it weren't for Republicans, I could have MY OWN WAY".

For the most part, I like gridlock. The more gridlock, the less laws get passed. In the recent debt ceiling debate, I would have been perfectly fine with no action.

Modern American politicians, from either party, can only do one thing: create more laws, more programs, and more costs -- more government. The party difference is scope.

These next 15 months will be pure hell for America. We will have to listen to politician after politician make promises that either cannot or should not be kept. The American political process has become the age of populism. It is bad for Latin American and it is bad for the USA.

Consumer Spending, Consumer Saving, Consumer Confidence

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 19:49:00 +0000

Let me start off with a disclaimer: my family is comprised of savers, not spenders. According to the media and economists, we are bad for the economy. They feel that the economy is primiarily driven by consumer spending.

What is it we need to buy? With age, our buying patterns have changed. We really don't need anything. We have a house (paid for), multiple cars (all paid for -- none newer than 2005), furtiture (paid for), clothes (paid for). We spend our money on insurance, food, and utilities. We eat out once a week at a moderately priced restaurant (rarely spending more than $10 per person). We have no credit card debt -- pay it off monthly (credit cards are for convenience, nothing more).

Our biggest expense these days is college tuition. Our three oldest attend state schools. They all work. We cover their tuition; they cover everything else. We disagree with those that believe children are entitled to a free education and do not need to make their own financial contributions.

I have little concern of people's spending patterns. However, from my observations in helping people move or closing up someone's home after a death, people spend money on some really useless things. Some much of this stuff goes in the trash.

We are savers. We would much prefer to save money than spend money on things we really don't need. We always consider the need vs want metric. Rarely to we splurge. Christmas and birthdays are holidays, not occasions to spend excessive money.

We always have had a pessimistic opinion about the financial future. When markets flurish, we are unexpectedly happy. We opt for a year's supply of cash -- the rainy day fund. All purchases are made with cash or credit card that is paid off that month. We do not pay interest.

A headline from today is: "U.S. Consumer Confidence Drops to Three-Decade Low." This is not necessarily a bad thing, especially if it forces people to save more and make more prudent buying decisions.

As consumer spending declines, the economy will right-size, if only the government would allow it to.

A decline in consumer spending and confidence is a movement to a more normal baseline. Despite the numbers, I see lots of money being spent today. Movie theaters are full, restaurants busy, athletic ticket sales good, smart phones and pads ubiquitious. We are living pretty comfortable lives.

Where we lack are personal freedom from government opression and moral decadance. Subjects for another time.

Obama's Archaic Government

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 02:47:00 +0000

The so-called debt ceiling bill was nothing more than a waste of time and a fraud upon the American people.

Why would anyone think that this shame of a bill would do anything toward national solvency. Obama clearly knows that it will do nothing. For him, it gave him more time to engage in more stimulus spending, printing more cash (quantitative easement III), and to find ways to attempt to buy votes for his next election.

These politicians are not idiots. They know they are spending money that does not exist. They know they are spending future generations' money. They just don't care. They hate capitalism in favor of power. Consider:

US debt shot up $238 billion to reach 100 percent of GDP after the government's debt ceiling was lifted.

The bill's requirement for a twelve-man committee will be comprised of Washington Congressional insiders -- tax and spend Democrats and RINOs. They will do nothing with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare -- the real budget killers.

Collectively Republicans caved yet again. I am thankful my two Senators (Hatch & Lee) noted NO. I have a Democrat for a Rep (Matheson) and he usually tows the Party line and voted for the bill in the House.

The winners were Washington insiders. Tea Partiers lost big. Americans lost big, even those that will "benefit" from federal handouts -- kept fat, dumb and happy.

After all is said and done, the debt ceiling bill was normal, corrupt Washington politics. Speaker Boehner and Senate Minority Leader McConnell are RINOs despite their rhetoric. They are gutless and let us down.

Debt Ceiling Debate Worst Than a Joke

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 03:27:00 +0000

How many times have we heard the media use the phrase "raise the debt ceiling?" As if that will solve all of our problems and avoid a downgrade.

Do they ever think to ask the question: "where does the money come from to pay these Congressional commitments?" Regardless of what the dolt in the White House says, America has spent beyond its means and the bulk in Congress do not have the desire to solve the real fiscal problems. Raising taxes on the rich is a class warfare tactic and will do nothing to address the spending problem -- the real problem.

Congress has no plans to address the real spending issues, the so-called entitlements.

According to the most recent government data, today some 50.5 million Americans are on Medicaid, 46.5 million are on Medicare, 52 million on Social Security, five million on SSI, 7.5 million on unemployment insurance, and 44.6 million on food stamps and other nutrition programs. Some 24 million get the earned-income tax credit, a cash income supplement.

By 2010 such payments to individuals were 66% of the federal budget, up from 28% in 1965. We now spend $2.1 trillion a year on these redistribution programs, and the 75 million baby boomers are only starting to retire.

None of this includes the ObamaCare entitlement that will place 30 million more Americans on government health rolls.

In three years the debt has increased by more than $4 trillion thanks to stimulus, cash for clunkers, mortgage modification programs, 99 weeks of jobless benefits, record expansions in Medicaid, and more.

Congress has made so many promises to so many Americans that there is no conceivable way those promises can be kept. Tax rates might have to rise to 60%, 70%, even 80% to raise the revenues to finance these promises, but that would be economically ruinous.

Yet Mr. Obama and most Democrats still oppose any serious reform of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. This insistence on no reform reinforces the notion that our entitlement state is too big to afford but also too big to change politically. This is how a AAA country becomes AA, the first step on the march to Greece.

All of this debt ceiling discussion is a waste of time. Only the Tea Party Reps are making any viable attempt to address our spending problems.

None of the debt plans will do anything to protects the nation's AAA rating. It has taken 75 years but we have finally become a broken socialist state patterned after the Europe we escaped from so many years ago.

Another Code Phrase: Balanced Approach to Debt

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 16:08:00 +0000

What is it we have heard every MSM talking head say about the dept crisis? What is it we hear every Democrat say about raising the debt ceiling? Answer: "we need a balanced approach."

These past few weeks, everytime President Obama talked about the addressing the US's debt crisis, he has said it must included both spending cuts and revenue increases (taxes), his so-called "balanced approach."

Balanced approach is the political answer to the fact that we have two parties and one party cannot have its own way, whether that party is right or not.

I heard a congressional Democrat actually say that a balanced approach is the way real businesses addresses its woes. Here's a man that has never lived in the real world and has never read a book on economics.

Businesses are always trying to increase revenues. They are always weighing the expenses versus revenues equation. When revenues and revenue forecasts are down, expenses must be put in line. Few established businesses actually make new investments -- take out loans to invest in new products. Their cash position may help short term but expenses must always be in line with revenues.

Democrats cannot do anything in government that does not involve higher taxes. They try to disguise it as "just a tax on the wealthy who can and should pay more."

The balanced approach is just another way of saying tax increases.

Taxes Are Now Referred to As Revenue

noreply@blogger.com (JD Hayes) — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 01:58:00 +0000

Subtle but very real, the White House, Democrats and many in the media are now referring to taxes as revenue.

The government increases its revenue by levying taxes. The government does not make or produce anything. It can increase "revenue" by increasing tax rates (the traditional Democrat method) or it can realize additional revenue through economic growth (the traditional Republican method).

When we hear government and revenue in the same sentence, it is almost always code for higher taxes.

If it is not clear now to Americans, Democrats are fighting this debt ceiling battle doing the only thing Democrats can do: demand higher taxes. The problem with its position is that higher taxes always mean higher spending. That's what politicians do, spend money, create programs; Democrats are the superior party at doing this, but Republicans do their share (hence the reference to RINO Republican).

A vote for a Democrat, regardless of how nice a man or woman that politician is, will always favor higher taxes and bigger government. Only a true Republican (today they are called Conservatives) will favor lower taxes and smaller government.

That is what this debt ceiling debate is all about.