Friday, October 2, 2009

Two Action Alerts and Some Olympic Fun!

Action Alert items on the agenda for today

1. Washington State residents - from Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) -

The legislature is in Olympia TODAY (10/2/09) for Committee Days, and so are the inevitable tax hike advocates vying for their attention. SEIU and various other organizations are leading the charge to pressure lawmakers to hike taxes rather than cut spending to fix the growing 2011-13 budget deficit. Even Governor Gregoire admits that raising taxes is on the table.

Everyone needs to CALL them TODAY and tell them that raising taxes is NOT the solution to our state's budget problems! EFF has put together 105 cost-saving ideas that the legislature could use instead. Call today. 1-800-562-6000.

2. The health care debate. What's happening? The Senate is playing around, putting together the "conceptual framework" for a health care bill and Henry Reid may be trying to attach this "framework" (this means there is no actual legislative language written yet... sounds transparent, right?) to the bill in the House that seeks to cap the salaries of executives who work for companies that took TARP money. That's right. Reid and Pelosi may actually try to attach it as an amendment to a completely different bill!

What can you do? Keep the pressure on. Call every single day. Call the members of the Senate Finance Committee and your own Senators. Call their district offices too, not just their D.C. offices. You can find the list of committee members here, and from there you can click through to each Senator's website to find the contact information. DO NOT ASSUME that enough other people will call. We must ALL call.

When you call, keep these simple points in mind:
a. NO individual mandates
b. NO public option or co-ops or government run "exchanges" of any kind
c. NO sleazy manuevers to get the bill passed - i.e. reconciliation or attaching it as an amendment to other bills
d. YES to totally eliminating barriers to buying health insurance across state lines
e. YES to real tort reform
f. YES to genuinely decreasing the mandates on health insurance companies and policies so that smaller, more flexible companies are allowed exist and compete
g. YES to allowing everyone to claim tax credits for providing health insurance, from corporations to small businesses to those that are self employed
h. YES to cracking open the potential of Health Savings Accounts (HSA's) by increasing the ceiling on maximum donations that each person can make each year
i. YES to allowing real freedom of choice for consumers who want to purchase high deductible policies in combination with an HSA or catastrophic policy (this one relates to point f)
j. YES to cutting out waste and fraud by VERIFYING the citizenship of everyone who receives an entitlement benefit
and finally,
k. YES to transparency and accountability - we want the entire bill, in its final legislative language put online for at least 72 hours prior to voting, as well as an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office being completed at least 72 hours before any voting is allowed to take place!!!!

These are just a few of the solutions offered by free market proponents and conservatives, including the Republicans in Congress. These are also the solutions that the three little piggies (Obama, Pelosi and Reid) continue to ignore and stifle.

Update: Hot Air links to a Daily Mail article about the IMF telling Britain that it must start charging for health care services in order to avoid financial ruin!!! HAHHAHA. And this is the system they want us to go to. British citizens may now have to pay for their health care via high taxation and fees for service! So much for that "free" health care.

Olympics Fun!

Chicago is elminated from the 2016 Olympic bid in the first round!!! Let's hear it for the little guy!! For once the corrupt and politically sickened Chicago machinery did not get its way, in spite of the embarrassing groveling performance that Michelle Obama, Oprah, and President Obama himself gave in Copenhagen.

Interesting sidenote - the vote was apparently taken by secret ballot. Just imagine what would have happened if the IOC was subjected to "card check." Another wonderful, visceral example of why employees must be allowed to keep the secret ballot when it comes to organizing or not organizing into unions. Anyone who tries to tell you that taking away the secret ballot results in more freedom and allows for more choice is trying to sell you a bridge to nowhere. Do not buy into it.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Action Alert - Stop the Seattle Gun Ban

My first foray into activism happened at a city council meeting held by Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels (though he didn't actually attend) to supposedly hear the citizens' opinions of a proposed "administrative rule" to ban all guns, including those with right-to-carry permits, on any city property. This was months ago, if not longer.

Well, it looks like we now have another chance to share our opinions. Though he didn't bother to attend the meeting that he allegedly put together for this same purpose, and he/the city council might ignore us anyway - oh and they will directly violate our state's preemption statutes - please take the time to email them about this very important issue: your 2nd Amendment rights.

Go here to make your voice heard. You have until Sunday, October 4th.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Michele Bachmann Needs Your Help Today

If you would like to help one of the leading (and only) true conservative voices in Congress, please consider donating a few dollars to Michele Bachmann. She draws almost as much ire from the left as Sarah Palin so you know she must be doing something right. They despise her, and Pelosi is making it known that she wants Michele's seat back.

Michele needs as many donations as she can get by October 1st in order for the donations to show up on the next quarterly fundraising report. Let's show Pelosi that Michele Bachmann will most definitely be around to fight for conservative values - long after SanFran Nan is gone.

Go here to donate.

Why Do We Need Limited Government?

I'm going to try and break this down so that the lefties understand. The biggest problem with giving so much responsibility to "the government" is that, in order for them to even attempt to carry out these duties, they must first get their billions of dollars from the citizens. Remember, the government has no money until it is taken from the people.

Now, when the government has all this money, it is not some robotic, unbiased, objective entity that is doling out the cash. The money is controlled by people - biased, emotional, fallible people. Therefore, these people in charge of everyone else's money can funnel it towards the causes they support, and more. Remember, the bigger something is, the harder it is to keep tabs on it and follow up on all the details. This arrangement inevitably results in fantastically large amounts of money being spent on projects and programs that benefit the status quo. What that means is it benefits the people in power, the people who already have control of the money.

For instance, Big Labor extracts money from their members - lots of it - and donates much of it to the Democrats. The Democrats in turn make laws benefitting Big Labor (which means labor bosses mostly) who can then expand their membership and ultimately their coffers. They can then donate even more money to the Democrats to get more Democrats elected, and the vicious cycle continues to grow.

Another example is the millions and millions of dollars going to "public service" or "community service" groups. It would be one thing if these groups really were just doing work in the community. However, time and time again (ACORN is the latest example) these groups are actively doing political work. They use taxpayer money to promote a very specific legislative agenda or politician, who will in turn give them more taxpayer money, and the vicious cycle continues to grow.

Here is a great, real time example. Taxpayer money is going to schools in LA to train them in union organizing and negotiating and striking.

Therefore, what fiscal conservatives and libertarians are trying to say is that the more money the government takes from people, the more opportunity there is for corruption, and more importantly, it turns our representative democracy on its head. When these groups become so big and bloated with other people's money that they hold all the power, then us little guys who have no affiliations end up getting trampled. I believe that the intentions of the founding fathers and the purpose of our Consitution and Bill of Rights were to protect the individual's interests from being run over by giant special interest groups.

I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend about this. Keeping the government coffers small forces them to use the money for what is truly needed, and keeps the little guy from getting trampled by groups that are using his own money to trample him and his voice.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Personal Health Care Stories Democrats Don't Want You to Hear

And Democrat/Obama/Single payer supporters. None of them want to acknowledge the "personal stories" that lay waste to their claims that a public option and more government intrusion is the right way to go. Though they'll whine and cry all day about "putting a human face" on the debate and will go out of their way to exploit stories, some true, some false, to push their agenda. Well, turnabout is fair play boys and girls and here are a couple of those anecdotes the left likes so much.

Via Gateway Pundit:
Story #1
Story #2
Info about the "Real Canadian Health Care Field Trip 2009"

Artist, Genius, Rapist

Okay. It is official. We live in the twilight zone. I don't mean twilight as in the vampire teen drama. I mean the upside-down, topsy-turvy, illogical, backwards, world of the Twilight Zone. A world that was science fiction.

As many people may have heard, Hollyweird director Roman Polanski was finally arrested in Switzerland and will hopefully be extradited back to LA to finally face the consequences of his actions. What were his actions? Raping and sodomizing a 13 year-old girl after getting her drugged up on quaaludes and champagne in the late 70's. Oh and then he skipped town after getting convicted and has been living in Europe for the last 30 years.

No big deal according to the European and Hollywood glitterati. Big Hollywood links to various articles about the "outrage" that all these millionaire, coked-up stars feel about this now 76 year-old "genius" getting arrested after all these years.

This opinion piece takes the cake. Though, that's hard for me to say as there are many disgusting and twilight zone-esque defenses of this man, but here are a couple of choice excerpts from the winner, or loser, depending on how you look at it.
Polanski was, in 1977 and '78, simply a brilliant obsessive with certain wounds and bruises and perverse inclinations who one night acted like a brute and a pig and probably damaged a young girl's psyche, although apparently not to a great extent, to judge by her own statements about the incident.

The victim, in her 40's now, has said she supports the whole thing going away because bringing it up again would be really hard on her husband and children. So this is apparently good enough for the Hollywood elite to come out and vigorously defend a child rapist. Besides, according to this author, she is partially to blame for what happened to her, "...the case of a young teenager who, with the aid and assent of her mother, got herself into a situation that was way over her head?" I'd say getting high on quaaludes and champagne and then getting anally raped counts as a situation that is way over the head of a 13 year-old.

One of the sickest arguments that the author of that article and many other, including the LA Times, makes is that Polanski has already paid for his crimes. Seriously. They really think this.
Has Polanski suffered at all for his crime, apart from going to jail for 42 days in 1977? Of course he has. The crime has been haunting his head and heart for 32 years and it has defined the political and geographical limits of his life and career for same amount of time -- more than half his adult life. He's lived as a fugitive, a restricted man, a hider in the shadows -- never a good thing for anyone in a spiritual sense.

So...I guess the punishment for child rape that is currently on the books is wrong. I suppose we had better change it quick so that the next man convicted of this offense can be punished correctly - i.e. being forced to live as a celebrity in a European country (France), make movies, win an Oscar, raise a family, and basically be a free man, albeit one with a warrant out for his arrest in some countries. Also troubling, the author thinks being a fugitive (which Roman chose to be) is not good for the spirit, but he neglects to mention what being raped and sodomized does to the spirit of a 13 year-old.

Anne Applebaum, a Washington Post pundit, and a woman who's husband is working to free Roman Polanski (no conflict of interest here folks, just move along) goes so far as to say that Polanski has totally paid the price for his sins because he didn't get to pick up his Oscar in LA when he won!
He did commit a crime, but he has paid for the crime in many, many ways: In notoriety, in lawyers' fees, in professional stigma. He could not return to Los Angeles to receive his recent Oscar. He cannot visit Hollywood to direct or cast a film.

Oh horrors of horrors!! The poor man! He had to live with professional stigma (which has yet to actually rear its head as most of Hollywood is defending him and wanted him to be able to return to the US years ago), and was unable to pick up his Oscar. This is proof that we are indeed a barbaric country. By her logic, when a man anally rapes a young girl and has managed to evade the law and the consequences for his actions for 30 years, and we do not allow him to visit Hollywood to direct or even cast a film, we are no longer a civilized society. They are upset and outraged that, after all this time, his crime still matters. They actually don't understand it.

I will try to explain it, hoping it will sink in to the cocaine ravaged brains in Hollywood. We are a nation of laws. There is a certain punishment for those that are convicted of committing crimes. Child rape is one of those crimes. Just because Polanski made the choice to run and become a fugitive, thereby avoiding his punishment for 30 years, does not mean we can let it go. This sets a horrible precedent.

His Hollywood defenders are basically advocating that if someone evades the law for long enough that their punishment is null and void. Civilized societies cannot afford this type of lawlessness. Punishment and consequences exist for punitive reasons and they act as deterrents. If a potential child rapist sees the example of Polanski being freed because he had to live in "hiding" as a fugitive for three decades, and that that is somehow equivalent to jail time, what's to stop the next child rapist from running off to France for 30 years because of the apparent shelf life of consequences?

This is not vengeance or projection or anything other than justice.

Somehow though, I don't see the glitterati going out of their way to defend Joe Schmoe the child rapist. No, I guess you have to be "tortured" and "brilliant" and an "artist" to be able to get away with RAPING A CHILD in Hollywood, and Europe for that matter.

Excuse me while I go throw up.

(Afterthought: I wonder if many of those defending Polanski's right to avoid punishment are the same ecozealots who would support strict consequences for people who "violate" the earth?)

Quick! There are ACORNS in the White House

Meet Peter Gaspard.