(Another repost that seems to fit better here.)
Since finishing Atlas (Yes, it’s been done. Shuddup) I’ve decided to reread the third part. And I’m not really reading, more like listening to the audiobook on my Droid before I go to sleep. Last night I finished “Atlantis”. If you’ve forgotten, the chapter is about when Dagny first arrives at Galt’s Gulch. The part the stuck in my mind THIS time around is when she’s talking to everyone at dinner at Midas’ house and they tell her why they left. Dr. Hendricks explanation is very timely, especially considering the passage of this monstrosity we call “health care reform”.
“I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago,” said Dr. Hendricks, “Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill. That was what I would not place at the disposal of the men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything–except the desires of doctors. Men considered only the ‘welfare’ of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, only ‘to serve.’ That a man who’s willing to work under compulsion is too dangerous a brute to entrust with a job in the stockyards–never occurred to those who proposed to help the sick by making life impossible for the healthy. I have often wondered at the smugness with which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscious, to stifle my mind–yet what is it they expect to depend on, when the lie on an operating table under my hands? Their moral code has taught them to believe it is save to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in their operating room and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man whose life they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it–and still less safe if he is the sort who doesn’t.”
Sometimes its hard to look at our country and think, well, it was beautiful and free, now…it’s…this. I am not under the illusion that I am powerful enough to go on “strike” and make a difference. But there are men who are, and it would be wonderful if they would. Go on strike. Let your corporations get sucked into the abyss of socialism, see how well this country works when no one is around to provide for the looters. But, that’s just a little dream I have, I’ll just continue hold out hope for a “John Galt” or “Francisco d’Anconia” or a “Ragnar Danneskjold”, even if such men don’t exist.
(I wrote this SEVERAL months ago on another blog, I decided to re-post it here for you guys to read.)
His name’s been in the news for the better part of a year. We could thank McCain for that, he had Tim Pawlenty (or T. Paw as he’s known in Minnesota and that’s how I usually refer to him.) on a short list of Vice President candidates. Since August of 2008, most of Minnesota knew TPaw was going to be running for President in 2012. Well, conservatives and libertarians in the state don’t really like that choice. I don’t pretend to speak for everyone, but given his record in Minnesota over the past 8 years, it’s so hard to see how any freedom loving American could get behind this man.
Minnesota is a pretty interesting state, politically. We’re pretty purple, but we also have strong loyalties to our “family”. Take the 1984 election for example, Minnesota was the ONLY state to vote for Mondale. Why? Because he’s our hometown boy, that’s why. Oh, and apparently we like women vice presidents? That’s a bit of a stretch, but none the less, you get the picture. We like when someone from Minnesota is famous. Look at the amount of money we throw at Joe Mauer every single season, just to keep our boy in our state. (Not that I mind really, he’s a great baseball player, and he’s cute.) The hoopla that surrounds Prince to this very day is another shining example. We love our people, well only some of them. So that’s why TPaw is getting big support from many Minnesotans.
My loyalties aren’t so emotionally tied though. I’ve seen TPaw’s RINO ways and I haven’t been able to look past them. He started off good, really good. He promised during his 2001 campaign that he wouldn’t raise taxes. And he didn’t. Technically. As far as his first budget is concerned, he didn’t raise income taxes at all. But you see, TPaw has a way of calling taxes “fees”. Take the 75 cents per pack cigarette “”health impact fee”. Its a tax. It goes to the state to pay for state health care programs, it’s not a fee charged only to smokers who use the state entitlement.
Take the new Twins Stadium, Target Field, it cost roughly $522 million, of that the team’s owner put up $130 million and the state picked up the tab for the rest at a HUGE cost to residents of Hennipen county (Minneapolis) by issuing a 0.15% sales tax increase to just that county. It may not seem like a lot, but it adds up. (as you’ll see) The new Gophers Football stadium, the state paid for nearly half (48%) or $130 million of the $288 million price tag. It’s all part of the cost of doing business, right? While the state picked up the tab, the university received $84 million dollars in donations from corporations and private citizens, leaving their portion significantly lower than the state’s. It would have been nice to see how much money could have been raised without the state stepping in. But I digress…
TPaw’s stance on health care isn’t what any good conservative would call, “good.” See, when the democrats proposed a bill for universal health care, T Paw decided it was too big (good right?) but instead of dropping the issue, he increased the state health care program to cover all children. See, he was smart enough to know that if a HUGE bill is proposed first then anything smaller would seem like a major win for the governor. Unfortunately, many Minnesotans or Americans for that matter, never seem to notice. We tend to have a mentality of “Well at least it wasn’t option 1, right??” *eyeroll*
But don’t let T Paw fool you with his “limited government” rhetoric. He’s anything BUT a limited government kind of guy. Take this light rail mess. I know, I know, if you’re visiting Minneapolis you love it and think it’s the coolest thing since the Slinky, but for us that are a little wiser know it’s nothing but a damn money suck. “But it’s an investment.” No, investments offer a return on your money my dear. The light rail has yet to issue a profit. “But they’re still working on it, it could be years before a return is made.” Um…no. We won’t see a return on that money. Public Transportation doesn’t make money. It spends money.
Such as the three-quarter-billion-dollar Hiawatha Line. Touted for its ridership success, it not only has failed to put a dent in traffic congestion, but already is running annual deficits (expenses less fares) of $10 million as far as the eye can see. The state is now the largest funding source for Metro Transit, spending $200 million annually for 2.8 percent of Minnesota commuters. Jason Lewis, Star Tribune Oct 2007
But the craziness doesn’t end there. Ever listen to Pawlenty talk about energy? He likes to stick to the “drill baby drill” concept when he’s on FoxNews, because that’s what the right likes to hear. But if you live in the state of Minnesota, you know good ol’ T Paw has a lot of “green” flowing through his veins. In fact, I’m pretty sure his blood is green.
“Thank you everyone. You’re all busy and you’ve taken time to help us form a better environmental program for the state.
As Peter Drucker taught us, “The practices that got us here, won’t get us to the future. The best way to think about future is to go out and invent it.”
It looks like we should have listened to President Carter. He called us to action, and we should have listened. So we now have ourselves in a bit of a pickle. As is often the case, the people are way ahead of the politicians. We’re benefiting from their tailwind.
Other visionaries deserve credit too, many who may have been dismissed as goofy. They were right, not goofy.
Energy and climate issues are intertwined. Climate change is real. Human behavior is partly and may be a lot responsible. Those who don’t think so are simply not right. We should not spend time on voices that say it’s not real. Please don’t let these voices discourage or distract you from your mission.
Our hope is at the end of your deliberations, you will have given us a plan for action.
I’m proud of Minnesota’s longstanding attention to environmental issues, but here we need to raise the bar as others catch up. We want to be bold, dynamic. But we have to fashion steps. Our actions on climate can’t unravel the political consensus or the Minnesota economy. It must be done in a rational way.
Sometimes success has led to complacency. Sadly we have been complacent in thinking about energy and environment. But we’re reaching a tipping point, and we have to deal with it now. I’ll do my best to lead and advocate for your recommendations. Tim Pawlenty to Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group, April 20th, 2007
Say it ain’t so T Paw? You some how managed to say Carter was a visionary, he was right, and Climate change is REAL in the same speech? *sigh* If that doesn’t say it all folks, I just don’t know what else to show you.
Oh, perhaps the fact that my energy bill has sky rocketed in recent years. Why? MANDATES. The state (and federal) government have been forcing companies like Xcel Energy to become more “green”. That has directly correlated into more money out of my pocket every year. But Pawlenty doesn’t seem to mind. It seems that he, like some dems, are big fans of creating a problem so they can get credit for the solution. Unfortunately, sometimes the solutions are worse than the problems.
The problem with T Paw isn’t that he’s a Republican with RINO tendencies, it’s that he’s never really had a foundation to stand on. He’s never been a limited government conservative. He’s a pretty good at being something to all people. That’s not what I want in the President of the United States. I want a man with conviction who is willing to stand up to his opponents. His use of the unallotment in Minnesota has been interesting, I’m starting to wonder if his motivation is to have, on record, more proof of his conservativeness and be able to show voters that in recent years he’s been tough against the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota. But let’s be real…he’s not fooling me. His record is anything but solid. As far as being a freedom loving American with strong conservative values, T Paw is NOT that man. Sorry kids.
“When government accepts responsibility for people, then people no longer take responsibility for themselves.” – George Pataki
No, I’m not kidding. I’ve argued for a long time that extending unemployment benefits doesn’t do anything to benefit the economy. In fact, unemployment extensions only impede economic growth and decrease a person’s drive to look for work. I guess it’s rather somewhat ironic that I’m suggesting that we look at one of the biggest nanny-state countries in the world as an example of how we should be handling unemployment benefits. Or is it?
Denmark is one of the most notoriously socialist countries in the world. The citizens don’t seem to mind the 50% tax rate and big government benefits. They seem to appreciate the “support”. Most European countries are of similar ilk. The thing is, after years and years of failed socialist policies, many countries are faced with a real problem: THEY’RE FLAT BROKE! Look at countries like Spain and Greece, they’re about to collapse under the weight of their growing debt and growing demand for government services. They know the only way for them to survive is to cut expense, yet, the people are rioting in the streets demanding more benefits. Unfortunately, those governments can no longer afford to bailout their citizens. Just look at what Denmark is doing to curb unemployment benefits:
But now Denmark, which allows employers to hire and fire at will while relying on an elaborate system of training, subsidies for those between jobs and aggressive measures to press the unemployed into available openings, is facing its own strains. As a result, it is beginning to tighten up.
Struggling to keep its budget under control after the financial crisis, the government in June cut into its benefits system, the world’s most generous, by limiting unemployment payments to two years instead of four. Having found that recipients either get work right away or take any job as their checks run out, officials are also redoubling longstanding efforts to move Danes more quickly out of the safety net.
“The cold fact is that the longer you are out of a job, the more difficult it is to get a job,” Claus Hjort Frederiksen, the Danish finance minister, said during an interview. “Four years of unemployment is a luxury we can no longer allow ourselves.”
I realize that cutting the length of unemployment benefits from four years down to two years doesn’t seem like that big of a deal, but I’m more concerned with the rationale behind it. Denmark recognizes that as long as people are receiving a handout from the government they don’t have the motivation to go out and find a job. The thing is, it’s happening in the United States. Millions of Americans are without work. A large percentage of those people collect an unemployment check and, at times, those checks can be equal to the person’s working salary which pretty much negates the necessity to find employment right away. Now that congress has passed the newest extension of benefits, unemployed Americans can go up to 99 weeks, nearly two whole years, before their money runs out. And that’s only if congress doesn’t extend it again, but believe me, there are lobbyists working triple time to ensure that it happens.
Complacency is human nature. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it?”, right? Many people don’t feel the urgency or gravity of being unemployed until it’s too late to do anything about it. It takes weeks, and in this economy, months to a year or more of hardcore dedication to find employment. The problem is many unemployed Americans don’t even start looking for a job until they realize their unemployment money is almost gone. Unemployment insurance isn’t a pay check, it’s an extremely short term, emergency back up plan. It used to be that you only had 26 weeks to find employment, but now, instead of 6 months, you get two years to hang out at home, drive the kiddos to school instead of daycare, and live like you’re employed without actually having to show up to work. It’s nice, right?
It becomes a major problem when people suddenly wake up one day and realize, “Holy shit!! I’m BROOOOOOKE!!” They do everything in their power to try to stop the impending disaster, but by then, it’s simply too late. There are approximately 1.4 million Americans who have been out of work for 99 weeks or more, “99′ers”. It’s a devastating statistic. There’s hundreds of thousands of people who have similar stories to that of Alexandra Jarrin, a graduate student, and currently living out of a “pay-by-the-week” motel, eating ramen noodles and rice to survive. The fortunate, or unfortunate, thing is, she doesn’t have children so she doesn’t qualify for Welfare, but she does get food stamps. Those who have been unemployed so long that their benefits are exhausted do have the option of going on Welfare. But if you want my opinion, unemployment benefits past 26 weeks are Welfare benefits. I wish we’d just call things what they are instead of sugar coating to preserve some sense of dignity.
My argument is, desperation creates action. If you have a constant, government-funded safety net, what’s the point in doing anything more than necessary? If we remove the the life preservers, you’re either going to sink or swim. I know it sounds harsh, but there’s no other way. We simply cannot afford to keep paying people to be complacent. Sure, if you’re a politician, you want people to depend on you, because that’s how you get your votes. (It doesn’t matter the party, everyone loves their own big government subsidies.) If you know your money is running out, you’re going to do one of two things, take any job you can find to support yourself, or you’re going to stand in the welfare line. Those are really your only options.
This “summer of recovery” saw more Americans unemployed that even some analysts estimated. Obama’s failed economic policies are one of the driving forces behind the lack of jobs. Small businesses and big businesses alike are not going to be hiring people because the Obama Administration is scaring the hell out of them! Between the threat of letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire, the ATROCIOUS health care reform bill, and mounting government regulation on the financial sector, many businesses either cannot get more capital, or they refuse to spend what little capital they still have on more employees when the future is so uncertain.
The thing is, as Europe moves away from their “tried and failed” socialist policies, the United States government really needs to start taking good hard look at what we’re doing. The further we slide into socialism, the harder it is going to be to climb out. My fear is that, like with most addictions, we will have to hit rock bottom before we can really recover. Unfortunately, we have a culture of dependence which is doing nothing but speed up that descent. At some point, we will have to destroy the safety net and retrain an entire generation how to survive without a government subsidy. That could be the most impossible task in the history of the world, but I have to force myself to maintain hope that it’s possible or else I need to just give up and end it all right now. I’m kidding, but taking an “ignorance is bliss” approach doesn’t sound too bad these days.
“You can’t sit here and be silent and go wrong to be popular anymore.” – Jason Lewis
When I’m stuck on a political problem I can almost always rely on Jason Lewis to give me some great insight. He’s kind of like that professor I had in college, Mr. Epps, he’s wise and usually provides me the “missing link” that gives me that “Ah HA! Yep.” feeling. The thing I’ve been struggling with this Cordoba House/Mosque at Ground Zero/Jihadi Recruitment Center/Muslim Community Center/Whatever you choose to call it, is that my problem doesn’t really lie in the fact that it’s proposed to be built 2 blocks from GZ (ground zero), while I do think it’s distasteful, there are not any laws in New York or New York City that forbid it from being built; my problem lies in the fact that we’re on the peak of a very slippery slope. Some on the Right are literally begging government bureaucracies to bend the ordinances and trample property laws to stop it. There’s also a growing Anti-Muslim sentiment in this country as a result. Both of those scare me so much more than a mosque two blocks from GZ.
Last night Jason Lewis made a great point about our current stance with Islam.
If, in fact, it is not possible [for a moderate Muslim to exist] why then, we should forget the pretext of freedom of religion and simply..simply demand a loyalty oath for all Muslims. I’m not being facetious here, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say on the one hand, “Well it’s possible to be a moderate Muslim” and then all of a sudden start carving out laws geared specifically for Islam. It does not comport with the New York Constitution, the United States Constitution, as we currently incorporate it, or most state constitutions. So the only other avenue, it seems to me, if you’re going to be legally and philosophically consistent is to simply say, “Well OK, but there’s no such thing as a moderate Muslim and therefore we must declare, in America, that Islam is not a religion, hence, it has no protection. And require loyalty oaths and…and maybe restrict immigration based on religion, what have you. I…I don’t know any other solution to this, I really don’t. [...If the GZM Imam's condemnation of terrorism and the community support isn't good enough] I’m not all together certain that we shouldn’t just spare the platitudes of our religious freedom and we just ought to simply declare that we’re going to have religious freedom for certain faiths in this country but we’re not going to include all of them and move on. Jason Lewis Show 8/16/2010 2nd Hour
Obviously I totally agree with Jason here. We cannot, as a nation, insist on supporting religious freedom while denying a religion the same rights and protection as others. Our country was founded on the belief that you are free to practice which ever religion you choose, just so long as it doesn’t harm me. Don’t even throw out the “but 9/11 was caused by Muslim extremists…” I know this, but that doesn’t mean every Muslim is a fucking terrorist. Just because one Christian shoots up an abortion clinic doesn’t mean that every Christian is going to go shoot up an abortion clinic. Look, we gathered up hundreds of thousands of Japanese after Pearl Harbor to “protect ourselves”, turns out, they didn’t support Japan’s attack on our country. *Shock* Now there are many in this country who would really love to do that with Muslims. In fact, I know for a fact that there are people in this country who are so intolerant of Islam that they wouldn’t bat an eye if we gathered them all up and shipped them back to wherever they came from.
Doug Mataconis posted a quote on his blog this morning that is a perfect reminder of where we are supposed to stand, as a country, on the issue of religion:
It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
– Thomas Jefferson, 1792, Notes On The State Of Virginia
The problem here folks, isn’t simply the anti-Islam sentiment in NYC. We have political figures, most notoriously Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, who have chimed in with their two measly cents. It’s done nothing but ignite a firestorm of national debate and fuel more anti-Islamic rhetoric. It’s been discussed that the anti-muslim rage isn’t solely in NYC nor is it only about the Mosque. There are mosques being protested all over the country and they are far, far away from the “hallowed ground” of Ground Zero.
My concern is, where does it end? First it’s Islam, next will it be Buddism, followed by Judaism and Christianity? I mean, lets be fucking reasonable here. You cannot just pick and choose which religion is protected under the 1st amendment. It really is an all or none. (No, fucktards, this does not make it possible for you to be allowed to make human sacrifices.) You either have freedom or slavery. There is no middle ground. NONE. I know there are a TON of people will who disagree with my view here, but I don’t care. I will not sacrifice my liberty to set a precedence for more nit-picking of religious freedom. If that’s what you choose, so be it, but do NOT ever talk to me about how you support the 1st amendment, because you can’t support it conditionally. Sorry, it just doesn’t work like that.
At this point, this topic nearly makes my head explode. I cannot fathom the level of hypocrisy and blatant bigotry that I’m seeing on a daily basis. It’s another example of “Well, it’s fine for us, but not for you” that many Americans are so fond of. It makes me sick. But let’s call a spade a spade here, you want a Holy War against Islam. Fine. Take on Islam with your little crusade. Cash out your 401k, gather an army and go fight your war.
But you won’t. You’ll just post another blog post about how upset you are that Muslims are allowed the same freedoms as everyone else.
The rest of us will simply attempt to preserve our liberty, the best we can, to ensure everyone in this country is granted the same freedoms that we demand, regardless of their religion, sex, race, or political affiliation.
Now, for a little bit of humor. Jon Stewart NAILED IT last night (Yep, that’s what she said!!) on The Daily Show.
The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand
This quote by Ayn Rand has been sitting around just waiting to be used. So what better time to utilize it than in my “introductory post”? The problem with discussing “the individual”, as it pertains to rights, in a blog post is that it tends to get long winded. (Believe me, I’ve written this post a dozen times and not once has it been under 2,000 words. But my goal is to avoid a blog-ertation [like a dissertation, but in a blog post. Yep, just made it up.]) The thing is, I’m not trying to write this to explain to you how everyone under the sun views individual rights, my mission is to explain my view and hopefully give you a little insight into my belief system.
I’m going to preemptively, and hopefully quickly explain property rights (LOL! I’m going to try, shut up!), since this tends to confuse some people. When I write of property rights, I do not solely mean “land ownership rights”. I mean “property” as you, your mind, your work and the fruits of your labor (earnings). This is important to understand because if you don’t have a right to your “property”, you are a slave. This doesn’t mean you’re a slave if you go to work, because you contract your abilities to your employer who then pays you for your work. It’s a free will transaction, you choose to offer you/your mind/your work in exchange for payment, thus your pay (fruits of your labor) becomes your “property” and the things you buy with your “fruits” thus become your “property”. (Read this if you want more information/clarification: Property Rights.)
“Property rights” and “individual rights” are interchangeable, I cannot have individual rights without that fundamental law that I am the owner and operator of my life and property. The only stipulation (if you can call it that) is that I cannot infringe on your same rights while exercising mine. And, in an ideal world, everyone would follow those simple rules. But as we all know, our world is less than ideal for these types of conditions. That’s why we have government, whose sole purpose is to protect our individual rights. But that’s a big huge failure too.
Our government has done nothing but increasingly trample on our individual rights. The government doesn’t care about “protecting” you, it only cares about how it can make you feel guilty for living your life because others can’t sustain life independently. Those in power could care less about the individual, or even the minorities they claim to be attempting to protect and help, their sole concern is maintaining power by nearly any means necessary. The government has no problem telling you how to live your life. “It’s for your own good. You clearly aren’t capable of thinking for yourself, therefore, we will legislate your entire life for you. Its for the greater good/children/America/blah blah blah…”. I can’t think of much in my life that exists without some form of government over regulation. Ok, that’s a lie, the only thing that really truly exists without government interference is my mind. And even that’s questionable since I went to public school, but more on THAT another time. And don’t even get me started on the imaginary “thought police”. Yes, I do have free will, I can choose to break the laws and do what I want. But I also know that there are consequences for doing that, so I won’t.
The point is, the most basic fundamental right is to live. I am in charge of my own life, just as you are in charge of yours. As long as you don’t harm me and my liberty in the pursuit of your happiness, we will get along just fine. Or, in other words, mind your own damn business jerkface, I’m not bothering you, nor harming you in anyway, so shut the hell up and get the hell out of my way!
You’ll be disappointed. Seriously. Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
So this is my new home for poli-blogging. It’s a nice little place but could use a few more personally touches. 
I will be messing with this over the weekend, hopefully, and get it how I want it. I’m not too sure about the theme or the header, which I created in 10 minutes in photoshop, but it’ll do for now. I’m excited about this new little project, hopefully I can stop tinkering and start writing soon.
All that said, WELCOME!!!
