UAW Execs Living It Up?

With the US auto industry crashing and burning, arguably because of the outrageous demands by the the UAW, surely the union is conserving every penny of the union dues in case of layoffs, right? Nope. They're spending money on a lavish retreat, only unlike AIG, the MSM gives them a pass. That's right, the interest from the strike fund pays for a lavish country club/golf retreat for the UAW brass. While this is their right, it makes me even less sympathetic to their whining for money. The union all but bankrupted the big three while lining their own pockets. Pres. Bush did not force them into bankruptcy, where the union mob's back could have been broken, and you can be sure Pres. Elect Obama will do everything he can to help the unions who helped win him the election. Remember this the next time you see a UAW rep on the news whining about corporate greed and government apathy.

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas everyone. May you holidays be filled with joy, family, thanksgiving, blessings and hope for the new year.

Erosion Of Liberty

Many people have asked why I harp on the War On Drugs so much. Aside from the fact that it is blatantly unconstitutional, it is also a Trojan horse to slip the erosion of our liberty past us, disguised as something that will never apply to us.

Drug war tactics were recently used on a home-based organic coop, aka the most harmless people in the world. Their account in their own words is here. As if the fact that they were harmless organic types wasn't enough, the only military aged male was not there, because he was serving in Iraq! That's right, a man who was serving in Iraq had his organic food selling family detained at gunpoint for 6+ hours and had personal property, including their food for the year, worth over $10,000 seized. The agents allegedly did not identify themselves as well as committing several other breaches of procedure. This was done by a SWAT team who ransacked the entire house.

Now, you're thinking, surely this was a dangerous group of radicals, maybe like the weathermen, or perhaps plotting some sort of civil disobedience, like chaining themselves to something. Nope. As far as anyone can tell, the charge is likely to be... running a retail establishment without a license. Not only that, the family claimed to have sent letters asking for the correct paperwork for over a year, and were ignored.

Now there is a lot of conjecture that this is a part of the government's plan to control food and to support Big Ag and Big Retail. I'm not going to get into that, though I think those claims may have some merit. The real issue is that everyone who takes the War On Drugs(/Liberty) lying down is guilty of contributing to this. It's just like the old quote about the Holocaust by Martin Niemoller:

When the Nazis came for the communists.
I remained silent;
I was not a

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a .

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Thankfully, what we are facing is no where near the Holocaust. It doesn't compare as far as the atrocities, and honestly, I questioned whether to use this comparison. The crimes aren't comparable. But the progression is.

As far as civil liberties, they came for the druggies, they came for the Arabs, they came for the gun owners, now they're coming after the most harmless people in society. If you don't speak up for the civil liberties of people who aren't like you, who will speak up for you?

Speak up for liberty. Write the Governor of Ohio.

MSM Double Standard

Copious Dissent has a great article on media double standards. He lists five current examples which are extremely difficult to refute objectively. All the more reason to broaden your sources for news.

Eye For An Eye

Iran is going old school on punishment, requiring a scorned lover who doused a woman with acid, blinding her, to himself be blinded by acid. Since one of my faithful readers asked me for my thoughts on it, here goes.

I support the death penalty. I personally believe it should at least be an option for all violent crimes such as robbery, rape and murder. (Yes, there are many cases of innocent people being put to death. Yes, the justice system needs to be improved. But that is a separate topic.) If a person is guilty with overwhelming evidence, the death penalty needs to at least be on the table.

However, the why is what is important here. I believe in the death penalty not as punishment or deterrence, but as prevention. Dead people can't hurt anyone. Punishments such as, in this case, dripping acid in the eyes, do not prevent crimes, but simply seeks to even scores which can never be evened. To me, this is unproductive and simply creates misery without fixing anything. It is unlikely that an act as irrational as throwing acid on a person can be deterred.

At the same time, there is an argument for corporal punishment for some crimes. I know my liberal friends will argue this point, and I agree, it is mostly speculative at this point. The crime/punishment in many countries is a chicken/egg deal. However, I have to believe, for a certain category of crimes it may work very well. These crimes would need to be not governed by emotion, as there is no deterrence that will work there. Crimes such as car theft, burglary and certain extreme DWI's would fall into this category. I simply have to believe that public flogging for these offenses would reduce their number. It is likely to be an non-issue due to many reasons, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work.

As far as my direct reaction to this incident, it's simple: kill him. People like that can't be allowed to live. The chance he may reoffend is too high to risk.

The Islamic world also must realize that things such as the original incident here scar it's name far more than terrorism. There is no excuse for any group of people to treat other groups of people as property to be owned or destroyed based on their own emotion.

I also find it ironic that so many intensely traditional groups decry modern society/the media/Hollywood for "objectifying" women by showing any sexuality. It seems pretty obvious that the worst danger to women is the reactionary three part classification of women as relative/wife/whore. This is where the view of women as property comes from, and it is the view of women as property that creates the worst offenses towards them.

Above all, it is a tragedy that we are even having this discussion.

Off-Message

It looks as though Mr. Obama will not make it through the Blagojevich scandal unscathed. Though there is still no indication that Mr. Obama will be implicated in any of the shadiness, the hope of this fading away quickly is itself fading. There are continual suggestions that the Obama camp must manage. It is a horrible sign that Rham Emanuel is hiding behind "no comment".

The real damage here is the distraction. Mr. Obama has received near universal approval for his action thus far. He does not need a scandal this early, especially one that threatens to typecast him as a typical Chicago politician, and worse, undermines his key campaign theme. In a worst case scenario, such as Mr. Emanuel being forced to resign, this could cast a shadow over his entire presidency. Even less grave outcomes will hurt his thus far stainless image with voters. Mr. Obama needs to deal with this aggressively and quickly. It is a failure of his camp that he is dealing with this at all.

More Illinois Corruption

The Governor of Mr. Obama's home state, Mr. Blagojevich is charged with what the FBI called a "political corruption crime spree". The Nixonian accusations run the gamut from bribery to intimidation of the press. The FBI, granted somewhat self-interestedly, is making this out to be one the largest, clearest corruption cases in recent history.

The more interesting questions are about the links between the arrested Governor and the President-Elect. The two come from the same party apparatus and have worked together for some time. In fact, Obama aides and loyalists are now falling over each other to recant previous statements of closeness and discussions of matters under investigation.

It is unlikely that Mr. Obama will be implicated in any wrongdoing. However, his comments on the subject thus far have been shamefully weak. He has thus far only made wishy-washy statements expressing "sadness".

This is inexcusable. As a candidate who ran one "change" Mr. Obama should strongly condemn the actions "if proven true" and should bend over backwards to help the investigation. Coming from a state the FBI calls one of, if not the most, corrupt, Mr. Obama carried the burden of proving his campaign slogans.

Another Wave Of Speculation On Israel Bombing Iran

There are new reports that Israel is prepared to bomb Iran with or without US assistance. While the actual reports may be probes at judging Iranian or other responses, the news continues to confirm that military options are now off the table. Israel believes Iran will have the fissile material for a bomb by late 2009. Some believe that the current government will fall before using the bomb, likely sparked by the effects of the falling price of oil. In any case this has the potential to be Mr. Obama, and Ms. Clinton's first major crisis.

Gun Sales Keep Soaring With Obama Presidency

The centrist course and moderate rhetoric aside, many Americans are still buying guns in preparation for what they believe will be an Obama administration attack on the second amendment. Sales, and prices, of possibly banned guns have skyrocketed since before the election. Some models are actually on waiting lists so long that could end up not being filled if legislation did pass. I have talked to gun shop owners who have told me manufacturers are completely sold out of models. Ironically, Mr. Obama's election has been a huge financial boost to the gun industry. Most ominously, guns sales are up the most around Chicago, where they know Mr. Obama best. Hopefully, Mr. Obama focuses on the economy, instead of eroding the rights of Americans.

Small Bright Spots In The Economy

While it is doubtless the economy is struggling, there were some glimmers of hope. Initial jobless claims were down, Wal-mart sales were up, and oil is still falling. Combined with Mr. Obama appearing to take a centrist approach to the economy, there may well be hope for a end to the recession sooner than many had feared.

Big 3 Showdown

The heads of the Big 3 Detroit automakers are in DC today for hearing on government financing. Of course, one of the reasons they are there in the first place is because they focus too much on lobbying Washington for favorable treatment and money, and not enough on running a solid company. So far this year they have already spent $50 million on lobbying Washington. That amount of money is fairly small, however, it is more about the mindset. You can't, or at least shouldn't, run a company by sucking up to Washington. Ironically, Detroit can't even pick a winner in Washington. Rep. Dingall, who they have lavished millions on, lost the chairmanship of a committee long used to protect the Big 3.

The situation does look dire. There is talk of a pre-packaged bankruptcy, which may be more palatable than the regular kind. In an extremely ominous sign, the UAW is ready to make wage concessions. That is a definite sign the end may be near.

Chambliss Blocks a D60, But At A Price

Saxby Chambliss (R, GA) has won his runoff election, thereby blocking the Democratic party from achieving a filibusterer proof majority in the Senate. There is now one legislative check on the power of the Democrats as a party. Though Mr. Obama so far shows every sign of governing from the center, it also acts as a check on Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi, who may not be so moderate.

Mr. Chambliss is likely a good man, and we agree on more than a few issues. However, some of his failings illustrate why the Republicans are now in the minority in both houses, have lost the White House and look likely to struggle to change the situation barring a failure on the part of the Democrats.

Many of Mr. Chambliss's weaknesses are stereotypical of a Republican Party that is increasingly dependent on a small group of reactionary political illiterates to win elections. His son is a lobbyist for an issue on which the Senator is one the committee for, though he is allegedly barred from lobbying his father. Mr. Chambliss advocated "arresting every Muslim who crosses state lines", though he later apologized.

Worst of all was his 2002 election tactics. Mr. Chambliss dodged the draft for the Vietnam War by receiving 6 deferments for various issues. He is what is known as a "chicken hawk", one who dodged the Vietnam draft with connections, then voted for the Iraq war and impugned the patriotism of anyone who opposed it. The Bush administration was full of them. However, Mr. Chambliss took it to another level.

His opponent, Max Cleland was a decorated Vietnam Veteren, who lost three limbs in the service. Mr. Chambliss, referring to votes cast by Mr. Cleland to protect worker's rights in the new DHS, accused Mr. Cleland of being soft on terrorism and the war, and implicitly attacking his patriotism. That's right. The draft dodger attacked the patriotism of a man who not only served with distinction in Vietnam, but left three of his limbs there! John McCain(R, AZ) said the ad was "worse than disgraceful, it was reprehensible" and Sen. Hagel(R, NE) said it was "beyond offensive to me".

At the core, the Republican party is based on solid ideas. In fact, these ideas should resonate with young voters, who are independent and grew up with no expectation of job security. However, the party needs to make a conscious choice to renounce the fear based mudslinging, xenophobia and jingoism that it has recently relied on.

The Republican Party needs to lay out a clear, positive vision for what it stands for, and then mobilize for the 21st century. If it does not, it is destined to be the permanent opposition minority.

Northern Command

Traditionally, the Northern Command, which is responsible for the United States, has not been assigned troops. That is because the US does not use troops for law enforcement, and we weren't exactly worried about getting invaded by Canada or Mexico.

That is changing now. There will now be 20,000 troops deployed to the US to prepare for a large scale event. They will allegedly be used only for that purpose.

I am torn about how to feel about this. On the one hand, what is stated as their mission is completely harmless, and seems to be specifically tailored to meet the objections of people like me. There will be minimal troops tasked to security, and they will allegedly be only for the defense of the unit.

However, this is a dangerous precedent, and the type of event that has been used elsewhere to transition to using the military more and more against civilians.

So far the plan seems to be sound. However, as has been stated many times and observed less, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.