Good News

There is a piece of good news out of Washington for those of us who believe they should have the right of self defense. The NRA is apparently having a fair amount of success limiting anti-gun legislation. This is mostly due to pressure on Conservative Democrats/Democrats from Conservative districts. However, even liberal Democrats remember that the "Assault Weapons Ban" play a role in their loss in the 1994 elections, and are unwilling to risk a repeat of that defeat in 2010. Hopefully, this will stave off the attempts by the Statists to outsource self defense.

Response To The Obama Presser

President Obama gave his second Prime time speech and news conference. If you missed it, or don't watch TV because it makes you stupid, you can read it here.

My response was a very simple, two part thought. He is truly gifted at abstractly arguing for his position in rhetorical terms, and at sounding extremely centrist. He is able to do this for the very simple reason that he was won the battle over the battlefield. That is to say, he has succeeded in framing the argument in a framework where is positions are moderate and reasonable.

Conversely, Republicans have failed because they took the bait, and tried to argue with the President on his own terms. They are trying to argue over what course of State action would be the most effective, rather than arguing over what the role of the state is. As long as they do not challenge the role of the State, they will always lose. They are going against a relatively popular President who succeeded a extremely unpopular President of their party, and have historically represented some constituencies that are extremely unpopular currently. Going on his turf and arguing his issues on his terms is not a formula for success. In order to have a chance, they need to force the debate out of his home field and onto their field. In this case, their home field is the role of government in abstract. Most Americans are still against Statism. Hopefully, they will figure this out before the midterm elections which may well prove pivotal for the country.

Welfare Alternatives

After seeing that the so-called "Octomom" had planned on supporting her kids on welfare, I decided that I would go into a little more depth on what I see as a critical reform to the tax and welfare system.

The idea is extremely simple. Enact a dollar for dollar tax credit(not deduction) for charities that take the place of welfare, up to the full amount your taxes would be. Obviously, they have to be nonprofits, and some general guidelines would need to be put in place. As they take off, there will be less and less need to have any governmental welfare, and once it is unneeded, it can be ended.

The beautiful part is, it's voluntary. Pay taxes OR support private charity. Generally speaking, liberals give far less to charity than conservatives anyway, so both groups can be happy.

The critical component is this: it removes the role of government in a place it doesn't belong. No more governmental involvement in socialistic redistribution of wealth.

Indeed, this approach could be applied to virtually all functions of the government, outside of a few bare bones functions such as law enforcement. You know, the way the founders intended?

The real question is: why has this not been proposed by the Republican Party? It is in accordance to several of the key "official" principles of the party: limited government, reduced welfare and reduced effective taxes. But the Republican Party has been seduced by power. Truly reducing the power of the government would reduce the power they have when they manage to convince people to vote them in by complaining about things they have no plan to fix. Remember, it was Clinton who last reformed welfare, not either of the Bushes.

Without tax revenues, they couldn't invade other countries with their shiny toys that they spend 30-50+% of the budget they complain about on. They couldn't use earmarks to bribe the people who helped to elect them on a platform of no pork. With reduced government spending, there would be less lucrative contracts to sign immediately upon leaving office to lobby for government spending.

So Republicans really don't care about cutting down the size of government or taxes, at least outside of soundbites and campaign ads. That's why they don't do it when they have power. At least the Democrats tell us what they are going to do.

It's time for another way.

Deficit Spending

The latest projections are that the policies sought by the Obama administration will contribute to nearly ten trillion dollars in deficits over the next decade. A moderate Republican who was nominated for Secretary of Commerce by President Obama says the new budget will bankrupt America.

To President Obama's credit, he campaigned on these principles. People knew what they were getting, and the fault lies with the American public as a whole. Though they are not happy with the spending, they seem resigned to it. Republican complaints, while red meat to the base, are not resonating with moderate Americans. Why should it? The last Republican administration brought us an illegal, absurdly expensive war and loads of pork barrel spending. All this from a President who mouthed the official Republican lines, then turned around and did the opposite. True, he enacted a temporary tax cut. However, when you increase spending, you by definition increase taxes. The two are linked.

Because of this, it will take time for Americans to believe the words of the Republican party. In order to regain credibility, the Republican party must reject the pop politics of talk radio, of simplistic political duality, and re-embrace their foundation. They must embrace limited government, not just pay it lip service. Tell us how you would cut the deficit. Take back the House in 2010 and actually cut the budget, and not just settle political scores with budget trimmings that are more than offset with barely concealed bribes to campaign contributors.

How about changes to the tax code that actually empower the private sector to take over government waste. How about a dollar for dollar tax credit for charitable donations? What about a tax credit for private or home school? What about ending the War on Drugs?

It will take a bold agenda to capture the attention and trust of the public, because you squandered it last time. If you continue being reactive and negative, sniping at the Administration without offering new solutions, then there is a very real prospect of lasting one party rule in America.

Is This Where We're Headed?

It's widely agreed that President Obama is steering the country towards a British-style mild socialism. Somewhat higher taxes with a sturdier "social safety net". Doesn't sound so bad, does it? Well, check out this British family. All four of them claim to be too fat to work. So the government pays them a healthy salary to sit around and eat. Sounds like a pretty sweet deal, eh? The worthless (can't find an word to use that isn't extremely vulgar)s whine that it's not enough money, that it's not their fault they are fat, and they are too poor to buy healthy food and don't have time to exercise. Can even the most bleeding heart liberal give me a reason they shouldn't be put down? Remember, none of the traditional excuses work. It's a socialist country. School and health care are free. They clearly aren't too busy working. Got anything?

If this is where we're heading, I don't want to go.

Where Are Americans Heads At?

There is an interesting article in the WSJ where a former Clinton pollster breaks down President Obama's poll numbers. He concludes that the numbers being reported in the MSM are misleading and that Mr. Obama's numbers are lower than Mr. Bush's were at the same time. He also notes that many Americans are deeply pessimistic about the near future, and are especially worried about the effects of deficit spending. This is likely to increase as China becomes increasingly vocal about it's loaning to the US.

Another key sign that Americans are uneasy is the continued reports of weapon and ammunition hoarding. Ironically, President Obama may be responsible for more guns being in circulation, if he spends his political capital before pushing through his draconian gun ban.

Some people are using the economic situation to advance common-sense legalisation. In California there is a bill to legalize and tax marijuana. Now that the stormtrooper-esqe Bush Administration DEA has been replaced by the somewhat more pragmatic Obama DEA, this would actually go into effect. This would cost the state less, while bringing in revenue. Funny how no one ever cites liberty as a reason...

Is The War On Success Driving Companies Offshore?

As a natural result of President Obama's War on Success, firms are starting to move offshore to escape the crushing US corporate taxes, which are among the highest in the world. The Swiss in particular stand to gain a great deal as they already have treaties with the US in place. This minimizes the consequences for firms. It may only be a matter of time before US citizens of high personal worth make similar moves.

Also, though he was obviously being hyperbolic, it's still not a good sign that a US governor is warning of a Zimbabwe style economic collapse in the US.