Laissez-faire

Since I’m thinking about the two establishment candidates attacking each other, I thought I’d mention McCain’s criticism of the extravagant stage set for Obama’s speech, resembling an ancient Greek temple.

Now, I know that Obama has no intentions of portraying himself as being more humble, or more thrifty than McCain; and though it might be a little bizarre to display yourself in such an arrogant manner, the content of Obama’s stage is really quite irrelevant. It’s not like taxpayers are being forced to contribute to this partisan event. Oh, wait…

That’s ok. I’m sure it’s covered under the “general welfare” clause in the Constitution.

McCain has been taking a lot of heat lately for owning more homes than he can count. Sure, having to consult your staff to get an accurate tally of the homes you own is bizarre; and owning that many(8?) homes is not something typical Americans can relate to; but I fail to see how this particular fact, being touted by the Obama campaign, is supposed to contrast the two candidates.

Obama may be able to count his mansions on one finger without consulting his staff, but his net worth (though considerably less than that of McCain’s) is still well above that of average Americans’. How he invests his millions is no one’s business but his own, and the same should be true of McCain.

And last I checked, there was no shortage of homes in the US. In fact, you might have noticed that the housing bubble that recently burst, begot an overabundance of new homes; many of which are now vacant. So we don’t need to worry about McCain hogging all the houses.

Michigan Republicans held their state convention yesterday in Novi. The vast majority of the convention was essentially a pep rally for McCain and Michigan Republican Candidates. There were only two uncontested primary races to vote on. There was however, one resolution that was introduced, “strongly encourag[ing] the members of the Platform Committee of the Republican National Convention to consider the adoption of the ‘The Platform of the American People,’” drafted by American Solutions — a political organization chaired by Newt Gingrich.

It is a broad platform full of buzzwords and rhetoric that may initially sound appealing to many Republicans. A more thorough reading of the platform uncovered compromises to core conservative values of limited governments and free-markets. It offers corporate handouts in the form of “prizes,” courtesy of taxpayers (I believe McCain was a trailblazer for this type of anti-market idiocy).

We support giving large financial prizes to companies and individuals who invent an
affordable car that gets 100 miles to the gallon.

We support giving a large financial prize to the first company or individual who invents new
ways to successfully cut pollution.

We support giving a large financial prize to the first company or individual who invents a
new, safer way to dispose of nuclear waste products.

It calls for enacting programs that would be steps in the direction toward a fascist police state.

The Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies should develop
programs to teach Americans what they can do as individuals to help in the fight against
terror.

The income tax system is called unfair, but then two lines away their alternative is offered, which suggests having the option of a single 17% income tax. That makes it fair?

These are just a few of the planks that not only contradict the principles of conservatives, but are counter productive to the growth and freedom of all Americans.

There were at least a couple small groups that were concerned with the passage of this resolution, and decided to take action. Flyers were distributed at the convention, and some people even spoke at the district caucuses, encouraging people to vote no on this resolution. When the resolution was read, we were pleasantly surprised to hear from the floor, loud booing and people yelling “no!” A vote was taken by district and the resolution was overwhelmingly defeated.

Clayton, California Mayor Greg Manning, put a stop to a couple of “self centered” capitalists who decided to sell produce from their garden on the side of the road. These little girls, won’t be causing anymore trouble.

It’s clear that abortion is a hotly debated issue, with strong feelings on either side, but it has always been my understanding that the termination (or intentional neglect) of a living, breathing infant, outside the womb — regardless of the circumstances — was universally regarded as murder. I have believed that, as a civilized nation, we denounced such actions socially and legally. That was until I learned of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act: Legislation that aims to protect the lives of infants born after botched abortions, by requiring that they receive medical treatment, rather than allowing them to die.

Why would such a bill even need to be introduced? Putting the abortion issue aside, aren’t human lives already protected by our laws no matter what? Well, despite these questions, the legislation was introduced at the federal level and in at least one state (Illinois). Unsurprisingly, the federal bill (HR 2175 [107th]) passed unanimously in 2002. An essentially identical bill introduced in Illinois (Three consecutive years beginning in 2001) however, had some dissenters. Among them; Barack Obama who claimed that the state bill did not include text preventing the undermining of Roe v. Wade, like that in the federal bill, which he said he would have voted for.

Just recently the Obama campaign has admitted that the state bill was identical to the federal bill, and that Obama had “misstated” this fact:

Indeed, Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday when he said the federal version he supported “was not the bill that was presented at the state level.”

His campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate, and a spokesman, Hari Sevugan, said the senator and other lawmakers had concerns that even as worded, the legislation could have undermined existing Illinois abortion law. Those concerns did not exist for the federal bill, because there is no federal abortion law….

I find the need to introduce such legislation disturbing. What’s more disturbing is the fact that a congressperson would vote against it, and then lie about his position, which amounted to what I see as allowing infanticide. I welcome any defense of Obama’s position regarding this situation. I’d gladly concede my misunderstanding to know that a legislator and possible future president does not believe it’s acceptable to take the life of an infant, living outside the womb.

Notice in the following video, James Carville’s pathetic attempt to defend Obama by avoiding the issue and criticizing Rick Santorum.

In a press conference, while discussing the Georgia-Russian conflict, John McCain said “In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.” Aside from that being largely inaccurate, I do believe he has been trumpeting the invasion of a few sovereign nations by the United States, which is in-fact a nation. And last time I checked, we were well into the 21st century.

I wonder if the hypocritical scolding of Russia by McCain, Obama and the Bush Administration has anything to do with the fact that the US equipped and trained the military of the semi-dictatorship of Georgia? They don’t discuss the fact that Georgia made the first act of aggression when they stepped up their military forces against South Ossetia, in an attempt to regain control of the essentially independent territory. A country’s abuse of their citizen’s rights, destruction of civil liberties, preemptive military aggression, oppression of political dissidents, use of torture, etc., is only acceptable if the country is our ally — or in many respects, if that country is ours.

I don’t condone Russia’s actions, but Georgia is not the innocent little nation that the media makes them out to be. And once again, our involvement in international conflict will likely lead to a broader conflict. Imagine if Georgia was a member of NATO, as Bush has attempted to arrange. The military actions of Russia against Georgia, would have obligated the United States and other NATO allies to take military action, possibly leading to another world war.

“peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”
-Thomas Jefferson

“In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken part, nor does it comport with our policy, so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced that we resent injuries, or make preparations for our defense.”
-James Monroe

I came across an interesting transcript of a congressman’s statement before the House Financial Services Committee on September 10th 2003. It appears that this particular congressman understood the consequences that would follow the interference in the market by the government. He warned them not to further distort the market with subsidies to Fannie and Freddie.

Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.

Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.

A few years later, the bubble burst exactly as he predicted. He’s still warning policymakers of the consequences likely to follow their insistence on interfering with the market, but his warnings fall on deaf ears. It makes one wonder what really drives their policy decisions. They do not appear to be motivated by the well being of the average American. Obama and McCain bicker over windmills, offshore drilling and Paris Hilton, while Americans have their tax dollars diverted to gigantic, irresponsible institutions; and their currency debased , driving up prices while wages and salaries remain flat.

Oh yeah…the congressman who made that statement: Ron Paul, of course.

Detroit Mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, is finally getting what he deserves. Judge Ronald Giles sentenced him to jail for violating his bond terms by taking a trip to Windsor. The restriction on his travel was ordered by Giles after law enforcement accused the Mayor of assault while serving his subpoena. This is in addition to the 8 felony charges filed against him.

It’s good to see that he isn’t completely above the law, like he has previously assumed.