Why Is Trump Waiting


until September to potentially threaten a government shutdown when he could have done so at the end of April?

The Continuing Resolution to fund the Government would have run out last week had Congress not passed a Joint Resolution to spend, spend, spend through September.

That a J.R. and a Bill are essentially interchangeable, the obvious question begging an answer is: Why did Trump not veto the damned thing? Almost nothing he has wished for was included in the Bill, so why not veto?

Perhaps Trump is right in that the procedural rules to invoke cloture on a filibuster need to be changed. But I think it is more than just a rule change, or electing more Republicans. I think there is more to it than simply draining a swamp. I think the problem goes further than lawyers and lobbyists writing legisation.

I think the entire system is in cardiac arrest. And I don’t think the general American population would understand the freedoms and necessary sacrifices of the early Federalist period.

Where’s the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act for that?


Election Day Ruminating


My small near-mid-western town likes to think big when it comes to racing police cruisers, the fire engine and an ambulance up and down main street multiple times a week. But other than the nuisance of that noise, it’s a rather hum-drum life here and I quite like it.

Returning a few movies to the library after voting, there was an older man, somewhere around retirement age, standing on the corner of the two intersecting main streets in town holding a sign:

Teamsters For

I honked, gave him a thumbs up and he waved back. This juxtaposed against the Democrat headquarters on the opposite diagonal corner, a sign in the window reading:

Stop The War On Workers

I love following politics. I’m a junkie, an amateur admittedly. I watched all the Republican Candidate debates last summer and earlier this year, as well as the two Presidential Debates a few weeks ago. I’m not at all a Romney fan. I voted for the Constitution Party candidate again this time. Joe Lieberman said it well after running as an Independent, that I didn’t leave my party, they left me. I feel the same about not only the Republicans, but most politicians in general. It would be whitewashing historical context to say that politics has always had the individual’s best interests in mind as government is at best a cruel master. But why is it so difficult for elected leaders to pass something that’s good for the country as a whole and then stay out of everyone’s business? 60 Minutes had a good story relating to that question just this past Sunday.

In any case, it would be nice to vote for a major party candidate who didn’t have his hands tied to the Israeli Lobby. Or thought closing military bases around the world constitutes retreat and defeat. For that would bring to the forefront the fact that despite the Cold War being “over”, the U.S. still effects that very mission. I never heard Romney explain why having a large military presence around the world was good for our security and interests. In fact, he never admitted what he believes our interests are. What is just as scary to me is Romney’s belief that an Executive Order is permissible to pass positive or negative law. He was rather adamant early on in saying he would use such a process to repeal ObamaCare.

I’m hoping Sherrod Brown loses his Senate seat tonight. I didn’t like pulling the lever for Josh Mandel since he is just as moneyed and tied to special interests as Brown. This was the most difficult decision for me since I’d rather have gone with Scott A. Rupert. But I finally decided that getting rid of Brown was best done in voting for Mandel. And that putting in a Rupert will be a better road to travel in the future.

In relation, I wish the electorate wasn’t so caught up on who wins the White House. True, the President sets the general political tone via his leadership but it is the Congress which ultimately sets policy via legislation.

Ohio has risen to the top in importance this last week of the campaign season. Anyone can win the state. Yet I have not heard one news agency explain Ohio politics well and why we are a purple state. It is somewhat like New York State where just a few counties in NYC will give a politician the state. For Ohio, it is the story of its cities. Obama did not win one rural county in 2008. For Romney to carry the state, he has to take or split at least one city with Obama. I believe it comes down to ethnic relation – how well did Romney present himself and his policies to Ohio’s black population? As Cincinnati was a major hub of the Underground Railroad, one would assume the black population would skew Republican. Yet I think it actually comes down to Cleveland. Urban blight coupled with how district lines are drawn will determine whether we in Ohio skew red or blue this time around. Urban blight and redistricting are why our ballot’s Issue 2 is so important.

And finally, keeping in line with my last two posts, I’ll leave off with some election humor.

A Few Thoughts At Quarter-to-Five AM

1 Comment

Some things to ponder after the previous few weeks of the Federal Circus Show in D.C.

Obama is the Great Manipulator.

His great cult of personality makes it nigh impossible to turn away from listening to any one of his speeches. He sucks the audience in with platitudes and a few truths and then quickly rips out the rug from underneath them with lies, misrepresentations and outright demagoguery. The less informed, aka the naive and ignorant, never understand what they are hearing.

Low interest rates do not necessarily signal a healthy economy.

Neither do they necessarily accord fairness for both the rich and the disenfranchised. On the contrary, in a Keynesian system such as what we live with today, low interest rates are the Devil’s workshop. In an ideal Keynesian world, low interest rates would signal we’ve arrived in Xanadu, a utopia wherein we are all equal, with economic downturns being a thing of the past. Unfortunately the Austrian school of thought tells us otherwise. Low interest rates in a Keynesian world are nothing other than a tool to stimulate the economy, largely through the manipulated creation of wealth by central bankers, in our case, the Federal Reserve.

Anyone fortunate enough to watch Obama’s televised speech earlier last week pleading with Congress to come up with a debt ceiling plan, heard him say close to half a dozen times, that a default would give rise to higher interest rates. I then read further as the week progressed in various articles of the same thing – not raising the debt ceiling would raise interest rates.

Ironically, a higher interest rate is a good thing. It signals that borrowing money entails more risk and so is a natural brake in a truer market economy on correcting issues before they develop into bubbles. Our problem today is exactly the opposite. Interest rates have been held artificially too low for too long. The fact that the Fed continues to keep rates low confuses businesses and the economy in general, leading them to their own, and everyone’s, peril.

The Tea Party is similar to Hillary Clinton.

They want balls but will never be capable of having them. They were elected last year to prevent the government from further burying us in debt. They’ve failed us. Twice this year already.

I put up the following quote two posts ago and found it still relevant to put up again. If the existence of the Federal Reserve System is not questioned first, debate over the debt ceiling is worthless:

(S)upporters of the market economy need to decide once and for all whether they really believe their own arguments. People who argue for “fiscal responsibility” will never get anywhere, and cannot be taken seriously, as long as they tolerate a system in which the government can create out of thin air all the money it wants. If the federal government is an addict, then the Federal Reserve System is its enabler.

Boehner is a RINO and a lactating boob.

He can cry all he wants, but he is certainly no Tom DeLay. A man who looks and sounds quite presidential is rather weak and incompetent when it comes to holding firm onto sound economic principles.

The letters after a Congressman’s name really do mean something.

To my delight last November, there was a Libertarian running against Boehner. The Libertarian received my vote for two reasons. Boehner voted for the 2008 Bailout. Secondly, I had a sneaking suspicion while at the booth that Boehner would not stand for sound economic principles.

Misery loves company.

Small consolation, indeed, but the positive side of a global economy, perhaps introduced by Nixon’s opening of the Asian market to the world, is if the U.S. is dragged into economic oblivion, so will everyone else.

The way I see it, can’t we just press the reset button and call it even?

If interested, check out Tumbledown. Some nice shots of a once-prosperous manufacturing town.

The Case For A Justifiable Impeachment


[One must assume that Obama took this long to address the public regarding military action in Libya so as to first test his speech with sample groups.]

Not once did we hear of a Constiutional justification for the use of the military. Instead, we were bombarded with “international coalition”, “the U.N.”, “Arab League”, and the cry for help from the Libyan people.

Not once did we hear him explain what American vital interests were at stake, as he claimed were part of the reason for military action. No, the closest we came to American interests was the threat of thousands of refugees pouring into a fragile Democratic Egypt and the fact that  “Libya sits between Tunisia and Egypt”.

Instead, what we heard earlier tonight was the clearest and most concise summation to date of his ideology. Yes, we already knew he was a Globalist and Internationalist by default. But his speech tonight, which should be dubbed The Obama Doctrine, is really an easy initial justification for an eventual impeachment trial.

Obama is in flagrant dereliction of Constitutional authority – that is, he is not allowed to use the military at his own personal whim, even if the International Ummah gives its approval. He has openly defied Congress of their power to declare war and thus further driven the American citizenry into oppression through military campaigning and Imperialism. If Clinton came under fire for his use of a cigar, how much more so should Obama for his Emperor-esque rule?


Richard Lugar Gets It Right

Leave a comment

From the National Journal:

Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Richard Lugar, R-Ind., says Congress should have had the opportunity to weigh in on what he said will be “a very expensive operation, even in a limited way.”

Speaking on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Lugar said, “It’s a strange time in which almost all of our congressional days are spent talking about budget deficits, outrageous problems. And yet [at the] same time, all of this passes.”

The fact that Ghaddafi is sitting on a large pot of gold should be quite worrisome to the supposed U.S.-led International Coalition bombing Libya through its weaponry bought with paper money. Worrisome because this never-ending manufactured Recession is causing the price of gold to skyrocket, thereby increasing Ghaddafi’s wealth. Secondly, if the Libyan leader does use guerrilla tactics to repel International Imperialism, we could very well find ourselves in a New Vietnam.

The only positive to a possible Vietnam type conflict is it would be relatively short-lived in comparison. The U.S. certainly doesn’t have the economic might to fund such a conflict and assuming all things stay as they are, our military doesn’t have the capability of escalating its presence in Libya as we are overextended in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In any case, let’s hope the folks elected via alignment with the Tea Party movement begin showing some chutzpah in Congress. The biggest fight to date since they’ve taken office is over the reading of the Constitution in session.

The Debt Ceiling

1 Comment

Problem: How does a newly formed nation raise funds to pay off previous war debts?

Answer: A publicly funded debt.

This was Hamilton’s answer. However, such a debt has a time limit. It must be paid off and Hamilton’s was designed to do just that. The current issue isn’t that we are in debt, it is that we are under water in terms of debt, that we continue to borrow more money, and that when we reach the threshold of borrowing Congress simply votes to raise the ceiling.

Obviously Congress can’t continue to raise the ceiling every time we brush up against it, but it seems they haven’t quite gotten the message. Paul Ryan is bucking that trend, as mentioned in an American Thinker article.

Not only should Congress not raise the ceiling this time around, they should actually decrease the ceiling. In terms of the debt ratio within the Federal budget, yes, we should turn back the clock. In terms of practicality, a few things will happen.

  1. Washington will grind to a halt. The answer then will be simple: Get rid of the national debt and Congress can go back to work.
  2. The States would need to revert to self-governance. Forget depending on Washington for your finances. Look out for the needs of yourself and demand less of Washington. In return, it will demand less of you. This means more autonomy right on down the line to the local level and finally, the individual citizen.
  3. Continual reception of seemingly free capital is nice, but you are the banker’s marionette. Should the debt ceiling be voted down, the ties to lenders will be cut. But it will be painful, which is point #1 up above.
  4. A lower debt ceiling is a smaller Washington. Washington needn’t be the giant ogre in the middle of the room. It is simply the binding force which is theoretically meant to keep the States from falling into Articles of Confederation dysfunctionality.

How cynical should we then be about our lawmakers should they increase the ceiling yet again? If they are patriots acting in the interest of national self-preservation, they will vote it down. If they are puppets in the hands of special interests and bankers, they will vote for the increase.

In This Case…

Leave a comment

…Ignorance is plain stupidity.

Anti-intellectualism should be rather embarrassed when it is caught with its pants down. I predict such might happen with more frequency should the “conservative movement” sweep itself into Federal political power post-November 2nd. At times, however, anti-intellectuals are so proud to be so that critique more or less falls upon deaf ears.

Thomas Lifson’s article over at American Thinker assumes the purity of the historical record is whitewashed in nothing but the most innocent of intent and honest of heart. He is daftly wrong in his belief that the practice of favoritism has no place in government. Favoritism, an informal, grassroots word for the idea of cronyism, or more accurately, the Federal Spoils System, is one of the unspoken rules of government.

There are obviously many ways to view the machinery of Favoritism. It is the definition by which one bill wins over the other, whether through coercion or other nobler means; the manner by which one candidate wins a Congressional seat. It could be classified as a subcategory of Madisonian terms in how factions keep checks on one another. Historical Jacksonians would use it so as to justify letting the charter of the Second Bank of the United States run out un-renewed. Today’s liberals would cite Chicago’s infamous Pay to Play system. In any case, the Spoils System is the oil by which our Two Party System works and perhaps to the chagrin of Washington (especially), Adams, Madison and Monroe, a necessary evil to the problem of the Party Politics.

This, of course, isn’t to bear false witness of the inerrancy of the Spoils System. On the contrary, it is fraught with danger, one with quite the slippery slope which easily leads to political faction and corruption. But on the other hand, Federalists and Anti-Federalists would at least be familiar with the current government in light that the system is still alive, a means of intellectual war between factions rather than outright physical turmoil. And on the positive side, in the case of ObamaCare, the Spoils System just might be one more kink in the chain that finally undoes the monstrosity of unConstituationalism so pervasive within the current Administration.

Older Entries