Friday, March 5, 2010

Benjamin Shapiro Was A Good Addition to the List

Here is another good article from Benjamin Shapiro.

As Shapiro rightly points out,
The Democrats and Republicans who oppose Bunning want fiscal responsibility, unless it actually requires them to act fiscally responsible.


The concept of Negative Rights versus Positive Rights is a simple idea, but many people probably have not thought of it -- but people should think of it. It is an important concept. As long as people feel that they are entitled to what other people have worked for, then we are on a downward spiral -- and the people who feel that way cannot be free.

34 comments:

  1. Of course he was a good addition.

    You do know that I'm in love with him, don't you???

    ReplyDelete
  2. I notice that stupid effing idiot who praised bin Laden for building schools and child care centers is quoted in the article.

    I emailed Bunning thanking him and said I wished he represented out state (instead of Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell). Unemployment already runs to almost 2 years; talking heads today were suggesting that extending it even longer would NOT encourage people to do anything but stay on unemployment longer. I agreed.

    The problem with the jokers who slagged Bunning was that they couldn't come up with appropriate spin on his motivation to filibuster. How refreshing is that?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I heard that a couple of days ago that Utah limits unemployment to a relatively short time. Utah aloo has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country.

    Someone years ago told me that Utah has welfare, but you have to earn it. Not many people are on welfare in Utah.

    Funny how those polices tend to keep people off of the programs.

    Vancounver BC probably does more to aid the "homeless" than any other city in Canada. It also has about the highest number of homeless in the country. You would think that people would add two plus two and realize that if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it.

    That is not to say there are not real cases of hard luck out there, but those people will want to what they can to help themselves.

    A few years ago, Fay and I were by the waterfront in Vancouver (overlooking the site of the Olympic Rings Barge, as a matter of fact.) A guy came up to us and asked if we could help. He said he had just come in on the Greyhound Bus from Newfoundland and needed some money to get a room at the YMCA. We declined his offer. He asked a couple of other people, who also declined. He then went into a tirade about how he had heard that people in Vancouver were friendly and willing to help, but that he was not seeing that. A year later, we were back at the same place. A guy came up and asked if we could help him. We ignored him, so he moved on to someone else. "I just came in on the Greyhound Bus and I need some money to get a room at the YMCA." I almost laughed out loud, and was tempted to tell him we had heard that one before and couldn't he get a new routine.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh yea, I remember that guy.

    Loser.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I had some guy outside the Vancouver Art Museum approach me with this crazy outlandish story and was asking me for money. It was really funny honestly and it took everything out of me to not laugh in his face. I didn't give him anything and he looked so upset that I made him go thru his whole schpeel before saying no.

    The BIG problem with Vancouver is the mental illness that many of our homeless have. I don't know the solution to it... Olympic protesters said we need to dump more money into housing for these people... and yet there are plenty of shelters that the same people they are wanting to help, refuse to go to. At what point do you stop trying to help them? Or do you continue to enable them? I dunno. I wish there was an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, in all the hissy-fit stories about the evil Senator Bunning, that is the first I'd heard that he had a revenue-neutral solution of using unspent 'stimulus' money.

    Even though that is nothing more than fiat money as well, at least it does not increase the deficit to any more than it already is.

    Of course, that would mean there would be less available for the Dems to buy votes next election, so it really makes no sense for other GOP'ers to oppose that solution.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I thought Bunning picked the wrong hill to plant his flag. There are lots of places to begin cost-cutting; to start with the very people who have shouldered the burden of this meltdown is idiotic. Most of these people have never drawn UE (or welfare, or food stamps, or rent subsidies, or even a Pell grant) in their lives until the past year or so. They've paid for every fucking social program for every lazy bum ALL OF THEIR LIVES. Bunning chooses THEM for the end of his boot?

    If we dramatically slash taxes there will be jobs. Able-bodied people will flock back to work by the millions. Those that don't? Cut 'em off.

    Then abolish the program completely. Responsible people will once again save a nestegg and be prudent with their money. Let civic organizations and churches sort out the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fay, I like Shapiro. I'm glad you added him!

    Bunning has the right idea. He just started the wrong place, IMHO.

    I think most people would quietly surrender their UE checks if Congress cut out all pork barrel spending, slashed social spending to the bone, and the austerity measures were shouldered by ALL Americans, not just the bruised and bloodied working class.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "I thought Bunning picked the wrong hill to plant his flag." I disagree, Lady Red:

    There are few, if any, "Let's build another superfluous building and name it after Robert Byrd" bills. Pork is added to other, "important," bills. The Senate passed a rule that they would not pass a bill without having the money to pay for it, then started passing bills without having the money to pay for them. I believe that this was the third. What other "important" bill was Bunning supposed to make a stand on? This bill was not intended to fund UE for new claims; it was intended to extend UE to, IIRC, 18 months.

    The Democrats are not at all interested in doing what is needed to get the economy rolling; they are interested in making as many people dependant on the government as possible.

    No matter what bill Bunning took a stand on, it would have been the wrong one. That is exactly what the Dems had in mind. Their tune of whining would have had different lyrics, but it would have been whining nonetheless.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Matt, you have a good point. One thing is for sure: if Bunning had been successful, it would have pinned Congress against the wall, and a firestorm would have erupted. Perhaps an uncontrollable firestorm.

    There are millions depending on those nasty little UE checks. Right now, they're all wondering if Bunning has lost his marbles. After all, is he going to throw his gilded congressional pension into the austerity hat with the UE checks? No.

    Are conservative older folks on social security willing to throw their checks into the austerity hat? No.

    Are students attending college willing to throw their grants into the austerity hat? No.

    I could go on, but I'm sure you get my drift. Bunning should have proposed a {insert number here}% slash in ALL gov't entitlements, across the board.

    I would support that. I can't support singling out working people who are barely hanging on, while everyone else rides the gravy train.

    If we're gonna do this thing, let's do it right. A wise man once said "we cannot sacrifice what is right for what is expedient."

    If working people are thrown to the wolves, they will turn this gov't upside down. Maybe that's a good thing. It would certainly hasten a return to self-sufficiency, because there's no damn way these jilted workers will ever agree to donate to the public coffers for social programs, ever again.

    Ever.

    Is my point valid, or am I off the rails?

    What you are saying has a drumbeat of it's own...and it's very seductive. Bunning's proposal is a match held to a tinder-dry nation. Are we prepared for the conflagration?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Well, I stand by my points too.

    Sen. Bunning did offer alternatives for funding benefits extensions (like stimulus $$, which has been mentioned). Why did they pass PAYGO if they are going to pick and choose what programs it applies to? In the long run, this is not helping our country or people out of work. It is putting us into catastrophic debt and/or increasing taxes on the backs of the already over taxed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, you have good points too, florrie.

    I agree with Bunning in principle; I just disagree with his scope. I think an across-the-board entitlement cut would be wiser than cherry picking which program gets the axe and which doesn't.

    Tax cuts. We need deep tax cuts to get people back to work. Too many people who have paid taxes all of their lives are on the wrong side of the equation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Our deaf representatives in WA state just overrode a voter initiative requiring 2/3 majority to raise taxes. They did this by using a "state of emergency" loophole.

    I'm so sick of politicians at this stage. I'm so frustrated that we voters have to tighten our belts, making our budgets stretch while every bill goes up - mortgage, utilities, food, fuel, cable, etc., not to mention home repair/maintenance costs rising. Our home's assessed value went down but prop. taxes went up due to various levies kicking in.
    So now I expect these asshats to start cutting programs, and YES, staff, commissions and advisors, the same way the average person has to do in order to make ends meet.

    OK, rant off :-)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Florrie, are Washingtonians angry at the override? Do you need us to send torches and pitchforks? Tar and feathers?

    It's aggravates me to no end that the politicians are so clueless. I hope everyone floods the polls in 2010, and we throw the bastards out by the armload.

    I also hope and pray that there is someone we can vote IN who has some sense of honor and integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  15. People here are FURIOUS, lady red. At the legislature and our PoS governor.

    I'm so angry at the arrogance and, like you said, CLUELESSNESS of these jerks.

    Yes, I was hoping Dino Rossi would challenge Patty Murray; he has name recognition and lots of support, I think he would have a good chance of beating her. But I haven't heard yet that he's in the race. If he were, we'd donate our time and $$ to his campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Bunning should have proposed a {insert number here}% slash in ALL gov't entitlements, across the board."

    Lady Red, this was not a matter of cutting one program while allowing others to continue unchecked. This was a case of not starting a new program (an extension of UE) without having the money to pay for it. The other programs were not on the table, or I am sure Senator Bunning would have taken aim at them as well.

    I have been hearing of a way to get things into shape: a 12.5 flat tax on everything currently being taxed (income, business, etc.), and cutting federal spending by half. That would make the U.S. the place to do business, revenue would come pouring into the government, and it would allow us to pay off the deficit.

    But the current junta is too interested in intentionally destroying the country to ever consider doing that.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Florie, the government of Washington State does not care if the people are furious. After all, the textbook on how to steal elections was written in Seattle.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "I have been hearing of a way to get things into shape: a 12.5 flat tax on everything currently being taxed (income, business, etc.), and cutting federal spending by half. That would make the U.S. the place to do business, revenue would come pouring into the government, and it would allow us to pay off the deficit."

    I like the sound of that, Matt.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This is exactly what I mean, Lady Red -
    "I thought Bunning picked the wrong hill to plant his flag. There are lots of places to begin cost-cutting; to start with the very people who have shouldered the burden of this meltdown is idiotic. Most of these people have never drawn UE (or welfare, or food stamps, or rent subsidies, or even a Pell grant) in their lives until the past year or so. They've paid for every fucking social program for every lazy bum ALL OF THEIR LIVES. Bunning chooses THEM for the end of his boot?"

    He did not choose them for the end of his boot at all. He offered a revenue-neutral solution, to take the money out of the not-yet-spent stimulus monies.

    But of course it was played in the press, and by far too many politicians, as just another evil, anti-little-guy Republican kickin'em when they're down.

    If even you, who are a lot more politically savvy then 90% of the voting populace, see it that way, then the media has done its job of smearing anything to the right of Joe Stalin

    ReplyDelete
  20. I owe everyone an apology.  I was ill-informed regarding the Bunning proposal.  I've been reading numerous articles this evening and I finally found one with a concise account of what actually happened.

    I've let myself be hoodwinked!  Dammit!  My sincere apologies for ranting out my ass.  Thanks to all of you for slapping me silly, and don't hesitate to do it again. 

    Crap on toast.  How utterly embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete
  21. On the personal side, Lady Red, no apology is needed. You inform us of a great number of things, for which we are grateful. We are here to cover each other's backs.

    On a larger scale, I must agree with Sid. If you believed that Bunning was stepping on “the little guy,” then the Ministry of Propaganda, er, Main Stream Media did what it intended to do. That is why we are here. The truth must be heard. We are here to teach ourselves and others. Do not be afraid to ask questions. If you had not tried to state what you believed to be true, your misconception would have continued. We have many voices, with many different views. And your voice is highly respected. That you listened is all that we ask – and you did listen. If we were wrong, we know that you would have shown us.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Crap on toast? Hmmm, think I'll pass...





    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  23. But yes, like Matt said, don't you dare apologize, lady red!

    ReplyDelete
  24. I'm so glad that we can talk about things here, and help each other to understand all the issues and events. There's so much to keep up with these days! It's enough to scramble my brain...

    I love TCKT.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I have been wondering what the shorthand name for our home should be. I nominate the T(i)CK(e)T, or Ticket. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I have just reread the comments on this thread. I am grateful to you all. We are in fearful times. We must be willing to stand up and debate what we believe is true. If we do not, then the true will not prevail.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Lady Red said: " I owe everyone an apology. I was ill-informed regarding the Bunning proposal "

    Maybe it's just me, but I presume the purpose of communication is to relay understanding and concepts from one to another. It works both ways to open minded people. Even stubborn as hell ones like me. If being wrong or misinformed on ocassion were a capital sin I'd already be grilling McBurgers in Hades. Recognizing it is the key, when it occurs, and simply stating agreement with a new position is all that is necessary, or asking queastions when you don't know something for sure.

    There is not enough time in any day for everyone to know everything for sure. When I first read about Bunning here I quickly noticed someone commented that he'd explained his reason vis a vis exsiting funding sitting idle momentarily...which made sense to me. My background as a "Fed" may have made that easy....I've watched appropriations be "squirreled away", for future misapplication, too many times to not notice it when stated plainly. Bunning appeared to do that. It was "spun" as cruel becasue somebody in media wanted to to sound that way...for reasons of their own.

    You owe no apology. You did nothing wrong, except be human, which at times seems grievous today. From the perspecytive you orignally spoke, I agreed with what you said. It wasn't until further conversation that I changed my mind. I'd think that is what places like this are for in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Maybe it's just me, but I presume the purpose of communication is to relay understanding and concepts from one to another. It works both ways to open minded people.

    Well... this Libertarian is learning a lot about the other side of politics, as well as, learning somewhat about US politics. Honestly most of this goes over my head because its non-Canadian content - but I am trying to learn. And it helps to read conversations like this. Although I may not necessarily AGREE with everything shared, I am learning and therefore, I thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Apology for what, Lady Red? The media did its very best to cover the truth in their typical layers of crap, and the Dems in congress did the same with Senator Bunning.

    In the end, those twop groups made some points with most voters, as usual by lying through their teeth and/or microphones.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I second Matt's suggestion for Ticket.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The media did its very best to cover the truth in their typical layers of crap, and the Dems in congress did the same with Senator Bunning.

    And some repubs too, Sidd. The ones we need to toss out on their a$$es next time they come up for reelection.

    ReplyDelete