MT Farm Boy

More Free Market Amazment

2007-10-22T11:19:00.000-07:00

It is obvious that we are on the ground floor of a major energy change. None of us have much fun going to the pump these days, but on an upside...this energy change is going to be fun to watch. I just ran across two companies that say they can cut cargo shipping fuel consumption by up to 35% using kites. I am continually amazed by the free market. This is going to be fun.

kiteship
skysails

BELIEVING THE ILLOGICAL - WHY THE WORLD DISLIKES US

2007-08-16T12:09:00.000-07:00

I have often heard in the last few years how our world standing has supposedly declined because of President Bush. Recently I got a little insight as to the real reason.

The other day in a pub I had a conversation with a very nice woman from Spain. We ended up talking about the forest fires in Montana. She made a comment about how she remembered reading in the European press how “stupid Bush’s” solution early in his presidency was to “cut down all the trees”. I assume she was talking about President Bush’s Healthy Forest Initiative to allow thinning in some national forests.

As most political things are the Healthy Forest Initiative was controversial, but even President Bush’s opponent have to agree that he doesn’t want to cut down all the trees. Hell, Max Baucus was at the signing in the above link.

I kept telling her that the Initiative was to thin the forest not to cut them all down. She didn’t seem to believe me and then talked in disgust about how Bush wanted to log Yellowstone Nation Park. She had visited Yellowstone and has a soft spot for that wonderful place (as we all do), which increased her delusional dislike of our President. I think I eventually did convince her that the Healthy Forest Initiative did not “cut down all the trees” and that there is no logging in National Parks. But she is only one person of billions around the world that harbor such delusions.

In my experience around Europe I have come across many instances of very bad information about our President. One must wonder how such blatant illogical falsehoods get so ingrained into people’s minds. One must also wonder why this didn’t happen during the Clinton years. Many seem predisposed to believe the worst lies and exaggerations about conservatives while seeking only the good in liberals. The media plays a role in spreading falsehoods, but people must be expected to use their brains. When things seem unbelievable and outrageous, it is usually because they aren’t true. I disagree with many liberal ideas, but I don’t for a second think they want to purposely cause harm. Why don’t conservatives get the same consideration?

THE FREE MARKET WORKS AGAIN

2007-08-08T03:47:00.000-07:00

I love American innovation. A company I just found called Solix is proof that the free market works wonders. We don’t need government regulation, we don’t need carbon taxes, we don’t need consumption standards, and we definitely don’t need very wasteful world concerts. All we need is low taxes/less regulation and the free market will find a solution. We hear a lot about ethanol and hydrogen. They will play a role in our future energy, but I think microbiological solutions like algae may play a bigger role. Algae can actually consume CO2 and pollutants to create a biodiesel, all in much less area than ethanol crops. As I farmer’s son I love ethanol because it is helping to create high grain prices, but in reality it isn’t a very efficient use of land or energy. Keep an eye on companies like Solix. In the next few years I think we will hear a lot about microbiology being use to solve environmental issues. Plus those who know me also know I have a passion for good beer, so it is exciting to hear that the brewing industry is playing a role.

Lets flip to the negative side of my brain for a moment:
I only wonder how long it will be until anti-corporation/anti-free market minded people go after “big” algae?

AWESOME OVERVIEW OF OUR WORLD

2007-07-31T02:02:00.000-07:00

This as a awesome overview of our world. Three things I took from it are:
1) We are in a battle against time to bring Islam into the 21st century.
2) Socialistic tax burdens are killing societies.
3) A resurgence of Judeo-Christian (and hopefully a modern Islam) values is needed to save our world.

Herb Meyer served during the Reagan administration as special assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence and Vice Chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Council. In these positions, he managed production of the U.S. National Intelligence Estimates and other top-secret projections for the President and his national security advisers. Meyer is widely credited with being the first senior S. Government official to forecast the Soviet Union's collapse, for which he later was awarded the U.S . National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal, the intelligence community's highest honor. Formerly an associate editor of FORTUNE, he is also the author of several books.
Herbert Meyer
P.O. Box 2089
Friday Harbor, WA 98250
Email: herbmeyer@storkingpress.com

A Global Intelligence Briefing For CEOs

Herbert Meyer

Currently, there are four major transformations that are shaping
political, economic and world events. These transformations have profound implications for American business owners, our culture and our way of life.

1. The War in Iraq

There are three major monotheistic religions in the world:
Christianity, Judaism and Islam. In the 16th century, Judaism and Christianity reconciled with the modern world. The rabbis, priests and scholars found a way to settle up and pave the way forward. Religion remained at the center of life, church and state became separate. Rule of law, idea of economic liberty, individual rights, human rights all these are defining points of modern Western civilization. These concepts started with the Greeks but didn't take off until the 15th and 16th century when Judaism and Christianity found a way to reconcile with the modern world. When that happened, it unleashed the scientific revolution and the greatest outpouring of art, literature and music the world has ever known. Islam, which developed in the 7th century, counts millions of Moslems around the world who are normal people. However, there is a radical streak within Islam. When the radicals are in charge, Islam attacks Western civilization. Islam first attacked Western civilization in the 7th century, and later in the 16th and 17th centuries. By 1683, the Moslems (Turks from the Ottoman Empire) were literally at the gates of Vienna. It was in Vienna that the climatic battle between Islam and Western civilization took place.. The West won and went forward. Islam lost and went backward. Interestingly, the date of that battle was September 11. Since them, Islam has not found a way to reconcile with the modern world.

Today, terrorism is the third attack on Western civilization by radical Islam. To deal with terrorism, the U.S. is doing two things. First, units of our armed forces are in 30 countries around the world hunting down terrorist groups and dealing with them. This gets very little publicity. Second we are taking military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. These are covered relentlessly by the media.. People can argue about whether the war in Iraq is right or wrong. However, the underlying strategy behind the war is to use our military to remove the radicals from power and give the moderates a chance. Our hope is that, over time, the moderates will find a way to bring Islam forward into the 21st century. That's what our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is all about.

The lesson of 9/11 is that we live in a world where a small number of people can kill a large number of people very quickly. They can use airplanes, bombs, anthrax, chemical weapons or dirty bombs. Even with a first-rate intelligence service (which the U.S. does not have), you can't stop every attack. That means our tolerance "for political horseplay" has dropped to zero. No longer will we play games with terrorists or weapons of mass destructions.

Most of the instability and horseplay is coming from the Middle East.
That's why we have thought that if we could knock out the radicals and give the moderates a chance to hold power; they might find a way to reconcile Islam with the modern world. So when looking at Afghanistan or Iraq, it's important to look for any signs that they are modernizing. For example, women being brought into the workforce and colleges in Afghanistan are good. The Iraqis stumbling toward a constitution is good. People can argue about what the U.S. is doing and how we're doing it, but anything that suggests Islam is finding its way forward is good.
2. The Emergence of China
In the last 20 years, China has moved 250 million people from the farms and villages into the cities. Their plan is to move another 300 million in the next 20 years. When you put that many people into the cities, you have to find work for them. That's why China is addicted to manufacturing; they have to put all the relocated people to work. When we decide to manufacture something in the U.S., it's based on market needs and the opportunity to make a profit. In China, they make the decision because they want the jobs, which is a very different calculation.
While China is addicted to manufacturing, Americans are addicted to low prices. As a result, a unique kind of economic codependency has developed between the two countries. If we ever stop buying from China, they will explode politically. If China stops selling to us, our economy will take a huge hit because prices will jump. We are subsidizing their economic development; they are subsidizing our economic growth.

Because of their huge growth in manufacturing, China is hungry for raw materials, which drive prices up worldwide. China is also thirsty for oil, which is one reason oil is now at $60 a barrel. By 2020, China will produce more cars than the U.S. China is also buying its way into the oil infrastructure around the world. They are doing it in the open market and paying fair market prices, but millions of barrels of oil that would have gone to the U.S . are now going to China. China's quest to assure it has the oil it needs to fuel its economy is a major factor in world politics and economics. We have our Navy fleets protecting the sea lines, specifically the ability to get the tankers through. It won't be long before the Chinese have an aircraft carrier sitting in the Persian Gulf as well. The question is, will their aircraft carrier be pointing in the same direction as ours or against us?

3. Shifting Demographics of Western Civilization

Most countries in the Western world have stopped breeding. For a civilization obsessed with sex, this is remarkable. Maintaining a steady population requires a birth rate of 2.1. In Western Europe, the birth rate currently stands at 1.5 , or 30 percent below replacement. In 30 years there will be 70 to 80 million fewer Europeans than there are today. The current birth rate in Germany is 1.3. Italy and Spain are even lower at 1.2. At that rate, the working age population declines by 30 percent in 20 years, which has a huge impact on the economy.

When you don't have young workers to replace the older ones, you have to import them. The European countries are currently importing Moslems. Today, the Moslems comprise 10 percent of France and Germany, and the percentage is rising rapidly because they have higher birthrates. However, the Moslem populations are not being integrated into the cultures of their host countries, which is a political catastrophe. One reason Germany and France don't support the Iraq war is they fear their Moslem populations will explode on them. By 2020, more than half of all births in the Netherlands will be non-European.

The huge design flaw in the post-modern secular state is that you need a traditional religious society birth rate to sustain it. The Europeans simply don't wish to have children, so they are dying.

In Japan, the birthrate is 1.3. As a result, Japan will lose up to 60 million people over the next 30 years. Because Japan has a very different society than Europe, they refuse to import workers. Instead, they are just shutting down. Japan has already closed 2000 schools, and is closing them down at the rate of 300 per year. Japan is also aging very rapidly. By 2020, one out of every five Japanese will be at least 70 years old. Nobody has any idea about how to run an economy with those demographics.

Europe and Japan, which comprise two of the world's major economic engines, aren't merely in recession, they're shutting down. This will have a huge impact on the world economy, and it is already beginning to happen. Why are the birthrates so low? There is a direct correlation between abandonment of traditional religious society and a drop in birth rate, and Christianity in Europe is becoming irrelevant. The second reason is economic. When the birth rate drops below replacement, the population ages. With fewer working people to support more retired people, it puts a crushing tax burden on the smaller group of working age people. As a result, young people delay marriage and having a family. Once this trend starts, the downward spiral only gets worse. These countries have abandoned all the traditions they formerly held in regards to having families and raising children.

The U.S. birth rate is 2.0, just below replacement. We have an increase in population because of immigration. When broken down by ethnicity, the Anglo birth rate is 1.6 (same as France) while the Hispanic birth rate is 2.7. In the U.S., the baby boomers are starting to retire in massive numbers. This will push the "elder dependency" ratio from 19 to 38 over the next 10 to 15 years. This is not as bad as Europe, but still represents the same kind of trend.

Western civilization seems to have forgotten what every primitive society understands, you need kids to have a healthy society. Children are huge consumers. Then they grow up to become taxpayers. That's how a society works, but the post-modern secular state seems to have forgotten that. If U.S. birth rates of the past 20 to 30 years had been the same as post-World War II, there would be no Social Security or Medicare problems.

The world's most effective birth control device is money. As society creates a middle class and women move into the workforce, birth rates drop. Having large families is incompatible with middle class living. The quickest way to drop the birth rate is through rapid economic development. After World War II, the U.S. instituted a $600 tax credit per child. The idea was to enable mom and dad to have four children without being troubled by taxes. This led to a baby boom of 22 million kids, which was a huge consumer market that turned into a huge tax base.. However, to match that incentive in today's dollars would cost $12,000 per child.

China and India do not have declining populations. However, in both countries, there is a preference for boys over girls, and we now have the technology to know which is which before they are born. In China and India, many families are aborting the girls. As a result, in each of these countries there are 70 million boys growing up who will never find wives. When left alone, nature produces 103 boys for every 100 girls. In some provinces, however, the ratio is 128 boys to every 100 girls.

The birth rate in Russia is so low that by 2050 their population will be smaller than that of Yemen. Russia has one-sixth of the earth's land surface and much of its oil. You can't control that much area with such a small population. Immediately to the south, you have China with 70 million unmarried men - a real potential nightmare scenario for Russia.

4. Restructuring of American Business

The fourth major transformation involves a fundamental restructuring of American business. Today's business environment is very complex and competitive. To succeed, you have to be the best, which means having the highest quality and lowest cost. Whatever your price point, you must have the best quality and lowest price.. To be the best, you have to concentrate on one thing. You can't be all things to all people and be the best.

A generation ago, IBM used to make every part of their computer. Now Intel makes the chips, Microsoft makes the software, and someone else takes the modems, hard drives, monitors, etc. IBM even out sources their call center.
Because IBM has all these companies supplying goods and services cheaper and better than they could do it themselves, they can make a better computer at a lower cost. This is called a "fracturing" of business. When one company can make a better product by relying on others to perform functions the business used to do itself, it creates a complex pyramid of companies that serve and support each other.

This fracturing of American business is now in its second generation. The companies who supply IBM are now doing the same thing, outsourcing many of their core services and production process. As a result, they can make cheaper, better products. Over time, this pyramid continues to get bigger and bigger. Just when you think it can't fracture again, it does. Even very small businesses can have a large pyramid of corporate entities that perform many of its important functions. One aspect of this trend is that companies end up with fewer employees and more independent contractors.

This trend has also created two new words in business, integrator and complementor. At the top of the pyramid, IBM is the integrator. As you go down the pyramid, Microsoft, Intel and the other companies that support IBM are the complementors. However, each of the complementors is itself an integrator for the complementors underneath it. This has several implications, the first of which is that we are now getting false readings on the economy. People who used to be employees are now independent contractors launching their own businesses. There are many people working whose work is not listed as a job. As a result, the economy is perking along better than the numbers are telling us. Outsourcing also confused the numbers. Suppose a company like General Motors decides to outsource all its employee cafeteria functions to Marriott (which it did). It lays off hundreds of cafeteria workers, who then get hired right back by Marriott. The only thing that has changed is that these people work for Marriott rather than GM. Yet, the headlines will scream that America has lost more manufacturing jobs. All that really happened is that these workers are now reclassified as service workers. So the old way of counting jobs contributes to false economic readings. As yet, we haven't figured out how to make the numbers catch up with the changing realities of the business world. Another implication of this massive restructuring is that because companies are getting rid of units and people that used to work for them, the entity is smaller. As the companies get smaller and more efficient, revenues are going down but profits are going up. As a result, the old notion that "revenues are up and we're doing great" isn't always the case anymore. Companies are getting smaller but are becoming more efficient and profitable in the process. Implications of The Four Transformations.

1. The War in Iraq

In some ways, the war is going very well. Afghanistan and Iraq have the beginnings of a modern government, which is a huge step forward. The Saudis are starting to talk about some good things, while Egypt and Lebanon are beginning to move in a good direction.

A series of revolutions have taken place in countries like Ukraine and Georgia. There will be more of these revolutions for an interesting reason. In every revolution, there comes a point where the dictator turns to the general and says, "Fire into the crowd." If the general fires into the crowd, it stops the revolution. If the general says "No," the revolution is over. Increasingly, the generals are saying "No" because their kids are in the crowd.

Thanks to TV and the Internet, the average 18-year old outside the U.S. is very savvy about what is going on in the world, especially in terms of popular culture. There is a huge global consciousness, and young people around the world want to be a part of it. It is increasingly apparent to them that the miserable government where they live is the only thing standing in their way. More and more, it is the well-educated kids, the children of the generals and the elite, who are leading the revolutions.

At the same time, not all is well with the war. The level of violence in Iraq is much worse and doesn't appear to be improving. It's possible that we're asking too much of Islam all at one time. We're trying to jolt them from the 7th century to the 21st century all at once, which may be further than they can go. They might make it and they might not. Nobody knows for sure. The point is, we don't know how the war will turn out. Anyone who says they know is just guessing.

The real place to watch is Iran. If they actually obtain nuclear
weapons it will be a terrible situation. There are two ways to deal with it. The first is a military strike, which will be very difficult. The Iranians have dispersed their nuclear development facilities and put them underground. The U.S. has nuclear weapons that can go under the earth and take out those facilities, but we don't want to do that. The other way is to separate the radical mullahs from the government, which is the most likely course of action.

Seventy percent of the Iranian population is under 30. They are Moslem but not Arab. They are mostly pro-Western. Many experts think the U.S. should have dealt with Iran before going to war with Iraq. The problem isn't so much the weapons; it's the people who control them. If Iran has a moderate government, the weapons become less of a concern. We don't know if we will win the war in Iraq.. We could lose or win. What we're looking for is any indicator that Islam is moving into the 21st century and stabilizing ..

2. China

It may be that pushing 500 million people from farms and villages into cities is too much too soon. Although it gets almost no publicity, China is experiencing hundreds of demonstrations around the country, which is unprecedented. These are not students in Tiananmen Square. These are average citizens who are angry with the government for building chemical plants and polluting the water they drink and the air they breathe.

The Chinese are a smart and industrious people. They may be able to pull it off and become a very successful economic and military superpower. If so, we will have to learn to live with it. If they want to share the responsibility of keeping the world's oil lanes open, that's a good thing. They currently have eight new nuclear electric power generators under way and 45 on the books to build. Soon, they will leave the U.S.way behind in their ability to generate unclear power.

What can go wrong with China? For one, you can't move 550 million people into the cities without major problems. Two, China really wants Taiwan, not so much for economic reasons, they just want it. The Chinese know that their system of communism can't survive much longer in the 21st century. The last thing they want to do before they morph into some sort of more capitalistic government is to take over Taiwan.
We may wake up one morning and find they have launched an attack on Taiwan. If so, it will be a mess, both economically and militarily. The U.S. has committed to the military defense of Taiwan. If China attacks Taiwan, will we really go to war against them? If the Chinese generals believe the answer is no, they may attack.. If we don't defend Taiwan, every treaty the U.S. has will be worthless. Hopefully, China won't do anything stupid.

3. Demographics

Europe and Japan are dying because their populations are aging and shrinking. These trends can be reversed if the young people start breeding. However, the birth rates in these areas are so low it will take two generations to turn things around. No economic model exists that permits 50 years to turn things around. Some countries are beginning to offer incentives for people to have bigger families. For example, Italy is offering tax breaks for having children. However, it's a lifestyle issue versus a tiny amount of money. Europeans aren't willing to give up their comfortable lifestyles in order to have more children.

In general, everyone in Europe just wants it to last a while longer. Europeans have a real talent for living. They don't want to work very hard. The average European worker gets 400 more hours of vacation time per year than Americans. They don't want to work and they don't want to make any of the changes needed to revive their economies.

The summer after 9/11, France lost 15,000 people in a heat wave. In August, the country basically shuts down when everyone goes on vacation. That year, a severe heat wave struck and 15,000 elderly people living in nursing homes and hospitals died. Their children didn't even leave the beaches to come back and take care of the bodies. Institutions had to scramble to find enough refrigeration units to hold the bodies until people came to claim them.

This loss of life was five times bigger than 9/11 in America, yet it didn't trigger any change in French society. When birth rates are so low, it creates a tremendous tax burden on the young. Under those circumstances, keeping mom and dad alive is not an attractive option.
That's why euthanasia is becoming so popular in most European
countries. The only country that doesn't permit (and even encourage) euthanasia is Germany, because of all the baggage from World War II.

The European economy is beginning to fracture. The Euro is down. Countries like Italy are starting to talk about pulling out of the European Union because it is killing them. When things get bad economically in Europe, they tend to get very nasty politically. The canary in the mine is anti-Semitism. When it goes up, it means trouble is coming. Current levels of anti-Semitism are higher than ever. Germany won't launch another war, but Europe will likely get shabbier, more dangerous and less pleasant to live in.

Japan has a birth rate of 1.3 and has no intention of bringing in
immigrants. By 2020, one out of every five Japanese will be 70 years old. Property values in Japan have dropped every year for the past 14 years. The country is simply shutting down.

In the U.S. we also have an aging population. Boomers are starting to retire at a massive rate. These retirements will have several major impacts:
Possible massive sell-off of large four-bedroom houses and a movement to condos.

An enormous drain on the treasury. Boomers vote and they want their benefits, even if it means putting a crushing tax burden on their kids to get them. Social Security will be a huge problem. As this generation ages, it will start to drain the system. We are the only country in the world where there are no age limits on medical procedures.

An enormous drain on the health care system. This will also increase the tax burden on the young, which will cause them to delay marriage and having families, which will drive down the birth rate even further.

Although scary, these demographics also present enormous opportunities for products and services tailored to aging populations. There will be tremendous demand for caring for older people, especially those who don't need nursing homes but need some level of care. Some people will have a business where they take care of three or four people in their homes. The demand for that type of service and for products to physically care for aging people will be huge.

Make sure the demographics of your business are attuned to where the action is. For example, you don't want to be a baby food company in Europe or Japan. Demographics are much underrated as an indicator of where the opportunities are. Businesses need customers. Go where the customers are.

4. Restructuring of American Business

The restructuring of American business means we are coming to the end of the age of the employer and employee. With all this fracturing of businesses into different and smaller units, employers can't guarantee jobs anymore because they don't know what their companies will look like next year. Everyone is on their way to becoming an independent contractor. The new workforce contract will be, "Show up at my office five days a week and do what I want you to do, but you handle your own insurance, benefits, health care and everything else."

Husbands and wives are becoming economic units. They take different jobs and work different shifts depending on where they are in their careers and families. They make tradeoffs to put together a compensation package to take care of the family. This used to happen only with highly educated professionals with high incomes. Now it is happening at the level of the factory floor worker. Couples at all levels are designing their compensation packages based on their individual needs. The only way this can work is if everything is portable and flexible, which requires a huge shift in the American economy.

The U..S. is in the process of building the world's first 21st century model economy. The only other countries doing this are U. K. and Australia. The model is fast, flexible, highly productive and unstable in that it is always fracturing and re-fracturing. This will increase the economic gap between the U.S. and everybody else, especially Europe and Japan.

At the same time, the military gap is increasing. Other than China, we are the only country that is continuing to put money into their military. Plus, we are the only military getting on-the-ground military experience through our war in Iraq.. We know which high- tech weapons are working and which ones aren't. There is almost no one who can take us on economically or militarily. There has never been a superpower in this position before.

On the one hand, this makes the U.S. a magnet for bright and ambitious people. It also makes us a target. We are becoming one of the last holdouts of the traditional Judeo-Christian culture. There is no better place in the world to be in business and raise children. The U. S. is by far the best place to have an idea, form a business and put it into the marketplace. We take it for granted, but it isn't as available in other countries of the world.
Ultimately, it's an issue of culture. The only people who can hurt us are ourselves, by losing our culture. If we give up our Judeo- Christian culture, we become just like the Europeans. The culture war is the whole ball game. If we lose it, there isn't another America to pull us out.

Give Credit Where Credit is Due

2007-07-18T00:24:00.000-07:00

As the DOW shoots over 14,000 and North Korea shuts down its reactors I am still in awe at how little credit our President gets for his many accomplishments. In fact President Bush seems to get little credit for anything these days. I am not sure if it is the difficulties of the war or just the media bias. While I don’t agree 100% with everything he has done, the list is still rather impressive and worthy of much more praise than he gets.

Abortion Traditional Values
1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade.
2. Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.
7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.
8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.
9. Requires districts to let students transfer out of dangerous schools.
10. Requires schools to have a zero-tolerance policy for classroom disruption (reintroducing discipline into classrooms).
11. Signed the Teacher Protection Act, which protects teachers from lawsuits related to student discipline.
12. Expanded the role of faith-based and community organizations in after-school programs.

Budget, Taxes Economy
1. Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history.
2. Supports permanent elimination of the death tax.
3. Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and deeply shocked as a result of the 9/11 attacks.
4. Is seeking legislation to amend the Constitution to give the president line-item veto authority.
5. In process of permanently eliminating IRS marriage penalty.
6. Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people.
7. Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts.
8. Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules would have shut down every home business in America.
9. Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.
10. Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains.
11. Signed trade promotion authority.
12. Reduced and is working to ultimately eliminate the estate tax for family farms and ranches.
13. Fight Europe's ban on importing biotech crops from the United States. 1
4. Exempt food from unilateral trade sanctions and embargoes.
15. Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home.
16. Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled.
17. Increased the annual contribution limit on Education IRA's from $500 to $2,000 per child.
18. Make permanent the $5,000 adoption tax credit and provide $1 billion over five years to increase the credit to $10,000.
19. Grant a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans.
20. Reduced H1B visas from a high of 195,000 per year to 66,000 per year.

Character Conduct as President
1. Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the presidency.
2. Has reintroduced the mention of God and faith into public discourse.
3. Handled himself with enormous courage, dignity, grace, determination, and leadership in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 hijackings and anthrax attacks. He almost single-handedly held this country together during those searing days: * Just three days after the attacks, in his address at the National Cathedral, the President reassured the nation when he said: "War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others. It will end in a way, and at an hour, of our choosing." * On Friday, September 14, 2001, President Bush visited Ground Zero. Standing on a crushed and burned fire engine atop the smoldering pile at Ground Zero, he put his arm around a retired firefighter who had volunteered to help, and began speaking to the crowd. Rescue workers shouted that they could not hear him. Someone handed him a small American flag and bullhorn. The President spontaneously shouted: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." The crowd roared with cheers and chants of "USA! USA! USA!" Then he raised that American flag and rallied a nation: Education Employment Training 1. Signed the No Child Left Behind Act, delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations). The very liberal California Teachers union is currently running radio ads against the accountability provisions of this Act. 2. Announced "Jobs for the 21st Century," a comprehensive plan to better prepare workers for jobs in the new millennium by strengthening post-secondary education and job training, and by improving high school education. 3. Is working to provide vouchers to low-income students in persistently failing schools to help with costs of attending private schools. (Blocked in the Senate.)
4. Requires annual reading and math tests in grades three through eight.
5. Requires states to participate in the National Assessment of Education Progress, or an equivalent program, to establish a national benchmark for academic performance.
6. Requires school-by-school accountability report cards.
7. Established a $2.4 billion fund to help states implement teacher accountability systems.
8. Increased funding for the Troops-to-Teachers program, which recruits former military personnel to to become teachers.

Environment Energy
1. Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty.
2. Submitted a comprehensive Energy Plan (awaits Congressional action). The plan works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc.
3. Established a $10 million grant program to promote private conservation initiatives.
4. Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.
5. Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.
6. Part of national forests cleanup: Restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges), and removed the need for an Environmental Impact Statement before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.
7. Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California.
8. Provided matching grants for state programs that help private landowners protect rare species.

Defense Foreign Policy
1. Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom.
2. Saddam Hussein is now in prison. His two murderous sons are dead. All but a handful of the regime's senior members were killed or captured.
3. Leader by leader and member by member, al Qaida is being hunted down in dozens of countries around the world. Of the senior al Qaida leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators the U.S. Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds have been taken into custody or killed. The detentions or deaths of senior al Qaida leaders, including Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, the mastermind of 9/11, and Muhammad Atef, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command until his death in late 2001, have been important in the War on Terror.
4. Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed.
5. Continues to execute the War On Terror, getting worldwide cooperation to track funds/terrorists. Has cut off much of the terrorists' funding, and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network.
6. Initiated a comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, and which accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE capabilities were critical in the 21st Century.
7. Killed the old US/Soviet Union ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses.
8. Has been one of the strongest, if not THE strongest friend Israel has ever hand in the U.S. presidency.
9. Part of the coalition for an Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace," along with Great Britain, Russia and the EU.
10. Pushed through THREE raises for our military. Increased military pay by more than $1 billion a year. 11. Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia.
12. Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia, and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ.
13. Prohibited putting U.S. troops under U.N. command.
14. Paid back UN dues only in return for reforms and reduction of U.S. share of the costs.
15. Earmarked at least 20 percent of the Defense procurement budget for next-generation weaponry.
16. Increased defense research and development spending by at least $20 billion from fiscal 2002 to 2006. 17. Ordered a comprehensive review of military weapons and strategy.
18. Ordered a review of overseas deployments.
19. Ordered renovation of military housing. The military has already upgraded about 10 percent of its inventory and expects to modernize 76,000 additional homes this year.
20. Is working to tighten restrictions on military-technology exports.
21. Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed.
22. Pushed thru Congress the 1st Military Death benefit raise in decades. Rasied the grant for survivors of military personal killed in the line of duty from a pitful $10,000 to over $100,000.

Globalization
1. Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become another League of Nations (in other words, showed the UN to be completely irrelevant).
2. Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court.
3. Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e., the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty).
4. The only President since the founding of the UN to essentially tell that organization it is irrelevant. He said: "The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of UN demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" We all know the outcome and the answer.
5. Told the Congress and the world, "America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country."

Government Reform
1. Improved government efficiency by putting hundreds of thousands of jobs put up for bid. This weakens public-sector unions and cuts undeserved pay raises.
2. Initiated review of all federal agencies with the goal of eliminating federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of the federal government while increasing private sector jobs.
3. Led the most extensive reorganization the Federal bureaucracy in over 50 years: After 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency, the Department of Homeland Security. *
4. Ordered each agency to draft a five-year plan to restructure itself, with fewer managers.
5. Converted federal service contracts to performance-based contracts wherever possible so that the contractor has measurable performance goals.

Health
1. Strengthen the National Health Service Corps to put more physicians in the neediest areas, and make its scholarship funds tax-free.
2. Double the research budget of the National Institutes of Health.
3. Signed Medicare Reform, which includes: * A 10-year privatization option. * Prescription drug benefits: Prior to this reform, Medicare paid for extended hospital stays for ulcer surgery, for example, at a cost of about $28,000 per patient. Yet Medicare would not pay for the drugs that eliminate the cause of most ulcers, drugs that cost about $500 a year. Now, drug coverage under Medicare will allow seniors to replace more expensive surgeries and hospitalizations with less expensive prescription medicine. * More health care choices: As President Bush stated, "when seniors have the ability to make choices, health care plans within Medicare will have to compete for their business by offering higher quality service [at lower cost]. For the seniors of America, more choices and more control will mean better health care. These are the kinds of health care options we give to the members of Congress and federal employees. What's good for members of Congress is also good for senio rs. * New Health Savings Accounts: Effective January 1, 2004, Americans can set aside up to $4,500 every year, tax free, to save for medical expenses. Depending on your tax bracket, that means you'll save between 10 to 35 percent on any costs covered by money in your account. Every year, the money not spent would stay in the account and gain interest tax-free, just like an IRA. These accounts will be good for small business owners, and employees. More businesses can focus on covering workers for major medical problems, such as hospitalization for an injury or illness. At the same time, employees and their families will use these accounts to cover doctors visits, or lab tests, or other smaller costs. Some employers will contribute to employee health accounts. This will help more American families get the health care they need at the price they can afford.

Homeland Security, Border Enforcement Immigration
1. See Government Reform above. Under President Bush's leadership, America has made an unprecedented commitment to homeland security.
2. Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first 10 ABM silos in Alaska so that America will have a defense against North Korean nukes. Has ordered national and theater ballistic missile defenses to be deployed by 2004.
3. Announced a 9.7% increase in government-wide homeland security funding in his FY 2005 budget, nearly tripling the FY 2001 levels (excluding the Department of Defense and Project BioShield).
4. Before DHS was created, there were inspectors from three different agencies of the Federal Government and Border Patrol officers protecting our borders. Through DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) now consolidates all border activities into a single agency to create "one face at the border." This not only better secures the borders of the United States, but it also eliminates many of the inefficiencies that occurred under the old system. With over 18,000 CBP inspectors and 11,000 Border Patrol agents, CBP has 29,000 uniformed officers on our borders.
5. The Border Patrol is continuing installation of monitoring devices along the borders to detect illegal activity.
6. Launched Operation Tarmac to investigate businesses and workers in the secure areas of domestic airports and ensure immigration law compliance. Since 9/11, DHS has audited 3,640 businesses, examined 259,037 employee records, arrested 1,030 unauthorized workers, and participated in the criminal indictment of 774 individuals.
7. Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally, and created and maintained more than 90 Maritime Security Zones.
8. Announced the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), an internet-based system that is improving America's ability to track and monitor foreign students and exchange visitors. Over 870,000 students are registered in SEVIS. Of 285 completed field investigations, 71 aliens were arrested.
9. This week, the US-VISIT program began to digitally collect biometric identifiers to record the entry and exit of aliens who travel into the U.Son a visa. Together with the standard information, this new program will confirm compliance with visa and immigration policies.
10. Eliminated INS bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability.
11. Split the Immigration and Naturalization Service into two agencies: one to protect the border and interior, the other to deal with naturalization.
12. Signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal aliens.
13. Established a six-month deadline for processing immigration applications.
14. Information regarding nearly 100% of all containerized cargo is carefully screened by DHS before it arrives in the United States. Higher risk shipments are physically inspected for terrorist weapons and contraband prior to being released from the port of entry. Advanced technologies are being deployed to identify warning signs of chemical, biological, or radiological attacks. Since September 11, 2001, hundreds of thousands of first responders across America have been trained to recognize and respond to the effects of a WMD attack.

Judiciary Tort Reform
1. Is urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits.
2. Killed the liberal ABA's unconstitutional role in vetting federal judges. The Senate is supposed to advise and consent, not the ABA.
3. Is nominating strong, conservative judges to the judiciary.
4. Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims.

Politics
1. His leadership resulted in Republican gains in the House and Senate, solidifying Republican control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.
2. Signed an EO enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision regarding union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes. .Has prosecuted 527 corrupt Union bosses in an effort to reform the rampant corruption in the Labor Unions.

Second Amendment
1. Ordered Attorney General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, and is NOT a Leftist-imagined "collective" right.
2. Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit.
3. Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers.
4. *See Globalization Internationalism.

Traditional Values, Compassion Volunteerism
1. Endorses and promotes "The Responsibility Era." President Bush often speaks of the necessity of personal responsibility and civic volunteerism. He said, "In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else to one in which every single American understands that he or she is responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself."
2. Started the USA Freedom Corps, the most comprehensive clearinghouse of volunteer opportunities ever offered. For the first time in history, Americans can enter geographic information about where they want to get involved, such as state or zip code, as well as areas of interest ranging from education to the environment, and they can access volunteer opportunities offered by more than 50,000 organizations across the country and around the world.
3. Established the The White House Office and the Centers for the Faith-Based and Community Initiative located in seven Federal agencies. The faith-based initiative supports the essential work of these important organizations. The goal is to make sure that grassroots leaders can compete on an equal footing for federal dollars, receive greater private support, and face fewer bureaucratic barriers. Work focuses on at-risk youth, ex-offenders, the homeless and hungry, substance abusers, those with HIV/AIDS, and welfare-to-work families.
4. The White House released a guidebook fully describing the Administration's belief that faith-based groups have a Constitutionally-protected right to maintain their religious identity through hiring even when Federal funds are involved.
5. Issued an EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible.
6. Increased funding for low-interest loan programs to help people with disabilities purchase devices to assist them.
7. Revised the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 rent subsidies to disabled people, permitting them to use up to a year's worth of vouchers to finance down payments on homes. HUD has started pilot programs in 11 states.
8. Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men, women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa.
9. Heeding the words of our own Declaration of Independence, the president laid out the non-negotiable demands of human dignity for all people everywhere. On January 29, 2002, he said, "No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture. But America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity." As stated by the President, they are a virtual manifesto of conservative principles: * Equal Justice * Freedom of Speech * Limited Government Power * Private Property Rights * Religious Tolerance * Respect for Women * Rule of Law

Promoting freedom and human dignity
The Administration has pursued a policy of promoting freedom and human dignity in every part of the world. The President pursues this policy both because it is right and because it addresses the fear, hatred, and inequality that contribute to terrorism and violence. Our policy is based on core values that uphold human rights through democracy and the rule of law. As a member of the international community, we are committed to pursuing freedom and promoting democracy and human rights, through both words and deeds.

Greater Middle East: Moved support for democracy in the Middle East to top of regional agenda, including support for individual champions of human rights and for reform efforts in Jordan, Morocco, the Gulf, and elsewhere.
Afghanistan: Policy based on achieving democracy through the Bonn process and assistance to constitutional, human rights and judicial commissions; established US-Afghan Women’s Council and funded centers to promote women’s education, entrepreneurship, and political participation.

Iraq: After removing Saddam Hussein’s oppressive regime, the U.S. is now leading an international coalition to assist in Iraq’s transition to democracy; established Iraqi Governing Council, representing the diversity of Iraqi society, to help chart course towards drafting, ratifying, and implementing a new constitution; building civil society through grants, workshops, consultations, and technical assistance to a wide range of Iraqi groups; provided over $100 million to date for local governance programs; supported women’s conferences; and established Abuse Prevention Unit.

Middle East Partnership Initiative: Established first initiative to support political reform efforts and economic development, especially for women and youth.

Middle East Peace: Placed democracy and human rights at the heart of efforts for a two-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian dispute, demanded reforms in governance of Palestinian Authority.
Africa: The Administration has an unparalleled record of engagement in Africa that incorporates support for democracy, reform, respect for human dignity and peace on the continent. Achievements include:
Liberia: Sponsored UN sanctions; engaged with ECOWAS and other regional actors to negotiate peace deal to end civil war that had serious human rights abuses.

Sudan: Heavily engaged in the peace process to end Africa’s longest-running civil war.

Zimbabwe: Imposed targeted sanctions against President Mugabe, Government officials, and their spouses in an effort to stop policies that undermine democratic processes and institutions.
Asia: The Administration’s policy is focused on assisting countries on the path towards democratization and long-term reform, and calling attention to those who fall short.
Burma: Leads international calls for release of Aung San Suu Kyi and for return to inclusive political dialogue; condemns regime for its human rights abuses; and strengthened sanctions on the regime for its imprisonment of leaders who believe in democracy.
China: Moved from defining progress on human rights solely by prisoner releases to also improving rule of law, electoral and other developments by increasing funding for programs from $7M in FY02 to $12M in FY03.

North Korea: Co-sponsored the first UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) resolution on human rights in North Korea to call international attention to abuses; consistently put human rights on the table during multilateral talks among other subjects. This tough stance had resulted in North Korea shutting down their reactors.

Central Asia: The Administration’s contact with the region after September 11, 2001 focused on the War on Terror and engagement on human rights practices of countries in the region.
Democracy and Human Rights Funding After 9/11: Doubled funding for democracy programs in Kyrgyzstan (funded first free printing press) and Turkmenistan; quadrupled funding for democracy programs in Uzbekistan (funded first political party programs) and Tajikistan.
Human Rights Practices: Sponsored first UNCHR resolution on human rights practices in Belarus and co-sponsored first UNCHR resolution on Turkmenistan; concluded Joint Declarations with Presidents of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan that cite continued progress on democracy and human rights as central to our bilateral relationships.

Georgia: Appointed James Baker as Presidential Envoy to underscore the need for free and fair parliamentary elections this November. Election results are incoming and we are counting on the Government and people of Georgia to ensure a free and fair outcome.
Western Hemisphere: The Administration is committed to democratic, constitutional governments through the Summit of the America’s “Democracy Clause.” We have shown strong support for multi-lateral engagement to address democratic crises in Bolivia, Venezuela, and Haiti, and are continuing efforts to promote rapid, peaceful democratic transition in Cuba.
Democracy in the Region: Concluded Inter-American Democratic Charter, which defines Western Hemisphere by its commitment to democratic principles.
Cuba: Launched “Initiative for a New Cuba” which challenges regime to undertake Political and economic reforms; supported resolution at UNCHR this year.

Haiti: Member of “Group of Friends” working to help the Haitian people build democratic institutions, supporting OAS efforts to resolve the political crisis.

Venezuela: Member of OAS Secretary General’s “Group of Friends” providing support for efforts to comply with OAS Resolution 833 calling for a peaceful, democratic, constitutional, and electoral solution to the political crisis through the referendum process.
International Institutions: The Administration is committed to reforming and rejoining international institutions that support human rights and promoting new initiatives.
Commission on Human Rights: Actively engaged in reforming UNCHR to realize its potential through membership and other changes.

UNESCO: Rejoined organization to promote education and democracy.

UN General Assembly: On November 6, 2003, U.S.-introduced resolution on Women and Political Participation was passed by the UNGA.
Human Dignity: The Administration has taken special efforts to safeguard the dignity of the individual.
Cloning: Co-sponsored resolution at the UNGA calling for ban on all forms of human cloning.

Religious Freedom: Worked with OSCE to hold the first meetings on religious freedom, including anti-Semitism in Europe.

Trafficking in Persons: President announced $50 million to support organizations that rehabilitate women and children who have been trafficked; U.S. efforts have led many governments to improve their own laws and performance.
Programs to Support Democracy and Human Rights: Significantly increased funding levels for Human Rights and Democracy Fund administered by the Department of State.

America’s Commitment to Democracy is Strong

Our perseverance and sustained work to spread freedom and democracy in the Middle East will make the world more peaceful and secure. As the President has said, “Freedom is worth fighting for, dying for, and standing for – and the advance of freedom leads to peace. And now we must apply that lesson in our own time. We've reached another great turning point -- and the resolve we show will shape the next stage of the world democratic movement.”

****I can't remember where I found all this info, but since they obviously appreciate President Bush even way more than myself, I doubt they will mind. I will try to add a source ASAP.

The Real Sicko

2007-06-21T07:45:00.001-07:00

Another thing we will hear in Moore’s new movie is how socialized medical systems spend less per person than we do in America. He will blame greedy corporate fat cats for this discrepancy and say a socialized system will eliminate that greedy profit. On the surface that even sounds good to me. What many people who push socialist healthcare can’t grasp is that to make that money, greedy corporate fat cats have to provide a new and innovative product that someone wants. In a social system there is little incentive to risk billions developing a new scanner or life saving drug that may not even work when little Timmy needs surgery now. But corporate fat cats will take that risk because there is the potential of big profit.

So why do most socialized medical systems spend less per person than we do? I will talk about three rarely mentioned reasons but there are many more. Sadly most of our increased cost are a direct result of the rest of the world being socialized.

1 Drugs. Ever wonder why much of the world's drug companies are in the USA? The rest of the socialized world has price controls on medicine. So when the drug companies need to make back that billion dollar investment it took to develop a new life saving drug, they charge the American healthcare system. This causes a two-fold difference when comparing American healthcare costs to the rest of the world as for ever dollar we are over charged it is because someone in a social system is being undercharged. This whole scenario causes one to wonder what would happen to future drug development and innovation if America healthcare became socialized. I have a direct example of this within our system. My wife worked in a hospital lab and our socialized Medicare system (who sets price controls) would often pay significantly less for a test than it cost the laboratory to run. So who do you suppose made up the difference?

2. Research and Development. In America we do massive amounts of R&D because companies can make tons of money. American hospitals almost always have newer and better equipment to attract patients. In socialized countries they wait around a few years for the equipment prices to come down. This is another two-fold difference as Americans are subsidizing the R&D costs of other socialized countries. Again it is scary to think of what would happen if American healthcare R&D companies had to sell to a socialized American healthcare system. Do you really think that new high tech scanner or the new surgery tools would be developed as fast, if at all?

3. We have a higher regard for live. I have lived in the UK for almost a year and in all this time I have seen one person with Down Syndrome. Ask yourself how may people you see with Down Syndrome in America in a year? My wife has had many conversations with medical professionals from Europe and to them it is just "common sense" to abort unhealthy babies. Sadly, it has become standard practice for problem babies to be aborted in the socialized world. I say thank God that in America we will spend a million dollars trying every last possible idea to save a child who has a dreadful disease. In part we do this because outside entities (insurance companies) have to pay what the doctors request. In a socialized system doctors have to decide who is best served with the limited resources. If they have a choice between spending a million dollars on one bleak case or three moderate cases they will always sacrifice the bleak case. Thank God we don’t have to make that choice in America. I personally think the higher cost is worth saving that Down syndrome child and I hope you do to.

I think the worst effect of a socialized medical system is how it turns hospitals into factories. Doctors no longer treat patients, they just diagnose. In order to keep costs down the socialized system decides the most cost effective way to treat any sickens. This is called medical coding and those familiar with Medicare know what I am talking about. The doctor makes a diagnosis, plugs the code into the system, and then the system tells the doctor what treatments it will pay for. Doctors have little room to make judgment calls or tailor a cure. Patients become just a number in a computer that gets treated by a code. This has become so prevalent that my wife has remarked how medical testing equipment is now being designed and sold based on what test Medicare will reimburse, which isn’t necessary what test doctors want.

If all of that doesn’t worry you, let's take a simple economic look at how a socialized system considers patients. Most social systems have a known budget for each year. Every new patient that comes in is taking a piece out of that known pie. This causes a huge disincentive for doctors to try any expensive remedy even if it is very effective. The tendency is to do the cheap, quick fix so there is more money for the rest of the patients. In our private system there is no set budget. The doctor and the patient get to decide how much to spend and what treatments to try.

On the surface socialized medicine sounds good even to me, but as with everything we need to dig deeper. Because there is “greedy” profit to be made, America is largely the last bastion of medical innovation and development in the world. Because we freely share our innovation the rest of the world has been able to get by with their factory like socialized systems. But if America listens to Michael Moore that bastion will fade away.

Don't Be Deceived By "Tricko"

2007-06-02T13:13:00.000-07:00

I am so excited (insert sarcasm). We will soon again be subjected to Michael Moore’s stupidity. His new film “Tricko” is coming out soon. It will be his greatest attempt yet to force the USA into a socialist utopia like…well actually there aren’t any socialist utopias because they all failed miserably. But hey, people like him think we should give it another shot.

I am guessing that his healthcare movie will be largely based on two talking points:

1) There are 44 million uninsured in this country and that makes private systems bad and uncompassionate.

2)Socialist systems have a lower overhead so private insurance is wasteful and wrong.

First of all, the 44 million uninsured figure we often hear liberals spout is highly exaggerated and based on a flawed study. It is spelled out here.

Second, socialist systems like Medicare have low overhead because they push tons of the work onto the hospital. This causes a two-fold discrepancy because private payers have to make up the difference. It is spelled out here.

My opposition to socialized medicine isn’t just because it will result in subpar care and lost innovation. It also gives the government justification to take away freedoms. Right now if I eat fatty foods, drink too much beer, or race dirt bikes I am only risking my own pocket book. But under a socialized system my risky behavior could be taking healthcare money from children with cancer. That then gives the government all the justification they need to take away freedom.

But don’t call me an evil capitalist just yet. I do worry about uninsured people and am greatly concerned about the poor in our country. I also understand how the uninsured really hurt hospitals and increase costs. Plus, getting insurance through ones work limits choice and is difficult during times of unemployment or job change.

Instead of creating a new massive healthcare system (proposed by people like Moore and Clinton) that will always be strapped for cash, cause subpar care, and supress innovation, let's let the free market that has made America so great go to work. Let's get rid of all the government healthcare programs and just give everyone an account that can only be spent on health care. If we divide up the Medicare budget alone ($400 billion / 300 million people) we could give every citizen $1,333. Add in all the other State and Federal healthcare programs and the money saved by companies no longer paying insurance (yes I would be for more taxes if the money was spent in a free market manner) and I bet we could give every citizen at least $2,500. I know personally you can purchase a good catastrophic insurance plan for $1,000.

This way people can choose how much coverage they want and the free market can go to work to compete for those dollars. Maybe younger people would choose low cost catastrophic insurance and let the account grow for later years. Or some people could chip in their own money and get no deductible coverage for every bruise and sniffle. I think we will all be shocked how well the system can work if we get the government out of healthcare decisions and let the free market take over.

Here is a great read on the topic of mandatory healthcare which my idea would encompass.

Got To Love Inhofe

2007-05-25T01:46:00.000-07:00

I couldn't say it better if I tried, so I won't:

The recreation industry’s true threats come not from climate change – which has always changed and will always change – but from the so-called global warming ‘solutions’ being proposed by government policymakers. Misguided efforts to ‘solve’ global warming threaten to damage the travel and recreation industry. In short, it is a direct threat America’s way of life. If we cannot fly to remote locations, and if few automobiles are capable of pulling boats, jet skies, and campers, and if RVs become a thing of the past as environmentalists would like, then minor climate fluctuations will have little impact on recreation because Americans will not have the means to recreate.

But the most verifiable threat to the recreation and travel industry is the unintended consequences of misguided government policy and environmental activists. The chilling effect of guilt that the climate alarmists are attempting to instill in Americans for owning four wheel drive vehicles, flying in an airplane and enjoying travel is enough to harm the industry. For examples of this promotion of misguided policies and guilt, you need look no further than a proposal in April by the UK-based Institute for Public Policy Research, which called for tobacco-style health warnings on airplanes to warn passengers that the plane flight may be contributing to a global warming crisis. The group proposed posting signs on airplanes which read “flying causes climate change.”

Another example of unintended consequences by climate crusaders was the recent proclamation by a UK grocery store announcing it would usher in ‘carbon friendly’ policies and stop importing food from faraway nations. This proposal may have been popular with wealthy Western environmentalists, but the idea did not sit so well with poor African farmers. As a February 21, 2007 BBC article details:

“Kenyan farmers, whose lifelong carbon emissions are negligible compared with their counterparts in the West, are fast becoming the victims of a green campaign that could threaten their livelihoods. A recent bold statement by UK supermarket Tesco ushering in ‘carbon friendly’ measures - such as restricting the imports of air freighted goods by half and the introduction of "carbon counting" labeling - has had environmentalists dancing in the fresh produce aisles, but has left African horticulturists confused and concerned.”

Here is the entire statement.

Fuel Prices...

2007-05-16T02:34:00.000-07:00

I have had a theory for a few years that more efficient cars do little to help lower energy consumption. My theory goes that when people get more efficient cars they end up driving more. Instead of taking the bus, carpooling, or biking, they just take their new Prius and feel all fuzzy inside. People are also more inclined to do things like long road trips if there is a Prius rather than a Hummer in the garage. This whole reverse “common knowledge” theory of mine also has the unintended consequence of causing more road congestion, which causes more road construction/maintenance, which expend lots more energy. If fuel prices stay up people will eventually lean towards more efficient cars. I will be interesting to see if fuel consumption goes down?

That said, lets talk about gas prices. It will be interesting to see what will happen this summer. Will people cut back or will they just eat the higher prices? Either way the free market will allow it to happen with no huge lines and no major shortages.

People are obviously upset with their rising fuel expenses. Even those on the left who claim to hold the environmental banner seem to be pissed. While I don't completely buy into the headline this article has some wonderful morsels of information that helps us understand the reason for higher prices (mixed in with all the worthless personal stories that reporters just can't resist inserting, but that is another topic).

Consumers may suspect that oil refiners are colluding in the recent price spike, but analysts say the real culprit is an unprecedented number of refinery accidents and maintenance outages this spring — combined with drivers' rising demand for fuel. Most prominent of the outages was a February fire that shut down Valero Energy Corp.'s 170,000 barrel-per-day McKee refinery in Sunray, Texas, for months."If you just count incidents, there are more this year than there have been in previous years," said Mike Conner, a specialist on refinery operations at the EIA.

Seems like we have a bottleneck at the refineries. This is also evident by the fact that fuel prices were lower last summer when oil prices where higher. How do we eliminate this bottleneck? More refining capacity seem to be the obvious answer. Who is limiting refining capacity? It isn’t the “greedy” cooperate world who would love to jump into the refining business and make money.

Drevna said refiners have been steadily expanding their existing facilities, adding the equivalent of one new refinery a year, on average, every year for more than a decade. That's a cheaper and faster way to expand refinery capacity than going through the multiyear process of trying to win a permit to build new plants, he said.

Okay the existing oil companies have found a work around although I am sure they would love to be able to build new refineries near new markets and new sources. But what about the heart of the free market…new companies who bring new ideas and new innovation? Why should they be left out of the equation by government regulations? So who should been getting the brunt of the blame for these high prices, Exxon or the government and those who have made it impossible to build new refiners?

On more golden tidbit:

Also, he said, the process of turning crude oil into gasoline has become more complicated over the years, particularly as different governmental entities have mandated changes to the chemical makeup of gasoline for environmental reasons. It takes more equipment, more complicated processes and more oil to make gasoline now than it used to, Drevna said.

It takes more oil to make gasoline now than it used to? Say it isn’t so. Environmental regulations have caused us to use more oil? I am shocked. The conclusion to my rant is basically this. More free market will make lower gas prices (and apparently allow more fuel to be made from less oil). Get the government out of the business of deciding things like building refineries and choosing fuel mixes. Get government out of the business of regulating car designs (there is a whole other topic here about how European cars are more efficient because they have fewer emission regulations). Get the government into the business of dropping rules that limit the free market and competition.

I’ll leave you with an article that might ruin that fuzzy feeling hybrid owners have every time they turn the key: Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage. They would be much better off getting a little Amercan made compact, which I intend to buy soon:)

Greens Should Educate Not Legislate

2007-05-01T04:09:00.000-07:00

For the up and coming election here in the UK the green party ironically has loads of paper fliers and plastics signs. That aside, I truly do sympathize with some of what the green party is trying to accomplish as I feel they have some similar ideals to the roots of conservatism, e.g., conservationism (yes some modern conservatives have strayed, but that is another topic). That said, I think the greens are doing their cause a disservice by jumping into the political arena. Many of their ideas would be much better received if they focused on education rather than legislation.

Most societies especially us Americans do waste too much. The ideas of sustainability and conservation are great principals that have valve beyond just being good stewards. Those who live a more sustainable/conservative life also seem to gain humility and respect, which are values I can relate to when looking at my very conservative homesteading grandparents.

But what can a green candidate really accomplish in government? Since the “green” ideal is largely a personal choice all a green legislator can do is force people to do their bidding. Isn’t it better and more effective if people choose to change rather than having it force upon them? I truly believe almost everyone wants to live more “green” but most people just don’t know how and are instead stuck in a wasteful rut.

Lets take the simple example of people using cloth bags at the grocery store. In the past I am personally guilty of looking at those people and thinking, “dirty hippy”. This is a mindset that I and I'm sure the greens want to change. Legislation can force people to use cloth bags. But without a mindset change people will just waste in other ways, which will lead to even more "green" laws and even less freedom. The only thing that can change a mindset is education and frankly peer pressure. This is where I think the “greens” could have a real positive influence. My advice to the green is to live by example and don’t legislate people…educate them.

Marxism Has Only Killed 100 Million... So Lets Try it Again

2007-05-01T03:48:00.000-07:00

There is an election coming up where I live in the UK and of course the area is covered in election signs. One thing that I find astonishing is that there is actually a Socialist party and they are blatant enough to have the gold star (the one on the old USSR flag) on their signs. If this was just some fringe group I wouldn’t give it a second thought, but these far lefties seem to have a good network as their signs are everywhere. I agree that Marxist ideas sounds good in theory (everything is “equal” and “fair”), but we all know that theory and reality are two different beasts. Socialism and its big brother Communism (which killed a 100 million people) has failed everywhere it was tried. Don't these people learn anything from history? Do they really want another USSR where 62 million people died of starvation and oppression? How may Floridians do we see jumping on rafts to get to Cuba? What about the emerging socialist government in Venezuelan, I bet it will be a bastion of freedom. Don’t they get that Socialism is the opposite of freedom. When people have no reason to improve themselves (work harder) they don’t, so to get anything done the authorities have to resort to force and intimidation (anti-freedom).
But I digress, what I actually wanted to talk about was the Green Party…I’ll just do another post.

Are we in Kindergarten Again?

2007-04-19T09:32:00.000-07:00

What is up with all the hearing protests (more) the last few years? Tell me if I am wrong, but I don’t remember this happened during the Clinton years. I know they loathe this administration, but isn’t there a minimal level of respect people should show to not just our politicians but to people in general? Honestly I hope they continue because it just makes them look childish which causes them to turn off many more people than they attract.

Time to Feel Good Again

2007-04-07T09:37:00.000-07:00

For those who don’t know, I am temporally living in the UK while my wife attends grad school (don’t worry…I’ll be back in Montana in time for harvest). This experience abroad has been both informative and encouraging. The informative part is that I am now thoroughly convinced that socialism in any form is a bad idea, but I will save that for another day as this is intended to be an uplifting post.

My wife and I recently attended a dinner party with some of her classmates who originate from all over the world. We had many great discussions that night, but one stands out. It was with a doctor from Rwanda. Despite all the hardships in her country she was still very much upbeat and passionate. It was one of those experiences where you get reminded that in the western world we have nothing in our lives worth complaining about. She was also very optimistic about her country’s future and gave a lot of the credit to the work being done both publicly and privately by the good old USA. Her kind words made us even more proud to be American, but our liking of her didn’t stop there. She went on to blame France for many of the problems in her country’s past and how they have new hope because of the good that normally occurs when the USA and Great Britain get involved in places. Although we didn’t have to be told, it was refreshing to get an endorsement as to the good of America. America has and always will do countless good deeds all over the world, but lately it seems like some are too focused on trying to see the bad.

I wish I had asked her for a specific way to help, but nonetheless I encourage everyone to seek out a Rwandan charity. If that doctor is representative of others in her country, Rwanda has much hope for a brighter future.

Here is another feel good story about the professionalism of our amazing troops. Thanks guys for doing such a remarkable job and being such great representatives.

The Big Bad Wulfgar (I dedicate a whole post just to you)

2007-04-02T03:55:00.000-07:00

This very mean-spirited remark, by the "peaceful" liberal Wulfgar, was in the comment section of my last post:

It was in response to a somewhat nasty comment by myself for which I hear by apologize. That said, Wulfgar…Relax. You have posted three lengthy straw laden attackes of me on your blog. I take one little shot in a comment section and you flip out. I find this whole situation ironic as the liberal is the aggressive combative person, while the conservative is much more passive and amicable.

Wulfar… give peace a chance. I will not be pulled into a trap where your desire/ability to spend loads of time in front of the computer blogging/debating will easily overwhelm/muddle the truth. I would rather spend my time in the real world with my wife, family, and friends. Plus I will readily admit you are a much better writer/speaker. I know my ideas are solid and superior, but I fully understand my many failings when it comes to expressing them. God has given me logical, rational, and analytical left-brain skills. But has left me very short on the subjective, intuitive, and randomness of right brain skills that are well expressed in your writings and very helpful in a fast paced debate. What likely takes you 15 minutes to write takes me an hour.

That said, I would love to sit down over a beer and discuss all topics. Although I love blogging, it's anonymity allows people to get too aggressive and become unmovable. When you talk face-to-face reasonable people become more peaceful and open-minded.

By the way, no one is manipulating me as I rarely read any blogs (I didn’t even know about you until recently) little alone communicate with anyone. Blogging seem to be a big deal in your life and you apparently get a trill from aggressive debate. I am glad you found something you are good at and enjoy. I don’t blog to be combative and get no thrill from arguing. I simply enjoy putting my thoughts into print and want people to take it or leave it as they see fit. To be honest I would rather spend my time sampling unique craft beers or helping out on the farm, but every so often a topic gets stuck in my head and blogging help me get it out.

Finally I have to clear something up. You are correct that I am currently not a farmer, but a mechanical engineer (Go Cats). That is why I titled my blog “Farm Boy” not "Farmer". But my father operates 5000 acres of wheat/barley which I someday hope to take over.

PS - You are welcome to the farm anytime to show me up;)

Where Rosie Libs Focus Their Attacks?

2007-03-29T06:42:00.000-07:00

Did anyone notice that Iran's interrogation and videoing of British soldiers violated the Geneva Convention? When some American soldiers do something stupid (to terrorists) we get 2 months of solid news coverage and unending attacks from Rosie liberals. When Iran kidnaps uniformed soldiers and breaks multiple Geneva Convention agreements we scarcely hear anything from our liberal friends. When they do comment, it is a British/American hoax to start a war...but they "support the troops" and tell us they will do better on national security. I call BS.

I hope to hell the Brits don’t follow Jimmy Carter's model to respond to this crisis or those Soldiers will be in for a long stay at the Ahmadinejan Hotel.

***In an effort to me more amicable I have edited this post to be more pointed towards the mindset I originally intended.***

How Modern Liberals Think

2007-03-26T10:56:00.000-07:00

I just ran across this awesome YouTube video. It is a speech by the political commentator/comedian Evan Sayet. He absolutely nails the warped mindset behind liberalism. You can also download the mp3 here.

Let me try to summarize his ideas (largely a copy of Mr. Sayet's words):

Liberals look at the world and see how man has attempted to make things right by creating entities such as religion, philosophy, ideology, & government. But in their minds all these things have failed to stop war, crime, poverty, and injustice. Therefore they are convinced that since all these failures came from mans attempt to be right, all that is bad must be found in the actual attempt to be right. As a result liberals try to tear down what is really right. In their minds, if no one ever thought they were right we would have nothing to fight or disagree about (no wars, no crime, no poverty). To create a world where no one is right liberals reject things like fact, logic, decency, and morality. They do everything they can to prove right isn't right and wrong isn't wrong.

Dems Have No Ethics

2007-03-23T03:42:00.000-07:00

This US attorney scandal is unbelievable. I predicted endless investigations when the dems took power. This truly proves how low they will stoop. Doesn’t anyone understand that the administration can fire any US attorney at any time for any reason? If President Bush didn’t like the guy’s suit color he could be fired, so what the hell are the democrats trying to do with a subpoena? They are obviously just trying to create a cloud of corruption where one doesn’t exist.

I expect this slimy childishness from the dems. What really pisses me off is the administrations refusal to fight. For god sakes, Clinton fired all 93 US attorneys including one who was on the verge of a Whitewater indictment. But beyond that hypocrisy, the recent attorney firings were for a good reason. They refused to prosecute may important cases, one of which was voter fraud. Why the hell doesn’t the administration shout that from the roof tops…THE DEMS WANT US TO GO EASY ON VOTER FRAUD.

Let us ask what the dems would do if the rolls were reversed and take a damn lesson. They would dig up every suit the fired attorneys didn’t pursue. They would attack back for hindering the dismissal of bad attorneys using keyword like “uncompassionate” and “harming children”. They would repeat again and again how Clinton fired all 93 attorneys to block the Whitewater investigation and put in place Clinton friendly attorneys. They would hit back by digging up and releasing any negative communications by congressmen trying to influence the Justice Department’s attorney appointments. And most of all they would claim racism against the first Hispanic American attorney general. Every democratic strategist and politician would be shouting in unison in front of every camera they could find. The President and republicans need to quit taking the moral high ground (which just makes them look guilty) and fight.

You self-righteous democrats should get on your knees and thank god for sending such a classy and humble man like President Bush who always tries to respect the office by rising above your childishness even to the detriment of his popularity. It makes President Bush an easy whipping boy for those with no morals or ethics and it makes me sick.

Who Actually Walks the Green Talk?

2007-03-01T05:03:00.000-08:00

The hypocrisy is killing me. President Bush constantly gets bash for his supposed poor environmental recorded by people who have little or no information. I know assumption is a part of human nature, but I wish these idiots would spend just five minutes researching the crap they spout. They might be surprised at what they find.

Is it possible that George Bush is a secret Green? Evidently his Crawford Winter White House has 25,000 gallons of rainwater storage, gray water collection from sinks and showers for irrigation, passive solar, geothermal heating and cooling. “By marketplace standards, the house is startlingly small,” says David Heymann, the architect of the 4,000-square-foot home. “Clients of similar ilk are building 16-to-20,000-square-foot houses.”

What ilk might he be talking about? Lets look at two liberal environmental icons who are actually major energy hogs.
Gore (And that is just his Tennessee home. He also has two or three other homes.)
Edwards

Gore’s home uses more than 20 times the national average.

Presidential candidate John Edwards and his family recently moved into what county tax officials say is the most valuable home in Orange County.

Let me make a prediction. Unlike Clinton (who flys anywhere there is a camera), when President Bush finishes his political career he will return to his ranch where he will live a modest life creating a modest carbon footprint. Whereas Gore, Edwards, and other environmental icons will spend the rest of there lives flying around in fuel hogging private jets tell us how to live our lives while using more energy in a few days than most people do in a year.

I'll leave you with a levelheaded overview (not emotionally charged rhetoric) of President Bush’s record.

Listening to Al Gore Would Ruin the World

2007-02-20T12:40:00.000-08:00

Al Gore has succeeded in bringing global warming to the forefront. All those fossil fuel burning private jet trips to promote his movie have paid off. Let me try to inject some sense into the debate. Is global warming happening? Probably. Are we causing it? Maybe a tiny little bit (.28%). This is where I could spend 50 pages reiterating all the scientific info from the skeptics which is commonly ignored in the media, but I would rather focus on something else...well OK, I will list just a few items:

A fun exercise is to actually crunch the numbers and see what percent of global warming gasses actually come from man. It is only about .28%
One scientist says warming is a natural trend that adds moisture to the air right before the next ice age, which is overdue.
A think tank that shreds Gore's movie.
Other scientists link global warming to solar activity. And another one more.
There is the Oregon Petition where 19,000 scientists have agreed to the following statement: There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
There is the MIT professor who disputes Global Warming as man made. He also lays out how skeptics are intimidated and have their grant money revoked.
How about the story that claims cows pollute more than cars. If cows create that much pollution, then what about the billions of non-domestic animals?
There is the Canadian scientist who says, Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth.
An article that claims the earth hasn't warmed since 1998.
A scientist who says gloabal warming would help the world.
There is the former director of the National Weather Satellite Center who says ground temperature measurement is flawed and that satellite temperature readings show no warming. He also claims that only about 100 of the 2500 scientist in the latest UN study are qualified to say anything about global warming.
What about the fact that Vikings raised crops and cattle in Greenland 1000 years ago, while Britons grew grapes in England. Four hundred years later, the Vikings were frozen out, Europe was gripped in a Little Ice Age, and priests performed exorcisms on advancing Swiss glaciers.
Then there is something I thought up, but have heard nowhere else. I am guessing, but there has to be at least 1 billion temperature controlled building in the world. That means there are 1 billion little heaters set at 69 (66 for us tightwads) degrees Fahrenheit (remember - air conditioners actually put out more heat than cold). Is it not possible to surmise these 1 billion heaters are raising the earths temperature and not “pollution”?

I’ll let you dig through the info and make your own determination. I would rather focus on what would happen if we listened to Al Gore and drastically cut CO2 emissions. Also, what we never hear about are the good things this evil substance called CO2 does and how liberal scaremongering has harmed billions of people in our world. Paul Driessen sums it up rather good:

Just the current Kyoto Protocol could cost the world up to $1 trillion per year, in regulatory bills, higher energy costs and lost productivity. That’s several times more than the price tag for providing the world with clean drinking water and sanitation – which would prevent millions of deaths annually from intestinal diseases.
Elsewhere, government and private studies calculate that the Protocol would cost the United States up to $348 billion in 2012. The average American family of four would pay an extra $2,700 annually for energy and consumer goods, and in US minority communities, the climate treaty would destroy 1.3 million jobs and “substantially affect” standards of living.
Yet, even perfect compliance with Kyoto would result in Earth’s temperature being only 0.2 degrees F less by 2050 than under a business-as-usual scenario. Assuming humans really are the culprits, actually controlling theoretical global temperature increases would require 40 Kyoto treaties – each one more restrictive, each one expanding government control over housing, transportation, heating, cooling and manufacturing decisions.
Over 2 billion of the Earth’s citizens still do not have electricity, to provide basic necessities like lights, refrigeration and modern hospitals. Instead they breathe polluted smoke from wood and dung fires, and die by the millions from lung diseases. But opposition to fossil fuel power plants, in the name of preventing climate change, ensures that these “indigenous” lifestyles, diseases and deaths will continue.
Opposition to hydroelectric projects (damming rivers) and nuclear power (radioactive wastes) likewise perpetuates endemic Third World poverty. So would a new European Union proposal to tax imports from China, India and other poor countries that are exempt from the Kyoto Protocol, because this gives them an “unfair trade advantage” over EU countries that are struggling to meet their Kyoto #1 commitments.

Listening to people like Al Gore would mean wide spread economic ruin and has already harmed billions in the third world. I know people like Gore mean well, but they cause far more damage to the world than global warming ever could.

Another downside of listening to Al Gore would be the necessary government regulations and intervention into our lives. Government would have to stick there nose into every aspect of our lives in order to be the CO2 police. The door will also be opened for world government intervention.

With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before.

Personally I don’t want anyone in France telling me what to do. Liberals would love this, but freedom is more precious than trying to fix a questionable problem. I don’t want to sound conspiratorial, but I somewhat think the global warming bandwagon is more about knocking down America and capitalism (to be replace by "green" socialism) than stopping pollution. Dr. George Reisman has a shocking quote:

…it should not be surprising to see hordes of former Reds, or of those who otherwise would have become Reds, turning from Marxism and becoming the Greens of the ecology movement. It is the same fundamental philosophy in a different guise, ready as ever to wage war on the freedom and well-being of the individual.

Now don’t call me an evil capitalist polluter. I encourage and practice cleaner lifestyles and energy conservation. I love the beauty of my home (Montana) and will fight to keep her that way. I also strongly support the efforts to develop clean energy and this is exactly where solutions should be sought. But we have a catch-22 situation. To develop the technology needed to move past fossil fuels, we need a strong and vibrant economy. Past economic prosperity has already taken us from wood, to coal, to oil, to gas, and soon to hydrogen. With each step there is more energy output for less pollution. We can force ourselves back into the stone age and get nowhere or we can plunge ahead and take the natural progression beyond fossil fuels.

Don’t force the world to ride bikes, don’t make the items people need to survive skyrocket in price, and don’t you dare take way my freedoms to fix something that may not even be a problem. Instead of destroying our standard of living let's focus on using technology to better the world. We are well on our way with the great strides being made in wind, solar, bio-fuels, hydrogen, etc. We can only guess what else is just around the corner, but a crappy economy will only move that corner farther away.

Oh yeah and if all else fails and I am completely wrong about CO2, we can use technology to fix that too. Some of the world’s scientists have devised ways to correct global warming.

I’ll leave you with a good read on the junk science behind global warming.

Minimum Wage – Democrats Hurting Those They Claim to Help

2007-02-04T05:47:00.000-08:00

Here we are again. The democrats are using the minimum wage to divide the country into “compassionate” liberals and “evil greedy” conservatives. They run around on their almighty high horse shouting how they want to help the little guy. But they know damn well a rise in the minimum wage will do little to help people, but will potentially do lots of damage. The reality is that democrats care more about looking good than actually helping people.

Let's first take a look at who actually earns the minimum wage and see how it correlates to what the democrats claim. The following is from a Heritage Foundation Study.

Minimum wage workers under 25 are typically not their family’s sole breadwinner. Rather, they live in middle-class households that do not rely on their earnings. For the most part, they have not finished their schooling and are working part-time jobs. These workers represent the largest group that would directly benefit from a higher minimum wage.

Even the vast majority of older adults who earn the minimum wage live above the poverty line. They have an average family income of $33,600 a year, well above the poverty line of $19,806 per year for a family of four. Most of them choose to work part-time, and a sizeable number are married. The average older minimum wage-earner simply does not fit the stereotype of a worker living on the edge of destitution.

Only one in five minimum wage-earners lives in a family that earns less than the poverty line. Three-fifths work part-time, and a majority are under 25 years old. Minimum wage-earners’ average family income is almost $50,000 per year. Very few are single parents working full-time to support their families—no more than in the population as a whole. It is not surprising, then, that studies show that higher minimum wages do not reduce poverty rates. Instead of raising the minimum wage, Congress should look at other ways to aid the working poor that actually focus on providing help to those who need it.

***more on the topic of who the minimum wage really helps***

So few people under the poverty line actually earn the minimum wage. Minimum wage earners are largely teenagers and retired people looking for something to do. But democrats would have us think people are starving in the streets and we have a crisis from which they can rescue us. In other words, they have found an emotionally charged topic that will gain them votes but do almost no good. If that was it I would applaud the democrats for their clever political move, but like most liberal ideas that seem compassionate on the surface when you dig deeper we find they actually do great harm. Let's explore some or the more obvious unintended consequences of this liberal idea.

I personally would love to sleep in every morning and spend my days drinking beer and watching movies. If I could make living doing that I would. Within that same train of thought, if a person is able to make a living doing menial work there is less incentive for them to improve their lives and become something like doctors or engineers. Removing hardships from people's lives is sometimes the worst thing we can do as hardship is an incentive to improve. The fear of hardship and the desire to improve ones life is largely the reason why America is a leader in medical advances and new technologies. Compare us to advancements coming for socialistic nanny countries like….well France. (A little off topic, but fewer medical advances mean more dead people. Yes, I’ll say it, the socialistic ideas pushed by liberalism, kill people. Instead on condemning America and “big business”, the world and democrats should be praising us for saving their asses when they are too lazy to do it themselves.)

Secondly, the minimum wage has destroyed our sense of community in regards to mentoring the growth of our children. Many of us remember working for local businesses as a kid to earn a few dollars. Well the minimum wage has made that almost impossible. Before you call me a cruel child abuser read this article . Walter Williams says it better than I can.

The little bit of money a kid can earn after school isn't nearly as important as the lessons gained through early work experiences such as: good work habits, respect for supervisors, and being prompt. Plus, early work experiences give youngsters a chance to make job mistakes at a time when they are not as costly as when there are dependents counting on a continuous source of income. Then there's the self-respect from being at least semi-financially independent. These benefits are important for any young person. However, they are even more important for young people growing up in dysfunctional homes and neighborhoods and attending rotten schools. If they are to learn anything that will make them more valuable employees in the future, they won't learn it at home, in the neighborhood or in the schools. Their only chance is in the world of work. Government has cut off that rung of the economic ladder.

Thirdly, let me make a prediction…the sales of industrial dishwashers will soon rise. Why you ask…because it will soon be more economical to buy an automatic dishwasher than to pay a manual one. The sad thing is that democrats will end up benefiting with new votes by causing job losses, as automation becomes more economical than manual work. Won’t it be great to be a democrat, the more damage you do the more power you gain.

The best thing a politician can do to help people is to get the government out of the way and let people use their natural talents and abilities to get ahead. I would be willing to wager that if there were no minimum wage people would get higher pay and services would improve. Both the employer and the employee get accustomed to the minimum wage and just accept it instead of letting market forces set the wage. The minimum wage creates a mindset that employers don't need to pay more and the employees don't expect more and therefore don't need to work harder. Without the minimum wage employers would have to compete for the better employees, and the employees would have more incentive to hand you a hamburger with a smile. But that wouldn’t create more democratic votes, so yet again we get to be subject to the democratic lies of how compassionate they are.

Make Money

2007-01-18T12:31:00.000-08:00

Let me attempt it explain my opinion on how liberals distort the idea of money. Has anyone ever wondered why we use the specific term “makings money” to describe our income? I have no idea the actually history of the term, but I think it is much more descriptive that one first thinks.

Liberals would have us think there is a finite amount of money. In other words if someone gets rich it must be “on the backs of the little guy”. They imply that someone else must get poorer for a rich guy to get rich. This is where the term “make money” comes into play in correcting this false liberalized train of though.

All people who earn a wage, create a product, or provide a service actually make new money. Lets imagine for a moment a world without money. We have a breadmaker and a candle maker. The bread maker needs light to make bread at night and the candle maker needs food. They each work hard to develop a product then they trade and are both satisfied. In reality it is not possible for all the different producers and service providers to find each other at the right time in order to trade so money is used as a universal representation of those goods and services. Money isn’t just a piece of paper that rich people have. Money is a loaf of bread. Money is a candle. People with more money just figured out ways to make more bread and more candles. They made new money they didn’t take it from other people.

This may be futile, but let me attempt an example. Our bread maker gathers flour, water, yeast, and heat that lets say costs $.60. He then uses his skills to turn those items into bread that he can sell for $1.00. There is now $.40 more money in the world. Since money is bread and bread is money, the baker has made new money. He didn’t take it from any “little guy” he made something new. In doing so he also made a product for the little guy and as the bakery grows new employees will be able to use their skills to make even more new money. It is a win win for everyone.

This is why it is absurd for liberals to bitch about excessive corporate profits and bash big business. If corporations make a lot of money it is because they have created a lot of goods or services (remember money is bread). Rather than being condemned, they should be applauded for making new money and adding it to the economy.

When you see wealth don’t be resentful and jealous. Realize that they made new money by providing a good or service someone wanted and likely allowed others to make money along the way. Even better, figure out how they made that new money and use the knowledge to make your own new money. Next time you hear your liberal friend rant about money, remind them why we say, “make money” not “take money”.

History Lesson

2007-01-11T02:42:00.000-08:00

Sorry another mass e-mail was just too good to resist.

Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals
2. Conservatives

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans
were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men.

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off.

New Direction, From What?

2006-12-11T14:58:00.000-08:00

I normally wouldn't post one of those e-mails that float around the net, but this one is pretty good.

Charity is Red

2006-12-07T02:09:00.000-08:00

I have long thought that the liberal claim to the most compassionate title is a load of crap. Mainly because they are idealists and think it is the government’s job to be compassionate. Conservatives are more realists and know that government “help” usually does more harm than good. So, conservatives take it onto themselves to spread compassion. Basically, liberals believe in government, conservatives believe in people. A recent article by John Stossel has some evidence to back up my belief. It is an overview of a book that I will defiantly read. Some interesting quotes from the article:

“You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."
"Religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly nonreligious charities. Religious people give more blood; religious people give more to homeless people on the street."
“Of the top 25 states where people give an above-average percentage of their income, all but one (Maryland) were red -- conservative -- states in the last presidential election.”

So money hungry capitalists are actually compassionate. Who would have thought.

Will We be Worthy

2006-12-05T06:37:00.000-08:00

I love hearing from old war heroes, especially WWII soldiers. They always have such a resolve to not be beaten by anything. Their resolve to win despite all costs and hardships saved the world.

The quotes in this article about the USS Intrepid really made me smile with pride and admiration.

"If she doesn't move, we are going to jump in and push her," a former crew member, 84-year-old Joe Kobert, said on the Intrepid's deck before the behemoth began to move on Tuesday.
"The whole empire of Japan couldn't stop her. What makes you think a little mud will stand in her way?"

I wouldn't surprise me a bit to actually see that 84 year old hero trying to push an aircraft carrier. These heroes are the foundation of our country. I pray my generation will be considered half as worthy.

The Other Side

2006-12-05T04:00:00.000-08:00

I have long thought President Bush didn’t underestimate the insurgency in Iraq nearly as much as he underestimated the inability of liberals (who voted for the war) to put country ahead of their desire for power. Because war is ugly, it can easily be used as a weapon to tear apart a president. Using this weapon and their ensuing political gains are just so tempting that they blind themselves to the good that can result from a win or the bad that would result from a loss. This is exemplified most dangerously in the media bias.

Where are the pictures of new schools, hospitals, and water systems? Where are the reports of how people were treated under Saddam? Where are the stories of the kids who love our soldiers? One hugely important fact that I have yet to hear anywhere in the MSM is that every child in Iraq and Afghanistan has been vaccinated. This alone has saved countless lives, quite possibly more than have been lost.

Those who have visited Iraq often reflect my sentiment like pro golfer Jerry Kelly who recently visited Iraq :

“Our soldiers are so selfless," he said. "We need to be promoting them and telling people what a great job they're doing. All they're hearing is bashing."
"They're spreading so much goodwill," he said. "All the kids are coming up to them and hugging them and mobbing them. People were waving at us. They want us there..."

He also told a very chilling story of how the MSM is actually aiding the enemy.

"One guy told me, 'I'm hesitant to do the job I was trained for. I don't want to return fire because I might be on CNN the next day.' That's sad. That's a guy risking his life for us. He doesn't want his family to see him on CNN being portrayed the way those guys are being portrayed."

Sad but true, I rarely hear democrats talk about how to win, we only hear that we are "losing". This battle can still be won despite the MSM, but it would be a lot easier if they would report just a bit of the other side. We are in this war now and there are only two options, win or lose. Ask yourself which outcome are your actions promoting?

What is Money?

2006-12-03T10:24:00.000-08:00

To continue the free market theme, I ask the question, “What is money?” Liberals seem to think money is a way to create class warfare. They use it to judge who “won the lottery of life”, who is greedy, and who must lack compassion. That is why they tout emotion driven false slogans like, “tax cuts for the rich” and “the rich get richer, the poor get poorer”. In reality money is just a certificate of proof that we did something to serve our fellow man. Those with more money have simply found ways to serve more people more effectively. People like that should be applauded not condemned.

Liberal’s hearts are in the right place. In their minds they want to create a more “fair” system where everyone is more equal, but in reality they fail miserably. Any success liberals have had in creating equality isn’t by uplifting those with fewer certificates of service. It is by stealing certificates of service from people (taxes) and making it harder for all people to earn certificates of service (regulations, big government, trade restriction, powerful unions). When there are fewer certificates of service fewer people get served. This means fewer opportunities, fewer jobs, and more expensive goods. All of which hurt the poor worse than the rich.

While liberal ideas make me feel warm inside, they actually promote a very unfair system. The truth is that some people will always find ways to help their fellow man more than others. These people have served more and should be rewarded with more certificates of service. We don’t reward these people because we are greedy capitalists. We reward them because we want to encourage more people to find better ways to serve their fellow man. This system has worked beautifully.

We live in a time of $15,000 new cars, $500 dollar supercomputers, and unbelievably cheap food. Even people who have few certificates of service can afford things past generation couldn’t have dreamed. In fact the biggest problem among people with few certificates of service is obesity. I dare a liberal to tell that to a Rwandan in the same breath as, “the poor get poorer in America”. On a side note, imagine if you will the government making cars, computers, or food. We would have $100k Pinto’s and $20 Big Macs. I don’t know how you can call capitalism anything but compassionate and the more government is removed from our lives the more compassionate society becomes.

The government’s job isn’t to create more equality. It is to make sure there is no cheating in our system that will allow some people to fraudulently get more certificates of service. This is where I join with liberals. Anywhere they can show an unequal tax system or a way to cheat I am with them. I will take it a step farther, but I am going to a place were “fair-minded” liberals depart from reality and head back to warm fuzzy town. The best possible way to make sure no one is able to unfairly get more certificates of service is a flat tax or a fair tax. No more loop holes, no more tax breaks, just fair and equal taxes. This is where liberals depart from their “fair-minded” values. If either of these systems were implemented liberals would loose some of their biggest talking points and loose much of their ability to drum up class-warfare. It seems power is more important than fairness.

Every time you think of money, yours or someone else’s, think of it as it really is... proof of service to mankind. You will then be able to see thorough liberal class warfare and life will get a whole lot happier.

(To head off anymore class warfare by liberals let me disclose something. I am still paying a big student loan, so I am obviously not rich. But I want to be rich and I know my biggest obstacle is the government and liberal policies.)

Free Markets Rule

2006-11-30T01:52:00.000-08:00

The more I read on economics the more I have come to see that the free market can solve almost every problem. Government has almost no ability to help the economy but has lots of ability to do great harm. By far the greatest economist of our time was Milton Friedman who passed away recently. Before Friedman no one talked about smaller government and lower taxes. In fact most people thought socialism and big government was the answer. Every time we hear a democrat say "tax cut" or "free market" we know how big of an impact Friedman really had. Probably my second favorite economist is Walter E William. Not only does he have great ideas, he has the ability to put them in a way anyone can understand. Below are some of my favorite articles. I encourage anyone who has the slightest interest in free markets and economics to poke around his web page. It is a lot easiser than reading a whole dry book on economics. When I first found it a few years ago, I had one of those WOW moments. He didn't change my view, but gave me confidence in what I already knew.

RESULTS VERSUS PROCESS

THE MINIMUM WAGE VISION

ECONOMICS OF PRICES

ECONOMICS 101

COMMON SENSE ECONOMICS

DISAPPEARING MANUFACTURING JOBS

More Organic?

2006-11-23T07:47:00.000-08:00

I want to follow up on my 11/16 post about organic farming. My father pointed out a few more downsides to organic farming beyond the problems of making less food and breaking up more land. To control weeds organic farmers have to go back to the old days of plowing a field. This drastically increases the likelihood of erosion. In other words, much more of Jon Tester's topsoil finds its way into the Missouri river than his neighbor's. I heard somewhere that the recent drought was just as bad as the dust bowl of the 1930's. The reason topsoil didn't blow away and farmers didn't starve this time was because of newer farming practices, practices that organic farmers can't use. In addition to erosion, plowing a field burns vastly more fossil fuels than the alternative. No need to add any final comments, you all get the significance of an "earth loving" organic eating environmentalist consuming a product that uses vastly more fossil fuels.

What am I Thankful For?

2006-11-23T02:34:00.000-08:00

Found this on a Billings soldier’s myspace page.

TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS, HE LIVED ALL ALONE,
IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF PLASTER AND STONE.

I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE,
AND TO SEE JUST WHO IN THIS HOME DID LIVE.

I LOOKED ALL ABOUT, A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE,
NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS, NOT EVEN A TREE.

NO STOCKING BY MANTLE, JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND,
ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES OF FAR DISTANT LANDS.

WITH MEDALS AND BADGES, AWARDS OF ALL KINDS,
A SOBER THOUGHT CAME THROUGH MY MIND.

FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT, IT WAS DARK AND DREARY,
I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER, ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY.

THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING, SILENT, ALONE,
CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME.

THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE, THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER,
NOT HOW I PICTURED A UNITED STATES SOLDIER.

WAS THIS THE HERO OF WHOM I 'D JUST READ?
CURLED UP ON A PONCHO, THE FLOOR FOR A BED?

I REALIZED THE FAMILIES THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT,
OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT.

SOON ROUND THE WORLD, THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY,
AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY.

THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR,
BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS, LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE.

I COULDN'T HELP WONDER HOW MANY LAY ALONE,
ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME.

THE VERY THOUGHT BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE,
I DROPPED TO MY KNEES AND STARTED TO CRY.

THE SOLDIER AWAKENED AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE,
"SANTA DON'T CRY, THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE";

I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, I DON'T ASK FOR MORE,
MY LIFE IS MY GOD, MY COUNTRY, MY HOME."

THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP,
I COULDN'T CONTROL IT, I CONTINUED TO WEEP.

I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS, SO SILENT AND STILL
AND WE BOTH SHIVERED FROM THE COLD NIGHT'S CHILL.

I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT,
THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR SO WILLING TO FIGHT.

THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER, WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE,
WHISPERED, "CARRY ON SANTA, IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE."

ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH, AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT.
"MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND, AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT."

This poem was written by an unnamed Soldier. The
following is his request. I think it is reasonable.....

PLEASE. Would you do me the kind favor of sending
this to as many people as you can? Christmas will be coming soon
and some credit is due to our U.S. service men and women for our being able to celebrate these festivities.Let's try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe. Make people stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who sacrificed themselves for us. Please, do your small part to pass on this small seed or remembrance.

Why I am a Conservative - Let us be Stupid

2006-11-19T11:31:00.000-08:00

Yet another reason I am a conservative is that I think we should have the right to be stupid. More important we have the need to learn the lessons gained from the repercussions of being stupid. Liberals, in their attempts to “help” people and make sure no one is hurt or offended actually end up removing many freedoms and important life lessons. I saw a good example if this in Scotland recently. Over the last few months I have noticed that may of the headstones in most cemeteries are laying down. My first thought was that some dumb punk kids are desecrating these holy places. But, I have come to find out that the liberal government is actually the culprit. Their reasoning is that some dumb punk kid might be messing around in a cemetery and end up getting hurt from a falling tombstone. To protect these idiots from themselves they are going through every cemetery and purposely pushing over any loose tombstones.

Tell me if I am wrong, but it might be the best thing that ever happened to a dumb punk kid (who should show respect in a cemetery) to have a tombstone fall on him. It just might be the kick in the pants he needs to shape up. A broken bone is a small price to pay for a life on the straight and narrow. I can’t fathom desecrating such holy places just to prevent stupidity. This is one more reason I will continue to oppose liberalism.

They know not what they do - Are you a Liberal

2006-11-17T05:28:00.000-08:00

It is my opinion that many people who say they are democrats today actually have little in common with the present views of their party. This is especially true with Montana democrats. It has gone largely unnoticed by the entrenched suporters, but the democratic party has quietly taken a drastic lurch left since JFK. So much so that I believed JFK would today be considered a conservative. According to columnist and radio host Dennis Prager:

“Kennedy advocated four major positions -- lower taxes, expanded military, the use of American power to fight evil, and the centrality of God to American life and to morality. Liberals and their political party, the Democrats, have since rejected each of these positions, all of which are now considered conservative.”

Dennis Prager and his readers have come up with a list for people to test their beliefs against the current dominant liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Do you believe the following?

Standards for admissions to universities, fire departments, etc. should be lowered for minorities.
Bilingual education for children of immigrants, rather than immersion in English, is good for them and for America.
Murderers should never be put to death.
During the Cold War, America should have adopted a nuclear arms freeze.
Colleges should not allow ROTC programs.
It was wrong to wage war against Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War.
Poor parents should not be allowed to have vouchers to send their children to private schools.
It is good that trial lawyers and teachers unions are the two biggest contributors to the Democratic Party.
Marriage should be redefined from male-female to any two people.
A married couple should not have more of a right to adopt a child than two men or two women.
The Boy Scouts should not be allowed to use parks or any other public places and should be prohibited from using churches and synagogues for their meetings.
The present high tax rates are good.
Speech codes on college campuses are good and American values.
The Israelis and Palestinians are morally equivalent.
The United Nations is a moral force for good in the world, and therefore America should be subservient to it and such international institutions as a world court.
It is good that colleges have dropped hundreds of men's sports teams in order to meet gender-based quotas.
No abortions can be labeled immoral.
High schools should make condoms available to students and teach them how to use them.
Racial profiling for terrorists is wrong -- a white American grandmother should as likely be searched as a Saudi young male.
Racism and poverty -- not a lack of fathers and a crisis of values -- are the primary causes of violent crime in the inner city.
It is wrong and unconstitutional for students to be told, "God bless you" at their graduation.
No culture is morally superior to any other.

Those are all liberal positions. How did you answer?

Past this on to your Liberal friends and put them to the test?

Tester, Organic, Smugness?

2006-11-16T03:22:00.000-08:00

The Billings Gazette relates this exchange between President Bush and Tester:

"We had pictures taken with him," Tester said. "It was kind of like, 'Hi, I'm Jon Tester and my wife, Sharla.' We mentioned we were organic farmers from Montana. He said, 'We look forward to working with you on the farm bill.' "

OK, this might be a low blow, but I am getting sick of Tester always saying he is an "organic" farmer. I never hear my father say he is a "normal" farmer. Does being organic in some way make Tester better? Yes I know there is a large part of Testers constituency that have orgasms when they hear the word organic. Ironically, these are the same people who say they care more about hunger, poverty, and the environment. Yes there is a contradiction that I will explain shortly.

Let me clarify my position on organic food. From the vantage point of a farm kid, I love organic because it takes land and makes it much less productive, which decreases the food supply and increases prices. Now this is great for the farmer, but bad for the consumer and the poor. Another side effect of less productive organic land is that more land has to be broken up from its "natural" state to grow the same amount of food. This is something I would think an "environmentalist" like Tester would oppose.

Tester's smugness about organic is also exemplified by what he farms… wheat. I do somewhat understand (though I don’t necessarily agree) organic is good when it comes to fruits and vegetables. These items often get sprayed directly with chemicals. But when it comes to grains, they are typically only sprayed in the plants infancy (and not at all if the farmer had good weed control before planting), long before the seed is even formed. In my opinion Tester is touting a term that is meaningless to what he raises therefore increasing his “smugness level” (this will make more sense if you watch South Park)

The simple fact is that if all farmers went organic, food would cost much more (which mostly hurts the poor) and less land would be left “natural” (which only hurts environmentalist’s feelings). If you ask me, my father is way more of a humanitarian and environmentalist than his organic counterpart. From now on my dad should introduce himself as, “I am a non-organic farmer and I feed more poor people than Jon Tester.”

Who Controls the Dems?

2006-11-15T01:26:00.000-08:00

Just to keep track of the other side (and to get a good laugh), years ago I put myself on Michael Moore’s e-mail list. He recently sent out a sarcastic mailing that had a list of promises to conservatives.

I, and the millions of others who are now in charge with our Democratic Congress, have a pledge we would like to make to you, a list of promises that we offer you because we value you as our fellow Americans. You deserve to know what we plan to do with our newfound power -- and, to be specific, what we will do to you and for you.

Most of the items are easily defeated distortions about conservatives used to mask his destructive views, but two items really stuck out:

8. We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is your business. We will continue to count your age from the moment you were born, not the moment you were conceived.
9. We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, pick up another sport. We will make our streets and schools as free as we can from these weapons and we will protect your children just as we would protect ours.

It is surprising to me that with all the advances in science that have shown how early in the womb a baby has a heart beat and brain function, liberals still insist life starts at birth. I think Moore makes it clear that with this new found control they will continue to allow partial birth abortion. I hate to be gruesome, but let me remind you of the truth. A baby is yanked part way out of her mother’s womb, a hole is poked in her head and her brains are sucked out. I am bewildered by anyone who thinks these people aren’t radical.

Moore also makes it clear they plan to take away all handguns and semi-automatic guns (I assume Moore is just ignorant as automatic guns are already illegal).

I believe most Montanans, regardless of party do not agree with these views. For years people like Moore were relegated to the fringes. They still are in the Republican Party, but they have made a big come back in the Democratic Party. So much so that they now run the party as evident in Moore’s line, “I and the millions of others who are now in charge with our Democratic Congress”. The Democrats are beholden to the extreme of their party and this will be more and more evident over the next few years. I hope middle-of-the-road Montana Democrats will help us conservatives to push these people back to the fringe.

Tester Proves Limbaugh Right.

2006-11-13T03:37:00.000-08:00

Tester and Anderson Cooper had this exchange on CNN:

COOPER: Rush Limbaugh said that Republicans lost this election but not conservatism. And this is what he had to say about the Democrats in this election, quote, "They advance no agenda other than their usual anti-war position. They have no contract. They really do not get specific. Their message was one of, 'vote for us, the other guys have been in power too long.'" Is that fair?

TESTER: I really don't care much for labels. I don't think they -- they provide -- I don't think they provide good leadership, quite frankly, so to call somebody a liberal or a conservative or whatever really doesn't get us where we need to go. Where we need to go is to find the common ground, working together. As I went around the state, everybody had basically the same problems, they weren't all Democrats, they weren't all Republicans, but they all had the same problems, that's why we need to work together and really change direction of this country and I think that's what this election said to me.

Cooper quotes Limbaugh as saying the democrats have no plan and no policy. Tester replies by saying he doesn’t like labels when Limbaugh didn’t even use any labels in the quote. Tester had a perfect opportunity to talk about his agenda, but instead he changed the topic and spews meaningless nonsense. The reason is that democrats can’t talk about their agenda. If they went around saying we want higher taxes, we want open borders, we want Al Qaeda member to have constitutional rights, we want abortion on demand, and we want far left Supreme Court justices they couldn’t be elected dogcatcher. Instead they just repeat hollow statements like “common ground” & “change in direction” to trick a war weary public into voting for them. Can anyone say want the democrat plan is for Iraq?

How would Al Qaeda vote

2006-11-13T02:36:00.000-08:00

The old media keeps talking about the latest al qaeda tape, where they claim to have 12,000 terrorists in Iraq. I say, how convenient, the greatest fighting force in the world is also there to kill them. That is until the dems pull us out and the 12,000 terrorists are freed up to sneak into our country. There was another tidbit in the tape that isn’t getting nearly as much coverage as the 12,000 terrorists claim. Al qaeda also stated, “The American people have put their feet on the right path by realizing their president's betrayal in supporting Israel….so they voted for something reasonable in the last elections.” So al qaeda thinks the democrats are “Reasonable”. Any reasonable democrat should take a little pause after hearing this and reflect a little about their recent vote. I promise you will never catch me voting for someone al qaeda thinks is “reasonable”.

Why I am a Conservative - Downfall of the Family

2006-11-12T11:25:00.000-08:00

Yes I know this will reveal that am a political dork, but I often find myself writing political speeches in my head. I see something on TV or read something and a few hours later a tirade has developed. I don’t even remember what got this one started, but I do know that it feels good to put it in black and white.

Yet another reason I am a conservative is because I see that the government welfare state has failed miserably. Welfare touting liberals really do mean well. What they don’t realize is that in almost every case their 10lbs of government help also created 15lbs of hurt. Liberals have the best of intentions but create terrible results.

Let me ask a question to illustrate my point. If the same amount of money the government has spent on poverty over the years was instead given to private charities and religious groups would there be more or less poor people today? I think most people, conservative or liberal, would answer that charities are better at helping people. So why do liberals demand that the government take 10lbs of help from the tax payers and redistribute it in an ineffective way. I have no idea the answer, but I do clearly see the 15lb of hurt in the downfall of community, church, and family in America.

In the past community, church, and family helped the poor, sick and downtrodden. Nowadays many people just pay their taxes and feel like they are off the hook to contribute to their fellow man. As the government under the direction of our liberal friends has attempted to solve social problems all three of these great institutions have fallen. When people get help from their community they feel humbled and make connections with caring people that can help them break the poverty cycle. When people get help from a church they get exposed to a positive foundation that can carry them out of poverty. When people get help from family they feel supported and have a great incentive to improve. But, when they get freebies from the government they feel entitled and have no incentive to not ask for the next check. The liberal “great society” had the greatest of intentions, but what has resulted is the downfall of the foundations of America. We have spent over 8 trillion dollars on LBJ’s great society to try to help people, yet we have just as many poor and way more moral decay.

The fall of community and church breaks my heart, but the saddest and most damning for our future is the downfall of the family. Because liberals have forced assistance to come through government, people feel less responsible for their family. Families who used to live close for support and guidance now just meet for holidays. Grandparents watching the kids has been replaced with daycare. Children tending to their elderly parents has been replaced with rest homes funded by Social Security and Medicare.

People used to have kids as an investment for the future. The author Vedran Vuk said it better than I can, “These people survived under a basic principle in life. You take care of your kids, and one day, they will take care of you. You knew that one day your children would take care of your needs as you took care of theirs. This created many incentives that produced a healthy family. For one thing, you had to be somewhat nicer to your children and make sure that you instilled good values. Children without a good work ethic or good values are not likely to perform well in the job market. A parent would have to teach these values to children to insure his or her own needs at a later time. Responsibility to the family ranked highly. Without this ingrained in a child, he or she might grow up one day and never return the nurturing given by parents early in life.”

I am a conservative because we believe in community, church and family not government. We measure compassion by how many people no longer need help not by how much we give to how many people.

RIGHT wing tirade

2006-11-11T10:24:00.000-08:00

I love politics and often need to vent. This is the begining of a my RIGHT wing tirade.