Tuesday, January 31, 2012

An Open Letter to the GAB

"The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday, John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 v. Sam Reed, that people who sign political petitions don't have a right to keep their signatures from being disclosed publicly. Defendants insisted that signatures, like Election Day ballots, should remain anonymous and a form of speech protected under the First Amendment. But the court decided that the benefits of disclosure outweighed its burdens" . Chrisitian Science Monitor http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Editorial-Board-Blog/2010/0625/Supreme-Court-on-transparency-vs.-anonymous-speech.

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided just this last week that your refusal to allow the Scott Walker Recall Petitions to be made public is illegal. As an arm of the Wisconsin government you are required to follow the decisions made by the Supreme Court or you will be in contempt of court. I heartily suggest you follow the law of the land and release the petitions so the public can access them to verify them.

I also request that this letter be considered an official document and be added to the public file and each of the GAB judges be given a copy.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Communism: the Myth

One of the favorite lines of the Progressive left is "Communism looks good on paper, but it has never been implemented correctly." It is my contention that Communism doesn't look good on paper either.

Wikipedia says "communism is the idea of a free society with no division or alienation, where mankind is free from oppression and scarcity. A communist society would have no governments, countries, or class divisions." So pure communism has no leaders, no elite, no upper class, no ruling class, no productive class, no dependent class. See where this gets a little tricky.

The Bible says clearly, "the poor you will have with you always," why? There will always be a dependent class, whether it is children or elderly retirees, the handicapped, or in-firmed, there will always be those people who do not produce anything. This is inevitable, you may be able to get rid of the less productive in a society simply by withholding their basic necessities, or killing them; but a society will never be able to get rid of the children, for obvious reasons.

And a dependent class will always take more than it produces. Obviously the women who are bearing the children will also be considered dependent at least for a short period of time. There are also those who are too old to work anymore, or those who have been injured while working or the insane or criminals. The list goes on and on of the dependent class.

Communism cannot ever be implemented correctly because it doesn't take into account human nature. Since Communism has at its core no government, pure communism outlaws a ruling class. But with such a huge dependent class, there is a need for some to rise to a position of decision making. Whether those who seek power do it for the better good or not, we know that "power corrupts". So any of the current communists claiming that they will simply give up all their power are simply lying to you. The myth of equality within communism is false.

The desire for power is only one aspect that it overlooks, there is also the means of production. This will take a little while to explain.

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Karl Marx. Each person will have a certain amount of need, from the sick and infirmed to the healthy worker. Lets register that need as 10 bushels. To begin with everyone has a 10 bushel need. How that is produced is the contentious issue. Give a man his 10 bushels and he is happy to produce it, he will produce it for himself and his family happily for decades. For every person there is a 10 bushel need, so when the worker has additional children, there is an additional 10 bushel need for each, this means the man must produce an additional 10 bushels for each member of the family.

The whole system works great as long as the man is producing enough for his need and his families needs, but along come the dependent class and they need their 10 bushels each. Therefore the man's burden becomes greater than his need, because now he is producing for someone else's need. This is where the trouble starts. As long as the man can keep producing his 10 bushels and his families bushels all is well, but when he starts being encumbered with producing additional bushels for those who produce nothing, he becomes burdened. Now he starts feeling resentment for those who produce nothing but still get 10 bushels; remember human nature, you can tell him he shouldn't feel that way, but he still will.

So the usual response is, over time, to decrease his production level. The man will naturally decrease to a production level of feeding his own family again. There is no incentive in the communist system to overcome this. Forcing workers to produce only produces less, and appealing to their sense of "fairness" only makes them realize how unfair it is to have to produce more than his need for someone who produces less than their own need. There is no accounting for this basic human nature in the whole philosophy of communism.

In fact, scarcity is the direct outcome of communism, so despite their belief in a lack of scarcity, scarcity is one of the myths of communism. And from the above example, human nature takes over and produces alienation and division as another side-effect of the system itself. No matter how pretty a writer makes it sound, all it takes is human sin to step in and the whole thing is mucked up. For this reason alone, Communism is a flawed system that will always fail no matter who implements it. It looks horrible on paper.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

Why is Act 10 Working?

Why is Act 10 working?

The Labor unions have been against this thing since the beginning saying it would destroy our state. We would be balancing the budget on the backs of working class families who would up and leave our state. We would be putting millions of dollars as kick backs into the hands of a few rich industrialists and evil corporate owners. So what really happened? And why is it actually working like Walker said it would from the very beginning?

Walker promises us that he would close loop holes and remove some unnecessary drains in the budget. Closing some departments and selling off some buildings that were unneeded, and privatizing some superfluous components, like the electrical plant. He wanted to make the government lean and mean and more able to handle the future. Act 10 and the 2012 budget did all that, just as promised.

So why the uproar? Because Act 10 did exactly as it was supposed to do. The unions knew exactly what it would do and they screamed like little girls the second they found out what it would do. So in a nutshell what did Act 10 do? The only thing it did was cut out fraud, waste, and abuse. And the people depending on that money had a hissy fit.

Fraud as in the case of the University professor that retires but still comes back after a short vacation to teach and then pulls in his retirement and a salary. That is double dipping and it is fraud, plane and simple. Waste as in the case of the power plant that was not being cost effective anymore. And abuse as in the case of the WEA Trust that because they were an entity only used by union teachers could charge anything they liked for their coverage; but now they have to compete with other insurers and what is the result, the cost for their coverage has come down, and the fat they had accumulated in their company trimmed. Clearly an abuse of the taxpayers.

So the defrauders, wasters, and abusers are ticked off royally and have taken to the streets. They are not getting their piece of the pie illegally anymore. The cockroaches have picked up picket signs. But Act 10 is working despite the protests. Simply because it has finally cut out the fraud, waste and abuse that the lefties had voted for themselves. That is why Doyle couldn't balance the budget even with double digit tax increases, not only did he overlook the waste in the system, he simply fed the defrauders and abusers.

Despite the call for the recall, Act 10 is working. And only the defrauders, wasters and abusers are unhappy. We have cut the scraps being thrown to the scavengers. Eventually they will get tired and give up, but not until the drag this state down with them. The recall will cost somewhere between $9 million and $20 million. More abuse. Yet they decry the voter ID bill because it could add a couple million to the budget.

It was the right time for Act 10 and that is why it is working. The scavengers will have to find some other carcass to feed on from now on.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Really. Whose Fault is it Anyway?

From Dave Almendinger:
This is just a History lesson. Please don't read this if you are afraid of the truth. It is history and nothing can change it.

The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd, 2009 it was actually January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

Remember that day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?

THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment...to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOS!

BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie -starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy. Barney blocked it and called it a "Chicken Little Philosophy" (and the sky did fall!)

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac?


And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especially BARNEY!!!!

So when someone tries to blame Bush......


Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving the economy into the ditch.
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period:
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.
In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for,
And then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th."
There is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!

"The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living."

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Climate Change Theorists: the new flat earthers

If you do a perusal of history, there are times when conventional, accepted science is so corrupt that the so-called scientists do everything they can to shut down real science. You get the whole "let's not let Galileo 's theory of a solar centered system see the light of day" attitude, and you get the nay-sayers proclaiming Columbus would fall off the edge and giving him ships would be a huge waste of the state's funds. These periods are led by a phenomenon called "scientific elitism". Basically a time when scientist think that they are the experts and ordinary citizens are not equipped to handle the complexities of scientific discovery by themselves.

This is part and parcel of today's science. You know it is. Any theory such as......I don't know....... global warming denial is looked at as something that needs to be shut down, no debate, no allowing the theories to see the light of day. After all, if they were the elite of science they would simply go along with the consensus that global climate change is the theory of the day and not try to interject any simple data into the pot. There is no room for simple observable data, there is no room for the scientific method, there is no room for thinking outside the box.

When scientists try to keep the everyday person out of the whole process of science and ensure us that they are the ones who know, watch out.... true science is not the goal.... the real goal is .....
money, power, control and ego. Stephen Hawking is a perfect example of the problem of elitist scientists. He wheels around saying he can prove there is no need for Divinity in creation. He touts his big bang theory and mocks anyone who has data or hypotheses that diverge from his theory. He thinks that only he is capable of understanding the creation of the universe. Well guess what, he is wrong, just as wrong as the scientist that held the consensus that the earth was flat.

There has been so much information coming out about the falsification of data by the climate scientists and the corruption of government funding of programs that verified the hypothesis of global climate change; that anyone who continues to push the theory can only be seen as corrupt. There is no science in climate science, unless it is classified as "junk science". The scientific method has been totally abrogated by today's climate scientists.

Let me give one example. One of my favorite targets is the whole idea that the universe is simply the result of a cataclysmic explosion of a singularity. How preposterous. Let me hit on just one quandary the big bang theorists have yet to explain. I have yet to find any scientist who can explain how a galaxy can keep its shape. Think about it this way.......when a marching band goes around a corner, the inner members march in place while the far edge is practically running. Lets apply this to a spiral galaxy, how is it possible that there are arms? The stars on the outer rim would need to be traveling at multiple times the speed of light to simply keep the shape, while the inner stars would never be allowed to rotate around the center. This is just one of the "mysteries" that scientists cannot explain with their theories.

And when someone comes up with a possible explanation that refutes the pet theory of big bang, they are resoundingly repudiated and made a laughing stock. Why? Because today's scientists are on an ego trip the size of a small continent. This is the same kind of attitude that led to the dark ages. If you don't believe me, look it up. There is a tendency of science to ebb and flow, and it has always been the attitude of scientists themselves that have led the charge. We are entering, or may have already entered, another dark age of scientific discovery. And the global climate change scientists (and Al Gore) are at the center.