Filed under: Freedom, History, Military, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: Photographic Essays, The American Civil War, The Origins of Memorial Day
It was after the worst war in our history that we began to officially celebrate Decoration Day, when the graves of the fallen were decorated with flowers, and ceremonies of remembrance were held. It was three years after the Civil War ended on May 5, 1868 that Major General John A. Logan, head of the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), declared that Decoration Day should be Observed, and the last Monday in May was chosen because flowers would be in bloom all across the country.
The first national observance was held that year at Arlington National Cemetery, just across the Potomac River from Washington D.C.. The Arlington Mansion, the former home of General Robert E. Lee, was draped in mourning. Mrs. Ulysses S. Grant presided over the ceremonies, and after the speeches, children from the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Orphan Home and members of the GAR made their way through the cemetery strewing flowers on both Union and Confederate graves, reciting prayers and singing hymns.
There were so many fallen, the traditional numbers were 618,222 — 360,000 from the North, 258,000 from the South. Demographic historian J.David Hacker combed through newly digitized census data from the 19th century, and recalculated the death toll and increased it by more than 20 percent — to 750,000. At that, Dr.Hacker made assumptions and the numbers are only an educated estimate. The data suggested that 650,000 to 850,000 died as a result of the war. He chose 750,00 as the midpoint. That meant 37,000 more widows and 90,000 more orphans.
Here is a fascinating photographic essay about the places of the Civil War 150 years ago, with 48 images. Photography was still in its infancy, but war correspondents produced thousands of images bringing the harsh realities of the frontlines to those at home in a new way. Remember that the United States was only 85 years old at the time. Here are some of the people of the War, the generals and the ordinary soldiers, the slaves, the President, the heroes and the dead.
I lost four great, great uncles in the Civil War, two on each side. One in the battle around Richmond where he was badly wounded and died from his wounds. His older brother and brother-in-law drove a wagon up from South Carolina, near the Georgia border, across South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia to bring his body home. His brother was killed at Snickers’ Gap, the only Confederate to die in that exchange. Their younger brother was in the South Carolina Calvary and survived the war.
On the Union side, the Ohio soldiers fought in the war down the Mississippi valley. One, I know only as “Uncle Frank who was killed in the war” for I have a tintype portrait. The other, I believe from the dates, was wounded at Chickamauga and died from his wounds.
War is terrible, and none was ever more terrible than the War between the States. but the nation healed slowly, and remained a strong union. “As we here highly resolve, these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Filed under: Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economy, Freedom | Tags: Governor Sott Walker, Political Courage, Wisconsin
The recall vote in Wisconsin is just days away. A new study shows that the reforms passed by Governor Scott Walker and Republican lawmakers has saved the state one billion dollars.
Act 10, which curbed (not eliminated) collective bargaining for most unionized public employees has reduced the state’s $3.6 billion budget shortfall. Unions are furious. Instead of having free healthcare and not having to contribute to their retirement benefits, the now have to make contributions to their benefits — not anywhere nearly as much as most people do, but it was a heavy burden on Wisconsin taxpayers. The reforms saved hundreds of jobs as well. So he had the temerity to do just what he said he would do when he was elected. He more than fulfilled his promises.
You have undoubtedly seen the rioting union people, the teachers’ unions, the union members bussed in from out-of-state. And remember how the Democrats in the legislature ran away to Illinois to avoid having to vote. The governor and his family have had death threats and wild accusations thrown at them for months. The Governor holds a six point lead in the latest Marquette poll. And last weekend the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, hardly a conservative paper, endorsed him in the governor’s race. If you believe in real political courage, and want to support Gov. Walker, his website is here.
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Freedom, History, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: "Profit" is Not a Dirty Word, Job Retraining, Misunderstanding
Forgive me, but this is so embarrassing. Barack Obama has just carefully explained that he has no understanding whatsoever of business. Like many leftists, he regards profit as something rather distasteful. The good things are when government retrains all those who have lost jobs due to private enterprise laying people off. Government investing money to encourage investment, encourage innovation, those are good things, aren’t they?
The only reason for a business to exist is to earn a profit, whether for the sole businessman or for huge groups of investors. If there is no profit, the business cannot operate. You have to earn enough to pay expenses, and have a little left over to live on, and to keep the business going until the next day when the process begins again.
Without a profit, a business cannot pay the wages of the workers. Without wages, the workers cannot pay taxes. Without taxes, there in nothing with which to enable a government to exist.
All those wise bureaucrats in government are there because of the profit in private business. Their comfortable offices, fancy buildings, government cars and hefty salaries come from business profits distributed in wages to workers who pay taxes to support the government. The government has no money of its own. The whole caboodle is supported by a vast array of taxes and fees and payments and charges, regulations and mandates that come from the profits of ordinary people making voluntary exchanges in the hopes of making a profit. Profit is not a dirty word. It is the essential driving force.
Mr. Obama also misunderstands the job of a president. It is not his job to figure out how to retrain people who lose their jobs. Most of the job losses have been caused by government in the first place. The government does not care to admit it, but this recession was caused by government’s good intentions to get everybody into owning their own homes — whether they could afford it or not. That was the vast gasbag that puffed-up a vast housing bubble that the banks and mortgage industry and Wall Street tried to swallow, but in the end, couldn’t.
The government is remarkably unsuccessful at job training. There are currently 47 duplicative, or overlapping job programs that are mot particularly successful. It is not a president’s job to retrain people, nor to pick companies to favor with taxpayer money, nor is it his job to pick winners and losers among businesses. It is not the president’s job to decide what form of energy the country needs or should have. The market will decide. If the marketplace will not willingly pay for a newer or cleaner form of energy, then its time has not come. It is not a president’s job to decide what kind of cars we should drive nor if we should abandon our cars for some other form of transportation.
Our government is divided into three equal branches, for good and historically careful reasons. The powers of each branch are delineated in the Constitution. There are limits to the expansion of government allowed under the commerce clause. The Supreme Court is going to be kept very busy. It would be wise to read the fusty old document. that will be 275 years old this September. I know that the left believes that it should be a “living document” so they can adjust it to their very own tastes, but it is meant for all generations — not just the current temporary one. It has survived good generations and less good ones as well, and it will, with our help, survive this one.
Filed under: Freedom, Health Care, Law, Politics, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: Cardinals Speak Out, Catholic Institutions, Obama Administration
Twelve legal challenges have been filed today by 43 plaintiffs against the ObamaCare regulation that requires health care plans to include abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization procedures. The University of Notre Dame was prominent among the challengers. Many religious institutions object on religious or moral grounds to providing, paying for and facilitating coverage for such procedures.
In addition there are several other institutions that have already filed lawsuits, with the Becket Fund for religious Liberty: Belmont Abbey College, Colorado Christian University, Eternal Word Television Network and Ave Maria University. Hercules Industries has filed suit as a family owned business that would be forced to violate its religious beliefs in February in Newland v. Sebelius in the U.S. District Court for Colorado.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has called the ObamaCare mandate an “unprecedented” violation of religious freedom by the federal government.
The case seems very strong that the mandate is in direct conflict with the freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Aside from that ObamaCare does grant religious exemptions to the mandate to Muslims, the Amish, American Indians and Christian Scientists. Then there is the famous Supreme Court decision in Youngstown Steel &Tube v. Sawyer in 1952. The Court held that “the president may not rule by decree, conscripting private industry to carry out his commands. The chief executive may only execute laws passed by Congress, according to their terms. He may not make up laws of his own and then enforce them.” That would seem to squash this particular mandate, and Obama’s personal revision of it, quite thoroughly.
The plaintiffs have a lot to complain about. Freedom to practice one’s own religion is one of America’s most cherished freedoms. It is not about contraception, abortion-inducing drugs , or sterilization. These services are widely available in the United States, and nothing prevents the government from making them available. But Barack Obama may not decree that religious institutions must violate their beliefs. The first phrase of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” And only Congress gets to make laws. That is not a power of the Executive Branch.
The administration clearly thought that this fit right into their silly “War on Women” theme. They assumed that the Catholics would fall in line, and claims that conservatives were trying to deny women the right to contraceptives because they objected to taxpayers being forced to pay for something that women should pay for themselves at $9 a month or less, would emphasize how conservatives were against women’s health.
Notre Dame’s president Fr. John Jenkins stated firmly:
Many of our faculty, staff and students — both Catholic and non-Catholic — have made conscientious decisions to use contraceptives. As we assert the right to follow our conscience, we respect their right to follow theirs. And we believe that, if the Government wishes to provide such services, means are available that do not compel religious organizations to serve as its agents. We do not seek to impose our religious beliefs on others; we simply ask that the Government not impose its values on the University when those values conflict with our religious teachings. We have engaged in conversations to find a resolution that respects the consciences of all and we will continue to do so.
This filing is about the freedom of a religious organization to live its mission, and its significance goes well beyond any debate about contraceptives. For if we concede that the Government can decide which religious organizations are sufficiently religious to be awarded the freedom to follow the principles that define their mission, then we have begun to walk down a path that ultimately leads to the undermining of those institutions. For if one Presidential Administration can override our religious purpose and use religious organizations to advance policies that undercut our values, then surely another Administration will do the same for another very different set of policies, each time invoking some concept of popular will or the public good, with the result these religious organizations become mere tools for the exercise of government power, morally subservient to the state, and not free from its infringements. If that happens, it will be the end of genuinely religious organizations in all but name.
If this case winds up before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli will have his hands full trying to defend this governmental usurpation of powers.
Filed under: Energy, Environment, Freedom, Humor, Politics | Tags: Real Problems, Small Warnings, The Eco-Police
If you watched the SuperBowl, you may have seen this, but it’s too good to allow it to fade in the memory. Sometimes serious subjects are best dealt with mockery and humor. We have a government intent upon regulating. The old quote from World War II is attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) and is a reminder…
When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews, I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
You are recycling and using twisty lightbulbs aren’t you?
Like this:
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Global Warming | Tags: Exterminating Humanity, Irrationally Green, Up With Dictators
Finnish writer Pentti Linkola is an ecological radical. He demands that the human population of the world reduce its size to around 500 million, abandon modern technology and the pursuit of economic growth. He compares the Earth today to an overflowing lifeboat.
“What to do, when a ship carrying a hundred passengers suddenly capsizes and there is only one lifeboat? When the lifeboat is full, those who hate life will try to load it with more people and sink the lot. Those who love and respect life will take the ship’s axe and sever the extra hands that cling to the sides.”
He believes that the apocalyptic climactic changes that will soon effect us here in humanity land but he chooses to be brutally honest and says that we’ve already missed our chance to curb the damage to the world, so we must begin the elimination of human and technological excesses now.
“A minority can never have any other effective means to influence the course of matters but through the use of violence.”
“Any dictatorship would be better than modern democracy. There cannot be so incompetent dictator, that he would show more stupidity than a majority of the people. Best dictatorship would be one where lots of heads would roll and government would prevent any economical growth.”
“We will have to…learn from the history of revolutionary movements — the national socialists, the Finnish Stalinists, from the many stages of the Russian revolution, from the methods of the Red Brigades — and forget our narcissistic selves.”
“Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed.”
“If the present amount of Earth’s population is preserved and is reduced only by the means of birth control, then:
Birthgiving must be licensed. To enhance population quality, genetically or socially unfit homes will be denied offspring, so that several birth licenses can be allowed to families of quality.
Energy production must be drastically reduced. Electricity is allowed only for the most necessary lighting and communications.
This man is clearly a lot more worried about global warming than I am, but there are those who go even further. Back to the Pleistocene! He sees America as the root of the problem:
The United States symbolizes the worst ideologies in the world: growth and freedom.
He has called for “some trans-national body like the U.N. ” to reduce the population via nuclear weapons or with bacteriological and chemical attacks.” Ecologists of this stripe have so glorified “nature” that they become freedom-hating authoritarians, who want control over their fellow humans. They cannot grasp that humans are a natural product of nature and a part of it. They have no interest in meeting the challenges of life on earth, but want government central planning and humans obediently to fall in line.
So he’s a nutcase, but he is not alone. I wonder how many of them inhabit the corridors of the EPA He celebrates, on his website, the Earth Liberation Front, the German Ecofascist Movement, Thomas Malthus and the Unabomber Manifesto. And he has a following.— hopefully very small. But these apocalyptic authoritarians keep popping up, you can probably name several of them.
There are, however, a number of authors who argue openly that democracy itself is the true obstacle and needs to be abandoned. We need to be aware of the nature of the opposition.
Filed under: Europe, Freedom, Heartwarming, History, Military, National Security, The United States | Tags: General Mark Welsh III, U.S Military, U.S. Air Force Academy
If you can manage the time tonight, watch this speech by General Mark Welsh III, Commander U.S. Air Forces Europe, speaking to the cadets at the Air Force Academy last November. You will quickly see why he is such a respected leader, and the speech is moving, inspiring, and worth every minute of your time.
This week, General Mark Welsh III was nominated to be the next chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force. By all accounts, General Welsh is perhaps the most respected leader in the Air Force today, and for months both active and retired Air Force personnel were rooting for him to occupy the top slot. Currently serving as Commander, U.S. Air Forces Europe, Welsh will take over a service whose mission is more vital than ever, but one that has flown through lots of turbulence in recent years, from severe budget cuts to program mismanagement and security failures. It would be hard to find an American military leader as inspiring as General Welsh, now that David Petraeus has retired, and the Air Force will have a formidable leader in the coming years.
Like this:
Filed under: Education, Freedom, Law, News of the Weird | Tags: Bureaucratic Control, Massachusetts, School Bake Sales
Common sense triumphs. Massachusetts state lawmakers overturned the ban on school bake sales. The controversial ban’s guidelines also prohibited pizza, white bread and 2 percent milk. Legislators heard plenty from outraged parents.
The theory is an “epidemic” of childhood obesity is threatening the lives of the country’s youngest generation —and that government bureaucrats must decide what foods children should eat and when. Hardly a day goes by without a new article about some bureaucrats somewhere telling people how to live their lives, or parents how to raise their children.
Like this:
Filed under: Domestic Policy, Economy, Freedom, Law, Statism, Taxes | Tags: Compulsive DoGooders, Opposed to Liberty, Regulation and Red Tape
The Stamp Act of 1765 was a was a tax that the British Parliament imposed on their colonies in British America. Printed materials such as magazines, legal documents, newspapers had to be produced on stamped paper made in London that carried an embossed revenue stamp. The tax had to be paid in valid British currency, not in Colonial paper money, and its purpose was to help pay for the British troops stationed in America.
The British government thought that the colonies were the prime beneficiaries of the military presence and should pay at least a portion of the expense. It was a last-straw of sorts, and both colonists and British Parliament got their respective backs up. Protests, opposition, even from British merchants and manufacturers. The Act was repealed, but Parliament emphasized their power in a series of new taxes and regulations also opposed by the colonists. Well, we know where that led.
Massachusetts, unfamiliar with their own history, has decided to outlaw school bake sales. Out with the cupcakes and cookies. No selling tasty goodies to make a bit of money for the benefit of the kids. Some bureaucrat thinks there are too many calories. No holiday parties, no celebrations, no door-to-door candy sales, and no goodies at football games. Parents are angry.
New York City’s Nanny Bloomberg has ordered homeless shelters to refuse any donated food that isn’t nutritionally “assessed.” He would rather see the homeless go hungry than eat officially unapproved food. City hall says that it cannot analyze food that organizations have been donating for years, so the shelters must turn the food away. A new document from the bureaucracy dictates serving sized, salt, fat and calorie limits, fiber minimums and condiment recommendations. Many of the city’s churches and synagogues would drop off freshly cooked surplus food from church events.
Bloomberg has already banned smoking in all commercial locales and the serving of trans fats in all city restaurants — though no one has found trans fats unhealthy.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has been tasked with devising stricter regulation of appliance labels. The agency intends to prohibit manufacturers from hanging yellow EnergyGuide labels from clothes washers, dishwashers and refrigerators. Instead adhesive labels will be required. The labels must be attached by the manufacturer, be easily removable with just water, but of significant adhesive so they will stick until the purchases removes them (size, adhesiveness, paper weight, and peel adhesion capacity are all specified). They haven’t decided whether to require “QR” codes that can be read by a smartphone.
This is all because the Government Accountability Office conducted surveillance at 30 stores in 2007, and 26% of the products had no EnergyGuide label. I believe I have read elsewhere that the EnergyGuide labels are largely hooey, but the labels must be there. U.S. Customs and Border Protection are proposing to turn away imports of any consumer products and industrial equipment that do not have the proper labeling.
Governor Christine Gregoire (D-WA) has decided that physicians should be required to prescribe generic drugs, and if they wanted to prescribe brand name drugs would have to go through a lengthy procedure to get permission.She does, I believe, have a law degree — she was Attorney General before winning the governor’s office, but as far as I know, no medical training whatsoever.
Liberals do these things for your own good, you see. They know what is best. They don’t think you are very smart or you would be doing these good things for yourself. It’s compulsive. When they give you all the good things that they bestow in order to win your vote, those things cost money. So in order to cut costs, they have to force you to follow their guidelines.
If you look at Obama’s “Life of Julia” and consider all the “beneficial things” that Obama has done for Julia in that light, Julia’s life doesn’t look quite so attractive — if you found it attractive in any way. If Julia doesn’t take advantage of the good works, you can bet that some bureaucrat will see that she does.
Democrats are perpetually discontented. They don’t like things the way they are, they want something different. They form their committees and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) so they have a larger voice in order to try to fix everything according to their lights. Liberty is not on their agenda. For Obama, leaving the individual citizen alone —without government help —is inconceivable. Yet this is a deep misunderstanding of the American people. America was founded by people trying to escape government regulation and government interference in their lives. We are a people hostile to committees and bureaus and bureaucrats.
The first thing a bunch of Democrats do is form a committee.
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Election 2012, Freedom, Taxes, The United States | Tags: Explaining Taxes, It's Not the Government's Money, Taking Has Consequences
Keith Hennessey made an important point about taxes last week. “The government doesn’t give tax cuts, it takes more or less taxes.” The president spoke to a number of college crowds in favor of raising taxes on the rich to subsidize low interest rates on student loans. The President said:
How can we want to maintain tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans who don’t need them and weren’t even asking for them? I don’t need one. I needed help back when I was your age. I don’t need help now. (Applause) I don’t need an extra thousand dollars or a few thousand dollars. You do.
“Let’s assume,” Hennessey says “that you agree with the President — that a college student has a greater need for an extra thousand dollars than a rich person. By itself that judgment does not mean that raising taxes on the rich to further subsidize student loans is good policy. To make a balanced decision you also need to incorporate the harm done by taking money from someone, a factor the President’s quote ignores because it treats tax cuts as given rather than taxes as taken.” (emphasis added)
The language the President uses assumes that it is the government’s money in the first place and the government can decide whether to give it to college graduates to pay for their student loans or to give it to rich people. If we agree with this logic, then because the new graduates have greater need, government should give them the money. In this assumption, the money belongs to the government, so the government should distribute those funds according to need — then the government gives tax cuts to people only when government officials decide that these people need them.
What is ignored here is that the government only gets their government money by taking it from someone. And taking has consequences. It harms the person from whom the government took the money, and it weakens incentives to work and invest. The President’s vocabulary is full on “giving tax cuts” or “give tax cuts”.” Hennessey queried whitehouse.gov for that terminology and turned up 248 hits.
The President’s language puts us on a slippery slope. If we treat all tax revenues as if they originate within the government, then we create a moral parity between giving tax cuts and increasing government spending. That means we trust government officials to reallocate society’s resources to those whom they decide have the most need while ignoring the harm done by the taking. By ignoring the harm done by taking we set no limiting principle on the government’s ability to take that which we earn and own and give it to others. We make the rich pay more because they have greater ability to pay and less need. Sound familiar?
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
(Karl Marx (Critique of the Gotha Program 1875)
A mark of successful and efficient government is not how much they spend, but how little they take of their citizens’ money. It isn’t the government’s money.
The government has not been successful nor efficient. The government caused an enormous loss of the wealth of their citizens. Instead of creating a business climate that made it easier for businesses to invest and hire, they did a lot more taking. And they invested their takings in brand new programs that the people didn’t want.
