Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Economics, Economy, Free Markets, History, Law, Politics, Regulation, Taxes, The United States | Tags: Preidential Election 1972, Senator George McGovern, The Wall Street Journal
A little history: George McGovern was a Senator from South Dakota. After college, he became a bomber pilot in the Air Force in World War II, then got a PhD in History and became a professor. In 1957 he became a U.S. Congressman, and then a Senator in 1967. He ran a grassroots campaign for the presidency in 1972, and lost in the biggest landslide in history, winning only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. He retired from the Senate in 1981 after a long and distinguished career.
He spent several years on public lectures around the world, for he was an expert in world food problems, and in 1988, invested most of the earnings from the lecture circuit acquiring the leasehold on Connecticut’s Stratford Inn. He had always been fascinated with Inns, hotels and restaurants, and it was “the realization of a lifelong dream to own an Inn with a restaurant and public conference facility, complete with an experienced manager and staff.”
He promptly went bankrupt, and in 1992 he wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal, headed with a quotation from Justice Felix Frankfurter:
Wisdom too often never comes, and so one ought
not to reject it merely because it comes late.
In retrospect, I wish I had known more about the hazards and difficulties of such a business, especially during a recession of the kind that hit New England just as I was acquiring the inn’s 43-year leasehold. I also wish that during the years I was in public office, I had had this firsthand experience about the difficulties business people face every day. That knowledge would have made me a better U.S. senator and a more understanding presidential contender.
Today we are much closer to a general acknowledgment that government must encourage business to expand and grow. Bill Clinton, Paul Tsongas, Bob Kerrey and others have, I believe, changed the debate of our party. We intuitively know that to create job opportunities we need entrepreneurs who will risk their capital against an expected payoff. Too often, however, public policy does not consider whether we are choking off those opportunities.
My own business perspective has been limited to that small hotel and restaurant in Stratford, Conn., with an especially difficult lease and a severe recession. But my business associates and I also lived with federal, state and local rules that were all passed with the objective of helping employees, protecting the environment, raising tax dollars for schools, protecting our customers from fire hazards, etc. While I never have doubted the worthiness of any of these goals, the concept that most often eludes legislators is: “Can we make consumers pay the higher prices for the increased operating costs that accompany public regulation and government reporting requirements with reams of red tape.” It is a simple concern that is nonetheless often ignored by legislators.
The article was truly notable, for it was a pretty big admission from a devout liberal that legislators didn’t have a clue about business. “One-size-fits-all” rules ignore the reality of the marketplace, and the thresholds they set for ‘regulatory guidelines’ don’t fit the reality of how business works.
Congressional Democrats may have had a few moments of reconsideration, but they quickly went right back to their comfortable, traditional way of despising business and businessmen and trying to extract more taxes from the affluent in order to make everything more equal and more “fair.”
Senator McGovern died in 2012 at the age of 90.
Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Free Markets, Freedom, Politics, The United States | Tags: Americans Don't Hate the Rich, Income Inequality, Redistribution of Income
How do you make an economy grow and prosper? An constant theme among the Democrats focuses on dividing up existing wealth. They are quite sure that affluent Americans have reached their wealthy state at the expense of the poor and the middle class. Their solution is to take the excess wealth from the rich and give it to the poor in the form of government grants of one sort or another.
The important point is that there is no growth nor prosperity in their plan. Bernie Sanders can promise free college for all which he intends to accomplish by taking more money from the rich, whether in much higher taxes on their income or some kind of direct grab of their untaxed wealth in offshore shelters or wherever they are hiding it.
The problem is that the Democrats are far more interested in “equality” than they are in creating wealth. They really don’t understand how wealth is created, they are much more caught up in class envy. A constant theme of the current Democratic presidential race has been income inequality, with a belief that America’s rich have reached their status at the expense of the poor and the middle class. Perhaps they always think of wealth as a pie, divided into servings, and the rich get the big pieces so there is little left for the poor.
They are big on “diversity” so they are currently intent on moving poor minorities into well-to-do suburban neighborhoods. Every neighborhood should be diverse, no more black neighborhoods or ethnic neighborhoods. My German ancestors came to Germantown in Pennsylvania when they arrived in America. Human beings are tribal, and want to live with people who are like themselves, and speak the same language, and eat the same kind of food, celebrate the same holidays — it’s natural, and happened with most ethnic groups who immigrated.
How do you create wealth? New small businesses start and gradually grow into big businesses, not all of them of course — but all big businesses once started as little businesses.
And those small businesses began with an idea. How do you generate ideas? Some of them start with irritation with a tool, for example, when someone is frustrated with a tool that does not accomplish the desired task, and they just figure there must be a better way. For most, it stops there because they have no idea how to turn their idea into a business. Those who create a business don’t necessarily have knowledge of how to successfully run a business. And how to run a business is divided up into many different skill sets.
All those inventions that have changed the world — think of how Edison’s little lightbulb changed life all across the world, and all the millions of other inventions and businesses that have derived from cheap, dependable light— when the sun goes down.
It’s autonomy — the quality or state of being independent, free and self directing. The capacity of a rational individual to make an informed, uncoerced decision. Why do the Democrats hate freedom so much?
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Domestic Policy, History, Military, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, The United States, Women | Tags: Representative Duncan Hunter, Representative Ryan Zinke, Women in the Military
Since the Department of Defense has declared women are to have access to all combat roles. Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Marine Corps veteran, and Rep. Ryan Zinke, a retired Navy SEAL commander have introduced a bill in the House to include women in the draft. The act would require women between the ages of 18 and 26 to register for the draft just 90 days after Secretary Ash Carter tells Congress that all military jobs are now open to women who qualify.
Hunter believes that allowing women in all combat roles is irresponsible, especially after the Marine Corps has strenuously objected as has the special operations community, and he might even vote against it as it moves through the annual defense operations process. Rep. Zinke agreed that women can play an invaluable role in war. His daughter was a Navy Diver, and women can gain access to strategic sites that men could not. But front-line combat positions are dangerous.
There are many roles where women are well suited, but the Administration’s plan to force all front-line combat positions and Special Forces roles to integrate women into their units is dangerous and reckless. The advice from the military comes from the people who have been in combat on the front lines and know what is involved. The Administration is once again substituting political correctness for common sense, and its own unfamiliarity with things military.
At a Senate Committee on Armed Services hearing this week Marine General Robert Neller and Army General Mark Milley both stated that if the restrictions on women in combat positions is lifted, than all eligible and qualified men and women should register for the draft.
Filed under: Cool Site of the Day, Freedom, Health Care, Heartwarming, Israel, Science/Technology, The United States | Tags: Dr Homayoon Kazerooni, Steven Sanchez, suitX exoskeleton
A California robotics company called suitX has presented it’s Phoenix exoskeleton to the public. It makes it possible for paraplegics and those with mobility disorders to regain their ability to walk, which is a priceless blessing. It is not the first exoskeleton, which was developed in Israel, but it is the most affordable so far, at about the price of a new Cadillac.
SuitX is led by Dr. Homayoon Kazerooni, who is director of the Berkley Robotics and Human Engineering Laboratory and co-founder and chief scientist of Ekso Bionics. Dr. Kazerooni and his team are driven by a dream of developing low-cost consumer bionic products to improve the quality of life for the disabled. To achieve their goal of keeping the robotics as affordable as possible the team worked with biomechanics instead of the bulky robotics used in the other exoskeletons available so far. One of their prime goals is to help children affected by neurological conditions like cerebral palsy and spina bifida, during the brief time in development when they perfect their walking skills.
The current Phoenix totals around 28 pounds. It consists of modules made for a person’s hips, knees and feet — each can be independently removed and adjusted to the individual’s exact size. A back-mounted battery pack provides power for eight hours of intermittent use or four hours of continuous use.The Phoenix can move a paralyzed person at a speed of 1.1 miles an hour, the company said.
Steven Sanchez was a former BMX dirt bike rider who became mostly paralyzed by a sports injury. He’s now one of the biggest proponents of the Phoenix. “It feels like you’re actually walking,”
The exoskeleton has silent carbon-fiber orthotics capable of being customized to its wearer. Attached to the orthotics are small motors that provide mobility to the hips and legs. Crutches provide upper body support and are integrated into the orthotics, allowing the wearer to control the movement of each leg with the touch of a button. A built-in back-mounted battery pack provides the wearer with 8 hours of intermittent or 4 hours of continual use.
Weighing around 27 pounds, the Phoenix is not the lightest exoskeleton on the market, but it is comparatively lighter than competing suits such as the more cumbersome 50 pound ReWalk.
While still costlier than a motorized wheelchair, the minimal design translates into a lower-cost exoskeleton; the Phoenix costs just $40,000 in a market where prices range from $70,000 to $100,000.
Dr. Kazerooni is more interested in cleverness. He says you can buy a motorcycle with all sorts of technology for $10,000, so he’s hoping to reduce the cost even more within two or three years— something robust and simple that walks, stops. sits and stands — hugely enabling.
Steven Sanchez tests the product monthly and demonstrates the product all over the world. He wore the Phoenix on a trip to the Vatican, and stood in line like anyone else — “wearing an “awesome robotic suit” and “no one cared.” For those who can only dream of walking, that is a very big deal indeed.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Crime, Democrat Corruption, Foreign Policy, Intelligence, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: Disguise / Conceal, Obfuscate / Muddle, Obscure / Hide
“There is nothing here. It’s a little bit like what the Republicans and others have tried to do with respect to Benghazi.”
“Rules should change to keep people from doing what I did with my emails.”
“I didn’t generate any ‘top secret’ e-mails.”
“None of the e-mails were labeled “classified”
“Nothing was marked ‘classified'”
“No classified material was ever sent over my private server”.
“She had never stored classified documents or transmitted them via her private server.”
“Her campaign smeared Inspector General McCullough as a ‘partisan'”.
(he was an Obama appointee.)
“I did not send or receive anything that was classified at the time.”
“I have never received anything marked ‘classified.'”
“A silly inter-agency food-fight about over-classification.”
“She did not ‘originate’ the offending documents.”
“She wants all of her top secret documets released for the public to judge.”
“When you receive information, of course there has to be some markings, some indication, that someone down the line had thought that this was classified, and that was not the case.”
“Well, It was allowed then!”
“She compared her situation to someone driving the speed limit, but then being ticketed retroactively after the speed limit was lowered for something that wasn’t speeding at the time.”
ADDENDUM: 2/05/2016, New Hampshire
We’ve got this absurd situation of retroactive classification” Added that she was “100% sure the FBI would exonerate her.”
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Crime, Free Markets, Freedom, National Security, The United States | Tags: Donald Trump, Luis Gutierrez D-IL, SEIU
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is joining with several Latino organizations who advocate for illegal Latino immigrants, and activist House Democrat Luis Gutierrez , D-Ill., to get as many of the 5 million Latino residents naturalized and registered to vote as possible before Election Day in November.
Gutierrez, long a radical socialist, is capitalizing on the anti-immigrant rhetoric from Republican presidential candidates. He wants them to get angry, particularly over the remarks of real estate mogul Donald Trump. SEIU’s campaign slogan is “Naturalize. Register. Vote.”
Gutierrez expects to travel across the country to attend as many of the nearly 100 naturalization seminars with iAmerica Action, Latino Victory Foundation, Mi Famila Vota, National Partnership for New Americans, and the SEIU. He’ll be starting in his hometown of Chicago and plans speeches in states with significant Latino populations like Colorado, Florida and Nevada. He’s hoping to turn 5 million Latino immigrants into voters by getting them to “stand up to hate.”
That’s an effective rabble-rousing message, but the republican message is not “hate,” but anger at the administration over executive actions that set aside the laws of the United States, order Border Patrol to stand down, ignore the millions of legal immigrants waiting in line — in favor of those who cross the border illegally and demand public services to which they are not entitled, and whose nationality and loyalties cannot be determined. But Trump’s rhetoric is ripe for twisting.
The groups cannot make the naturalization process any faster, but the campaign is aimed at making sure that those who are legal permanent residents trade in their green cards for citizenship. According to some sources, many Latin American immigrants simply want to work here and send money back home, but are not really interested in citizenship. I don’t know to what extent that is true, but many believe that Obama’s lax immigration policies are aimed at changing the nature and numbers of voters.
They will also launch a digital campaign, beginning with a website for the New American Democracy Campaign, which strives to “remove the barriers that keep eligible immigrants from naturalizing, increase naturalization and mobilize voters by creating the first-ever voter registration program for naturalized citizens and for the U.S.-citizen children of immigrants.”
The site, which points visitors to events in their areas, states that the campaign launched because “xenophobic and anti-immigrant rhetoric has inundated the presidential campaign trail” and therefore, “we must empower the immigrant community so that their voices may be heard at the polls.”
Obama’s plan to “fundamentally change the United States of America” has always been about making permanent— Democrat control of the reins of government — not of doing anything to improve the country, which should be clear by now.
It’s just about power and control.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Crime, Domestic Policy, Intelligence, Law, National Security, The United States | Tags: "The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy", Carly Fioriana, Hillary Clinton
Carly Fiorina, if you remember, did so well in the “undercard” debates that she moved up into the main debate — two debates ago — and she did well, though she remarked that people were just getting to know her, which was true. At that point, she ceased to exist. She appeared as an effective candidate, and I thought she seemed a potential Margaret Thatcher, and wanted to know more about her.
But she disappeared from public notice. She was busy campaigning, and appeared on some radio shows, notably Hugh Hewitt’s, but there was not a mention of her in the mainstream media. With no buzz about her candidacy, she became invisible. The media had apparently determined that since Hillary was running as “the first woman.” she did not need any female competition, particularly competition from someone so competent that she made Hillary look bad, and not only that, but who expressed her eagerness to debate Hillary.
That’s what the left-leaning press does. Invisible and with no mention in the press, interest waned, and it was back to the undercard debate. That’s the media exerting their influence over the outcome of an election. The Trump attention evolved into overkill, and people realized what was going on.
Hillary, they say, is the most qualified candidate in the campaign. Depends on what you mean by “qualified.” She has had a number of important titles, but a singular lack of specific accomplishment in any of the occupations. Her jobs have been a succession of scandals from Whitewater to Benghazi to jeopardizing national security and the lives of the people who make our nation secure — with an attempt to hide all of her correspondence from public view. Why? No one knows.