http://www.brucespringsteen.net/news/index.html
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The Ever-Quotable P.J. O'Rourke
"The free market is not an ideology or a creed or something we're supposed to take on faith, it's a measurement. It's a bathroom scale. I may hate what I see when I step on the bathroom scale, but I can't pass a law saying I weigh 160 pounds. Authoritarian governments think they can pass that law—a law to change the measurement of things."
More here.
Mark Perry follows this up with a note on the minimum wage:
Exhibit A: The minimum wage law. A teenager with no work experience steps on a "bathroom scale" that accurately and truthfully measures the market value of unskilled labor, and the scale says "$5.00 per hour." Politicians pass minimum wage legislation to rig the "bathroom scale" of labor value to instead produce an inaccurate, false inflated reading of "$7.25 per hour." And they then seem puzzled that more than one out of every four teenagers who is looking for a job is unable to find one, but that's what happens when you "rig" the "bathroom scale."
(h/t: Mark Perry)
More here.
Mark Perry follows this up with a note on the minimum wage:
Exhibit A: The minimum wage law. A teenager with no work experience steps on a "bathroom scale" that accurately and truthfully measures the market value of unskilled labor, and the scale says "$5.00 per hour." Politicians pass minimum wage legislation to rig the "bathroom scale" of labor value to instead produce an inaccurate, false inflated reading of "$7.25 per hour." And they then seem puzzled that more than one out of every four teenagers who is looking for a job is unable to find one, but that's what happens when you "rig" the "bathroom scale."
(h/t: Mark Perry)
Thursday, August 19, 2010
A few thoughts on President Obama and this whole Ground Zero Mosque fiasco
The day was January 14th, 1980 and William F Buckley - at a taping for his program, Firing Line - asked President-elect Ronald Wilson Reagan the pointed question, "I should like to begin by asking President Reagan: What would you do if, say, one afternoon you were advised that a race riot had broken out in Detroit?" Reagan, after a brief pause, replied, "Well, I would be inclined to say that that was a problem for the local authorities in Detroit, unless those local authorities were unable to control the situation."
This is a request to President Barack Obama.
Dear President Obama,
I understand that you are in a bit of hot water again. This time it is due to your comments supporting the "Ground Zero" mosque. I will dispense with any positions I may have on this issue as I believe them to be moot in relation to the office you hold (and the office I seek). But, let me say this, read the above statement by former president Reagan and take it as a "teachable moment". You seem to be a man of many opinions, which, I can't say I blame you - I too suffer from the weight of many an opinion. But, perhaps you should understand that your job, or role, as president is a Federal one. Your duties are restricted by the Constitution to the Federal government, not the individual states.
Now, I understand that the Federal government has its fingers in many state matters and thus the line is so blurred that we cannot comprehend the difference. But, be that as it may, perhaps you should take the same route which Reagan chose. I know that your comments about the arrest of Henry Gates last year gave you a bit of flack and resulted in the ridiculous "Beer Summit". I thought you would have learned a lesson with that episode in your presidency but apparently you have not.
This "Ground Zero" mosque melee is ultimately a local and/or state issue. As many Americans were affected by the horrific events of that day, a nation such as ours was founded upon the rights of private property and, in the issue of this current case, is currently handled (at best I might add) by the local and/or state authorities.
The next time a reporter, or anyone else for that matter, inquires about your opinion on a particular matter in which you ultimately have no jurisdiction over, perhaps you should reply that said matter is one for the local and state authorities. Besides, I'm sure you have another game of golf which is a far more pressing issue. ;)
This is a request to President Barack Obama.
Dear President Obama,
I understand that you are in a bit of hot water again. This time it is due to your comments supporting the "Ground Zero" mosque. I will dispense with any positions I may have on this issue as I believe them to be moot in relation to the office you hold (and the office I seek). But, let me say this, read the above statement by former president Reagan and take it as a "teachable moment". You seem to be a man of many opinions, which, I can't say I blame you - I too suffer from the weight of many an opinion. But, perhaps you should understand that your job, or role, as president is a Federal one. Your duties are restricted by the Constitution to the Federal government, not the individual states.
Now, I understand that the Federal government has its fingers in many state matters and thus the line is so blurred that we cannot comprehend the difference. But, be that as it may, perhaps you should take the same route which Reagan chose. I know that your comments about the arrest of Henry Gates last year gave you a bit of flack and resulted in the ridiculous "Beer Summit". I thought you would have learned a lesson with that episode in your presidency but apparently you have not.
This "Ground Zero" mosque melee is ultimately a local and/or state issue. As many Americans were affected by the horrific events of that day, a nation such as ours was founded upon the rights of private property and, in the issue of this current case, is currently handled (at best I might add) by the local and/or state authorities.
The next time a reporter, or anyone else for that matter, inquires about your opinion on a particular matter in which you ultimately have no jurisdiction over, perhaps you should reply that said matter is one for the local and state authorities. Besides, I'm sure you have another game of golf which is a far more pressing issue. ;)
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Who's Reviving Who's Economy?
In all due respect to those candidates in attendance. Politicians don't revive the economy, the people do. Let loose the chains that bind us and you will see real growth.
Read more here.
Read more here.
When Enough is Enough
At recent events I've had people come up to me and express their frustration with their elected representatives. They often speak out of regret for having voted for this official or that. They ask me what they can do about this. Often I am perplexed as I try to find an answer to their dilemma.
I often think of life as a system of trade-offs. You may decide to buy the car with a larger engine because of the feel of the acceleration yet you accept the trade-off of getting fewer miles to the gallon. You may decide to send your child to a certain private college in spite of the costs to you as a parent. That decision may prevent you from taking a vacation overseas, or buying that V8 Mustang, or going to see Springsteen as many times as you can in as many cities possible but you make that choice because the trade-off is more important to you and more in line with your values.
The same could be said of the choices we make when voting for our elected officials. Some may view the fiscal or economic issues as being more critical and thus may be willing to overlook the drawbacks or cons that come with a certain candidate. On the other hand, some may consider social issues such as gay rights, abortion, the war on drugs, etc. to be of more importance that any fiscal or economic issues.
What I would propose is we get back to what is the foundation of our Republic, our Constitution. If we ever need to consider whether or not to support an incumbent in their bid for re-election I suggest we look at their voting record. If, at any time whatsoever, they have voted in support of legislation which violates our constitution then they have violated the oath the swore when they took office and should not be re-elected.
If the candidate has not served in office, then perhaps we should evaluate their positions to see if they, in any way, violate and infringe on the Constitution then they should not receive a single vote.
There it is. Our decision may not be easy, but it is simple. If we as the people of this great Republic ever want to reclaim this land back from the Republicans and Democrats we must hold them accountable to the Constitution. At the end of the day, it is all we have left that preserves our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or property, as it was originally written and is in the way I prefer).
I often think of life as a system of trade-offs. You may decide to buy the car with a larger engine because of the feel of the acceleration yet you accept the trade-off of getting fewer miles to the gallon. You may decide to send your child to a certain private college in spite of the costs to you as a parent. That decision may prevent you from taking a vacation overseas, or buying that V8 Mustang, or going to see Springsteen as many times as you can in as many cities possible but you make that choice because the trade-off is more important to you and more in line with your values.
The same could be said of the choices we make when voting for our elected officials. Some may view the fiscal or economic issues as being more critical and thus may be willing to overlook the drawbacks or cons that come with a certain candidate. On the other hand, some may consider social issues such as gay rights, abortion, the war on drugs, etc. to be of more importance that any fiscal or economic issues.
What I would propose is we get back to what is the foundation of our Republic, our Constitution. If we ever need to consider whether or not to support an incumbent in their bid for re-election I suggest we look at their voting record. If, at any time whatsoever, they have voted in support of legislation which violates our constitution then they have violated the oath the swore when they took office and should not be re-elected.
If the candidate has not served in office, then perhaps we should evaluate their positions to see if they, in any way, violate and infringe on the Constitution then they should not receive a single vote.
There it is. Our decision may not be easy, but it is simple. If we as the people of this great Republic ever want to reclaim this land back from the Republicans and Democrats we must hold them accountable to the Constitution. At the end of the day, it is all we have left that preserves our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or property, as it was originally written and is in the way I prefer).
Monday, August 9, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010
It's Come to This...
If this does not convince people of the lunacy that is our out-of-control government I don't know what will.
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/portland_lemonade_stand_runs_i.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/portland_lemonade_stand_runs_i.html
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
National Night Out
An open letter to those I met tonight (and all others in my district).
Thank you for allowing me visit with, and meet all of you. I wish I could have sampled some of your food but between the heat and biking around it would not have been a good idea. :)
I wish I could have spent more time talking to you but I had a narrow window to make my rounds. But, I would like to thank you for showing me the respect you displayed with me. I know Republicans are not that popular in this district and it means to world to me when people show genuine kindness and respect towards those they disagree with, especially me. :)
I would be proud to represent all of you - Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, or Independent.
Thank you for allowing me visit with, and meet all of you. I wish I could have sampled some of your food but between the heat and biking around it would not have been a good idea. :)
I wish I could have spent more time talking to you but I had a narrow window to make my rounds. But, I would like to thank you for showing me the respect you displayed with me. I know Republicans are not that popular in this district and it means to world to me when people show genuine kindness and respect towards those they disagree with, especially me. :)
I would be proud to represent all of you - Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, or Independent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)