Tag Archives: Big Government

Videos

Michele Bachmann promises to work to repeal Obamacare

7 Comments

According to a Bloomberg national poll, the majority of Americans are as depressed as I am about the direction that the country is going in. And I think that that the health care reform bill is part of the problem.

But Michele Bachmann has a plan.

First, she doesn’t sugar-coat the problem.

Second, she has a plan to solve the problem.

Last week was very depressing for me… but she gives me hope.

Michele Bachmann has a book that I have

By the way, check out he bookshelf that appears behind her in the second video. I can make out War Footing, published by the Naval Institute Press, on the left side of the bottom shelf. I have that book in my office shelf at work.

Details:

America has been at war for years, but until now, it has not been clear with whom or precisely for what. And we have not been using the full resources we need to win.

With the publication of War Footing, lead-authored by Frank Gaffney, it not only becomes clear who the enemy is and how high the stakes are, but also exactly how we can prevail.

War Footing shows that we are engaged in nothing less than a War for the Free World. This is a fight to the death with Islamofascists, Muslim extremists driven by a totalitarian political ideology that, like Nazism or Communism before it, is determined to destroy freedom and the people who love it.

Mr. Gaffney and his esteemed colleagues offer ten specific steps that Americans, as individuals and as communities, can take to ensure their way of life and safety and the future well-being of their children and grandchildren. These steps include detailed recommendations about how to:

This book is a highly readable and definitive owners manual for the War for the Free World. Whether we like it or not, every American owns a stake in its outcome. War Footing tells us how we can make sure it comes out right.

Among those who contributed brilliant analyses and commonsense recommendations to War Footing are: R. James Woolsey, Victor Davis Hanson, General Tom McInerney, General Paul Vallely, Alex Alexiev, Andrew McCarthy, Claudia Rosett, Michael Rubin, Daniel Goure, Caroline Glick, and Michael Waller. Their inputs – and those of twenty other contributors – help make this strategy for winning the War for the Free World as readable as it is needed.

If there is one thing I like to see in women other than fiscal conservatism, it’s foreign policy conservatism. War is often the only way to stop tyranny and bloodshed in countries. The world is not a happy-clappy place. The United States military protects the safety of other nations by just being present, and sometimes even by fighting. We face serious threats. It’s good to see that Michele is at least aware of what is going on in the world. I think that most people who are anti-war really haven’t read anything about the way the world really is.

Mentoring

The Wintery Knight’s greatest fears about the future

50 Comments

I was asked recently to explain some of the big fears I have about the future, and I wrote a horrible paranoid screed that probably has scared her away from me for good. So, I thought I would re-write it in a more organized and sensible way.

So, I basically don’t have too many fears about the future as a single guy. I have economic fears about the future, but since I’m a good saver and having been saving all these years, I’m not worried about taking care of me because I’ve got the money to do that. And I don’t think things will get too bad before I die. Basically my fears for myself alone are because young people are being neglected by their working parents, and indoctrinated in the public schools.

Things that public schools teach:

  • taught Darwinism
  • taught sex education
  • taught that capitalism is evil
  • taught global warming alarmism
  • taught anti-Christian views
  • taught religious pluralism
  • taught moral relativism
  • taught postmodernism/skepticism
  • taught that Western civilization is evil
  • taught that America is evil
  • taught that war is never justified
  • taught that traditional marriage is wrong

…not to mention all things they don’t learn that put Christianity, America, capitalism, business, marriage and Western civilization in a positive light. I worry about how they will act and vote and demand entitlements from government to “equalize” their life outcomes after they make self-destructive decisions based on what they learned in school. And many of them are growing up without fathers which brings a whole host of other problems. But I am not too worried about this because I can always pick up and move somewhere else if things get really bad here.

But these fears pale in comparison to my fears about what might happen if I took on marriage and parenting. That’s when things could really go downhill fast, and all the chastity and money in the world won’t save me.

Below I’ll summarize some of the biggest problems:

  • The biggest fear I have about marriage is that my wife will be pressured to abandon the idea that marriage and parenting is about self-sacrificial love of her husband and children in order to please God. That could mean ignoring or not meeting my needs as a man for things like sex and approval. It could also mean just giving up on the children and refusing to protect their worldviews from the outside world, e.g. – the public schools, Hollywood, etc. Maybe she will just become totally disinterested in the threats posed to the children by these enemies? Or undermine my efforts to teach the children theology, apologetics and morality?
  • I am also concerned about increasing encroachment by the state into the education of children. I hear stories about homeschooling being outlawed, about parents not being able to opt children out of anti-Christian educational programs, about children as young as five being put on hate registries for being politically incorrect, and homeschooled children being placed in government-run schools for believing that Christianity is true. My fear is that this trend could get worse to the point where children are seized by the government because they are being taught Biblical Christianity in the home.
  • What if government spends so much money that they end up increasing inflation and raising taxes such that my wife has to go to work, or that I lose my job due to economic decline? Without money, it is almost impossible for us to protect the children from all of the anti-Christian influences we would face. If we took government money or relied on government services (e.g. – health care) then we might even have to comply with government regulations and conditions that would be antithetical to our plans.
  • I am also afraid that I will be charged by something like the Canadian Human Rights Commissions for expressing traditional Christian views in public. In Canada, there is no such thing as free speech. If you cause someone to feel badly with your speech, you will be placed on trial for several years, pay about $100,000 in legal fees, and then you will be convicted, forced to apologize, force to deny your Christian faith in public, and prohibited from speaking freely in any public forum including on web sites or e-mail.
  • I am concerned that government programs that push feminism, no-fault divorce and generally paint men as irresponsible and aggressive could turn my wife against me and cause her to divorce me for the money. I read a lot about divorce courts, fake charges of domestic violence, etc. And I think there is a concerted effort to paint men as being unreliable, aggressive and harmful to children. What if my wife began to believe all of these myths and felt that she could do a better job parenting the children without me? The children would be harmed, I would be penniless and I might never see my children again.
  • Finally, I am worried that she will become less tolerant about my desires to be romantic and chivalrous and just sort of check out of the marriage emotionally. That she will not give me things to do, or dragons to slay, trophies to collect, etc. That she won’t speak to me for long periods of time, or write to me, spend time alone with me. I worry that she will instead become interested in her own interests and causes and forget that I need a romantic relationship with her! I’ll die if I can’t express myself romantically.

So I hope this explains to all a little bit about why I am skeptical about marriage, even if I met a perfect person to marry. I would like to see a lot more work being done by the church to focus on things like fiscal conservatism, small government and politics. As it stands, I am not hearing very much that is re-assuring me that potential Christian wives are as aware about these issues as I am, or that they are prepared to fight them.

When I talk to Christian women, they are usually not aware of any of these concerns, and in fact are quite secular and leftist in their voting. This is very disconcerting to me because it seems like they are not applying their state Christian beliefs to their future plans for marriage and parenting. Instead, they are happily voting for bigger and bigger government and they are oblivious to how this undermines Christian marriage and family.

When I ask them what they have read about these issues, they are usually reading Christian self-help books, devotional literature, theology-lite (Phillip Yancey), emergent church, social justice stuff from the religious left, sensational Dan Brown fiction that undermines the Bible’s authority and makes women appear to be the victims or men, or end-times fiction. Many read things like “Blue Like Jazz” or other mystical craziness. Are there any women out there who read Thomas Sowell and Wayne Grudem and William Lane Craig and Stephen C. Meyer and Craig Evans and Stephen Baskerville and Jennifer Roback Morse? Or even Lee Strobel and C.S. Lewis, for starters?

I think some of these problems might go away if I married someone with the foreign policy views of Marsha Blackburn, the fiscal conservatism of Michele Bachmann, and the social conservatism of Jennifer Roback Morse. But one woman cannot remake the whole world. One woman can’t get taxes lowered, secure school choice, protect religious liberty, and get the government out of the marriage and away from the children.

And it’s not just that there are problems today – it’s tomorrow, too. I am quite surprised at how passionately young people advocate for ideas that undermine their own liberty, prosperity and security. The very things needed to make Christian marriage and Christian parenting work. Can one woman fix the irrationality of the young people who are voting today? I don’t think that one woman can fix everything.

Well, Michele Bachmann can fix everything if we would just vote her in as President, like I want. If we put Michele in charge of the world, then I’ll get married.

Related posts

Commentary

Did George W. Bush’s tax cuts help or hurt the economy?

Leave a comment

From Investor’s Business Daily.

Excerpt:

Data from the end of 2001 to the latest recession bear this out. The economy started expanding again in the fourth quarter of 2001 and grew for 25 consecutive quarters. After enactment of the 2003 tax cut, which lowered the marginal effective tax rate on new investment, gross domestic product surged 7.5% in the third quarter, the fastest pace since 1984. And for 26 straight months unemployment stayed below 5%.

The Bush tax cuts also led to increases in tax revenues, and after 2004 the revenues grew faster than the economy. The ratio of tax receipts to GDP rose to 18.8% in 2007, above the 40-year average, and the deficit was just 1.2% of GDP.

From 2004 to 2008, capital gains realizations grew by 60%; from 2004 to 2007, corporate tax receipts nearly doubled, adding a full point to the revenues-to-GDP ratio.

The Heritage Foundation reported on research by two Harvard economists who published a research paper on this very topic.

Excerpt:

…government spending cannot create economic growth. More government spending, whether financed by taxes or borrowing, only takes money from one sector of the economy and transfers it to another. The government creates no new spending power when it redistributes money so it creates no new economic growth.

As the Heritage Foundation has pointed out, a stimulus package that lowered marginal tax rates instead of spending massive amounts of future generation’s wealth would actually create jobs and help pull the economy out of the Great Recession. That is because lower marginal tax rates would increase the incentives of people and businesses to work, save and invest – the very ingredients needed to create economic activity.

These findings are backed up by a new study, “Large Changes in Fiscal Policy Taxes Versus Spending,” authored by Alberto F. Alesina and Silvia Ardagna – both Harvard economists. Alesina and Ardagna find that:

…tax cuts are more expansionary than spending increases in the cases of fiscal stimulus. Based on these correlations…the current stimulus package in the US is too much tilted in the direction of spending rather than tax cuts.

In addition to their findings that tax cuts are better at promoting economic growth, Alesina and Ardagna found that spending-based stimuli are actually associated with lower economic growth rates.

The problem is that Democrats like Obama don’t know anything about economics, and they don’t care. They know less about economics than my keyboard. In fact that is exactly what being a Democrat means. It means that you know nothing about economics, but prefer to create policy based on feelings, rather than facts. Economics is irrelevant – they just want to be loved. It’s narcissism.

Economics in One Lesson

Perhaps it is time to review Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson, chapter 4, entitled “Public Works Mean Taxes”.

Excerpt:

Therefore, for every public job created by the bridge project a private job has been destroyed somewhere else. We can see the men employed on the bridge. We can watch them at work. The employment argument of the government spenders becomes vivid, and probably for most people convincing. But there are other things that we do not see, because, alas, they have never been permitted to come into existence. They are the jobs destroyed by the $10 million taken from the taxpayers. All that has happened, at best, is that there has been a diversion of jobs because of the project. More bridge builders; fewer automobile workers, television technicians, clothing workers, farmers.

And consider Chapter 5 as well, entitled “Taxes Discourage Production”.

In our modern world there is never the same percentage of income tax levied on everybody. The great burden of income taxes is imposed on a minor percentage of the nation’s income; and these income taxes have to be supplemented by taxes of other kinds. These taxes inevitably affect the actions and incentives of those from whom they are taken. When a corporation loses a hundred cents of every dollar it loses, and is permitted to keep only fifty-two cents of every dollar it gains, and when it cannot adequately offset its years of losses against its years of gains, its policies are affected. It does not expand its operations, or it expands only those attended with a minimum of risk. People who recognize this situation are deterred from starting new enterprises. Thus old employers do not give more employment, or not as much more as they might have; and others decide not to become employers at all. Improved machinery and better-equipped factories come into existence much more slowly than they otherwise would. The result in the long run is that consumers are prevented from getting better and cheaper products to the extent that they otherwise would, and that real wages are held down, compared with what they might have been.

There is a similar effect when personal incomes are taxed 50, 60 or 70 percent. People begin to ask themselves why they should work six, eight or nine months of the entire year for the government, and only six, four or three months for themselves and their families. If they lose the whole dollar when they lose, but can keep only a fraction of it when they win, they decide that it is foolish to take risks with their capital. In addition, the capital available for risk-taking itself shrinks enormously. It is being taxed away before it can be accumulated. In brief, capital to provide new private jobs is first prevented from coming into existence, and the part that does come into existence is then discouraged from starting new enterprises. The government spenders create the very problem of unemployment that they profess to solve.

George W. Bush cut taxes in his first term and created 1 million NEW JOBS. Government spending is a job killer. And no amount of charm and teleprompter reading is going to change the laws of economics.

In fact, you can even see it failing today in Japan: Did massive government spending succeed or fail in Japan?