A Political Junkie Goes to Washington D.C.

Last month Darrin and I travelled to Washington D.C. for an industry association legislative conference.  Normally I'd go by myself, but this was Washington (during an election year!) and I knew I'd want to see the sights with my best friend by my side.  Darrin knew how excited I was about this trip, so he willingly went along.  Big shout out to my parents for taking our kids for a week so we could really enjoy this trip by ourselves!

Highlights of our trip (in no particular order):

1. Arlington National Cemetery, and the tomb of the unknown soldier - breathtaking.

2. Spending a day at the Capital "talking shop" with Congressmen from California.  The Republicans such as Tom McClintock, Dan Lungren, Wally Herger and Jeff Denham welcomed us into their offices and discussed the serious issues facing businesses today.  Other than Jerry McNerny (who probably wished I hadn't come in his office because he didn't like my tough questions regarding his opposition to the Keystone Pipeline), the Democrats didn't bother to meet with us, and instead had their staffers take five minutes in the hallway to discuss our concerns. 

I can't even tell you how much I LOVED talking about the 2012 election with top leaders of the Republican party at the evening social events.  LOVED IT. 

Darrin and I pictured with Congressman Tom McClintock.

3. Darrin sitting in the gallery of the House of Representatives with me for two hours while we watched John Boehner (Speaker of the House, R-Ohio), Eric Cantor (R-Virginia), Nancy Pelosi (D - California) and others debate repeal of the health care law.  Darrin turned to me after watching Pelosi speak and said "How can she just stand up there and LIE like that?!?"  

4. John Boehner and Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) speaking before our association on day two of the conference.

5. A cocktail event where I shook hands with Congressman Darrell Issa (R-California) and thanked him for going after President Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder for the screw up known as Operation Fast & Furious. 

6.  The White House, the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, World War II Memorial, Vietnam Veteran's Memorial, the Supreme Court, the Library of Congress, the tour of the Capital.

7. The Smithsonian Museum of American History.  Seeing the original Stars & Stripes, the top hat Lincoln wore the night he was assassinated, a war boat from the American Revolution, a picture of my little sister's BFF (superstar soccer player) Megan Rapinoe on the wall of contemporary American history. 

8.  Meeting new friends, drinking ouzo and yelling "OPA" while we talked politics. 

9.  Trying to meet Congressman Paul Ryan, but getting turned away by his staffers because I didn't have an appointment - even after I told them he's been my political crush for at least two years.  Imagine that.

10. Five days, immersed in politics, in the place where it all happens.  Surrounded by the action that I read about on a daily basis.  Feeling like I should be doing something there instead of just watching. 

I will go back to Washington D.C. my friends.  It may be just to take the kids when they are old enough to understand the magnitude of our nation's history.  Or it may be to participate in the politics that I love.  Visiting this place gave me a renewed sense of energy that our amazing country will get through these tough times and come out stronger for it. 

But only if we stay engaged and make our voices heard. 

Why I'm Endorsing Mitt Romney

You know that I have been watching this GOP primary season with supreme interest.  I believe Barack Obama needs to be a one term President - and not because I'm racist as the Democrat party would have you believe - but because he's absolutely destroying this country.  You can blame Bush if you want for the mess that Obama inherited (and I don't entirely, but that's a different post) however, President Obama has had three years to turn things around and instead he has our country in a death spiral.

Picture taken from http://www.mittromney.com/

So I've watched the field of GOP candidates closely, trying to determine the candidate I most identify with and the candidate that can earn the votes of the independent voters in the country.  I've gotten excited at times about all the candidates, only to see most of them fizzle out from media scrutiny and the political machine on both sides of the aisle.  Some people believe this primary has been damaging to GOP candidates, but I don't believe that.  We've seen from past elections (and from this primary) that the extreme liberal Democrats will stoop to all levels to damage the credibility of the Republican candidates (cue Gloria Allred and Michael Moore), and some Republican candidates will crash due to their own past stupidity without the help of the Democrats.  With a projected $1 BILLION to spend on his campaign, I have no doubt that Obama will throw everything at the eventual Republican nominee, so I'd rather get it all out in the open now and not deal with any October surprises.

My hope is that we ferret out all these political sound byte issues now, so we can actually focus on the economy and creating jobs in the general election.  

Before I tell you why I'm endorsing Romney, let me tell you why I'm not endorsing the other candidates:

Ron Paul - I actually like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say about our economy.  But the guy is friggin' crazy when it comes to foreign policy.  For example, Ron Paul has no problem letting Iran get nukes, and he thinks our current economic sanctions only anger Iran against us.  Yoo-hoo, earth to Paul, Iran doesn't hate us because of our sanctions, Iran hates us because we are American!  No foreign policy (or lack thereof) is going to make them like us or Israel better.  Even if Iran doesn't want to destroy America, their leadership certainly wants to destroy Israel - and I'm just not sure we'd be okay with a second holocaust.  I hate war too, but sometimes you carry a big stick to prevent war.  Duh.

Newt Gingrich - I love listening to Newt in the debates.  I love how he brilliantly speaks about the issues, isn't afraid to call a spade a spade, and how intelligent he is on ALL of the topics a president needs to know.  The problem is the guy's ego - it gets him into trouble.  And I think that ego would alienate him against moderate voters, which are the very people we need to attract.

Rick Santorum - On the campaign trail, Santorum sounds like a good conservative candidate but I have two problems with him:  1) his voting record, and 2) his ability to get mired in social issues and torn apart by the mainstream media.  When you analyze Santorum's voting record you see he only votes conservatively about 50-75% the time.  Even on the issue of Project Labor Agreements (that require union-only labor on construction projects and discriminate against the 85% of the workforce that chooses not to be union) Santorum voted against a national Right To Work Act, against amendments that supported the rights of merit shop apprenticeship and training programs, and supported bills that discriminated against open shop contractors.  Santorum's voting record is very conservative on social issues, and very middle of the road on economic matters - exactly the OPPOSITE of what the GOP needs to win this election and fix the economy.  

And Santorum showed just how strategically deficient he is on social issues when he allowed himself to become mired in a debate over contraception (and say some really stupid things that disenfranchised women voters) when the debate was actually over religious freedom.  I honestly think the mainstream media would eat Santorum for lunch in a general election.

So that brings us to Mitt Romney.  Like many Republicans, I was slow to get on board with Mitt.  The reason for my hesitation was the lack of passion I saw in the debates and speeches.  I felt like Mitt was plastic, playing it safe, and devoid of the leadership that we really need right now.  I also didn't like what I heard about Romneycare.  But a couple of things happened to change my mind.

Picture taken from http://www.mittromney.com/ 

First, I started learning more about Romney's record as Governor of Massachusetts.  I learned that Romney's version of Romneycare wasn't actually a bad deal until Democrats in the state got a hold of it (and why it IS constitutionally sound when Obamacare is NOT).  Romney took Massachusetts from a deficit of $650M handed to him by the previous governor, to a $2 BILLION rainy day fund four years later, by slashing spending.  And he did that with a Democrat controlled legislature.  The State was 50th in unemployment (meaning it was the worst), but was 12th by the end of Romney's term as Governor.  He also cut taxes 19 times as Governor.  (This was during the boom years of 2003 to 2007, while California was spending all of its extra boom-time revenue and creating ever larger deficits.)  See more about Romney's economic record here.  For some extra (and entertaining!) reading, one of my favorite sarcastic columnists, Ann Coulter, has several articles on Romney's record including Romneycare, Obamacare & Immigration Reform, Romney's time at Bain Capital, Romney's wealth and more.

But the second reason I decided to endorse Mitt Romney, and the final thing that pushed me into his camp, is that I got to see him speak in person.  At my conference in Arizona a few weeks ago, Romney requested to speak before our group of contractors.  From the minute he started speaking I was energized by his passion, his leadership, and his strong ideas on how to turn our country around.  I realized that he possessed the attributes that I thought he had been missing - which made me realize that he wasn't playing it safe in those debates, he was playing it smart.  And smart is what we need to win this election.

Because I live in California, my vote in the general election against Obama won't matter.  But my vote in the GOP primary can make a big difference.  The other candidates can't win against Obama (or even against an assault by the mainstream media) nor are they the candidates that have the potential to revive our economy and get people back to work.  Mitt Romney is that candidate.

If Romney is not the GOP candidate, and Obama wins reelection, I'm just not sure our country will recover.

Crushing On Charles Krauthammer

At my conference in Arizona a couple of weeks ago, one of the guest speakers was Dr. Charles Krauthammer.  He is a conservative columnist whose work I have admired for a long time.  His discussion did not disappoint me, as he is witty and and dynamic in addition to being totally brilliant.

Dr. Krauthammer poses with us after his
presentation (and yes, I've already decided
to get rid of that blouse after seeing this picture!).

This being an election year, his topic was of course the 2012 presidential race.  He made very clear his opinion that if Rick Santorum were to become the GOP candidate against President Obama, not only would Republicans lose the presidential election but we would lose the House and Senate as well.  In his view (and I very much agree), Rick Santorum would be so divisive in the social issues that the emotional appeal and scare tactics used by the Democrats would chase all the independent voters away from Santorum and back towards Obama.  Over the last couple of weeks Santorum has allowed himself to get mired in this "birth control controversy" instead of the "freedom of religion controversy" that we are actually facing, which is totally proving Krauthammer's point.

But the crux of Krauthammer's discussion that day was a poignant synopsis of President Obama's narcissism and the effects it has already had on our country.  Dr. Krauthammer stated that Obama's goal is to make history by fundamentally transforming America.  He planned to do it in three areas, and stated such in one of his early presidential speeches, by changing 1) Healthcare (which comprises 1/6 of our national economy), 2) Energy (if you control energy you control the economy), and 3) Education (which sets the direction for our future).

Because our country was mad about the recession and the wars coming out of the Bush years, President Obama thought he would have carte blanche power to assert his agenda, just as in 1933 when people looked to the President to do whatever it took to get them out of the Great Depression.  But Obama miscalculated.  Americans didn't want fundamental transformation of our country - we wanted him to fix the damn economy!

Instead what we got was Obamacare.  In the history of our country, all other important pieces of legislation that were huge changes in paradigm (like the Civil Rights Act, Social Security) had some bipartisan support.  Obamacare was passed in a crooked way with not even one Republican vote.  And America got pissed, which resulted in the Republican sweep across the country in 2010.  President Obama realized this, and in the past couple of years has been instituting these same type of changes in a more sly fashion - through recess appointments and administrative changes such as new committees or bureaus that make regulations.  These are ways that still implement his agenda, but without the publicity garnered by the Obamacare debacle - which helps when he needs to think about reelection.

Dr. Krauthammer stated it correctly when he said that this election is not just about Republican versus Democrat, it is a debate over the nature of the American social contract - a debate about an individual's relationship with the government.  For several decades we have been operating under the fundamental transformation inspired by President Reagan, who said that Government is not the solution, it is the problem.  Now we have a President who believes Government IS the solution, and wants to impose the will of the Government on the people, when it should really be the other way around.

If Obama is reelected, not only will we be stuck with Obamacare, but he will be unrestrained by not having to worry about reelection.  What you will see is the equivalent of Obamacare in the areas of energy and education.  If he does not have control of the House and the Senate, he will push his agenda through administratively, as we have seen with his non-recess appointments and the actions of the NLRB.

Dr. Krauthammer eloquently put into words the fear that has been gnawing at me regarding this election.  Republicans are accused of disliking President Obama because he is a black man, but that ridiculous assertion could not be further from the truth.  Republicans dislike Obama because he stands for everything that we think is destroying this great country - he is for increasing the people's dependence on the government, he is for government telling the people where their hard earned money should be spent, he is for controlling our lives in the way of energy, healthcare and education.

If we do not change this course in 2012, I'm afraid that President Obama will be successful in his fundamental transformation.  That is an America I do not want to see.

To read more of Dr. Charles Krauthammer's recent columns, check out this link.

What's The Difference Between Me And An OWS Protester?

On my run through the Arizona Biltmore neighborhood yesterday I couldn't help but notice the gigantic houses lining the street.

An Occupy Wall Street protester would look at these houses with their perfectly manicured lush green lawns (in the Arizona dessert!!), the opulent copper gutters and sculptures, the beautiful architecture and sizable lots and think "These people should be paying more in taxes to be fair to people who don't have such amenities!"

I look at these houses and think, "How blessed are we to live in a country where people can work hard, create jobs for other people, succeed in business and be rewarded for their efforts? And how can I earn such success for my family?"

I'm so tired of hearing the class warfare buzzwords of "Fair Share" when:

• Over 49% of the country pays zero dollars in taxes,  
• The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay over 70% of all federal income taxes, 
• There are current examples of how raising taxes reduces overall tax revenue, 
• If we taxed 100% of the earnings of all the "rich" (people making over $250,000 per year), it would only raise $900B annually, when our government adds $1.6T in debt each year, so taxing the rich does not solve our deficit problem.

If 10% of the people pay 70% of the taxes, and almost half pay no taxes at all, doesn't that already seem like the "rich" are paying an absolutely UN-fair share?  And if not, at what point does it become fair - when they pay half of their income in taxes, or ALL of it?  And why does the government get to choose what is a "fair" amount for people to keep out of income they rightly earn?  

I don't think this whole tax the rich propaganda actually has anything to do with reducing our deficit - it has everything to do with dividing the people in our country in an election year. 

  

Let's Talk Healthcare Controversy, Shall We?

I've been watching a lot of Facebook posts lately about the congressional hearings on the new health care mandate versus religious freedom protected by the Constitution.  For Democrats, this issue is about "women's access to reproductive healthcare" and for Conservatives this issue is about religious freedom.

From my perspective, I feel like Democrats are making this another polarizing issue to demonize Republicans.  It makes a good sound byte to say that Republicans want to take birth control options away from women, or that conservatives want women to die on the floor of the hospital.  This is simply not true, and I hope people are smart enough to really dig in and research the issues without believing this hype.

Here are my thoughts on the current health care debate.  Obviously it's way too long for a Facebook post, which is why I love to blog!

1. Our government was founded on the principle of separation of Church and State.  It guarantees religious freedom.  That means the government has no right to tell our churches how to perform their business.  This is tricky, as we've seen from the controversies of Sharia law (Islam's law which some say treats women as inferior or allows cruelty in deciding disputes).  Other controversy stems from anti-discrimination laws that protect things like religion, yet religious institutions are allowed to discriminate for that very reason (i.e. not hiring a person of another denomination).  While I recognize that this is a difficult thing to sort out, I think all of our decisions as a country need to focus on the fact that government is not supposed to dictate what religious organizations do for matters that specifically go against their religious beliefs. . . . such as birth control.

2.  Somehow, in this current fight, "a woman's access to reproductive healthcare" has come to mean "a woman's access to free reproductive healthcare".  Right now, even without the changes to health care, all women have access to birth control.  Isn't that why we completely subsidize Planned Parenthood - so that women of all income levels can quickly, easily and cheaply purchase birth control?  All women also have the right to go into any grocery store and purchase birth control.  And of course, all women are free to not have sex.  But the issue has now become women's right to have these things provided for free.  The Catholic Church's unwillingness to provide birth control under an insurance plan it pays for does not mean that women can't get the birth control they desire.

3. Women can choose to not work for a religious institution.  My sister recently applied for a job at a Catholic School.  The job was hers except she had to promise to not live with her fiance, since they were not married.  The school felt that living with a man she wasn't married to went against their religious principles.  So my sister turned down the job.  If women want to have birth control provided under their employer's insurance plan, then they have the freedom to not apply for jobs within a religious organization, or to take the job and know they will have to pay for birth control on their own.

4.  This is a perfect example of how a country wide mandate isn't always the best fix for the problem, since there is no one-size-fits-all solution.  Yes, health care in our country is broken.  It's broken because of the ridiculous cost of health care and prescription drugs, it's broken because hospitals have to charge paying customers enough to cover the non-paying customers, it's broken because of frivolous lawsuits and medical malpractice, it's broken because insurance companies can't sell across state lines (causing monopolies in individual states), it's broken because people can be turned down for pre-existing conditions, and it's broken because it is way too expensive for individuals to shop for and purchase their own plans outside of an employer.  Yet none of these issues are fixed by the new health care mandate.

All the mandate does is force employers to purchase insurance for all employees even if the system is completely broken.  And it forces individuals to purchase insurance even if it is ridiculously expensive and they don't want it.  Instead, if we actually fixed the problems, health insurance would be much easier for employers to provide or for individuals to purchase.  And those that don't want it?  Well they shouldn't have to buy it - but they also shouldn't receive free health care.  After all, an uninsured driver doesn't suddenly get free auto body work when they get in an accident!

When you force "something" on all the people in our country, you quickly start to realize that the "something" doesn't work for everyone.  I think this birth control issue is only the first of several issues that will come to light in the next several years.

5.  I also find it interesting how many waivers have been given out by the Obama administration.  These waivers allow companies to not comply with the health care mandate.  The result?  Well, Main Street companies in our country have this health care mandate shoved down our throats, while anyone who is friends with the Obama administration gets a pass.  A large majority of firms given waivers are unions and Wall Street firms.  I'm sure that will help Obama's campaign funds for his 2012 election.  But it sure doesn't help the rest of us.  If this health care mandate is so great, why are so many companies being given waivers?


In short, the entire Obamacare mandate sucks, because it doesn't fix the problem with healthcare in our country. I vigorously support healthcare reform (especially since the health insurance our company buys has increased substantially in cost EVERY SINGLE YEAR) - but only where it actually reforms something, and doesn't just make a bad product mandatory.

If you've made it this far in my post, you deserve something funny.  So here's a sign that was posted in the shooting range the other day.

The State Of The Union

On Tuesday night Darrin and I watched President Obama's speech, and the response by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels.  Although I'm a political junkie I usually skip the speeches and catch up on the highlights via the internet the next day.  But there is so much at stake in our country right now that I devoted my evening to listening to what the President had to say.

And for two days now I have been trying to figure out how to write my response to the speeches, but every time I get started it turns into a political rant.  If I use this blog to rant, I want it to be about the food industry or maybe local issues that affect our schools or public safety.  I know that a political rant won't sway those that disagree with me or provide information that you can't find elsewhere on the web.

It wouldn't serve any purpose except to make me feel better.

Because I would say things like this:

1. Actually, President Obama, Americans are NOT stupid.  We DON'T need additional government agencies to protect us from the credit card companies or mortgage brokers.  What we need is to take responsibility for our lives, and move on so we can recover from bad investments (housing) or job losses.  We all thought the bubble would never burst and took risks with mortgages we knew we couldn't afford, or those home equity loans that allowed us to buy that boat or travel trailer, or those credit card bills that allowed us to purchase things we couldn't afford.  Wall Street was there to provide this credit we all wanted, and yes they made a handsome profit from it and found clever (and even some shady) ways to keep the cash flowing.  But those days are over, we all contributed to the problem and we need to quit pointing fingers at each other.  Enabling prevents healing, Mr. President, and we need to move on already.

2. Unemployment benefits do not put people back to work.  I know the economy sucks and jobs in many industries are all but impossible to find. But people who want work, find work.  During the great depression our grandparents didn't turn down jobs because they were "beneath them".  They worked wherever and whenever they could to support their families and pick themselves up by their bootstraps.  We need to support this type of hardworking American and not the ones content to sit it out on unemployment for three years while they wait for a "decent opportunity".

3. Mr. President you can continue to blame Congress about inaction, but that is EXACTLY the way our founding fathers wanted our system to work.  There is a system of checks and balances so no one side can overpower the other, unless voters give them control of both houses and the executive branch.  Mr. President you had this control the first two years of your term, and you failed to do any of the things you promised in your speech on Tuesday.  Moreover, your Democrat controlled Senate has failed to propose or pass a budget in 1000 days, long before Republicans gained control of the House!  You speak of compromise but I specifically remember when you had control and told Republicans to "sit in the back" while you steamrolled our country with Obamacare.  So you can continue to call the Republicans a do-nothing Congress, but I say they are doing EXACTLY what voters wanted when we voted your Democrats out in 2010.

4. Mr. President, you can boast about how you will take care of business if the Congress can't, but all I've seen you do in the past three years is golf while our country waited for legislation that would help our economy.  The only gutsy thing I've seen you do is wipe the floor with our Constitution when you made "recess appointments" while Congress wasn't actually in recess or invade other countries without Congressional approval.  You sure talk tough in your speech, but you've failed to show any leadership on domestic issues during these toughest times, content to let our legislature duke it out while you were strikingly absent.

5. You can continue to blame Wall Street and business for the mess we're in, but it makes you a hypocrite, since those very Wall Street people are some of your biggest financial supporters.  I don't think anyone sees past the fact that Bank of America has given more to you than any other candidate in their history.

6. While you enjoy your soundbites about punishing Wall Street, we know that 80% of the people in our country work for small businesses like ours.  We are not millionaire babies that live off the return on our great-grandfather's investments - we are people who work and risk our livelihoods by owning a business.  Our company pays around 50% of our net profit in taxes, plus I personally pay over 30% on my salary. How you can state that I am not paying my fair share when in reality over 40% of our income goes straight to you, is inconceivable to me.  You also need to realize that I am sending you money that could be used to hire more people to grow our business which would allow us to hire more people.  But of course, you think you know more about putting people back to work than those of us that actually put people back to work.

7. I recently read that even if all the "Millionaires" that you complain about put 100% of their earnings and income into taxes, it wouldn't even make a blip on the trillions of debt you have brought on our country.  In fact, you are slated to add more debt than ALL THE OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED.  How's that legacy for you, Mr. President?



Whew.

Ok, I have to admit I feel a little better after that rant.  For those of you that made it this far, I should reward you with something lighthearted and fun.  So here is a picture of my five year old (who is currently in bed with the stomach flu) after eating Oreos.

Oh that life was as easy as Oreos and milk.

Don't Occupy My Street

So, I've not paid a ton of attention to the Occupy Wall Street movement to date.  I figured it was just a bunch of 20 somethings with too much time on their hands and little to no understanding of how the real world works.  But I came across a couple of articles today that seriously had me busting a gut at the demands of these protesters.


Now, I respect the protesters for using their freedom of speech to speak out against what they feel are the injustices in the world.  That is what America is all about.  I don't respect the bad apples that are part of the protest who are doing things like pooping on police cars, stirring up trouble with the police, trashing the parks where the protests are being held or having sex in public.  However I'm sure these hoodlums are not representative of the entire movement.


Today I read the manifesto of sorts, maybe a declaration of independence, that embodies what the Occupy Wall Street Movement is all about.  And I seriously laughed my arse off.


For one thing, you keep hearing about how the protesters are against "capitalism" - that big evil word that is symbolized by Wall Street.  And yet the protesters all have their iPhones, iPads, computers, etc.  Um, sorry folks, but capitalism - not government or "the people" - made those gadgets possible.  I'm not really sure that Steve Jobs would have been on his endless quest for newer/faster/better products if he wasn't making a gazillion dollars off of them, or if he didn't have the venture capitalists to fund the projects.  Just sayin'.


But the really disturbing part, is the conflicted manifesto that the movement has created.  Now granted, there is a disclaimer that this document is just a rough draft.  But good gravy, it is full of conflicting ideas and half brained schemes - and I have a very hard time believing that anybody takes it seriously.  You can read the entire document here, but below I have copied a few of my favorite lines, besides the one about a "General Happiness Indicator" (notes in () are mine):

• Socialize undergraduate level college.  Make failing impossible to assure that everyone has the same chance in the work place post-college.  (Can you tell this came from the generation where EVERYONE got a trophy just for participating?)
• Teach character building classes from grade one, measure success based on drive/cooperation/interactions with others, not only final outcome.  (Because it's not how well we perform that determines success, it's how much people like us and how we work with them, right?)
• Impose universal morality for parents who do not participate in raising their children.  Remove children from households with parents who refuse to educate them properly.  (OK, this one's just scary.  Who gets to determine the "universal morality" and who decides whether children are being educated "properly"?)
• Education should be funded with some of the $2billion/week that goes to war-funding.  At least 50% of it. This will weaken our military by 50% at least, forcing the rest of the world to pick up the slack.  This will in turn cause their economies to tank, taking ours with it.  But at least we'll be highly educated. (I don't even need to comment on this one, do I?)
• We will have no military - only defense.  (Huh?)
• There will be no war, so that's moot.  The government will have one media center in which it broadcasts/reports on the news.  Who do these war-mongers think are going to attack us?  (Cool, I've heard this government news thing works really well in China and North Korea.  As for the war-mongers, I guess maybe they just remember 9/11 and pay attention to the news everyday where PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO ATTACK US!  Wait, I guess that makes me a war-monger.)
• Reinstate the draft - no loopholes for college attendees.  (Why is the draft necessary if we don't have war in this utopia?)
• The government should only work with weapons manufacturers organized as Non-Profits.  (Bwahahahahahaha!)
• Compulsory registration and voting for all US citizens age 18 through 70 for State and Federal elections. (Voting is your right, therefore we are FORCING you to do it! Except if you get too old, then we can't trust you.)
• Absolute debt relief.  (Sweet, I'm going shopping NOW!  Where did I put that credit card - oh yeah, I tore it up so I didn't go into debt.  Guess I regret that fiscal prudence now.  Stupid Dave Ramsey.)
• Prosecute every elected, appointed, or career bureaucratic official in the Obama administration who conspired to traffic guns to drug cartels, resulting in countless murders on both sides of the border, a scandal worse than Watergate, where nobody died.  (I actually agree with this one.)
• End the war on drugs.  Allow each person's neurochemical balances to be a personal choice.  These substances have also been proven to give already brilliant minds newly profound insights.  It is safe to assume that these insights would have remained unimagined otherwise.  If we allow our scientists - if they so choose - access to take these substances while working on unrelated research, it may potentially lead to monumental breakthroughs not yet imagined. (Bwahahahahahaha!)

Even better, they have predetermined "appropriate" salary ranges for various occupations:

• Bankers $20,000
• Lawyers $27,500
• Realtors $25,000
• Doctors $28,000
• Nurses $27,500
• Teachers/Librarians/Train Engineers/Bridge Maintenance/Ship Pilots $35,000
• Police $36,000
• Public Servants $28,500
• Other public sector $30,000
• Other private sector $29,000
• Entrepreneurs/Business Owners $10,000
• Congress $30,000
• President $40,000
• Soldiers N/A
• Defense Workers $25,000

After my good laugh at the expense of Occupy Wall Street, I sat back and actually thought about this.  And it's more than a little scary.  If this is the mindset of our younger generations, we are in big trouble folks.  Because everything they have outlined - it's called socialism.  


And it has never worked ANYWHERE.  


So in closing, take a look at this cartoon that was created in 1948.  It's surprisingly profound and I think it needs to be broadcast in New York and every other city that is currently tolerating the Occupy Wall Street Movement.  Capitalism is responsible for many good things we have in our lives today.  It may not be perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than any other -ism.  

Democracy Has Left The Building

***Warning - political rant to follow.  If you are here only for blogs about our family or healthy eating, please skip this posting.***


Democracy is a form of government in which all people have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.  (Wikipedia)

Last Friday, a governor of a very liberal state, defied the will of the people by signing a state law that overturned the people's vote on a very important issue.  These people had voted overwhelmingly in support of a ballot initiative that prohibited discrimination - in one area as much as 76% voted yes on this initiative.  The people were currently gathering signatures to put this same issue on the ballot in other cities and counties.  The people knew that if left up to the local boards and city councils, made up of politicians who owed favors to special interests, that this discrimination would continue to occur - both to the detriment of workers and the taxpaying citizens.  So the people used the power they had - a ballot initiative - and made their will law.

But the governor and his friends didn't want to abide by this ban on discrimination - after all, the discrimination gave them an unfair advantage in the market place!  And so, they drafted a bill that said these bans on discrimination were not allowed and that each local board or city council could make the decision - instead of the voters.  And in areas like charter cities, in which the State has no authority to make such a rule, they made it law that if these bans on discrimination were enacted, that charter city would no longer receive state funding.

And in his signing message, the governor wrote that it was more democratic to allow each local board or city council decide whether or not the discrimination was right for their area.  More democratic apparently than allowing the voters in those areas to decide.  Because democracy is a form of government in which only the officials have a say in the decisions that affect the lives of the people, right?  Oh wait, that's called dictatorship.

What would you say if this discrimination was against ethnic minorities?  What if it was against certain religious groups?  What if it was against certain genders or sexual orientation?  Well for sure the governor and his friends would never promote that type of discrimination because that would just be wrong.

This discrimination promoted by the governor and his friends is discrimination against the worker who decides to not belong to a union.

Because while the Democrats in our state (and the nation for that matter) pretend to be the group that speaks out for the social injustice of the world - these same people not only allow, but PROMOTE discrimination of the non-union worker.  Somehow in their world, this makes sense.

I am speaking here, of course, of Jerry Brown and the Democrat legislators in our state who passed SB922 along party lines (it received not one Republican vote), to ignore the will of the people in several cities and counties who have banned Project Labor Agreements (PLAs).  These are agreements that will not allow non-union workers to work on a project, (a project funded by their own tax dollars) unless that worker joins the union and pays dues, gets dispatched from the union to the project, and pays into the union pension and benefits programs from which they will never receive benefits or pension.  The effect of these rules is that non-union contractors do not bid PLA projects because of the drastic pay cut that results for their employees, and having to abide by non-productive union work rules such as staffing on the project.  

Which is just fine for the unions, because they don't like competition anyway.

I am disgusted at this law.  First, because it absolutely spits in the face of real democracy.  Second, because it is funded entirely by special interests (unions) who are legally able to take mandatory dues from their members and fund political campaigns whether or not the members approve.  Third, because our politicians in this state MUST comply with the union rule or else risk being thrown out in the following election when the unions support an alternative candidate, and their insane legislation illustrates these favors to the unions.  Four, because of the hypocrisy of the Democrat party which portrays itself as the great equalizer but only really for those it calls friends.

If ever there was a time to change the direction of our state, this is it.  I for one do not love America for its dictatorship - I love it for its democracy.  And that, my friends, is dead in California.

For more on this issue please check out the following links:

Gut and Amend Bills Bad for California

Governor Brown doesn't think it's okay for local boards and city councils to decide on an issue like circumcision, but they can decide themselves to discriminate against 75% of the construction workforce in CA.

Here's the story on union campaign contributions that led to the passage of SB922.

And this is fun!  From maplight.org you see the total contributions by Interest groups for 2009 and 2010.   Wow, small business doesn't have a chance in California.  But I can see why our state is going bankrupt and is full of frivolous lawsuits!

Top Interest Groups

Last two years of available data, Jan. 1, 2009 - Dec. 31, 2010.

Construction unions	$5,438,156
Attorneys & law firms	$4,147,108
Police & fire fighters unions and associations	$2,665,964
Native American tribes & governing units	$2,572,862
State & local government employee unions	$2,494,189
Property & casualty insurance	$1,815,768
Telecommunications	$1,721,519
Pharmaceutical manufacturing	$1,278,381
Teachers unions	$1,200,551
Physicians	$1,131,876

But hey, don't worry voters!  While Jerry and his friends can reverse your ballot initiative with the swipe of a pen, all you have to do to overturn their law is raise about $4 Million and go for a referendum.

No sweat!