Ryan Frazier’s “Big Announcement” … Switching to Take on Perlmutter?

by Ben DeGrow | 10:12 pm, October 12, 2009

Yes, rumors are running rampant about an impending big announcement from Republican U.S. Senate candidate Ryan Frazier.
My guess? Fundraising numbers for the third quarter were less than stellar, and higher-ups in the party finally had the leverage to persuade Frazier to take a stab at the 7th Congressional District instead. Challenging Ed Perlmutter will be [...]

Health Care Reform Video

by Ben DeGrow | 10:00 pm, October 12, 2009

From the Independence Institute, the latest in the pantheon of great videos on the health care reform debate:

Meanwhile, here’s a more sensible, patient-centered health reform plan.

Weapon-Wielding Student Thwarted by Perceptive Faculty

by Night Twister | 9:50 pm, October 12, 2009

A Christina School District student in Newark, Delaware was apprehended today before he was able to turn his weapon on his fellow students. The quick-acting faculty of his school noticed right away when he pulled out his dangerous weapon in the school lunchroom. They immediately confiscated the weapon and proceeded to properly discipline [...]

**Update: Frazier to Challenge Perlmutter in CD7; Earlier–Ryan Frazier Announcement Expected This Week

by elpresidente | 9:08 pm, October 12, 2009

**Update 4–Lynn Bartels at the Post appears to confirm the insider mumblings heard Monday evening about Ryan Frazier’s “announcement”: Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier will drop out of the crowded GOP race for the U.S. Senate and instead challenge U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, The Denver Post has learned. Frazier expects to make the announcement as [...]

KRCX Seng Center 10/8 – Shortened Show

by Jimmy Sengenberger | 7:00 pm, October 12, 2009

A shortened but fun Seng Center show featuring our expanded “Pink Panther Moment,” covering three distinct, humorous issues: the staged Obama-doctor photo-op in the Rose Garden, the distribution of “Obama Money” in Detroit, and the French President taking Barack Obama to task on Iran.  We also discuss the possibility that Obama’s “Pay Czar” Kenneth Feinberg will cut executive salaries by force, and chat with average joe student Danny on campus political sentiment.  (Note: The first segment of the program is not included due to recording issues.)

Direct Link
27.8 MB Download

Comments are more than welcome!  E-mailed Jimmy at Jimmy@SengCenter.com or post on the site!  As always, please be respectful in your remarks.

Tune in LIVE to Seng Center every Thursday night from 6-8pm MTN online at krcx.org, official website of KRCX 93.9 Regis University.

Greeley’s 3A: a teachable moment?

by Amy Oliver | 5:42 pm, October 12, 2009

There is no guarantee that voters will reward a transparent government by approving a tax increase.  But it sure is easier for any government to make its case for more money when it has shown taxpayers the respect they deserve by providing detailed financial transparency.  With detailed, online financial transparency, government demonstrates that it wants to be a [...]

Senate Finance Committee to vote on Baucus bill on Tuesday 10/13

by Rossputin | 4:04 pm, October 12, 2009

The Senate Finance Committee will vote on the disaster that is the Baucus almost-bill tomorrow.  The WSJ’s take on the bill can be found HERE, and my article on the measure can be found HERE.  If your Senator is on the Finance Committee (see list below), I urge you to contact him/her and express in the strongest possible terms your opposition to this disastrous not-even-written legislation.

 

Senator Max Baucus
Democrat, MT (Committee Chair)

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV
Democrat, WV

Senator Kent Conrad
Democrat, ND

Senator Jeff Bingman
Democrat, NM

Senator John F. Kerry
Democrat, MA

Senator Blanche L. Lincoln
Democrat, AR

Senator Ron Wyden
Democrat, OR

Senator Charles E. Schumer
Democrat, NY

Senator Debbie Stabenow
Democrat, MI

Senator Maria Cantwell
Democrat, WA

Senator Bill Nelson
Democrat, FL

Senator Robert Menendez
Democrat, NJ

Senator Thomas Carper
Democrat, DE

Senator Chuck Grassley
Republican, IA (Ranking Member)

Senator Orrin G. Hatch
Republican, UT

Senator Olympia J. Snowe
Republican, ME

Senator Jon Kyl
Republican, AZ

Senator Jim Bunning
Republican, KY

Senator Mike Crapo
Republican, ID

Senator Pat Roberts
Republican, KS

Senator John Ensign
Republican, NV

Senator Mike Enzi
Republican, WY

Senator John Cornyn
Republican, TX

Should we Celebrate Columbus DAY?

by Mr. Bob | 3:55 pm, October 12, 2009

#tcot #columbus #redco #teaparty
In a word…yes. Here are a few reasons. Regardless of some of the negative things that did happen after Europeans descended upon this land (which we hear about all the time), Columbus is significant and positive for many reasons.

A lot of the naysayers in this politically correct climate have what I call “Gene Roddenberry” disease. They believe that the prime directive is not fiction, that we have no right to say our civilization is better than another. The view that one society is not better or superior to another is completely ridiculous on its face.

Some cultures are better than others: a free society is better than slavery; reason is better than brute force as a way to deal with other men; productivity is better than stagnation. In fact, Western civilization stands for man at his best. It stands for the values that make human life possible: reason, science, self-reliance, individualism, ambition, productive achievement. The values of Western civilization are values for all men; they cut across gender, ethnicity, and geography. We should honor Western civilization not for the ethnocentric reason that some of us happen to have European ancestors but because it is the objectively superior culture.

Columbus Day celebrates the beginning of cultural exchange between America and Europe.
After Columbus, came millions of European immigrants who brought their art, music,
science, medicine, philosophy and religious principles to America. These contributions have
helped shape the United States and include Greek democracy, Roman law, Judeo-Christian
ethics and the tenet that all men are created equal.

Columbus brought America to the attention of the civilized world, i.e., to the growing, scientific civilizations of Western Europe.

Columbus Day also commemorates the arrival on these shores of more than 5 million Italians
a century ago. Today, their children and grandchildren constitute the nation s fifth largest
ethnic group, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

It was Columbus’ discovery for Western Europe that led to the influx of ideas and people on which this nation was founded—and on which it still rests. The opening of America brought the ideas and achievements of Aristotle, Galileo, Newton, and the thousands of thinkers, writers, and inventors who followed.

Prior to 1492, what is now the United States was sparsely inhabited, unused, and undeveloped. The inhabitants were primarily hunter/gatherers, wandering across the land, living from hand to mouth and from day to day. There was virtually no change, no growth for thousands of years. With rare exception, life was nasty, brutish, and short: there was no wheel, no written language, no division of labor, little agriculture and scant permanent settlement; but there were endless, bloody wars. Whatever the problems it brought, the vilified Western culture also brought enormous, undreamed-of benefits, without which most of today’s Indians would be infinitely poorer or not even alive.

Columbus should be honored, for in so doing, we honor Western civilization. But the critics do not want to bestow such honor, because their real goal is to denigrate the values of Western civilization and to glorify the primitivism, mysticism, and collectivism embodied in the tribal cultures of American Indians. They decry the glorification of the West as “Eurocentrism.” We should, they claim, replace our reverence for Western civilization with multi-culturalism, which regards all cultures as morally equal. In fact, they aren’t.

READ; The Ayn Rand Institute Columbus Day a Time to Celebrate.

What’s Wrong With the Republican Party? let me count the ways

by Mr. Bob | 12:31 pm, October 12, 2009

#tcot #redco #libertarian #teaparty
ok, maybe not count the ways but how bout ONE GIANT one. Republican Leader Lindsey Graham is apparently signing on to a form of cap and trade.

This makes my blood boil and very well could lead to long time registered Republican supporters like me turning to Libertarians. Choosing the “moderate” McCain should have been the last straw and was for a lot of folks, but this in unbelievable.

Lindsey Graham signs on to cap-and-tax Michelle Malkin chronicles the demise of the party on this issue. Graham needs to lose the next election and find a new job….and it should not be as a lobbyist.

I hate to say “I told you so.”

But, well, I told you so.

GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham has signed on to the Democrats’ massive green redistribution scheme masquerading as a planet-saving, national security-enhancing “energy independence” scheme.

Can John McCain and the rest of the Climate Change Republicans be far behind?

First, a quick trip down GOP eco-sellout memory lane: READ IT HERE

Don’t worry, the feds will pay for it.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 9:56 am, October 12, 2009

Those that control the language control the debate.

Frazier Favors Tax Cuts, ‘Stimulus,’ Public-Private Partnerships

by Ari Armstrong | 9:51 am, October 12, 2009

Does Ryan Frazier support genuinely free markets or not? I had been under the vague impression that he does, but reports of a recent interview suggest that Frazier supports Keynesian “stimulus” spending and public-private partnerships, which violate economic liberty. So what is the straight scoop?

Ben DeGrow pointed out an article by David Thielen republished by the Huffington Post pointing out that Frazier favored “stimulus” spending for transportation and education in addition to public-private partnerships.

I was a little surprised by DeGrow’s kid-glove treatment of the candidate: “Solutions-oriented? Definitely. Committed to limited government principles? An opportunity for a clarifying follow-up discussion.”

If Frazier can’t clarify his basic views in an hour-long interview, I doubt a “follow-up discussion” will shed more light on the matter.

But is Thielen’s summary accurate? I was surprised that his “interview” contained not a single direct quote. Might “Liberal and Loving It” Thielen be skewing Frazier’s remarks? Thankfully, on his original post, Thielen offers a link to download the audio file of the interview.

After a discussion of food and personal background (and a telling remark from Thielen that he regards certain “libertarians” as to the right of Genghis Khan), Frazier at 17 minutes, 42 seconds into the recorded conversation discusses his general principles:

There were certain principles that attracted me to the Republican Party. … [Something] the free enterprise system. [There's a lot of background noise with the recording, making parts of it difficult to understand.] … Fiscal responsibility. And protect the rights of the individual. And in doing so you protect the rights of the community.

Frazier discussed the “fiscal responsibility that I think will in the long term help create a better America for our children.”

At 19 minutes, 48 seconds, Frazier says:

For me, there are a couple things that are absolutely, I think critical to a stronger, better, safer America. Obviously it starts with the economy. At the end of the day, [if] a person can’t keep a roof over their head and lights on and provide clothes for their children’s back… Trust me, I know, I grew up in a difficult environment. And, for me, that ought to be the focus for all of us. That ought to be one of the primary things that any of us who seek to represent the people focus on. That is, how do we continue to enact policies, or restraining government, such that the economy, and the ability for it to flourish, is sustainable. …

I would look to leaders who have demonstrated the ability to do that. I think one of the Democrats’ very best… is JFK. … If you read some of his speeches, things he pushed for, I think a lot of those things are true today, as much as they were true then, in 1962. For instance… he gave an address to the economic club on New York in 1962. I thought it was one of the best addresses I’ve heard, period. And in effect what he says … [is] the single largest thing that the federal government can do to aid economic growth is to create an environment for private consumption and investment…

He goes on to say to cut the fetters of… [the] private sphere. And he goes on to make a case for the types of things, given the circumstances, given the environment — i.e., you have an economy that is trying to find it’s footing, that has a potential to grow much more — that can be done to assist in that effort. And he in this case advocates for tax relief for everyone, both personal and corporate income tax relief. …

If you want to truly, really stimulate your economy, one of the greatest ways is to reduce, even if it’s momentarily, reduce any barriers… to private consumption and investment. … So what does that look like? … You look at ways that you can reduce taxation on everyone. Not just one segment of society, but everyone, in order to stimulate private consumption, which ultimately leads to a growing economy. And you also incentivize… investment in additional equipment… and technology. …

Obviously I’m a Republican because I believe in a more limited government, which is not the same thing as no government. There is a role for government, and I’ll have that conversation with anybody who believes otherwise. … But the question is, what is that role, and what extent ought that role to be?

At this point, I was thinking to myself, Jesus, Thielen; you wandered into a gold mine and came out with a few shiny lumps of coal. But I give him credit for conducting an interesting interview. At 24 minutes, 30 seconds, Thielen asked Frazier what positive role he sees for government in the economy. Frazier replied:

A limited government is not no government. So I think you have to articulate what are those limited roles, and what is it that government can or properly should be doing. I happen to be an advocate for public-private partnerships. I think that is a great solution for a lot of the challenges we face in this country. Whether it’s FasTracks here locally, and looking at public-private partnerships there, or other projects where the private sector and the public sector can come together to help further the improvement of our community. It makes a lot of sense to me. … I think transportation is one of the perhaps single largest areas for public-private partnerships in this country and right here in Colorado.

At 29 minutes, 32 seconds, Thielen asks, “Well let me ask you about the present downturn… There were a lot of things that fed into it. But the thing that made this thing just horrendous is credit disappeared. … Cutting taxes doesn’t do squat for getting the credit unstuck. … Do you think what they did up to now was a reasonably good attempt to address it?”

Frazier replied:

I’m not sure that tax relief doesn’t do squat. Because one of the reasons that credit markets are so tight… is there continues to be a lack of confidence in where the economy will go. Will we start to produce, will we start to flourish, or will we continue to… either stagnate or perhaps move in the south direction? That’s a factor in credit markets that perhaps is less tangible but exists…

Tax relief… is a part of the solution ultimately in getting the economy going. But what we’re able to achieve, if we’re able to stimulate the economy, is confidence. … What I’m advocating for is looking ways in which government perhaps can reduce… taxation on business and to the individual in order to incentivize private consumption and investment in industry.

At minute marker 33, Frazier discusses federal “stimulus” spending:

The results have not quite been what has been expected or touted. … I believe that that stimulus package would have been better suited had it focused more on infrastructure and development in this country. … Six percent actually went towards transportation infrastructure. … I believe that that was insufficient. If you want to do a stimulus package and you’re seeking to build longer-lasting jobs, it seemed to me that, if you’re not going to look at investment tax credits or, somehow, tax relief for everyone, that you ought to invest in infrastructure, in transportation. … The state of transportation in this country… is bad. … And so it seemed to me that a larger portion, a much larger portion, of the stimulus package, should have been directed toward infrastructure, which would have created a lot of jobs that I believe would have been around longer, had a much larger impact on the economy…

In response to Thielen’s comments about the usefulness of “stimulus” spending for things like education and national parks as well, Frazier responds, “That’s true. I think, when you look at the cost-benefit… transportation infrastructure and education would have probably made the most sense.”

At 38 minutes, 7 seconds, Frazier offers an interesting qualifier:

I agree with you, that productivity ultimately ultimately will increase the economy… That said, the question is how best do you achieve that… I think that’s the debate in the country, is, do you believe that more government spending will result in that? It possibly could. I’m sure you could point to points in our history where that had worked. … There are more instances in history where you could point to how you, not necessarily reduce government, but you reduce the perceived burden of government on individuals and on business, which ultimately leads to… private consumption and investment…

The upshot is that the initial reports were accurate: Frazier explicitly advocated “private-public partnerships” and “stimulus” spending for transportation and education. That Frazier used TaxTracks as his lead example of an allegedly successful public-private partnership did surprise me. (I stopped listening at about the forty minute marker, when Thielen strangely asked about the difference between a scientific fact and theory, so somebody else might want to listen to the rest of the recording for additional insights.)

Obviously Frazier is more enthusiastic about lowering taxes, and less enthusiastic about “stimulus” spending, than many Democrats. His view of “stimulus” spending during a recession is not that it’s always necessary, but that it’s sometimes useful. He showed serious interest in limiting federal spending to particular, widely popular sorts of projects. So Frazier is not as bad as Barack Obama or George W. Bush when it comes to violating economic liberty on the alter of Keynesian economics.

But Frazier still has some deep problems. I’ll discuss two of his problems briefly, one of economics and one of political philosophy.

“Stimulus” spending is on net destructive to the economy despite its prejudicial title. It is more accurately called welfare spending, and often it is corporate welfare. Candidates are less inclined to admit they endorse corporate welfare than they are to claim they favor “stimulus” spending.

Forced wealth transfers deprive the voluntary economy of critically needed resources. Frazier is right that lack of confidence is a big problem: and the biggest contributer to this lack of confidence is a federal government intent on imposing capricious and ever-changing controls on the economy. The economy still suffers under the looming threats of cap-and-trade and a political health takeover, to mention just two examples. So the federal government should get the hell out of the way of economic recovery, then it should give people the freedom to invest their own resources as they see fit. Tragically named “stimulus” spending only interferes with the recovery process. At best it creates less-productive make-work that contributes little to long-term recovery while squandering resources.

Then there is the Constitutional problem. If there is an argument for spending federal tax dollars on transportation and education, as Frazier advocates, it has nothing to do with “stimulating” the economy, for again the wealth is forcibly transfered away from voluntary exchanges. But Article I, Section 8 doesn’t even mention education as an approved federal function, and it mentions only “post roads” regarding transportation “infrastructure.” Apparently Frazier is of the “fluid Constitution” school.

The more fundamental issue is the basic one of political philosophy. DeGrow talks about “limited government.” Thielen discusses a “role for government” — without bothering to define what that role should be. Frazier combines the two vague phrases, apparently on the theory that the solution to ambiguity is to compound it.

What conservatives and “liberals” hardly ever discuss is what they think government is fundamentally for. Saying we need “more” or “less” government, robust or “limited” government, evades the central issue. Invoking vague phrases such as “the common welfare” begs the question of what constitutes welfare and when welfare is properly common. Everyone (save nihilists and self-refuting anarchists) wants both a robust and a limited government: a government that does very well whatever it is it should be doing and that doesn’t do whatever it should leave alone. The critical question is, what purposes does a government properly serve?

My view, rooted in classical liberal theory and the more recent ideas of Ayn Rand, is that the proper role of government is to protect individual rights, including those of property and voluntary association. Thus, so-called “stimulus” spending is not only economic folly but moral depravity. I want government to robustly protect individual rights, and I want government limited to that function.

Perhaps in some future interview Frazier will offer his answer to this fundamental question, then explain how that answer relates to his particular policy prescriptions.

James Warner Shares Light of Liberty

by Ari Armstrong | 9:47 am, October 12, 2009

The following article originally was published October 12, 2009, by Grand Junction’s Free Press.

James Warner shares light of liberty

by Linn and Ari Armstrong

The Hanoi Hilton. That’s what we called the Prisoners of War camps in Vietnam. Thankfully, though your elder author Linn served in that war, he never got room service at the Hilton.

James Warner was not so lucky. When helping to set up a talk Warner gave in town last month, Linn learned that during the war Warner was imprisoned 650 miles to the north.

Several years ago, Linn met Captain Gerald M. Coffee, who spent over seven years in solitary confinement, the second longest imprisonment in northern Vietnam. Linn asked Warner whether he knew Coffee.

“Of course I knew of him, we spent several years together at the Hilton,” Warner said. “You don’t know someone when your only communication is tap tap, tap tap.” The prisoners had developed a code to communicate with each other.

During the conversation Linn was taken back to thoughts of the great friends that he got to know, such as Tracy and Redman. Yes, a band of brothers.

Warner, former legal council to the National Rifle Association, spoke at the annual Informed Gun Owners conference last month, an event hosted by the Pro Second Amendment Committee.

He titled his talk, “From the Hanoi Hilton to the White House: How I learned the Value of Freedom in a Communist Prison.”

Warner was held by force. He held his audience captive for ninety minutes with the power of his life’s story. Warner showed little personal bitterness toward the pilot who, Warner believes, made a mistake that cost him his freedom and gave comfort to the enemy camp.

Warner has written, “I was put in a cement box with a steel door, which sat out in the tropical summer sun. There, I was put in leg irons which were then wired to a small stool. In this position I could neither sit nor stand comfortably. Within 10 days, every muscle in my body was in pain (here began a shoulder injury which is now inoperable). The heat was almost beyond bearing. My feet had swollen, literally, to the size of footballs. I cannot describe the pain. When they took the leg irons off, they had to actually dig them out of the swollen flesh.”

Warner and his fellow prisoners would remember each other’s names, so that if one got out he could inform the families of those still held. This was the first time that many would learn whether their loved one was still alive.

Some of the POWs would remember great works of literature, surprised by how much of a reading or poem they could recall. Some thought of philosophy, remembering the historical importance that the Greeks played in saving the idea of the individual.

Warner wrote a text on math. He had to steal empty cigarette containers from the guards, soak the containers in water until the sheets of paper separated, and then compress the sheets under his straw mat until dry. Several times guards confiscated the pages, and Warner had to start again. But Warner completed the work and brought it back. It now resides at the Marine POW museum.

Warner, commissioned a Second Lieutenant in the Marine Corps in 1966, volunteered for duty in Vietnam the next year. He flew more than 100 missions before enemy fire shot down his VMFA-323 just north of the Demilitarized Zone on October 13. He spent five and a half years as a prisoner. His chest full of metals, including a Sliver Star and two Purple Hearts, only begin to reveal the heart inside the chest.

Warner continued to unfold his life’s story. One could see and feel the spirit of the old warrior as he leaned on his cane.

Warner served as Domestic Policy Advisor to President Ronald Reagan, focusing on economic and health policy issues. You can thank Warner every time you drive down I-70, as he helped repeal the 55 mile-per-hour speed limit. Warner has also won the H. L. Mencken award defending the First Amendment and gone to the Supreme Court defending the Second Amendment.

Warner joined a long line of great speakers brought to our community by the Pro Second Amendment Committee. Past speakers include David Kopel, lead scholar for the Independence Institute; Suzanna Gratia-Hupp, who advocated concealed carry after witnessing her parents’ murder in Texas; John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime; and former Sheriff Riecke Claussen.

After listening to Warner talk about his experiences and answer questions, the audience seemed emotionally drained, horrified by the details of Warner’s imprisonment and inspired by his continued resolve.

Warner said he has dedicated his life to the never-ending battle for freedom. Warner went through years of living hell, then went back to work defending freedom in America. Most of us have only to read about the issues and articulate the case for liberty. May we, like Warner, show the fortitude to overcome adversity and fight for our principles.

Linn Armstrong is a local political activist and firearms instructor with the Grand Valley Training Club. His son, Ari, edits FreeColorado.com from the Denver area.

A Little Different Take on Ryan Frazier from Liberal Blogger David Thielen

by Ben DeGrow | 8:16 am, October 12, 2009

About 5 months ago El Presidente and I interviewed Republican U.S. Senate primary candidate Ryan Frazier. I left the interview with the theme of Frazier as a “principled” candidate focused on a solutions-oriented message.
On Friday, liberal blogger David Thielen posted his favorable observations after a sit-down with Ryan Frazier. A few key passages jumped out [...]

Lindsey Graham, economic traitor

by Rossputin | 2:14 am, October 12, 2009

In Saturday’s New York Times, Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) co-authored an op-ed in support of cap-and-trade legislation.  Graham is apparently using the fig leaf of adding support for nuclear power to the otherwise disastrous bill as a reason to get behind it.

It’s the economic version of adding lobster to a convicted man’s last meal.

“Climate change” legistion will have no impact on the climate but will have devastating impact on our economy and our worldwide economic competitiveness.

This is an incredibly expensive “solution” to a non-existent problem.  And while I could argue that it will have truly terrible unintended consequences, the truth is that – at least for the left – all the consequences are intended.  Lindsey Graham is little more than Barack Obama’s useful idiot, a man who clearly has no interest in the scientific data and who is so desirous of “doing something” that he barely cares what it is he gets done.

With luck, Graham will not be able to get his partner-in-dangerous-”bipartisanship”, John McCain, to come along. With luck, he will get very few Republicans to join his quixotic quest to make one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation in our history very slightly better.  At the end of the day, our economic hopes will be tied to the thin reed of needing a few sensible Democrats to refuse to go along with the economic idiocy of Senators Kerry, Boxer, and Graham.

Denial of claims: Medicare does it most

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, October 12, 2009

Critics of non-government insurance complain that such companies deny claims, and imply that this would never happen with government-run insurance such as Medicare.  In a previous post I pointed out that in Massachusetts, Medicaid denies a higher percentage of claims than non-government insurers.
According to the American Medical Association’s 2008 Health Insurance Report Card , the [...]

TIME magazine gets it right on nuclear weapons

by Rossputin | 1:28 am, October 12, 2009

OK, it’s just one guy…not really the editorial position of TIME magazine, but it’s still a remarkable thing to see in such a spineless, Obama-worshiping publication.

The short version: The only thing scarier than a world with nuclear weapons is a world without them…

See “Why the Nobel Peace Prize Should Go to Nuclear Weapons“, David Von Drehle, TIME Magazine, 10/11/09

Excellent article about Rothbard and current economic idiocy

by Rossputin | 12:04 pm, October 11, 2009

Over at the Las Vegas Journal Review, Vin Spurynowicz has written an excellent article talking about how Murray Rothbard has explained what policies government should enact if it wants to prolong an economic downturn…and how those are exactly the policies are government is now following.  It’s a very good, and relatively short, read:

See “Extending the recession indefinitely“, Vin Spurynowicz, 10/4/2009
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/extending-the-recession-indefinitely-63472802.html

Hate Crime Bill Hidden in 2010 National Defense Authorization Act

by Live Free | 11:59 am, October 11, 2009

I received an email today from Representative Diana DeGette touting new federal hate crimes legislation included in the National Defense Authorization Act that was just passed by the House of Representatives.  The conference committee that negotiated the House and Senate versions of the National Defense Authorization Act decided to slip this unrelated piece of legislation [...]

The Hypocritic Oath

by Brian Schwartz | 1:31 am, October 11, 2009

A nice cartoon by Glenn McCoy at Slate:

Related posts:
Make Congress enroll in “public option”
Congress & gov’t employees would be exempt from new insurance mandates.

Algore Shuts Down Climate Debate as Denver Endures Record Freeze

by Ben DeGrow | 3:13 pm, October 10, 2009

Update, 10/12: Here’s the video of Phelim McAleer’s question, with a little more context.
Yesterday I told you about the important October 18 premiere of the movie “Not Evil But Wrong”. The movie’s producer and co-director Phelim McAleer yesterday confronted Al Gore at a public forum with inconvenient questions about the errors in his movie “An [...]

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold speaking at Jeffco Breakfast Club Monday morning (12 October)

by CTBC Director | 9:11 am, October 10, 2009

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold is the featured guest speaker at the Jefferson County Republican Men’s Club breakfast meeting Monday morning (7 AM) October 12th at the Denver West Holiday Inn (click here for map/directions).
Join Matt at the breakfast club meeting to learn more about the Mullarkey Court’s repeated assaults on the Colorado Constitution, the resulting [...]

Happy Birthday to Me

by Rossputin | 8:09 am, October 10, 2009

As a birthday present to myself, I’m taking the day off from blogging.

I wish it weren’t 6 degrees and snowing at my house (not kidding!) but we’ll make the best of it.

I wish you all a great weekend.

Ross

Marxist-Led ‘Free Press’ Group Shaping Obama Policies

by Mr. Bob | 4:15 pm, October 9, 2009

#marxist #che #teaparty #tcot hat tip Breitbart TV

Who WasThe Real Che’ Guevara?

by Mr. Bob | 1:06 pm, October 9, 2009

#tcot #che #revolution #teaparty
Updated- Video from Democrat supporter of Che’ see bottom of post. Hat tip Founding Bloggers.

I have a shirt I wear on occasion that has Che’s mug on on it with a line through his face as in “no Che” …most people these days (even my age) don’t even know who he was and I often get puzzled looks. I’ve been told by one reader that I use the terms communist and socialist too much to describe the enemies of this Republic. It is not my fault that people are not taught real history. I can’t find another descriptive term that works better than Marxist, communist or socialist.

Currently Ernesto “Che” Guevara is being touted as a man of the people, a revolutionary hero. College students wear his face on their shirts and lefties in this country think he was swell. I remember some of Barack Obama’s campaign HQ photo’s with a picture of Che’ on the wall.

However, the real Che’ was a communist revolutionary with a bent for blood.., he personally killed people not just because he was at war with freedom and capitalism but because he enjoyed watching people die. It is also important to note that his boss, Fidel Castro…a man touted by people in the Obama administration as “democratic” and someone to be admired.

Consider the kind of man Che was. “When you saw the beaming look on Che’s face as the victims were tied to the stake and blasted apart by the firing squad,” a former Cuban political prisoner told this writer, “you saw there was something seriously, seriously wrong with Che Guevara.”

As commander of the la Cabana execution yard, Che often shattered the skull of the condemned man (or boy) by firing the coup de grace himself. When other duties tore him away from his beloved execution yard, he consoled himself by viewing the slaughter. Che’s second-story office in La Cabana had a section of wall torn out so he could watch his darling firing-squads at work.

Romanian journalist Stefan Bacie visited Cuba in early 1959 and was fortunate enough to get an audience with the already quasi-famous Ernesto “Che” Guevara. Upon entering Castro’s chief executioner’s office, Bacie noticed Che motioning him over to the office’s newly constructed window. Bacie got there just in time to hear the command of “Fuego!” and the blast from the firing squad and to see a condemned prisoner crumple and convulse. The stricken journalist immediately left and composed a poem, titled, “I No Longer Sing of Che.” (”I no longer sing of Che any more than I would of Stalin,” go the first lines.)

You may be saying…well these men (women and children) were condemned to die, so what if he did the deed himself.

Then you should know that the only evidence against these people was likely that that they are accused of opposing the Castro regime. Che Guevara’s instructions to his revolutionary courts: “judicial evidence is an archaic bourgeois detail.”

The one genuine accomplishment in Che Guevara’s life was the mass-murder of defenseless innocents. Under his own gun dozens died. Under his orders thousands crumpled. At everything else Che Guevara failed abysmally, even comically.

During his Bolivian “guerrilla” campaign, Che split his forces whereupon they got hopelessly lost and bumbled around, half-starved, half-clothed and half-shod, without any contact with each other for 6 months before being wiped out. They didn’t even have WWII vintage walkie-talkies to communicate and seemed incapable of applying a compass reading to a map. They spent much of the time walking in circles and were usually within a mile of each other. During this blundering they often engaged in ferocious firefights against each other.

“You hate to laugh at anything associated with Che, who murdered so many,” says Felix Rodriguez, the Cuban-American CIA officer who played a key role in tracking him down in Bolivia. “But when it comes to Che as ‘guerrilla’ you simply can’t help but guffaw.”

Che’s genocidal fantasies included a continental reign of Stalinism. And to achieve this ideal he craved “millions of atomic victims” – most of them Americans. “The U.S. is the great enemy of mankind!” raved Ernesto Che Guevara in 1961:

“Against those hyenas there is no option but extermination. We will bring the war to the imperialist enemies’ very home, to his places of work and recreation. The imperialist enemy must feel like a hunted animal wherever he moves. Thus we’ll destroy him! We must keep our hatred against them [the U.S.] alive and fan it to paroxysms!” READ THE REST AT FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE or Cross Posted at American Thinker.

This is the man the left fantasizes is a hero. There must be some Democrats left who are not won over by propaganda and lies…I know there is. Please join the common sense brigade and help us root out all anti-American leftists in this country. They are on the wrong side of history and common sense about everything…always have been. I am not saying that all lefties are wanna be murderers, I am saying that if they are wrong about such simple things, like what is right and what is wrong, then they can be fooled on just about anything.

They hated us then, and they hate us now, but now they are within in greater numbers. They hate freedom, they hate anyone who owns private property, they hate religion, they hate job creators and risk takers.

These far left, out of touch, Che’ loving idiots are the crew that is currently calling the shots in the once great Democratic party. You can see them over at The Democratic Underground , the Daily KOS, Think Progress , and many others. Check out this tweet page dedicated to Che‘ and Democrat policies. These whacked out lefties are not the majority in the country who are registered as Democrats but they run the party. Pelosi, Reed and Obama are doing their bidding as much as is possible. How long will people inside the Democratic party put up with it?

And no the R’s are not the answer, I’ve never really thought that, though I hoped they would be. But they at least know what communism is. Some of them know where socialism leads. And to those Republicans who think socialism lite is the way to get along….we are coming for you too.

Transparency Wrap-Up

by Jon Caldara | 11:03 am, October 9, 2009

I can’t help but be impressed with every post I’ve read on the Colorado Spending Transparency (COST) blog run by our transparency Czar (just kidding), I mean Transparency Director Amy Oliver.  Following our investigative reporter Todd Shepherd’s report, Amy’s thoughts on Bill Ritter’s lack of disclosure transparency were right on the money.  She has also [...]

Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize. Next stop, sainthood?

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 10:41 am, October 9, 2009

The Nobel Committee has awarded U.S. President Barack Obama its formerly prestigious Peace Prize award.

Thorbjoern Jagland, head of the Nobel Committee, said the committee attached “special importance to Obama’s vision.” Jagland continued: “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.” *

The Committe said that it was no longer necessary to have actually accomplished anything, and that in the future, candidates’ “vision”,” “hope” and the ability to grab “attention” would be the most important considerations for the award.

Not to be outdone, the Vatican announced it was beginning the canonization process. “No, he hasn’t actually done anything YET,” Cardinal Antonio Sarducci said, “but, damn, he has so much charisma! And he’s so handsome! We feel pretty strongly that the Pope will waive the ‘three miracle’ requirement and just kinda ignore that he’s not dead yet. Why wait!” a gleeful Sarducci gushed.

* Actual quotes.

Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Price for Intending to Do or Not Do Something

by Mr. Bob | 8:19 am, October 9, 2009

That has to be what it is. #tcot #tarp #stimulus #teaparty

He hasn’t done any thing yet other than kill a fly, pass TARP and STIMULUS,
I know it just sounds like sour grapes but every day this administration is involved in something new that looks incredibly bad.
oh yeah he’s ignored the fact that our currency is now 50th most stable on the world’s stage….oh and they want to pass another stimulus package. He can’t make up his mind about what to do in Afghanistan…he’s done that too.

But to anyone paying attention, the Nobel Prize has been nothing but a political left wing progressive pay-off than anything else for a long time. Watch the video below to see who AlGore beat out for his Nobel for his movie about a slide show.

Eric Holder Will Decide if You Belong to a Hate Group

by Night Twister | 7:42 am, October 9, 2009

That is, if HR2647 passes. This bill originally passed the House without the Hate Crimes legislation included, but it was added as an amendment in the Senate. The text of the legislation gives the Attorney General, currently Eric H. Holder, Jr., the right to determine if a group is “associated with hate-related violence [...]

As if the Nobel Peace Prize weren’t degraded enough

by Rossputin | 7:11 am, October 9, 2009

A once-noble (or is it “once-Nobel”?) institution, the Nobel Peace Prize, has been so degraded by cheap far-left politics and stupidity that it’s a wonder anybody still takes it seriously.  The awards could just as easily be determined by the wing nut readers of Daily Kos, Huffington Post, or any other group of naifs whose view of America (and secondarily of Israel) is somewhere between cynicism, mistrust, and outright hatred.

In 1994, the Nobel Committee awarded the prize in part to Yasser Arafat, a lying murderous terrorist who never renounced his desire to push Israeli Jews into the sea.

In 2002, they awarded the prize to Jimmy Carter, one of America’s leading foreign policy idiots and probably its foremost apologist for Palestinian terrorism in particular and anti-Semitism in general.

In 2005, they awarded the prize to Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, a man who has consistently understated how close Iran was to producing a nuclear weapon and now a man who is reported as saying “Israel is the number one threat to the Middle East”, thought it’s not yet 100% clear that the Iranian news agency didn’t invent the quote. Unfortunately, it’s all to easy to believe he would say it.

And, in 2007, the Nobel Committee awarded the price to Al Gore and the IPCC, namely a group of people who lie about scientific data in order to make money by scaring the world into thinking that humans are responsible for climate change.  Al Gore is a guy who said that it’s OK to lie to his audience if that’s what it takes to convince them.  He’s a guy who got a Nobel Prize for a mostly fictional movie posing as a documentary.

After Al Gore, I thought the Nobel Prize couldn’t because any more transparently political or any more worthless, but today they’ve outdone themselves by awarding the 2009 Peace Prize to Barack Obama.

The Nobel Committee said the award was for for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

But what exactly has Barack Obama done?  Oh, I know, he’s gone around the world apologizing for the country he clearly dislikes almost as much as his friends in Tehran and Venezuela…and his own cadre of White House czars…do.

Obama hasn’t actually strengthened anything (except possibly the Russian position in the world) and he’s been in office for less than a year.  He’s being scolded for fiscal irresponsibility and/or international affairs irresponsibility by France, Germany, Poland, and others.  Obama, like Gore, is not a force for good or for truth. He represents the anti-American and anti-capitalist views of the European elites who select the prize winner, emphasizing, as if it needed more emphasis, that Americans should be extremely skeptical of both Barack Obama and the Nobel Prize.

Friday’s Funny

by Jon Caldara | 5:53 am, October 9, 2009

© 2008, Benjamin Hummel. To see more cartoons like this go to www.politixcartoons.com.

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers