Cash For Clunkers Should Be The Symbol of Statist Economics

Big Media has been giddy for several days over the popularity of Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's "Cash for Clunkers" boondoggle. In fact, it has been such a "success" that it blew through $1 billion like Amy Winehouse through a hotel liquor cabinet. It doesn't exactly take the ghost of Billy Mays to convince folks to take a fistful of free money and run with it. Of course, ecstatic with ""success" and void of responsibility, Congress wants to plunk down another $2 billion to buy junk cars. Now, that these jackholes are comfortable discussing spending you and your children's wealth in terms of trillions, $2 billion is couch change.

Let's break down the program for what it is: Congress is stealing your future earnings, but offering you the golden opportunity to cash in an old gas guzzler for $4,500 toward a new car that likely costs $25,000-$35,000. One of the mitigating factors in the current recession is the insane debt that Americans have bought. Now, in order to "boost the economy," the government is offering folks a little up-front cash to drive themselves FURTHER into debt. Yeah, that's a winning plan.

The Kremlin on the Potomac believes that only they can stimulate the economy. Well, in a sense they are right at this point. They could cut taxes on all Americans, especially the ones specifically targeted at the job creating segments of our society. But, that might give folks the idea they can solve their own problems. This way we can keep the country in crisis, but feel sure that our imperial federal government is working on a new solution.

In a matter of a couple days, Congress is wanting to triple the spending on a program they didn't understand in the first place. Something as straightforward as giving a $4,500 voucher for a junk car has created mayhem and a tripling of the budget. Now, do you really want to put these buffoons in charge of your health care? It is often said that any government program's announced cost can be at least tripled. In the case of Medicare, I don't think there is a word to describe how far off the numbers were except "arrrrggghhhhh!!!"

Cash for Clunkers is the quintessential Beltway boondoggle. Sell a program as a "gift" to the American people (paid for out of their own pockets, of course, and adding to their personal debt). Create mounds of paperwork and bureaucratic confusion. Underestimate the cost of the program. Then demand even more money be spent on the program because it is vital to the nation's interests.

The great Ronaldus Maximus was correct about the Liberal-Leftist-Progressive-Democrat-Statist's philosophy: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. "

Liberty Summer Book of the Week: "Meltdown" by Thomas E. Woods Jr.

If you are tired of business as usual in Washington, D.C., Professor Thomas Woods has provided fuel for the fire. In his latest book, "Meltdown," Woods does not nibble around the edges of our bloated federal government to find the answers to our current (and future) economic problems. Instead, he stabs the beast right in the heart.

Throughout the last election cycle, especially with the disastrous economic news that began hitting in September, Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama bemoaned the failure of the free market. Government needed to take a greater role in the economy. Free market actors are all rogues, but government is the Lone Ranger, Superman, Santa Claus, and Mother Teresa rolled into one benevolent problem solving panacea. Sadly, his GOP counterpoint John McCain differed little from Amerika's First Marxist President when it came to allure of government solutions.

"Meltdown" exposes the underlying problems that brought on the current crisis and that will insure that any recovery will be small and temporary. It's the government, stupid. Woods' economic analysis is heavily influence by the Austrian School and, particularly, Friedrich Hayek.

Woods examines Congressional misfires of recent decades. He is equally willing to criticize Republicans as Democrats. After all, from 2003-2006, the GOP held the White House and both Houses of Congress, but did nothing to rein in Leviathan. Yes, I know Democrats accused every reform proposition as being code of racism, sexism, homophobia, blah, blah, blah. A note to the GOP if they ever regain control: "Grow a pair!"

While most Conservatives are well aware of the violence the legislative and executive branches do to the economy, Woods has scathing words for an institution that is always on the periphery of the argument, but receives little real criticism from either side of the political equation: the Federal Reserve. Did you realize that the United States became a world economic power WITHOUT the Federal Reserve? It is a fact of history that American expanded and strengthened for over 130 years without the Fed. The shenanigans were almost immediate. Many economists have come to conclude that the Fed was the key culprit in the 1929 depression (though Hoover and FDR did their level best to keep the depression going). Fed policy and pronouncements on the economy over the last two decades are shown to have played a significant role in the current collapse.

For those who accept the premises of supreme federal authority over all aspects of the economy, Thomas Woods' "Meltdown" will seem extreme. However, if you believe in federalism and the U.S. Constitution, you should be willing to put everything on the table in coming to terms with our current situation. The Federal Reserve needs to be examined, as does the conventional wisdom we are taught about the nature of depressions and recessions.

Ron Paul introduced HR 1207 which would audit the Federal Reserve. The bill has 261 co-sponsors--that is over half of the members! The bill has languished in the House Committee on Financial Services since late February where Chairman Bahney Fwank will likely do his best to kill it. A Senate version (S604) is also bogged down in committee. Let's see if the most ethical Congress and the most transparent President are willing to open up the books of the shadowy agency that is increasingly taking control of the American economy.

Obama's EPA Repeals 1st Amendment and Transparency

The Wall Street Journal has a shocking piece on the Obama administration's silencing of a global warming heretic. The EPA is the agency at work in forcing scientists to accept climate extremist ideology over, you know, science! The global warming goons sound like the ruling classes of Medieval times who would declare a "scientific truth" and imprison anyone who dissented from their pronouncements.

EPA scientist Alan Carlin found out that you don't go against the family. Chicago rules have replaced scientific inquiry.

In March, the Obama EPA prepared to engage the global-warming debate in an astounding new way, by issuing an "endangerment" finding on carbon. It establishes that carbon is a pollutant, and thereby gives the EPA the authority to regulate it -- even if Congress doesn't act.

Around this time, Mr. Carlin and a colleague presented a 98-page analysis arguing the agency should take another look, as the science behind man-made global warming is inconclusive at best. The analysis noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend. It pointed out problems with climate models. It highlighted new research that contradicts apocalyptic scenarios. "We believe our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA," the report read.

The response to Mr. Carlin was an email from his boss, Al McGartland, forbidding him from "any direct communication" with anyone outside of his office with regard to his analysis. When Mr. Carlin tried again to disseminate his analysis, Mr. McGartland decreed: "The administrator and the administration have decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. . . . I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." (Emphasis added.)

Mr. McGartland blasted yet another email: "With the endangerment finding nearly final, you need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc, at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate." Ideology? Nope, not here. Just us science folk. Honest.

The emails were unearthed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Republican officials are calling for an investigation; House Energy Committee ranking member Joe Barton sent a letter with pointed questions to Mrs. Jackson, which she's yet to answer. The EPA has issued defensive statements, claiming Mr. Carlin wasn't ignored. But there is no getting around that the Obama administration has flouted its own promises of transparency.

Now, there is change you can believe in. Science is now a religion or a rigid corporate doctrine. Independent thought will be punished. Big BrObama is watching.

But, never fear. You can be sure our Mainstream Media will do their job and investigate Big BrObama and the EPA's crackdown on scientific analysis. Just as soon as they finish with Michael Jackson's memorial service...Michelle Obama's garden...and Sarah Palin's relationship with Lucifer...and the attempts to overthrow a legitimate election in Iran...and America's desire to embrace illegal immigration...and the racist Conservative attacks on Sonya Sotomayor...and Chastity Bono's genitalia...and Barack looking cool...and Barack looking fit...and Barack being intelligent...and Barack saving the economy....but, eventually they will look into this thing.

Barack Obama Wins Daytime Emmy For Best Lead Role In A Drama

All politics has an element of propaganda, but Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama and his gaggle of clowns have taken the phenomenon to a new level. The staging of Obama's health care "town hall" was so blatant, I don't know whether to laugh or to be frightened. This seemed like something Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro would have arranged to put a happy face on their latest usurpation of individual liberties. Of course, given the fact that Obama is of the same voice as Chavez and Castro on the Honduran president's overthrow after trying to become lifetime dictator, maybe we should be more alarmed than amused.

The emotional bang came from a lady from southwest Virginia named Debby Smith who is dealing with cancer. She is not the villain and everyone wishes her well and hopes she will get the needed treatments for a full recovery. However, she was not just someone who happened to be there. She is an employee of Obama's Organizing For America brownshirts within the DNC. The White House brought her to the event. Maybe she should ask her boss about helping her out. Of course, to her boss, Comrade Obama, Ms. Smith was simply "Exhibit A" (his words) for why all Americans should turn their health care over to the imperial federal government. The hug made for nice theatre, but she was used as a prop for further Statist usurpations of American freedom.

If Leftist Democrats were serious about health care costs, they would examine the reasons for those costs. When was the last time you heard a Democrat seriously discussing changes to policies and laws that would give greater freedom and flexibility to individuals, employers, and insurers? No, they simply beat us over the head with "turn your life over to the government and all will be well." Its about power, pure and simple. The amazing thing is that the dumb masses do not laugh in their collective faces when Democrats talk about government making an industry, any industry, more effective and efficient. The federal government is the Babe Ruth of inefficiency.

The extent of the ObamAlinsky propaganda machine has even led to antique journalist Helen Thomas snapping back at their media control. Thomas is a leftwing elitist, but even she is alarmed at the White House's tight grip on media access and staging of events. Give credit to Helen Thomas; unlike Katie Couric, Andrea Mitchell, Chrissy Matthews, George Stephanopolous, and most of the Mainstream Media she still has at least a little journalistic integrity.

One question for the DNC, Barry Vladimir Hussein Obama, the Mainstream Media, and all the front groups raising money to propagandize Americans to forfeit their bodies to government control: instead of spending tens of millions (or hundreds of millions) of dollars on spin and misinformation, why not create a free market insurance company based on the principles you want the government to impose on the folks? If you really want to provide insurance to 46 million uninsured people, you could easily get the ball rolling without involving the other 260 million people. Or could it be power, not health is the primary concern?

Mark Levin Butchers History Of The South And The Constitution

I love Mark Levin and his books have been important contributions to the Conservative movement. However, he got on a rant at the end of his show today that demonstrates the limits of a Yankee education. I've heard him tell his version of the North/South issues of antebellum American, so it wasn't a big shock. The misunderstanding of early American history is a big problem when it comes to truly understanding how and why our liberties are under attack now. Conventional Conservatives typically start with FDR and work forward through the Great Society and the impact of educational and media indoctrination over the last half century. Occassionally, they will venture back to Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives, though they are careful to uphold Theodore Roosvelt as a paragon of liberty even though we may well have been more of a Statist than Wilson.

Levin was on a slavery, the South and "Civil War" kick for some reason. I'll admit, I missed out on what led into the rant, but what I heard was a severe lack of historical depth. First, he was talking about how a clause to end the slave trade in twenty years was placed in the Constitution to appease the South. In fact, every Southern state except South Carolina outlawed the importation of slaves prior to 1808. When Congress passed a law to place a federal ban on slave importation in 1808, there were representatives from four states in opposition: South Carolina, Virginia, Vermont and New Hampshire (FYI, the last two are not in the South).

From there he jumped to how the North went to war to end slavery. Oh my. First, let me suggest what I believe is the best book on the subject: "When In The Course of Human Events" by Charles Adams. The refusal by so many to accept that there were any burning issues in antebellum America other than slavery is detrimental to our understanding of the earliest attacks on the Constitution.

Conservatives fall into a trap with the focus on slavery in that historical discussion. The other issue, and the one which had a bigger impact on secession, was the federal government's tariff policy. The tariff was the primary revenue source for the central government. The Whig party, and then the Republican party, favored a tariff system that favored manufacturing states at the expense of agricultural exporting states. Southern states argued that the tariff laws violated Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Now, by chance, the lineups are essentially the same. The anti-slavery states were also the pro-tariff states as they paid little in tariffs and reaped the benefits of road, canal, and eventually railroad construction grants from the federal government. The slave states opposed the protective tariffs because they paid the lion's share while receiving few direct benefits. In other words, the Whigs and Republicans were practicing the same kind of income redistribution that Leftist Democrats do today. Obviously, their abuse paled in extent to what we see today, but it was an unchecked usurpation that eroded federalism and helped feed Leviathan.

I think Conservatives are afraid of this issue, but to understand how we have gotten to this point it is vital to understand that liberty has been under attack and the State has been on the advance since the ink on the Constitution was barely dry. It is a tremendous irony that a war that did result in the ending of slavery (although that was an afterthought and not a primary purpose) also greatly advanced the war on federalism and the growth of central power. There is no denying this fact.

Being historically correct is not a defense of slavery. It was an immoral institution. However, slavery's immorality should not be used to shroud the violence done to the Constitution and federalism by the Whigs/Republicans of that time (including Saint Abraham). Check out the words of French economic philosopher Frederic Bastiat in 1850:

Look at the United States There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its proper domain: the protection of every person's liberty and property. As a consequence of this, there appears to be no country in the world where the social order rests on a firmer foundation. But, even in the United States, there are two issues, and only two, that have always endangered the public peace.

What are these two questions? They are slavery and tariffs. These are the only two issues where, contrary to the general spirit of the republic of the United States, law has assumed the character of a plunderer.

Slavery is a violation, by law, of liberty. The protective tariff is a violation, by law, of property.

The one evil was eradicated from the United States. The other, the primary reason for the War of the Rebellion, was vindicated with the Union victory. The non-slaveowners are uncritically considered the heroes of the episode even though they did great violence to the Constitution. As Bastiat said, there were two pervasive evils. It is time we finally defeat the other one, which is unlawful plunder of man's property for redistribution by the state. An important step is admitting the genesis of the problem as we strike at the roots.

Why Is The Mainstream Media Surprised That Wal-Mart Supports ObamaCare?

Wal-Mart's announcement of its support for Barry Vladimir Hussein Soetero Obama's nationalized health care scheme has sent shockwaves through the state-run media. Shocking! The eeee-vil corporate giant supporting the kind-and-benevolent Democrats' desire to mandate mediocre medical care to all Americans is reported as a surprise development in the long march toward socialized medicine. Is the mainstream media really that stupid or are they convinced that we are?

Wal-Mart already has health care for employees. They see the strong possibility of more stringent federal regulations on employer-based health care and the likelihood of a government option. Hmmmm, so Wal-Mart can be a "good corporate citizen" and support universal health care while shedding the responsibility of paying for it directly. There is a reason the company has been so successful and will continue to be. They know how to play the game.

I don't fault Wal-Mart for this action. They are acting as good stewards of their company and their stockholders. They understand what Dr. Barry Mengele doesn't want you to grasp. The "public option" is less for individuals than it is for businesses. Why should they shoulder the responsibility of their employees' medical care when the imperial federal government is willing to take their workers into a government-based system?

Here is the other inconvenient truth of most government regulations and usurpations: despite all the "evil corporation" rhetoric that the Statists spew to the dumb masses these centrally-planned schemes are a boon to Big Bidness. The math is simple. Who can more easily absorb the greater costs of regulation and taxation, as established company or one that is growing or in the start-up phase? A larger corporation can diffuse the increased costs more broadly with less of a hit to the bottom line than can a smaller company. Ultimately, the consumers will pay any increased corporate taxes through higher prices, so Wal-Mart can do that more cheaply than can Bob-Mart, Sid-Mart or Dave-Mart.

Obama's health care scheme comes from the same totalitarian desires as his nationalization of banks, car companies and the energy industry. There is precedent. Americans should look back at FDR's horrendous National Industrial Recovery Act for an example of how this works. Competition and the free market were blamed for the depression that became "Great" with FDR's help. The NRA abolished competition and forced industries into strictly-enforced rules that eliminated the dynamism of capitalism.

So, expect more big corporations to jump on board. It is clear that any company that is willing to play ball with Comrade Obama will be taken care of and those who do not will become targets. I wonder how the Leftist propagandists will square their hate of corporate America with industrial support for universal health care? Or will they even need to as the dumb masses continue to mourn Michael Jackson and prepare for the next season of American Idol?