Crouching Patriot, Hidden Bircher

Most people have heard about the book, The 5,000 Year Leap.  It's billed as a book which explains about how  representative democracy, which began in the US, propelled humanity forward the same distance in 200 years as it had taken 5,000 to previously transverse.  In terms of freeing up markets and granting people civil rights, America became a place where it was better to have a great idea than to be born into an aristocratic family.  This allowed America to progress at a greater rate than nations who still answered to a monarch or where social status was the sole determinant.  

Having only heard about the book in passing but agreeing with the thesis in general, I decided to purchase a copy for my new Kindle. The sample section talked about federalism, the Articles of Confederation, The Constitution, Jamestown, socialism, and capitalism.  After purchasing the book, however, I learned that the real message had to do with the supposed 28 principles for good government and that is when I started to notice a trend.    

Principles 1-5 are directly related to God or morality, Principle 9 refers to divine law.  The remaining principles are all derived from a narrow view of religion and seem to only have a thin veneer of political thought.  As a religious book, it's passable if not quite inspiring. As a political book, it's garbage.    


After suffering through fifty pages, I decided to look up the author.  From the introduction, he described himself only as a constitutional historian but I guessed there was more to that story.  The author, Cleon Skousen, turned out to be a Mormon evangelizer and an associate of the John Birch society.  His other works covered topics such as New World Order conspiracies, end of the world prophecies, and parenting (I have not read the parenting books by him, but I can't quite recommend them either!).  

For those not familiar with the John Birch Society, it takes what should be a good foundation of anti-communism and succeeds into making it a bizarre belief system.  Birchers, as they are often called, believe President Eisenhower was a communist.  They also believe that adding fluoride to the drinking water (which occurred way back in 1945) was  a communist plot.  As Ayn Rand said of them, "What is wrong with them is that they don't seem to have any specific, clearly defined political philosophy.  I consider the Birch Society futile, because they are not for capitalism, but merely against communism. I gather they believe that the disastrous state of today's world is caused by a communist conspiracy. This is childishly naive and superficial. No country can be destroyed by a mere conspiracy, it can be destroyed only by ideas. The Birchers seem to be either nonintellectual or anti-intellectual. They do not attach importance to ideas. They do not realize that the great battle in the world today is a philosophical, ideological conflict."

After reading up on Skousen, I contacted Amazon and told them I had bought the book in error.  It was removed from my Kindle and I was issued a full refund.  I suppose many people would have let their experience with the book pass without comment or simply would have stopped reading the book without undertaking the level of research I did.  My reason for needing to warn others about the author is as much motivated by personal reasons as political ones.  Over the years I have read thousands of books.  While other kids played, I read.  In 26 years, I have only ever not finished three books after starting them.  The first was an uninteresting and over-technical book by Piers Anthony in the Mode series which was a fantasy series based around the geometric pattern of the Mandelbrot set.  The second was Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.  Zinn was at best a deluded moron or at worst a pathological liar, there is enough there to start another post so I'll simply direct anyone interested in Zinn to Reason.com's latest post on him.  The third will be the 5,000 Year Leap. 

Are You A Good Witch Or A Bad Witch?

Christine O'Donnell upset the GOP establishment candidate for the Delaware primary in the Senate race last week.  The establishment candidate, Mike Castle, was a nine term member of the House who supported abortion, gun control, cap and trade, and did not support repealing Obamacare.  A virtual unknown in the race several weeks ago, Sarah Palin's endorsement rocketed her past Mike Castle with six points to spare.  Unfortunately, that's when the trouble started. 

Mike Castle ran negative campaign ads against O'Donnell but it is when she won the primary that the national media starting repeating the same set of talking points.  One Mike Castle ad that has found new life in syndication claims that O'Donnell "owes $11,744 in back taxes and penalties," and "was sued by Fairleigh Dickenson University for unpaid expenses." The ad goes on to say O'Donnell, "defaulted on her mortgage," "ran up huge campaign debt and left vendors and staff unpaid," and "used campaign donations to pay her rent."

Back in 1999 while on Bill Maher's "Politically Incorrect", O' Donnell said, "I dabbled into witchcraft. I never joined a coven."  She continued, "I hung around people who were doing these things. I'm not making this stuff up. I know what they told me they do.  One of my first dates with a witch was on a satanic altar, and I didn't know it. I mean, there's little blood there and stuff like that. We went to a movie and then had a little midnight picnic on a satanic altar." 

To overcome this perception, O' Donnell should be going on every interview she can while being prepped for the tough questions she will inevitably get.   Unfortunately she seems to be passing up early chances to change the tone and her campaign is suffering.

Unlike Sharron Angle or Rand Paul, this "Tea Party" candidate looks almost completely unelectable.  Whether religious people take offense to the witchcraft statement or the nonreligious just find her too kooky, she has an almost impossible uphill battle.  Although many in Obama's cabinet also have large unpaid tax bills, it is a bigger deal for someone who is pushing fiscal restraint.

I disagree with her opponent, Coons, on more substantive issues and her win could be the 51st Senate seat so I must say that despite all this I will likely vote for her.  If it was anything short of that level of importance, I would likely vote 3rd party.

Although the Tea Party can do great things, we must remember the rule given to us by the great William F. Buckley, "Support the most conservative candidate who is electable."  The Tea Party must not assume its own enthusiasm is enough to elect candidates, especially in the Northeast. 

Don't Believe Obama's Deathbed Conversion On Tax Cuts

After borrowing money, printing money and raising taxes (or "fees" if you believe the text of the Obamacare legislation), Obama now says he wants to give Americans a tax cut.  Some speculated that even Obama realizes his stimulus programs didn't work and is now pursuing solutions within the Austrian school of economics.  This view was shattered when Obama took to the road touting the necessity of a second stimulus.  Although he hypes the tax cut portion of it, there is also 50 billion dollars for infrastructure repair (didn't we already designate a 767 billion dollar stimulus for "mostly" infrastructure repair?  Those roads must be in terrible shape!). 

And even when it comes to tax cuts, Obama has decided to extend them only to the middle class regardless of the fact that filers in the top 3 percent are responsible for generating 50 percent of small business income.  While this would still help the poor and middle class by reducing their tax bill, it would do nothing to improve the economy which would them exponentially more than a tax cut alone.  In fact, since Obama's tax cut is really only a middle class only extension of the currently active Bush tax cut, high earners actually face a tax hike.

Senior citizens might be some of the hardest hit by the new tax structure, according to Heritage.  While the Medicare Advantage supplemental program will be done away with in part to move $500 billion out of Medicare and into Obamacare, subsidies to similar plans will be cut forcing premiums up.    Ninety-one percent of all Medicare beneficiaries have some kind of supplemental coverage.  While seniors costs will go up, their income may decline due to the dividend tax rate rising (as referenced previously in End The Recession By Taxing The Rich).  The taxes are projected to drop the value of stock prices by 211 billion dollars.  Seniors hold the most stock of any demographic group and are most likely to hold high dividend stocks which are perceived as lower-risk. 

Regardless of his motivation, Obama deserves at least a little credit for proposing the extension of tax cuts but when the alternative is raising taxes in the midst of a recession the amount of credit is small indeed.    Although more an idealist than a pragmatist, even Obama saw the political repercussions of not extending the tax cuts.  Let's just hope a Republican House can hold his feet to the fire after November and force him permanently into a pragmatic mindset.

Vacation Post

Happy Labor Day to everyone.  I'll be taking a working vacation this weekend trying to clean up the house and hit as many barbecues as possible.  This week's update is a riff off of Bud Light's Real Men of Genius ads.  This week we salute Vice President Joe Biden.



On my computer, the video seems to be a little out of frame so you can click on the video area itself to go to the Youtube source link if you have the same issue.  

"Unity" Mosque Causes Deep Divisions

Ever since the media first started covering the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque," there has been a frenzy of strongly stated dissenting opinions.  Many on the left say we should accept the mosque at face value and accept it as part of the healing process.  Those on the right are suspicious of the imams and the financial backers' motives.  It's odd to see the left jumping to the mosque's defense and citing freedom of religion.  Aren't these the same people who started the Freedom From Religion Foundation?

While the left is certainly deserving of mockery for their selective outrage (would they feel the same way about a church being built close to the site where a believer bombed an abortion clinic?  Certainly they wouldn't tar an entire religion for the acts of one member, right?), that doesn't mean that the right is handling the issue well.  Some conservatives want to see building codes enforced to the point where the mosque is effectively blocked by the state.  Bad idea.  Republicans knew this ten years ago when they passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.  RLUIPA, as it is awkwardly abbreviated,  was aimed at local government bodies using zoning authority to prevent religious institutions from moving in or expanding their operations.  Land use laws are so byzantine that any building can be prevented from being built almost anywhere almost anytime.  However, by preventing the building of one mosque we would not only give government a stick to use against thousands of churches but we would also not be living up to the values that Americans hold dear. 

So does that mean the mosque has to be built?  Not necessarily.  Public pressure is still a legitimate way to deter the mosque being built.  To tar those who oppose the mosque as right-wing racists is lunacy.  A majority (52%) of New Yorkers oppose the mosque and Big Apple residents are not exactly known for their conservative bona fides.  This kind of pressure was legitimate when Jews opposed the monastery at Auschwitz.  Although no one doubted the Catholic nuns had the best of intentions in praying for those who perished in the Holocaust, Jews felt the ground was sacred to them and demanded the monastery be moved.  Pope John Paul II obliged and agreed it was "hallowed ground."  Even without suspecting the imam's motives, there are legitimate objections to the mosque.  

And for those who would like to take a closer look at Imam Rauf's motives, he is putting fuel on the fire.  A mere 19 days after the attack he contends that the US was an accessory to 9/11.




The imam also was caught on tape saying that America has more blood on its hands than Al Qaeda although the video has been quickly pulled by the copyright owner.  Also for someone who claims unity is his goal, he seems fine with opposing more than 50% of New Yorkers.  When it comes to funding he says he will not accept money from terrorist organizations but when asked if Hamas and Hezbollah were terrorist organizations, he refuses to answer. 

Whether you question his motives or just think that he should voluntarily be respectful of the land he is choosing to build on, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to oppose the mosque but if he chooses to press on, I would rather have a mosque at Ground Zero than a black mark on our history of the government not impinging on religious freedom.

Media Being Left By The Wayside

Americans have always relied on the media to keep tabs on those in power.  It now seems we need someone to keep tabs on the media.  

During the 2008 primaries an online listserv group of liberal journalists going by the name Journolist plotted to cover up the Jeremiah Wright story in an effort to boost Obama into the Presidency.  Sound like a nutty right wing conspiracy?  Not so.  According to records obtained by Tucker Carlson of the Daily Caller this actually happened.  

During the debates when Obama was asked by George Stephanopoulos, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”   Richard Kim of the Nation fumed on Journolist that Stephanopoulos was “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent went even further. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”  He continued: “I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need to. It’s not necessary to jump to Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a right winger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously, I mean this rhetorically.”  I guess I should be thankful he only meant it "rhetorically."  

As if journalists showing their already present biases weren't enough Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun, suggested “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?”

Luke Mitchell, a then editor at Harpers magazine, even suggests openly coordinating coverage in favor of the Democrats.  “...It seems to me that a concerted effort on the part of the left partisan press could be useful. Why geld ourselves? A lot of the people on this list work for organizations that are far more influential than, say, the Washington Times.  Open question: Would it be a good use of this list to co-ordinate a message of the week along the lines of the GOP? Or is that too loathsome? It certainly sounds loathsome. But so does losing!”

This was not just a group of disaffected D-listers either.  Its 400 member roster included Joe Klein of Time Magazine, Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker and CNN, Dave Weigel of the Washington Post, and was founded by Ezra Klein also of the Washington Post.  

Is there any wonder every poll done on the media in the last 30 years has shown that most people believe the media tilts left?  But this is even beyond that.  In his 2001 book, Bias, Bernard Goldberg exhaustively proved a left bias but chalks it up to everyone cribbing the same big sources for headlines such as the New York Times.  He stressed that although 99% of media lean left, there is no grand conspiracy.  Goldberg has now been making the rounds on talk radio shows saying that this is new and very troubling.  He conjectures that the media is no longer 99% liberal with the rise of Fox News which presents points of view previously only heard on the AM dial.  The liberal media realizes it is losing its great monopoly on TV and won't go down without a fight.  While some claim that Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party, there is no evidence of that.  On the other hand, there is mounting evidence that the mainstream media is an arm of the Democratic Party. 

Government In Your Bathroom and Car

Buying your first house and moving out of state is a unique experience.  Maybe I just feel that way because that is where I am in life but to be sure there are more than a few things to be learned in the process and almost as many to be detested.  Most are the result of government intervention into that which they have no reason to be involved with. 

Shortly after moving in I learned that the showerhead didn't work.  Not a problem, I ran to Home Depot and bought a new one.  As I perused the instructions I found an interesting statement along the bottom in small type:  This product meets federal standards for GPM and psi.  GPM, as I learned later, stands for gallons per minute.  Federal law decrees that showerheads may have a maximum of 2.5 GPM and at no greater pressure than 80 psi.  Fortunately the law was largely unenforced except for those unlucky to sell nonconforming showerheads, such as Paul Coombs of Zoe Industries,  in states that had laws that mirrored the federal statute.  However the Wall Street Journal reports that this could all change soon.  Some "rain-fall" showerheads emit as much as 12 GPM.  Some showerheads that aid disabled people could also be in violation.  Many older units installed in schools and gyms could also run afoul of the law.  The proponents of the law claim this will save water.  It might, although some people may choose to take longer showers after turning in their nonstandard heads.  It would also undoubtedly reduce water usage to pass a law saying no one may shower for longer than 15 minutes, or to limit people to one shower a day.  A faucet that leaks twice per minute will waste over 100 gallons of water a year, maybe the government should mandate random home inspections as well.  As always the government is making a token effort to control people's behavior in one specific and business unfriendly fashion while not doing much at all to solve the problem.  I wouldn't want a "rain-fall" showerhead even if it was legal.  I fixed all the leaky faucets in my house when I moved in not because I am worried about the planet but because I didn't want to pay for 100 gallons of water a year that I was gaining no benefit from.  Water costs money and many would choose to use a showerhead that is economical.  Do we really need a law that would prevent those willing to pay a little more for a higher volume of water per minute from having it?

Shortly after replacing the water head, I had a similar situation with my new toilet.  My old one was an older model which used 3.5 gallons per flush.  New toilets must be "low-flow" toilets that only use 1.6 gallons per flush.  Although it is not illegal to operate an older toilet, it is illegal to install them if your old one breaks.   "Low-flow" toilets are more economical but less effective.  Once again, it is a choice that is taken away from consumers by government busybodies. 

Federalism is one of the great things about America.  Each state can pass its own laws independently of the federal government as long as they do not contradict eachother.  The framers envisioned the federal government to pass basic laws and leave the details to the states.  Unfortunately, the federal government got in the business of details and states now regulate even further.  After returning to the DMV for my license plates, I was confused.  I was only issued one plate.  I had previously had two in New Jersey.  Only a rear plate is necessary for most states, I came to realize.  Problem is when I bought my car in New Jersey, the plate holder was mounted to bumper.  After removing the New Jersey plates, as is required by law, I ended up with this:

I am not really a car person so I'm not furious that my car has prominent nail holes in it now but why do states regulate cars down to the details of numbers of plates?  What about cars sold to out of state used car lots that don't have matching laws?  A cop trails someone before pulling them over, so what is the need of the front plate?  It's OK though, I can now hang a vanity plate on the front, I was thinking of something like NOCHANGE in this holder: