Category Archives: Politics

Economic Storm Clouds and a Potential Blue Sky

There’s a pair of columns on the web today that I found time to digest that are excellent and well worth your time. The first is by Paul A. Rahe, hosted by Big Government. Rahe is a Hoover Institution fellow, as is another columnist/historian I look up to, Victor Davis Hansen. This column lays out in quick — but pretty accurate — terms how we got to in our country’s current economic downturn, the mistakes that our leadership has made in dealing with the crisis, and most importantly, what very well might be the horizon for us if we don’t turn ship immediately. He makes the compelling case that the worst is yet to come, a view that I share. It’s not pretty. Spend 5 minutes and read it.

The second piece comes from TV’s newest reality show star, Sarah Palin. She writes an editorial in the Wall Street Journal today, vigorously supporting Paul Ryan’s “Roadmap for America’s Future” that was released earlier this year. I have more respect than ever for Palin in endorsing the plan. I’d agree with her that it’s the best plan proposed by anyone with actual power in the government. It shows that all the wailing in our capitol about how it’s impossible to balance the budget and to fix our structural fiscal issues is hogwash.

Now, most importantly, does our leadership have the courage to implement something like this? It’s radical, sure, but no more radical than the original programs — Social Security and Medicare — that got us into this mess to begin with. Probably more to the point, do the American people actually want this? Unfortunately, probably not yet. This is from a poll by Bloomberg:

Americans want Congress to bring down a federal budget deficit that many believe is “dangerously out of control,” only under two conditions: minimize the pain and make the rich pay.

The public wants Congress to keep its hands off entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, a Bloomberg National Poll shows. They oppose cuts in most other major domestic programs and defense. They want to maintain subsidies for farmers and tax breaks like the mortgage-interest deduction. And they’re against an increase in the gasoline tax.

Pain for thee, but not for me. The crazy part about this is that Ryan’s plan doesn’t really involve much in the way of extreme sacrifice for everyday citizens. No, if implemented, the pain would be felt primarily by politicians and bureaucrats as their power is slowly stripped away. What a shame that would be, right?

The Star Spangled Banner, As Explained by Isaac Asimov

Thanks to Jerry Pournelle for this. He put the whole thing in his post, so I’m going to do the same. Really, we as Americans should hear the full four verses much more often than we do. They should be explained and analyzed in high school civics classes, too (at least it wasn’t in my high school way back when).

Our National Anthem

Four Stanzas

By Isaac Asimov

I have a weakness–I am crazy, absolutely nuts, about our national anthem.

The words are difficult and the tune is almost impossible, but frequently when I’m taking a shower I sing it with as much power and emotion as I can. It shakes me up every time.

I was once asked to speak at a luncheon. Taking my life in my hands, I announced I was going to sing our national anthem–all four stanzas.

This was greeted with loud groans. One man closed the door to the kitchen, where the noise of dishes and cutlery was loud and distracting. “Thanks, Herb,” I said.

“That’s all right,” he said. “It was at the request of the kitchen staff.”

I explained the background of the anthem and then sang all four stanzas.

Let me tell you, those people had never heard it before–or had never really listened. I got a standing ovation. But it was not me; it was the anthem.

More recently, while conducting a seminar, I told my students the story of the anthem and sang all four stanzas. Again there was a wild ovation and prolonged applause. And again, it was the anthem and not me.

So now let me tell you how it came to be written.

In 1812, the United States went to war with Great Britain, primarily over freedom of the seas. We were in the right. For two years, we held off the British, even though we were still a rather weak country. Great Britain was in a life and death struggle with Napoleon. In fact, just as the United States declared war, Napoleon marched off to invade Russia. If he won, as everyone expected, he would control Europe, and Great Britain would be isolated. It was no time for her to be involved in an American war.

At first, our seamen proved better than the British. After we won a battle on Lake Erie in 1813, the American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, sent the message “We have met the enemy and they are ours.” However, the weight of the British navy beat down our ships eventually. New England, hard-hit by a tightening blockade, threatened secession.

Meanwhile, Napoleon was beaten in Russia and in 1814 was forced to abdicate. Great Britain now turned its attention to the United States, launching a three-pronged attack. The northern prong was to come down Lake Champlain toward New York and seize parts of New England. The southern prong was to go up the Mississippi, take New Orleans and paralyze the west. The central prong was to head for the mid-Atlantic states and then attack Baltimore, the greatest port south of New York. If Baltimore was taken, the nation, which still hugged the Atlantic coast, could be split in two. The fate of the United States, then, rested to a large extent on the success or failure of the central prong.

The British reached the American coast, and on August 24, 1814, took Washington, D. C. Then they moved up the Chesapeake Bay toward Baltimore. On September 12, they arrived and found 1000 men in Fort McHenry, whose guns controlled the harbor. If the British wished to take Baltimore, they would have to take the fort.

On one of the British ships was an aged physician, William Beanes, who had been arrested in Maryland and brought along as a prisoner. Francis Scott Key, a lawyer and friend of the physician, had come to the ship to negotiate his release. The British captain was willing, but the two Americans would have to wait. It was now the night of September 13, and the bombardment of Fort McHenry was about to start.

As twilight deepened, Key and Beanes saw the American flag flying over Fort McHenry. Through the night, they heard bombs bursting and saw the red glare of rockets. They knew the fort was resisting and the American flag was still flying. But toward morning the bombardment ceased, and a dread silence fell. Either Fort McHenry had surrendered and the British flag flew above it, or the bombardment had failed and the American flag still flew.

As dawn began to brighten the eastern sky, Key and Beanes stared out at the fort, trying to see which flag flew over it. He and the physician must have asked each other over and over, “Can you see the flag?”

After it was all finished, Key wrote a four stanza poem telling the events of the night. Called “The Defence of Fort M’Henry,” it was published in newspapers and swept the nation. Someone noted that the words fit an old English tune called “To Anacreon in Heaven” –a difficult melody with an uncomfortably large vocal range. For obvious reasons, Key’s work became known as “The Star Spangled Banner,” and in 1931 Congress declared it the official anthem of the United States.

Now that you know the story, here are the words. Presumably, the old doctor is speaking. This is what he asks Key:

Oh! say, can you see, by the dawn’s early light,

What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming?

Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,

O’er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?

And the rocket’s red glare, the bombs bursting in air,

Gave proof thro’ the night that our flag was still there.

Oh! say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave,

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

“Ramparts,” in case you don’t know, are the protective walls or other elevations that surround a fort. The first stanza asks a question. The second gives an answer

On the shore, dimly seen thro’ the mist of the deep,

Where the foe’s haughty host in dread silence reposes,

What is that which the breeze, o’er the towering steep.

As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?

Now it catches the gleam of the morning’s first beam,

In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream

‘Tis the star-spangled banner. Oh! long may it wave

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

“The towering steep” is again, the ramparts. The bombardment has failed, and the British can do nothing more but sail away, their mission a failure.

In the third stanza, I feel Key allows himself to gloat over the American triumph. In the aftermath of the bombardment, Key probably was in no mood to act otherwise.

During World War II, when the British were our staunchest allies, this third stanza was not sung. However, I know it, so here it is:

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore

That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion

A home and a country should leave us no more?

Their blood has washed out their foul footstep’s pollution.

No refuge could save the hireling and slave

From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

The fourth stanza, a pious hope for the future, should be sung more slowly than the other three and with even deeper feeling.

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand

Between their loved homes and the war’s desolation,

Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n – rescued land

Praise the Pow’r that hath made and preserved us a nation.

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,

And this be our motto–”In God is our trust.”

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I hope you will look at the national anthem with new eyes. Listen to it, the next time you have a chance, with new ears.

And don’t let them ever take it away.

–Isaac Asimov, March 1991

My Dream: Eliminate a Law For Each One Passed

That would be an idea pushed by my dream candidate: every law that’s passed, one needs to be removed from the books completely. Every program passed, one needs to be discontinued. You get the point. Too many stupid laws get passed because legislators and executives feel the need to “do something” and “look busy” for the voters. And sadly, many voters eat this stuff up. Good example: there’s already laws on the books (at least in Oregon) pertaining to distracted driving, careless driving, and reckless driving. So along comes a new Crisis of the Day for pundits to flip out about: talking on your mobile while driving. The police could enforce the laws already on the books in egregious circumstances, or the lawmakers could modify the existing ones, if they don’t give enough leeway. Instead a new law is passed, giving the pols a chance to crow in front of the press how they’re earning their salary keeping the children safe. Grandstanding.

So Reason Magazine comes out with a post today about Sam Brownback out of Kansas:

Kansas GOP gubernatorial candidate Sam Brownback is proposing an “Office of the Repealer,” tasked with seeking out bad or repetitive laws, wasteful programs, and archaic state agencies for elimination.

Excellent! How much of this is more smoke and mirrors? I have no clue, as I don’t follow Kansas politics at all, and I don’t know the guy. The idea, though, is fantastic. I’d love to see another pol one up Mr. Brownback with my idea above, though.

(Thanks to Instapundit for the heads up.)

And In the News: More Anti-Semitism!

This whole “peace flotilla” thing in the news lately has been difficult for me — difficult to take those “morally outraged” at Israel as serious in any respect. I tried to explain my frustration with this to my wife the other day, and found that it was difficult. Thanks to Victor Davis Hanson, I can just link to him, though. He pretty much explains exactly my own thought processes and conclusions with this whole mess. Make no mistake — most of the people in the news with their underthings in a bunch are flat out anti-Semites. It’s difficult to have patience with racists.

It is hard to become much more influential than the doyen of the White House press corps, who is given a ceremonial front-rows seat at press briefings and press conferences. So when Helen Thomas suggested that the Israelis should leave their country and “go home” to Poland and Germany, this was not some obscure, eccentric anti-Semite, but a liberal insider who has come to enjoy iconic status and a sense of exemption from criticism.

Note that Ms. Thomas did not call for just a West Bank free of Jews. And she did not just wish for the elimination of the nation of Israel itself. Rather, Thomas envisions the departure of Israelis to the sites of the major death camps seven decades ago where six million Jews were gassed.

Read the whole thing, of course. What, you thought I’d copy and paste the whole column?

Let It Burn?

I’ve been holding onto this post for a while in my head, as you can tell by the age of the article I’m referencing: May 15th. It’s called Let It Burn, published on the American Thinker, and while pessimistic as all get out, it’s also flirting with the place my head’s been at for quite a while.

For the past hundred years, America has been slowly moving away from the principles of its founding. The ideals of liberty, individual achievement, limited government, and the equality of opportunity have been slowly supplanted by calls for security, class warfare, excessive regulation, and the equality of outcome. The passage of stimulus acts, bailouts, government takeovers of two U.S. automakers, and the health care overhaul prove that our movement away from 1776 has accelerated.

Read the whole thing, of course. The idea behind the piece is that we need to go much further into the darkness before we can come back into the light. I’ll believe that this country is ready to come back to the light of liberty when I see that a majority of people 50+ want to completely discontinue Social Security and Medicare. Until then, we as a people are not serious.

After reading this article, if you haven’t already, read “The Coming of the Fourth American Republic“. It describes the Special Interest State, and why our government, as it’s setup and running now, is absolutely guaranteed to fail at some point. Hopefully not for a long time, but there are way too many variables for anyone to a year on it. Hopefully we’ll wake up as a people well before that point and transition to something better instead of letting chaos dictate what our future is.

Guns and the Economy

I don’t have a lot of time for writing today, but before I didn’t have time, I had a bit for reading. So, I’m passing along two columns I read this morning that are both pretty interesting. The first is by Walter Russell Mead about the top 10 things we’ve learned from the financial crisis. It’s good, and I agree with almost all of it. We certainly do live in interesting times.

The world economy is like a person with a bad stomach flu; that horrible sick feeling keeps coming back. In 2008 it was mortgage-backed bonds and the failure of Lehman Brothers; last year it was the worst recession since the 1930s; this year it’s the European financial crisis. We still don’t know where this is going; there is plenty of good news out there. The National Association of Business Economists is upgrading its growth forecast for the US in 2010; China remains strong; the IMF is upgrading its growth forecasts worldwide. On the other hand, some of the world’s smartest investors are buying gold like there was no tomorrow, there is talk about a new global meltdown, and the world’s financial markets seem ready to plunge on the slightest whiff of bad news.

The second is a piece on Pajamas Media pointing out that the Mexican President’s pants are on fire. One thing I’ve learned through my study of history: always be very scared when politicians want to take away the citizen’s guns. It all comes down to power and money.

President Calderon’s assertion that Mexico has seized around 75,000 guns and assault weapons in the last three years — and that more than 80 percent of them came from the United States — is a bald-faced lie. It simply is not remotely connected to the truth.

Huge Homeschooling Success Story

This is a pretty amazing story about a homeschooled girl that shows just how successful homeschooling can be when combined with the right parents, the right plan, and I’m sure the most important piece of all, the right kid. It also just so happens that Dakota Root is the daughter of the Libertarian Vice-Presidential candidate for 2008, so obviously we’re talking about a… motivated family. Read the Dad’s story first on Whiskey and Gunpowder. Here’s the beginning:

This is the story that the teachers unions wish had never happened. This is the story that proves all their hysterical demands for more money are nothing but a sham. This is the story that makes the unions and education bureaucrats sick to their stomachs. This is the personal story of my daughter Dakota Root.

A quick Google search on her names shows a write up on some site called Cyberspacers. It’s a good little bio of her, detailing her successes. As an aside, fencing is cool, to boot.

Homeschooling is quite a serious commitment, and isn’t for everyone, especially in the days that two income households are more often a reality than not. So this story certainly doesn’t mean everyone should homeschool, it does show that non-public school options not only can compete but far surpass the “regular” option. Of course, this is nothing new, especially if you browse anything in the libertarian or conservative world. But it’s a good reminder. I constantly find it amazing that parents put up with public school monopolies and the threats handed down from teacher’s unions and school boards alike. It’s nothing more than a naked display of what people will do to protect their power, and damn the consequences — included your kids and your freedom. From the first article referenced — well said:

The sad reality is that teachers unions and government aren’t the solution – they are the problem. Our public schools get worse every year, yet teachers unions demand more and more money. They get their money, it gets worse yet, and they demand even MORE. That is the definition of insanity. This is “Groundhog Day.” It isn’t working- and hasn’t since the day that government took over education in this country.

What Might Have Been: The State of Jefferson

If you’re a student of history — especially American history — and want a fascinating read, follow this link to a post on the Strange Maps blog. Back in 1941, there was a honest-to-God movement for counties in southern Oregon and northern California to secede from those respective states to form a new one. Namely, they were going to name it the State of Jefferson. The idea was that they weren’t receiving the attention they thought they deserved from their respective state capitols, and thought this was the best solution. Things were moving along until, well, December 7th of 1941. The attack on Pearl Harbor and the immediate entry into the war by the United States put to an end talk of state secessions.

I’m sure that many communities in America still share the same frustrations that plagued these local leaders over a half century ago. This is one reason why increasing Federal power is a Bad Thing: the most effective government is a local one, where it tends to be more responsive. This is something our forefathers knew well, as that philosophy is reflected in our Constitution.

It’s a simple idea: whatever can’t be handled by the individual, family, or church, the local city or county government steps in. What they can’t handle the state government steps in, and finally, the Federal government handles the rest. The last run of the ladder includes things like a post office, a currency, foreign relations, interstate commerce, and a military. So, does our modern governmental structure follow this pattern?

More SWAT Abuse Thanks to the War on Drugs

This is apparently old news, but for in the corners of the blogosphere that I frequent, it’s only a day old. Last week, a rare video of a SWAT-type drug raid was posted to YouTube and it’s caused quite the uproar. As well it should. I know some law enforcement officers, and they’re good people. I’m sure a majority of them are. But there is a non-insignificant percentage of LEO’s that, I’m convinced, only got the job because they wanted to get paid to be a disgusting combination of Rambo and a middle school bully.

Radley Balko is absolutely right: this sort of thing happens way too often. You don’t need to trawl the news sites to find many more examples of these raids going bad. And for what? Because someone might have drugs in their house? This is probably the main reason I don’t call myself a Republican. They have proven time and time again that they are willing to throw out almost any individual right if they feel it just might help the War on Drugs. The Democrats are hardly better, either.

Watch the video and then read the account on Reason Magazine’s site by Mr. Balko. Any police that were involved in this raid should be outright fired. Period. Any police that act like this should be fired. Period. What would that mean? It would mean this sort of thing wouldn’t happen very much at all. And wouldn’t that be a shame? This is not how you treat citizens of these United States. This is not how people sworn to protect those citizens should act. The War on Drugs has done quite a bit to corrupt this country — much more than any drug at any amount could ever do.

THAT Arizona Immigration Law

Byron York at the Washington Examiner had an eye-opening op-ed today, asking what America Micahel Gerson is living in. While I hadn’t read that particular piece on on the Washington Post, I’d read similar comments both from the chattering class as well as on various comment boards. To wit, concerning Arizona’s new immigration enforcement law: Americans just won’t put up with having the authorities ask for their ID on demand. To this, Mr. York says:

Which leads to the question: What America is Gerson living in? No, we are not confronted by actors with heavy German accents demanding our papers. We are instead confronted routinely by people of all stripes asking to see our driver’s license. When we board an airplane, we are asked to produce a government-issued photo ID, usually a driver’s license. When we make some credit- or debit-card purchases in department stores, we are asked to produce a driver’s license. When we enter many office buildings, both private and government, security guards often ask us to produce a driver’s license. When we go to doctors’ offices and hospitals, we are asked to produce a driver’s license. When we check into hotels, we are asked to produce a driver’s license. When we purchase some over-the-counter drugs, we are asked to produce a driver’s license. If we go to a bar or nightclub, anyone who looks at all young is asked to produce a driver’s license. And needless to say, if we have any encounter with police or other authorities, we are asked to produce a driver’s license.

Bingo. Read the rest for more insight and in retrospect, obvious points. While I respect — and to a certain point, agree — with the idea that people should be able to carry on their daily business without having to prove their identity on demand, this doesn’t really change things all that much. All the hyperventilating about racism or Nazism is flat out crazy or dishonest at worst, and incredibly misguided at best. Listen: if a particular law just happens to be broken by X color, enforcing that law isn’t racist, assuming that the law wasn’t created to go after X color to begin with. And these weren’t.

As I’ve said before multiple times: if you remove the hyperbole, lies, and self-interested politics from the issue, the immigration “problem” isn’t one at all. Let those that want to live and work in the United States in, as long as they’re not criminals or felons. We need to control the borders of our country, though, and know who we’re letting in. Anyone that balks at that requirement has ulterior motives.