Showing posts with label Chrysler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chrysler. Show all posts

Friday, June 26, 2009

Getting to the Bottom of the AmeriCorps Scandal

If anyone doubted that the federal government rests firmly in the hands of traditional Chicago style politics, the ripening AmeriCorps scandal should erase the doubts except amongst the truest O-believers.

Just after AmeriCorps seemed to benefit from a statutory expansion of its numbers and role, Obama broke the law and fired the inspector general. Legally, inspectors general are supposed to be immune from instant firings and political retribution. This was a noble piece of legislation recently cosponsored by---Senator Barack Obama.

Apparently the mayor of Sacramento misused federal funds and Inspector General Gerald Walpin doggedly investigated. He ran into trouble because Mayor Kevin Johnson happens to be a strong supporter of---you guessed it--- Barack Obama.

Democrats in Congress wish it would die. The GOP has too little leverage to launch a major investigation without a public outcry. However it does prove that Chicago politics is alive and well. Imagine the possibilities for corruption with all of these federal funds raining down upon these big city Democratic machines. We have already seen in the Chrysler scandal how the targeted dealerships for closure were almost all GOP supporters. Now we see Obama breaking his own law to purge his own official to protect his own friend.

Meanwhile North Korea is now capable of hitting Alaska with a nuclear bomb.

Thanks Democrats. We sure do love all this change.

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Mercantilism Is Almost Here

The government is out of control.

This week, the president fired the CEO of General Motors.

Everyone outside of the looniest lefty ought to cringe when the federal government starts hiring and firing private sector employees.

The reasoning given was that the bailout money could only go forward with fresh leadership. Even the Democratic governor of Michigan expressed outrage over this unprecedented move. Almost ignored was the forced merger of Chrysler with Fiat.

Government money gives the government the right to interfere with a private corporation? Maybe so. However, it means that said corporation will be saddled with bad economic decisions made for political reasons. Is it more cost effective to put a new plant in right to work Tennessee or union oriented Pennsylvania? The Democratic powers that be will insist on helping their allies. And since they have so much invested in GM, they would by necessity have to discriminate aaint independent Ford.

Mercantilism means that the government is not a referee, but a player in the economy. As a player, it has interests to defend. Those independent of the government get shut out and honest competition dwindles.

Mercantilism was one of the reasons why America broke free of Britain. We wanted a fair economic system where competition was not rigged. In 1776, Adam Smith called it capitalism. Barack Obama's "change" is leading us full circle back to the bad old days of mercantilism.

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Who Is John Galt? Do You Dare Find Out?

The most important book for any conservative or libertarian to read in 2009 is Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. It extends for over a thousand pages and drags from time to time, but within the story lines of this novel emerges a philosophy that we as Americans must embrace again. If we do not, our nation has but two fates, empire or collapse. We must either brutally conquer to add resources to pay for our bloated government and increasingly depraved psyche, or our civilization will collapse due to over regulation, a culture of entitlement, and lack of initiative.

The book is about an America where industrialists who seek profit and their self-interest over a more vague concept of public service are demonized. Government forces business into cooperative ventures that play to the emotions of the populace and force unsustainable burdens on capitalists. Considering the plight that General Motors is in due to its attempt to conform to the ideal of "good corporate citizen," the message of Atlas Shrugged is more important than ever.

My only problem with Ayn Rand is her atheism. Her Russian Orthodox background led her to see Christianity not as an exercise in free will, but as another parasite on man's reason. To me, religion and that which is done in God's name is another choice that people make and the freedom to choose represents the lifeblood of dynamic humanity to Rand.

Below is a speech given by the main protagonist John Galt. In Rand's book, he organizes a strike of capitalists and intellectuals against a society that demands more and more while offering less and less tangible reward.

It will either reinforce your beliefs and help you to openly argue with socialized liberals, or it could radically change your mind. Seriously, if you read this book you will literally at some points step back and say "Whoa!"

For twelve years you've been asking "Who is John Galt?" This is John Galt speaking. I'm the man who's taken away your victims and thus destroyed your world. You've heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis and that Man's sins are destroying the world. But your chief virtue has been sacrifice, and you've demanded more sacrifices at every disaster. You've sacrificed justice to mercy and happiness to duty. So why should you be afraid of the world around you?
Your world is only the product of your sacrifices. While you were dragging the men who made your happiness possible to your sacrificial altars, I beat you to it. I reached them first and told them about the game you were playing and where it would take them. I explained the consequences of your 'brother-love' morality, which they had been too innocently generous to understand. You won't find them now, when you need them more than ever.

We're on strike against your creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. If you want to know how I made them quit, I told them exactly what I'm telling you tonight. I taught them the morality of Reason -- that it was right to pursue one's own happiness as one's principal goal in life. I don't consider the pleasure of others my goal in life, nor do I consider my pleasure the goal of anyone else's life.

I am a trader. I earn what I get in trade for what I produce. I ask for nothing more or nothing less than what I earn. That is justice. I don't force anyone to trade with me; I only trade for mutual benefit. Force is the great evil that has no place in a rational world. One may never force another human to act against his/her judgment. If you deny a man's right to Reason, you must also deny your right to your own judgment. Yet you have allowed your world to be run by means of force, by men who claim that fear and joy are equal incentives, but that fear and force are more practical.

You've allowed such men to occupy positions of power in your world by preaching that all men are evil from the moment they're born. When men believe this, they see nothing wrong in acting in any way they please. The name of this absurdity is 'original sin'. That's impossible. That which is outside the possibility of choice is also outside the province of morality. To call sin that which is outside man's choice is a mockery of justice. To say that men are born with a free will but with a tendency toward evil is ridiculous. If the tendency is one of choice, it doesn't come at birth. If it is not a tendency of choice, then man's will is not free.

And then there's your 'brother-love' morality. Why is it moral to serve others, but not yourself? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when experienced by others, but not by you? Why is it immoral to produce something of value and keep it for yourself, when it is moral for others who haven't earned it to accept it? If it's virtuous to give, isn't it then selfish to take?

Your acceptance of the code of selflessness has made you fear the man who has a dollar less than you because it makes you feel that that dollar is rightfully his. You hate the man with a dollar more than you because the dollar he's keeping is rightfully yours. Your code has made it impossible to know when to give and when to grab.

You know that you can't give away everything and starve yourself. You've forced yourselves to live with undeserved, irrational guilt. Is it ever proper to help another man? No, if he demands it as his right or as a duty that you owe him. Yes, if it's your own free choice based on your judgment of the value of that person and his struggle. This country wasn't built by men who sought handouts. In its brilliant youth, this country showed the rest of the world what greatness was possible to Man and what happiness is possible on Earth.

Then it began apologizing for its greatness and began giving away its wealth, feeling guilty for having produced more than ikts neighbors. Twelve years ago, I saw what was wrong with the world and where the battle for Life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality and that my acceptance of that morality was its only power. I was the first of the men who refused to give up the pursuit of his own happiness in order to serve others.

To those of you who retain some remnant of dignity and the will to live your lives for yourselves, you have the chance to make the same choice. Examine your values and understand that you must choose one side or the other. Any compromise between good and evil only hurts the good and helps the evil.

If you've understood what I've said, stop supporting your destroyers. Don't accept their philosophy. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, and your love. Don't exhaust yourself to help build the kind of world that you see around you now. In the name of the best within you, don't sacrifice the world to those who will take away your happiness for it.

The world will change when you are ready to pronounce this oath:I swear by my Life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man,nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine.