The week in news

This week, the big news was the proposed ammendment to the constitution. I know why the President supported it, but I think his timing was bad. And it just reinforced one of the reasons I am no longer voting Republican. As I have been clarifying my political opinions, it has come down to a simple statement: I will not vote for people who have a fundamental difference in their belief of the role of government.

In my humble opinion (and that of the founders of our country), government was intended to serve a couple of simple purposes: "Government should keep the peace, coin money, establish a post office, postal roads, and the courts, and secure time-limited copywrights and patents." For those of you whom I sent a "pocket Constitution," that comes from Article 1, Section 8.

However, things began to dramatically change, mostly as we began to get more involved in war. Around the beginning of World War I, the Federal Reserve was created. It near sole purpose was to prevent the reduction in currency purchasing power. It became known to protect the financial markets, but it didn't stop the Depression of 1920-21, or the Great Depression of 1929-1941. In fact, the more government intervenes, the more damage it tends to do. President Franklin Roosevelt hired an economic advisor named John Manynard Keynes. Keynes became lauded for his "central planning," government-controlled economic policy. It supposedly worked until the 1970s when stagflation occurred. In this environment, any "push" in demand, created more inflation, causing higher interest rates and further decline in the purchasing power of our currency. I would argue that Keynes policy didn't work when is supposedly did. England came out of their own depression in 1934, many years before the United States, simply by implementing free-market, supply side policies. Pres. Roosevelt may have kept us in the Depression longer because of his economic policies. This certainly didn't mean that he wasn't a good President. It just means that history's glowing review of his performance may be flawed.

I will close this post with the quote from Thomas Jefferson I found in John Stossel's new book, "Give Me a Break:"

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain."

Men of the People

I have heard much lately of our Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates (and current occupants) declaring they know what the middle class needs. Oh really? How many of you are in the middle class. I find it a bit condecending when someone like Preisdent Bush or Sen Kerry pretends they have ever had to worry how they were going to pay for groceries this month. In fact, I would doubt very much if either had ever created a personal budgets.

So next time you hear this drivel, remember where it is coming from. Each of these men are worth many, many millions of dollars.

Celebrity and Politics

It may have started with Jane Fonda, but it has now expanded. What makes celbrities think that we want to know where they stand on any political issue. This seems to be a much larger problem for liberal celebrities. And for the record, I don't care who a celebrity supports. If he/she likes Republicans, Democrats, or Socialists. This will not impact my financial support of their projects. Where I do get upset is when celebrities denegrate certain candidates with insults. It is at this point that I create my own celebrity embargo list. These are people who I will not pay any money to buy their videos or music, buy tickets to their movies or watch them on TV. If I hear them on the radio, I turn the station.

Celebrity Embargo List:

Barbara Streisand (some people aren't bright enough to attempt to speak without a script, but do anyway).
George Clooney (there is only one exception: Ocean's 11; I love that movie, but maybe I should watch the original)
Jeneanne Garafolo (I would try to verify the spelling, but I don't really care)
Al Franken
Whoopi Goldberg
Tim Robbins (I liked Bull Durham, but that was about it)
Susan Sarandon (I can't think of a single thing she has ever done that I have the slightest interest in)
Meryl Streep (ditto)
Chevy Chase (this is too bad, but he has tied my hands)
Jessica Lange (I am sure she has done something, but I couldn't name one project if you'd give me a million bucks)

Most of these people were in New York for Sen. Kerry's fundraiser. There were others, but I didn't hear any other offending statements. I encourage you to join me in my boycott.

9/11 Commission

In case you wanted to read the most recent working papers by the 9/11 commission (I highly suggest it), the link is http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing12/staff_statement_15.pdf .

The most interesting things I found in the statement are the fact that Al Qaeda is thought to have significantly collaberated with Hezbollah and Iran. This is signficant because Hezbollah, of course, is a target on the "War on Terror." Additionally, Hezbollah is supported by Syria, a secular regime. The residents of Syria are largely Sunni Muslim (74%), whereas the Hezbollah organization is largely a Shi'a sect.

Just food for thought.

How to recruit terrorists, and other such quests.

I have had a working theory for some time: Successful terrorist operations, more than anything else, recruit terrorists.

As of late, I have heard much conjecture about whether our presense in Iraq is creating more terrorists. This is certainly possible, but I would say that terrorists pulling off terror operations is much more successful.

Finally, evidence confirms it. In the 9/11 review, working papers quote Osama Bin Laden as saying that he wanted to pull off a major operation to create a "funding and recruiting bonanza."

Just as I thought. So in order to prevent the recruitment of terrorists, I suggest we continue to attempt to prevent all terrorism everywhere.

Inflation? What inflation?

Today, initial CPI, or Consumer Price Index, data came out for the month of May. In short, this is supposed to measure the amount of general increase in the price level of consumer items.

Mathematically, there are some 40,000 items which are factored into the calculation of the index. Today's data came out at an annualized rate of 7.25%. Historically, inflation has averaged 3%, so 7.25% is a pretty big number. However, certain economists like to "net" out certain items which can regularly scew data. These items are food and energy. Of course, most every American needs to buy items which fall into the food and/or energy category. However, these items tend to be quite volatile and bounce around quite a bit from month to month. In short, it is not politically popular for Americans to see prices increase at 7.5% per year, so it may make sense to remove these items from the commonly quoted data. When you do this, the "core" inflation number comes in at 2.5%; much more palatable.

So as the stock market rejoiced the "core" inflation number, the commodities market was looking at the net number of 7.25%. Take a cursory glance at your expenses. Have they risen? Which number do you think is more accurate?

Hope that clears things up.

B

My 2nd Favorite Holiday

Well, I have still not figured out how to post pictures, but I am working on it.

Now is the time of year where we are fast approaching my second favorite holiday: the 4th of July. Now you ask, "What is your favorite holiday?" Well the answer to that is simple: Thanksgiving. No, not because of anything to do with the founding of this country, but becuase it is the one day of the year that I am sure to be able to see a Dallas Cowboys game, and have pumpkin pie! In fact, as I am still a meat and potatoes kind of guy (despite the fact that I am attempting to broaden my food plan), there is no better food than turkey, mashed potatoes, gravy and pumpkin pie.

OK, now that I have gotten that out of my system, the 4th of July is my second favorite holiday, strictly for patriotic reasons. I am not big on fireworks, but I am big on reflecting on the meaning of July 4th, so in that light, I have some trivia. Recently, we have heard much about our country being a democracy, but did you know, that is not true? Our country is a constitutional republic. This means that we have certain rights that cannot be democratically (or tyrannically) removed. These would be the rights found (but not given to us) in the Constitution.

Did you know that?

That is right. The consitution of these United States does not give us any rights! We have unalienable rights which are secured by the Constitution. This is as opposed to the new European Constitution, in which rights are granted to its citizens. Well, as Americans, we all know that if we are given rights, they can be taken away. If they are inalienable, they cannot.

This is the first in I am sure many installments of historical trivia about our great country. And by the way, if Europe thinks I am arrogant or a cowboy for saying that our country is great, then I will think of my favorite cowboy and thank them. Some day soon, we will save them again!