Historically, Peaceful Majorities Are Irrelevant
Posted by Tom in Law, Morality & Religion in the Public Square, Statism, Terrorism on September 1, 2010
I recently received an email tagged as “A German’s View on Islam” which essentially advanced the proposition that complacency of the “silent majorities” in Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany, or Tojo’s Japan is responsible for the fanatics accession to power. The email is taken from a dated article by Paul E. Marek and is currently applied to Islam. It reads in part:
“The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history; it is
the fanatics who march…it is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting
wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian
or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire
continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder,
or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It
is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims
and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to
become suicide bombers..” In other words, peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence!
With this historical logic difficult to refute, it was heartening to see today’s WSJ article, “A Symposium: What Is Moderate Islam?” This is a collection of six answers given by Islamic scholars and commentators. I commend a full reading to the piece, but I was particularly drawn to the last two essays, “Don’t Gloss Over The Violent Texts” and “Mystics, Modernists and Literalists.”
From the first, “Radical Islam is not limited to the act of terrorism; it also includes the embrace of teachings within the religion that promote hatred and ultimately breed terrorism. Those who limit the definition of radical Islam to terrorism are ignoring—and indirectly approving of—the Shariah teachings that permit killing apostates, violence against women and gays, and anti-Semitism.”
“Moderate Islam must not be passive. It needs to actively reinterpret the violent parts of the religious text rather than simply cherry-picking the peaceful ones. Ignoring, rather than confronting or contextualizing, the violent texts leaves young Muslims vulnerable to such teachings at a later stage in their lives.”
And, from the second: “The literalists believe that Muslim behavior must approximate that of the Prophet in seventh-century Arabia. Their belief that Islam is under attack forces many of them to adopt a defensive posture. And while not all literalists advocate violence, many do. Movements like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and the Taliban belong to this category.”
Islam has a foundational text problem which gives rise to the terrorists. It is difficult to see how that will be solved even if the silent majorities rise up in force in their totalitarian societies.
By modern analogy, silent majorities are responsible for the ills of great democratic nations. We have witnessed as much here over the last half century with our gradual descent on the road to serfdom, our slip into socialism. Hopefully we wake up soon!
Schwarzenegger on the Public Pension Time Bomb
Posted by Tom in Democrats, State Finances, Unions on August 27, 2010
Arnold’s op-ed in today’s WSJ is worth the time. Basically he contrasts the unionized public employees with the poor unemployed working stiffs who are expected to support them through taxes. A couple of charts are telling:
![[schwarzenegger]](http://sg.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AM115B_schwa_NS_20100826182703.gif)
He highlights the games played: phony portfolio return assumptions, “spiking” promotions, and retirement at 55. Points out the fact that private employees make less and have less retirement security–their 401k s have declined 20% in value since 2007 while state employee pensions have grown during that period. The public employee effectively has $1 Million in retirement savings!
He calls for a stop to taxes and borrowing to fund pensions. He wants a reversal of the massive retroactive pension increases passed eleven years ago. He wants greater employee contributions to the pensions.
Unfortunately, he fails to call for a constitutional amendment prohibiting public employee unions. This is the only effective way to break the unholy alliance between the democratic legislators and the public employee unions that get them elected. Until that is ended the dirty money game between the two groups will continue.
I commend a full reading of Arnold’s call for reform. Note that it comes from a RINO, and that is a positive step indeed.
Cold War Image Duel
Their Guy
Our Guy
Says it all!
Even Libs Learn The Hidden Cost of Obamacare
Posted by Tom in Business, Democrats, Nationalized Health Care, Welfare on August 26, 2010
Surprise, surprise, colleges want a waiver from Obamacare. If asked to name a liberal bastion as left as the Fourth Estate it would be the universities. Obama is their product, their teacher, their community organizer and their ordained leader. So why are they chafing from his most progressive achievement, Obamacare? Well according to an editorial piece in today’s WSJ, the law “could make it impossible for colleges and universities to continue to offer student health plans.” That’s how the American Council on Education and a dozen other higher-ed lobbies put it in a recent letter to the Obama Administration, warning that the insurance coverage they offer may get junked by ObamaCare’s decrees.” Seems that the bureaucratic “one size fits all” plan will cost too much for the 4.5 to 5.5 million students annually enrolled in college plans. Logical indeed, when you consider the average age of the students.
Of course, we the unwashed masses who will be taxed to pay for this unaffordable welfare program know the truth. EVERYONE WILL PAY….THE POOR STUDENTS…AND THE EMPLOYEES. That’s right, you won’t need to earn over $250,000 to suffer under this monstrosity. The people who can least afford it will be penalized most.
This from my friend Joe Morabito to his U.S. employees: “Hello All: We just sat through a horrible presentation done by our insurance broker related to the impact of Obama’s HealthScare Plan on our medical and other benefits. Let me be clear, for any employee who believes this is a “scare tactic”, effective next January, 2011; all will be paying significantly more for medical and other benefits because Paragon cannot absorb the cost increases that are coming as a result of ObamaCare. Further, as we go into 2012 – 2014, other elements of the plan kick in that will impact our entire benefits program so big changes will be coming related to how and from whom you buy your health insurance. If ObamaCare is not repealed first, we may, or may not, have a company sponsored plan based on what is most advantageous to both Paragon and our employees. What I know for sure is that Paragon cannot afford the insurance premium increases and additional administrative costs that are coming as a result of Obama’s HealthScare Plan. We will have to consider all alternatives.”
“As you go to the polls next November, I suggest you vote for candidates that advocate REPEAL of Obama’s HealthScare Plan, which will be a disaster for Paragon and our employees. Clearly, it is impossible to insure 30 million uninsured, (plus potentially 12 million illegal aliens) without someone paying the bill. In this case, those who already have health insurance and senior citizens will be paying that bill. Elections have consequences. JM”
The hidden tax that is Obamacare is only starting to be unmasked. There will be more “surprises!” None of them will be good.
As Joe says, “elections have consequences!”
One Brit’s Opinion-No Mosque
Posted by Tom in Law, Morality & Religion in the Public Square, Terrorism on August 24, 2010
Europe, indeed England, is witnessing its own Islamifcation. When I traveled to London in the ’70s half the hotel signs were in Arabic; it has only accelerated in succeeding decades. And Shria law governs the local Muslim enclaves. Well here’s a no-holds-barred opinion from across the pond:
August Reno Hayek Meeting: Nevada Hurting
I am late in thanking Randy York for the excellent discussion of Nevada’s deficit difficulties. Randy as president of the NV Manufacturers Association well knows the gravity of the over spending over the last several years and the temptation to add new taxes so that it can continue. Those potential taxes whether corporate income, gross receipts or the so-called Texas franchise tax will further hobble Nevada businesses.
Randy got everyone’s attention with some recent economic headlines: gaming revenues down, A&E layoffs, land prices and real estate valuations plummet. The state leads the nation in unemployment; Lyon County’s rate is up at 18.5%. And predictions for job growth will be down for many years. With the $3.2 Billion deficit in mind the state’s budget director Andrew Clinger said you would have to cut everything but education (55% of the budget) to balance the budget.
The Democratic majority typically favors tax increases or new taxes to protect coveted programs and insure public sector jobs. Steven Horsford, the senate majority leader has proposed a 50-50 deal, $1.5 Billion in taxes and $1.5 Billion in cuts. Problem here is the lack of detail and the temporariness of cuts against the permanence of taxes. With over half the legislature being public employees, it is difficult to see how devastating tax increases will not come about. And, it is not as if those public employee salaries and benefits are cheap. Randy showed compensation charts that make NV look like Bell CA!
Simply put, more government, more spending and more taxes will drive businesses from NV and further tank the economy. The only way to guard against this is to elect conservative candidates who will block tax increases and insist on expense reductions and government efficiency.
Randy listed key Assembly and Senate races: Assembly: District and conservative candidate: 5th-Williams, 13th-Hammond, 21st-Sherwood, 22nd-Stewart, 23rd-Woodbury, 27th-Jurado, 29th-Hill, 31st-Thompson, and 40th-Livermore. Senate: 2nd-Gustavson, 5th-Roberson, and 8th-Cegavske.
There has been some sentiment in our membership for a more active role in addressing the issues we discuss. Indeed, our tag line for the Reno Hayek Symposium is: “Articulating conservative solutions to current issues & supporting their intelligent champions.” As Randy ably pointed out, now is the time to support conservative candidates. To that end, we will have special meet and greet candidate interviews between now and the November election. The object is to raise money and where feasible offer “boots on the ground” help to get these folks elected. We will have both email and web notices of upcoming opportunities.
I also want to thank John Dunn for his NV4CFE (Yucca) update, Tom Gurnee for his China business comments, and Jerry O’Driscoll for expanding his recent WSJ article on the balance sheet recession.
Finally Joe Morabito announced a key federal race fund-raiser for Dr. Joe Heck who is running against Dina Titus; this will be held at his home on September 24th. RSVP to Nicole at 702-614-5900 or nsarouphim@gmail.com.
Barney Frank Admits the Truth
Posted by kyle in Centrally Managed Economy, Congress, Democrats, Economics, Financial Crisis, Financial Policy, Statism on August 21, 2010
This is beyond amazing.
Barney Frank, co-author of the housing bubble and the subsequent financial crisis, calls for the elimination of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!
“August 21, 2010
Barney Frank Comes Home to the Facts
By Larry Kudlow
Can you teach an old dog new tricks? In politics, the answer is usually no. Most elected officials cling to their ideological biases, despite the real-world facts that disprove their theories time and again. Most have no common sense, and most never acknowledge that they were wrong.
But one huge exception to this rule is Democrat Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
For years, Frank was a staunch supporter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government housing agencies that played such an enormous role in the financial meltdown that thrust the economy into the Great Recession. But in a recent CNBC interview, Frank told me that he was ready to say goodbye to Fannie and Freddie.
“I hope by next year we’ll have abolished Fannie and Freddie,” he said. Remarkable. And he went on to say that “it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn’t afford and couldn’t really handle once they had it.” He then added, “I had been too sanguine about Fannie and Freddie.”
When I asked Frank about a long-term phase-out plan that would shrink Fannie and Freddie portfolios and mortgage-purchase limits, and merge the agencies into the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) for a separate low-income program that would get government out of middle-income housing subsidies, he replied, “Larry, that, I think, is exactly what we should be doing.”
Frank also said that any federal housing guarantees should be transparently priced and put on budget. But he added that the private sector must be encouraged to re-enter housing finance just as the government gradually withdraws from it.
Some would say Frank’s mea culpa is politically motivated in advance of an election where bailout nation and big government are public enemies No. 1 and 2. Of course, poll after poll shows that the $150 billion Fan-Fred bailout, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates could rise to $400 billion, is detested by voters and taxpayers everywhere.
In fact, these failed government agencies are in such bad shape that they can’t even pay Uncle Sam the dividends owed under the conservatorship deal reached two years ago. That’s right. In order to pay a $1.8 billion dividend on Treasury department stock, Fan and Fred had to borrow $1.5 billion from — you guessed it — the Treasury.
Then there’s this head-scratching detail: In an absolutely outrageous move last Christmas Eve, President Obama signed off on $42 million in bonuses for the top 12 Fannie and Freddie executives, including $6 million apiece for the two CEOs. (Hat tip to attorney Stephen B. Meister.)
Voters are on to all this. So politics may indeed be motivating Barney Frank’s turnaround. But I’m going to credit him with more than that.
I think Chairman Frank watched these government behemoths descend into hell and then witnessed the financial catastrophe that ensued. And I think he has come to realize that the whole system of federal affordable-housing mandates that was central to the real-estate collapse — including the mandates on Fannie and Freddie and the myriad bad decisions made by private banks and other lenders in response to the government’s overreach — simply needs to be abolished.
Noteworthy is the fact that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has come to a similar conclusion. Geithner told a recent Washington conference on the future of housing finance that the system needs fundamental change. He said, “We will not support a return to the system where private gains are subsidized by taxpayer losses.”
Of course, the withdrawal of housing markets from government programs, and the onset of a reinvigorated private sector for providing mortgages, must be done gradually over a period of years. But it is possible that the federal mortgage madness is coming to an end.
We will have to see if Congress really does say goodbye to Fan and Fred, as Republicans like Jeb Hensarling are advocating. Equally important, we will have to see if the federal affordable-housing mandates created by Congress and implemented by HUD and banking regulators are similarly repealed.
And then we will have to see if reformed federally guaranteed housing insurance includes larger down payments, stricter underwriting standards and greater reliance on private capital markets, lenders and insurers. In other words, we need to see if housing will be restored to a market-based system and removed from the government-backed system that has proved so disastrous.
The broader lesson here is that government planning doesn’t work. And if left to their own devices, market processes will work. I don’t know if President Obama gets this. But my hat goes off to a man who does, Chairman Barney Frank.”
Are Low Rates Counterproductive?
Posted by Tom in Centrally Managed Economy, Deficit, Fed, Financial Policy, Monetary Policy, National Debt on August 12, 2010
John Michaelson’s WSJ post, “The High Costs of Very Low Interest Rates,” presents the dark side of the Fed’s current policy. In it he makes the following points:
- low rates mean low earnings on savings giving consumers less to spend,
- folks close to retirement need to save more to get expected earnings,
- corporate pension plans need to fund more to make up for low earnings, which reduces money available for investment, and
- banks can borrow at zero and buy US bonds at a risk free return, so they do not lend to businesses for investment and job creation.
What’s sad is that the Fed has not learned from Japan’s lost decade experience. In 1990 following the burst of the credit bubble, Japan dropped it rate to an unprecedented .25% It’s government then borrowed to create massive “stimulus.” This froze out private borrowing, investment and consumption creating the lost decade.
Does any of this sound familiar?
I recommend the full article linked above.
Finally A Stimulus That Has Its Intended Effect
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Democrats, National Debt, Nevada, State Finances, Stimulus/Bailout, Unions on August 11, 2010
What is this latest $26 Billion stimulus, is it number 5 or 6? I’ve lost count. But this one you can bet will work effectively to accomplish its intended purpose…..to buy votes for Comrade Obama and his leftist cronies. It goes directly to the public employee unions, specifically the teachers. That increases union dues which in turn increases political donations. This stimulus rewards spendthrift states–takes from fiscally responsible states like Indiana and gives to bankrupt states like New York and California. Seems we find the most registered Democrats in those fiscally irresponsible states!
Today’s WSJ pens a great editorial on the subject, “Stimulus Pushers.” As the title suggests, Hussein Obama is the dope pusher further addicting these leftists spendthrifts with a high powered dose of bailout. The addicts don’t care about the hidden costs or the consequences; they just want the fix.
A few principled governors like Haley Barbour of Mississippi are pushing back. The federal government is hijacking state budgets. Rick Perry of Texas is in disfavor with the DC crowd so Texas gets penalized in the legislation. What’s astounding in this is the sheer hubris, the sheer abuse of power with the simple justification that the leftists have the power.
Two points are clear: One, this stimulus only postpones the day of reckoning for these bankrupt states. And, two, these parasites if left unchecked will eventually kill the host—the private sector that pays taxes will no longer be able to afford the excessive pay and benefits sucked up by the public sector. Atlas will indeed shrug!
For Nevadans, Reid must go, and the Pelosi’s democratic lackeys must be defeated. By piling up deficits and debt they are stealing from our children and grandchildren, the height of immorality!