The Top 1%

In my post below about our kitchen flood, commenter Bubblehead Les asked me how it felt to be in the Top 1% (because I actually had enough emergency fund money set aside to pay cash for a $1,300 refrigerator). All snark aside, the ability to purchase luxury goods and services because I earned and saved some money is indeed nice. Make no mistake, refrigeration *IS* a luxury. Most of the world has to do without it.

Strictly speaking though, the top 1% worldwide is not a very high bar. Our poorest citizens, those making <$5,000 per year, are in the top 15% of income earners worldwide. Does this make them rich? It depends upon your perspective. In the abstract, it does. In our Second World economy with its high cost of living? Not really.

According to the Census Department, we have 118,682,000 households reporting income in 2010. Dividing this into fifths (quintiles), you get 23,736,000 households in each quintile.

In terms of quintiles, our bottom 20%, with incomes under $20,000 annually, are in the top 15% (that bar being only about $2500 per year).

The second quintile, with incomes between $20,000 and $38039, is in the top 10% worldwide.

Our middle fifth (the average earners in our nation), with incomes between $38,040 and $61,719, is in the top 1% worldwide.

I will let you refer to the charts to glean what information you can. Generally speaking those people who work, have some education, and make good choices about relationships tend to do better than those who don't.

We live in the greatest country the world has even known. We have the ability to do almost anything in an attempt to earn a living. We can choose to save, spend, invest, or squander whatever we earn. We have choices open to us that most of the world can only dream of.

Attempting to change our economic meritocracy into a system of cronyism, rent-seeking, Marxist-redistributionism, or Socialism in the name of "Democracy" and "Fairness" misses the fundamental aspects of our Republic: Equality of opportunity and preservation of property rights. What you work for, what you *EARN*, you get to keep (most of, anyway) or dispose of as you will. It is too bad that the useful idiots in the "OccupySomething" protests weren't taught this in college.

Make good choices, you can buy luxury goods and services. Make poor choices, live a life that is relatively poorer as a consequence. Works for me.

Pax,

Newbius

2010 Census data on Income Quintiles and Income Distribution
Worldwide data pulled from Globalrichlist.com

Letter to Bill Engvall

Sent today to "askbillengvall AT aol DOT com"
The letter generated an auto-response out of office reply ("Hello. I am away until January 1, 2010 and am unable to read your message."), so I am posting it here as well.

Here's your sign on the Second Amendment

Mr. Engvall,

I must respectfully disagree with your comments on Bill Maher's show. You appear to have bought into the 'sporting purpose' rationale as the main purpose of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment was not ever, and is not now, a license to hunt. Congressman Issa got it right: it is the assurance that Tyranny will not happen in the USA. No matter what ancillary purpose we can obtain for sporting purposes or self-defense, the core of the right is as a check on out-of-control, power-hungry politicians who wish to rule instead of serve.

All snarky comments aside about Nukes, Tanks, and the Air Force, the fact is that our government respects that we are armed. They know that the more than 100 million firearms present in the US presents a clear tactical challenge to any army wishing to attempt invasion or incursion into our territory. There is no armed force large enough in the world to overcome this. In fact, the number of licensed deer hunters in the country far outstrips the size of any army in the world. Deer hunters who, by the terms of the Violence Policy Center and the Brady Campaign, are armed with "cop-killing, high-powered, long-range sniper rifles with scopes".

You may have considered it humorous to quip that "I don’t believe there’s any reason for a person like myself to own an AK-47…I’d be willing to meet you halfway and say I think you can ban guns if you can pull the trigger and 60 bullets come out—there’s no need, it’s not used for hunting, it would ruin any of the meat…". Those of us who understand that the Second Amendment is not about hunting (but instead revolves around the civilian ownership, training, proficiency, and use of arms-especially those suitable for militia), advocate the civilian ownership of weapons that you would find unsuitable for putting meat on the table. Yet, these same weapons protect your right to hunt, or to defend yourself as required.

Please set aside the shtick about hunting with full-auto machine guns. Please reconsider your willingness to side with those who would curtail all of our freedoms (as long as they let you keep your hunting rifle and shotgun). Please quit pandering to the Hollywood Elite in forums like Maher's program, while performing (out of the other side of your mouth?) at places like the NRA Convention and the SHOT Show. Pick one, or the other. Choose now whom you will serve. Just remember: "First they came for the Jews..." (or, in context, "First they came for AR-15s and AK-47s...").

You owe the law-abiding gun owners in the United States an apology. If you don't feel that this is the case, then "Here's your sign".

Newbius

Kabuki Sunday

Kabuki Theater. The highly stylized drama wherein the characters are known, the moves are well-scripted, and the outcomes known in advance. The plot is either historical, or hysterical, depending on the play. The players know their roles. The narration explains the action to the uninitiated.

Kind of like the Sunday talk shows.

Of the Sunday talk shows, the only one I can even stomach for brief stretches at a time is Fox News Sunday. Even this one gets to me after a few minutes and I have to leave the room. I leave because the play is the same every week, and only the plot topic changes. This week the topic is "Pledge to America".

Whoopee

Chris Wallace asks "Why don't you mention entitlement cuts?" to the StupidParty reps, and allows the lies about the economic record from the EvilParty reps. The goal? Another YouTube video with their logo in the lower corner showing politicians either saying incendiary things, or slyly ducking the questions that everybody knows won't get answered.

I would prefer it if the politicians told the truth. Unfortunately, the American populace would rather have sweet-smelling lies piped to them than face the aftermath of the last 75 years' greed and sloth. So, in order to remain electable, the politicians lie to us. They do the Kabuki Theater of the Sunday shows, trying to impress with their perfectly coiffed hair, their spray-on tans, and their ability to lie to the camera with well-practiced ease.

Here's an idea: Stop kicking the can down the road. Tell everybody currently receiving Social Security and Medicare that they are the last recipients. The systems are BROKE. INSOLVENT. Tell everybody else that the deductions for "OASD" and "MED" are taxes (because they are) and not savings accounts for the future (like they are marketed to us as). Tell everybody who is not yet a recipient that they will have to depend upon the charity of their communities and families, like the olden days, if they failed to prepare for the future. And eliminate ALL of the regulations affecting retirement age, pensions, and government-mandated health plans including Medicare, Medicaid, and ObamaCare.

The politicians won't tell us the above. Because the first one who does is immediately featured in an opposition party advertisement depicting them as wishing to starve old ladies, kill children, and destroy the "underprivileged" (whatever that means). But, it is the reality.

Boehner doesn't wish to broach the subject of "non-discretionary spending" where ALL of our tax revenue goes, because to do so is to start the ad machines running. Hoyer wants to keep blaming the previous executive for the economic decline because Bush was fool enough to sign the Democrat's last two budgets. Everybody does the dance, and we already know the outcome.

Throw the bums out. Throw ALL of them out. And, tell the replacements that the Founder's Republic is the Constitutional limit to their authority. And, they better trim back to it or face the wrath of a public that is tired of being lied to by their servants.

Pax,

Newbius

Intellignorance

The ignorance of the intelligentsia.

The crass stereotyping of us "rubes" and "wing-nuts" as "racist hate-mongers" is beginning to wear a little thinly with me. The fact that I am a champion of civil rights for all people makes me unacceptable to them, because I am not sufficiently guilty about being white. That I decry their own policies as racist makes me a target, because reverse-racism is just reparations-lite.

Sorry. Not going to feel guilty.

How about my Pro-Second Amendment stance? Well, in their eyes, that makes me an uneducated, redneck, cousin-humping Neanderthal who wants to give machine guns to pre-schoolers and rocket launchers to high school kids. Because then they can all settle their differences in glorious gunpowder-fueled orgies of lead and destruction.

Seriously. Go read the comments at Politico, The Puffington Whore, or the Daily Kook. If the disdain shown for white, Christian, gun-owning America doesn't scream at you loudly, then you might just be one of them and are blinded to your own bigotry.

You know, when I was young, I was taught that two wrongs do not make a right. I was taught to fight evil whenever I found it. I was taught that the Golden Rule meant we had to do what was right, regardless of who the person was, or their station in life. I was taught that skin color didn't matter, that character mattered. I was taught tolerance for people who were different than I. And, I was taught to look at actions and not listen to words. I was taught Live and Let Live. I was taught that our level of achievement was directly attributable to our level of industry and drive to succeed. I was taught that the American Dream was something that was within the grasp of anybody who was willing to work to make it happen. And, that each person's idea of that dream was their own and not to be defined by any outside party.

In short, I was taught classic Liberalism.

Where has my country gone? Why is my government trying to destroy everything that America once stood for?

Is this the last, best gasp of the 1960's? Are the radicals now in power? Are the Marxist corruptocrats just puppets on a string, controlled by some faceless power-broker behind the curtain? Will we ever know?

One thing is for certain. My views are now belittled by the intellignorant. The MSM conspires to control the narrative. The Polital class seeks to stifle dissent. The Liberal Elite looks down their noses at us poor schlubs in Middle America, and the top 1% uses every trick in the book to ensure that they are favored while they rob us blind.

Are we still in Claire Wolfe's "Awkward phase"? If so, until when?

Will we get another engineered event like Oklahoma City, designed to discredit the Patriots and garner sympathy for the Establishment?

I don't know. I don't have any answers today, only questions. In the meantime, I will keep on doing my best to do what is right. And, I'll keep praying for my country. G_d knows we could use His help.

Pax,

Newbius

Qui Bono?

"Who Benefits?"

We are over two months into the Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico. Still, the Obama Administration displays a stunning lack of ability to manage the problem, while preventing the professionals with experience from engaging. Who Benefits?

When asked about how he would have responded to the oil spill crisis, former President Bill Clinton responded:

"The federal government's position ought to be very straightforward," he said. "The most important thing is to fix the leak -- and anybody that can help us fix the leak, I'm for it. The second most important thing is to keep the oil away from the shores. The third most important thing is to minimize the damage when of the oil that reaches shores.

"The fourth most important thing today is to figure out who did what wrong and hold them accountable -- whether it was somebody in BP or somebody in the U.S. government. I'll do that, but let's do one, two, and three first... What people want is to fix the leak"

Exactly.

So who benefits from the current administration posture?

Is it the environmentalists? Does the environmentalist movement derive more power from the destruction of the gulf shores, in order that they may eliminate our carbon-based energy economy? Is the destruction an "acceptable loss" in the war against capitalism? Is Cap and Trade that big a grail that this spill is worth perpetuating? Is there a market out there that would benefit from carbon limits?

How about the Labor Unions? We have had offers of assistance from 60 countries, many of whom have the specialized equipment and expertise necessary to rapidly and effectively deal with oil spills. There are ships in the Persian Gulf, the North Sea, and all around the United States (even in Louisiana) capable of skimming massive amounts of contaminated water and removing the oil. These sit idle. Why? The Jones Act. A 1920 protectionist measure designed to ensure that only American ships and American (union) labor work in our waters. This is the act that G. W. Bush waived in order to allow outside assistance in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Obama won't waive the act to allow these high-tech skimmers access to work the spill. Instead, they sit idle. Maybe using exclusively unionized labor is more important than getting this disaster resolved?

The incompetence of bureaucracies is on full display with the Army Corps of Engineer's delay in permitting sand berms because "...even under an expedited basis, the dredging project would need to comply with federal environmental regulations."; the Coast Guard's shutdown of skimming/separating operations because of life jackets and fire extinguishers; and the EPA's disapproval of the Costner oil separators because the output "didn't meet water quality standards of 15ppm of oil"

Really.

President Obama's response to this oil spill so far has shown up his executive inexperience, as he owns all of the above agencies. So far, the only thing he has shown any talent at is shakedowns. He got $20 Billion from BP in less than an hour. Money that is not held by a disinterested third party, and has no accountability mechanism or oversight. In my opinion it is just another slush fund like TARP, and it will be abused similarly for political favoritism, vote buying, and graft.

Time for some aphorisms. I give you, in order, Clark's Law, Hanlon's Razor, Occam's Razor, and Emanuel's First Rule:

"Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice."
"The simplest explanation is usually the correct one."
“Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste, they are opportunities to do big things.”

So I ask you to make a judgment about the administration's response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Incompetence or Malice?

Qui Bono?

Pax,

Newbius

QOTD - Ben Bernanke

“I don’t fully understand movements in the gold price”

Quoted in an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

Really? Are you kidding?

Let me break it down for you Mr. Chairman. Gold is a store of value. Gold's price moves as a result of three primary motivators: Greed, Fear, or Relative Worth to your fiat trash from the Fed.

Let's take the last one first, Mr. Chairman. Your wanton profligate printing of paper currency with no backing has inflated said currency and diminished said currency's value relative to precious metals. An ounce of gold's utility is roughly the same as it was 3 years ago, but its ability to be purchased requires more of your worthless trash to acquire. Hence, the price has risen.

Next, the price of gold is also an indication of the relative stability of geopolitics. As world events unfold, the price of gold fluctuates with the level of tension among adversaries. More tension (as with Iran's saber-rattling) equates to higher prices of precious metals. If you couple an unstable world with your unrestrained printing presses, people get a little worried about their ability to buy bread in the future and tend to run to things which will store value for them. Fear is a factor in the price of gold. Your policies are not helping calm the sheep. Really. Go look it up.

Lastly, let's look at greed. Seriously. Your friends at Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, and the other brokerages have been speculating that the price of gold might rise given your policies at the Fed. I am not sure where they would get this wild idea from, since they are not all Harvard-educated like yourself. Maybe you could ask George Soros about currency speculation...I hear he might know a thing or two. He might be able to explain to you that in every political and economic crisis there is profit to be extracted. Further, if you can manipulate the crisis to your advantage, you can get the other players in the global speculatory regimes to play along and thus milk them for some squeeze too. It was just a thought...you might not actually know George Soros personally. You might have to get Barry to introduce you two so that you can get an education at his knee about things like gold.

Mr. Chairman, in all of your years studying economic theory at MIT (Ph.D. 1979) and Harvard (BS, 1975)), and teaching it at Stanford (1979-1985), you never fully grasped the prime movers of the price of Gold? I find this truly baffling.

Perhaps I can recommend a book to you that would help you understand the basic concepts. Heck, I'll send you my copy.

Pax,

Newbius

The hyphenated "But"

Just a quick comment on the state of linguistics as it relates to identity politics...

Usually, whenever a person (especially a politician) makes a statement of fact, or professes his or her support for a concept, they say something like the following:

"I support the right of Americans to own guns for sport and hunting, but I think reasonable regulation of xxxxx is necessary."

In an example such as the above, everything before the "but" was misdirection, or an attempt to garner sympathy before taking the action which is the actual goal. In the above case, the goal is restrictions on gun ownership.

In the arena of identity politics, where the Statist Left continues to divide us into interest groups to remove our common ground from us, the most obvious example of the "but" is the hyphen. To wit: African-American, Mexican-American, Italian-American, Gay-American, et cetera. In all cases, the desire of the moniker is to emphasize the part before the hyphen, thereby diminishing the part after.

If we are to survive as a nation, indeed if we are to reclaim our liberties as free citizens, we need to reject the labels, the hyphens, and the "buts" from our discourse. We need to call out anybody who uses these artifices to subtly divide us into factions.

We need to focus on the phrases after the "but", and reject the lies before it, in order to understand how we are being manipulated.

We need to reject the balkanization before the hyphens, and focus on the uniting fact that regardless of heritage or skin color or faith, we are all Americans.

Words matter. The artful turns of phrases being used to lull us into complacency regarding our rights and our future need to be exposed for what they are: the seductive opiates which enable our destruction. Reject them.

Pax,

Newbius

New Apple App rumored

Apple has been talking to the Catholic Church about a new "app" for the iPhone, iTouch, and iPad that will help the Clergy run their districts more efficiently.

It will be called iDiocese.

Pax,

Newbius

Marsh's anti-gun Goon Squad to meet March 4th

The header above is mine, the alert below is from the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. I don't think I have sufficient vocabulary to describe my utter disdain for the cowardly and underhanded way Senator Henry Marsh is handling the gun law reforms.

The citizens of Virginia are clamoring for these common-sense reforms, yet Senator Marsh knows what is best for us (or what is best for keeping his donations flowing). Richmond, you deserve a Senator who will fight for ALL of your civil rights, not just the ones which are "politically correct".

Once upon a time, brave freedom fighters fought "The Man" for their rights. Sadly, now "The Man" is Senator Marsh and his anti-freedom colleagues. Dogmatic adherence to Liberal Orthodoxy seems to be the rule of the day now, instead of continuing the fight to dismantle the remaining restrictions disproportionately affecting minorities in Richmond, Fairfax, and Portsmouth.

From the NRA-ILA:

Virginia: New “Special” Firearm Sub-Committee to Meet on Thursday, March 4!

Please Contact Committee Members!

On Thursday, March 4, the new “special” Senate Sub-Committee created to handle all firearm related bills passed by the House of Delegates, will meet at 2 p.m. in the 4th Floor East Conference Room.

State Senator Toddy Puller (D-36) will Chair this new special Sub-Committee and be joined by her fellow rabid anti-gun colleagues; State Senator Marsh (D-16), State Senator Louise Lucas (D-18), and State Senator Janet Howell (D-32). The sole Republican member of the Sub-Committee will be State Senator Frederick Quayle (R-13). Please contact the members of this sub-committee and urge them to request a fair hearing on firearm bills. Contact information can be found by clicking on their name.

Also, please contact Senate leadership and your State Senator and tell them you oppose the formation of this blatantly anti-gun sub-committee. Urge them to disband this sub-committee and allow these bills to receive fair consideration. You can find contact information for your State Senator by clicking here. Contact information for Senate Leadership can be found below.

Senator Richard Saslaw (D-35), Senate Majority Leader

(804) 698-7535

District35@senate.virginia.gov



Senator Henry Marsh, III (D-16), Courts of Justice Committee Chair

(804) 698-7516

District16@senate.virginia.gov

Listed below are the bills, which the special Senate Sub-Committee is expected to hear:

House Bill 26, authored by Delegate Thomas Wright (R-61), would prohibit the Clerk of the Court from requiring an applicant for a concealed handgun permit to provide any documentation or information not authorized by the law or prescribed by Virginia State Police.

House Bill 52, sponsored by Delegate Mark Cole (R-88), would allow a court to waive a $25 dollar fine upon presentation of the permit to the court, if a person fails to display his concealed carry permit when requested by a law-enforcement officer.

House Bill 79, sponsored by Delegate R. Lee Ware (R-65), would prohibit the Clerk of Court from publicly disclosing concealed handgun permit application information unless the permittee has provided written consent for the release of the application or information. The information would still be available to law-enforcement acting in the performance of their duties.

House Bill 108, also introduced by Delegate Cole (R-88), would prohibit agents of localities or localities themselves from participating in “gun buy-backs” unless the governing body of such a locality authorizes such a program. The locality would then have the option of selling the firearms by auction to a federally licensed dealer (FFL) or disposing of the firearm in any other appropriate manner.

House Bill 109, also sponsored by Delegate Mark Cole (R-88), would repeal the statute which allows the governing body of any county to require the sellers of pistols and revolvers to furnish the Clerk of the Circuit Court with the name and address of the purchaser, date of purchase and the number, make, and caliber of the gun.

House Bill 171, authored by Delegate Brenda Pogge (R-96), would prohibit property owners, employers, or a business entity from establishing or enforcing any policy prohibiting a person who may lawfully possess a firearm from storing a firearm in a locked motor vehicle in a publicly accessible parking lot.

House Bill 236, sponsored by Delegate Bill Janis (R-56), would remove the prohibition imposed by localities on hunting within a half-mile of subdivisions.

House Bill 854, sponsored by Delegate Will Morefield (R-3), would provide immunity from civil prosecution if someone uses force, including deadly force, to defend themselves and their loved ones if attacked in their home by someone who has entered unlawfully.

House Bill 870, sponsored by Delegate Benjamin Cline (R-24), would repeal the language that allows localities to fingerprint applicants for a concealed handgun permit.

House Bill 885, sponsored by Delegate Cliff Athey (R-18), would allow any person who may lawfully posses a firearm and is carrying a handgun while in a personal, private vehicle or vessel to keep the firearm secured in a container or compartment in the vehicle or vessel.

House Bill 1092, sponsored by Delegate Anne B. Crockett-Stark (R-6), would give retired law-enforcement the ability to carry a concealed handgun without a permit.

House Bill 1191, introduced by Delegate H. Morgan Griffith (R-8), would allow a circuit court judge to authorize the Clerk of Court to issue concealed handgun permits in instances where the application is complete, the background check does not indicate that the applicant is disqualified, and, after consulting with the local sheriff or police department, there are no other questions or issues surrounding the application.

House Bill 490, sponsored by Delegate Scott Lingamfelter (R-31), would direct the Department of State Police, in cooperation with the Secretary of Public Safety, to develop a plan to allow the State Police to issue lifetime concealed handgun permits to Virginia residents. The Department and the Secretary shall submit the plan, and any recommended legislative changes to implement the plan, to the Chairmen of the House Committee on Militia, Police, and Public Safety and the Senate Committee for Courts of Justice by October 15, 2010.

House Bill 1217, sponsored by Delegate Lynwood Lewis (D-100), would allow local school boards to offer firearm safety education programs in the elementary grades. To assist local school boards opting to provide such instruction, the Board of Education must establish a standardized program of firearm safety education for students in the elementary school grades to promote the protection and safety of children. The bill requires that the program objectives incorporate, among other principles of firearm safety, accident prevention and the rules of the National Rifle Association's Eddie Eagle Gunsafe Program. Local school boards offering the program must comply with Board curriculum guidelines and integrate the instruction in appropriate subject areas, if feasible, to ensure that every elementary school student receives instruction in firearm safety education.

House Bill 1070, sponsored by Delegate Clay Athey (R-18), would provide that a person who has a valid concealed handgun permit may not be barred from carrying a concealed handgun in any place or facility designated or used by the Governor, any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or any other governmental entity as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons.

I hope to be able to go to Richmond personally tomorrow. I am already burning up the phones. Virginians, you should do likewise.

Pax,

Newbius

The District of Columbia Gun Labyrinth

Want to lawfully exercise your Second Amendment right to self defense in the District of Columbia? Then be prepared for a lengthy and tortuous trip down the rabbit hole of rules, regulations, and fees.

Read this Examiner article by Kris Hammond and prepare to be amazed at the arrogance of the officials in DC for implementing this sham on their population. Shame on them. The reality is that criminals won't follow this procedure, and only the law-abiding are impacted. Perhaps that is how they want it to be.

Someone please tell me how this process doesn't constitute Infringement of a right? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

Newbius
|||

Virginia Legislative Black Caucus

Yesterday, I posted a piece about the Richmond Free Press and their tirade about the pro-freedom gun legislation working through the Virginia Legislature. One of the things that struck me about the newspaper article was the fact that the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus overwhelmingly opposes expansion of gun rights in the Commonwealth.

As someone who understands the historic roots of gun control in America, and, as someone who understands that history to be overwhelmingly anti-minority, I find it odd that the people who champion minority causes oppose repealing gun control laws. I just don't understand it. If these legislators understood their history and remembered the Deacons for Defense and Justice, they would know that it was only through the exercising of their Second Amendment Rights that their Civil Rights were ensured.

Why is this lost on them? What am I missing here?

Do they think that there is a disconnect between Liberty, and the most effective means to defend it? Or, are they cynically taking the place of the oppressor in order to aggrandize wealth and power unto themselves by following the time-worn path of continuing the oppression, while demagoguing the easy target of "the man"?

In my experience, politicians who are pro-2nd Amendment are also pro-freedom for everybody. In that light, one could conclude that the VLBC is anti-freedom. It is kind of ironic if you think about it.

Here is the current makeup of the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, along with their rating on gun issues from the National Rifle Association:

F * Virginia State Sen. Mamie Locke (D-2nd) Hampton, Newport News, Portsmouth, and Suffolk
F * Virginia State Sen. Louise Lucas (D-18th) Emporia, Greensville, Nottoway, and Sussex. Part of Brunswick, Chesapeake, Franklin City, Isle of Wight, Lunenburg, Portsmouth, Southampton, and Suffolk
F * Virginia State Sen. A. Donald McEachin (D-9th) Charles City. Part of Henrico and Richmond City
F * Virginia State Sen. Henry L. Marsh (D-16th) Dinwiddie and Petersburg. Part of Chesterfield, Hopewell, Prince George, and Richmond City
F * Virginia State Sen. Yvonne B. Miller (D-5th) Chesapeake, Norfolk, and Virginia Beach
C * Virginia State Del. Kenneth Cooper Alexander (D-89th) Norfolk
F * Virginia State Del. Mamye BaCote (D-95th) Hampton and Newport News [3]
F * Virginia State Del. Rosalyn Dance (D-63rd) Chesterfield, Dinwiddie, and Petersburg
F * Virginia State Del. Charniele Herring (D-46th) Fairfax and Alexandria
B+ * Virginia State Del. Algie Howell (D-90th) Chesapeake, Norfolk, and Virginia Beach
NR * Virginia State Del. Matthew James (D-80th) Portsmouth
F * Virginia State Del. Jennifer McClellan (D-71st) Henrico and Richmond City
F * Virginia State Del. Delores McQuinn (D-70th) Chesterfield, Henrico, and Richmond City
F * Virginia State Del. Lionell Spruill, Sr. (D-77th) Chesapeake and Suffolk
NR * Virginia State Del. Luke Torian (D-52nd) Prince William County
F * Virginia State Del. Roslyn Tyler (D-75th) Emporia, Greenville, and Sussex. Part of Brunswick, Isle of Wight, Lunenburg, Southampton, and Franklin City
C * Virginia State Del. Jeion Ward (D-92nd) Hampton
A * Virginia State Del. Onzlee Ware (D-11th) Roanoke City and Roanoke County

18 members. All Democrats. 12 "F" ratings, 2 "C" ratings, one "B+", one "A", 2 Not Rated yet.

Their agenda (From Wikipedia):

"The No. 1 budget priority is continuing to fund a proton beam cancer center at Hampton University. The $200 million project, which focuses on using proton beams to shrink tumors, is under construction.
Other priorities include establishing a 36 percent interest rate cap on payday loans, expanding pre-kindergarten education programs, reforming the mental health system and allowing low-income working Virginians to purchase health insurance through a state program."

I would add: Keeping minorities financially enslaved to predatory lenders, disarmed (and subject to oppression by criminals), and dependent upon Government (and the thugs and bureaucrats who work there).

Fifty years ago, this agenda would be decried as racist against minorities. Now it is championed by minorities as beneficial and caring. Why is this agenda not racist if it is championed by blacks instead of whites? Especially if the outcome is the same?

Think about it.

Pax,

Newbius

QOTD-AGW edition

A commenter at PJM brilliantly and succinctly nails the discussion on AGW.

For me the money quote is this:

"The AGW frauds who have conspired for so long to wreak our economies, steal our livelihoods, and subvert our freedom are criminals. Justice demands that they pay a penalty that ruins their lives, as they have worked so hard for so long to ruin ours."

Go and RTWT, including especially the comments.

H/T Alger

Dear Barack

It is OK to go after the Jihadists. They are TerrORists, not Terrists. They are not a part of the Green Movement.

The TerrORists want to kill us by, well, killing us.

The Terrists just want choke off our livelihood, sustenance, energy supplies, transportation, and way of light life. The latter group are your friends, not the former. Try and remember that.

Pax,

Newbius

The power to tax

Basic economics lesson for the youngsters:

The power to tax is the power to control. Never forget that fact. Anybody who tells you that they are raising taxes to raise revenue is lying to you. They are raising taxes to control behavior and force changes in the way you run your life.

Whenever a politician tells you that he is raising taxes to pay for something, instead look at the depressive effect that those taxes will have on whatever is being taxed. Any government that wanted to raise REVENUE, lowered taxes. Kennedy, Reagan, Bush increased (actually, Congress increased) revenue by lowering taxes. This stimulates investment and frees up capital for the people to spend, and the effects trickle down through all strata of society.

Don't be fooled by the deficit numbers. These only track the delta between revenue and spending. Even if revenue skyrocketed, if the spending out-paces it, then the deficit will increase (and will give the spenders some fodder to make the claim that lowering taxes increases the deficits). Watch who complains when tax rates are lowered. It will ALWAYS be the people who want to exert more control over your life. These people are the enemies of freedom and Liberty.

Pax,

Newbius

Hypocrisy

How come the groups who got the vapors when Corporate fat-cats flew into Washington are silent when The Won jets around the world on behalf of his cronies in Chicago? How come we hear no vapidities about the carbon footprint of Oprah, Michelle-my-belle, and BHO when they EACH take separate jets (at least two of which are JUMBO JETS) to Copenhagen to do what amounts to a conference call?

< crickets >

Does a 25 minute tarmac meeting with McChrystal justify the trip?

< crickets >

How about the carbon footprint of the dinner date in New York (when one of the best chefs in the world is in your own kitchen)?

< crickets >

How about the carbon footprint of the trip to Colorado to promote the Green Energy portion of the Stimulus (which got signed after a languid few days of idling over the weekend-AFTER it was passed in "an emergency").

< crickets >

Judging by the profligate use of energy by this President in promoting HIS agenda items, one would think that "saving the planet" wasn't one of the items. In fact, one could propose that by his actions, this President is actually hostile to the environment. What say you ELF?

< crickets >

I guess it is really about ideology after all...

Newbius
|||

I can't say something nice

So I am not going to say anything at all about the passing of Edward Kennedy.

Newbius
|||