21 July 2010

Congressman Gerrymander: Reply to the Unbudget Letter

I'm shocked I even got a response.  I feel sorry for the staffer that has me marked on the "have to respond, so don't do a good job" list.  See the edits below.

Dear Mr. FightinBluHen51

Thank you for contacting me about deficits and the national debt.  The national debt is a serious problem that requires our attention; I agree that we must act decisively to right our present fiscal course [that I voted for 99% of the time]

The irresponsible fiscal policies of the last decade [80 years and more specifically the last eighteen months] left our nation on precarious fiscal footing as we slid into the worst recession in a generation.  The impact of these policies cannot be reversed immediately and, without sustained economic growth, draconian spending cuts and tax increases will be required [which I will work to prevent, make sure we spend more, and HA, give me 100% of your paycheck since you work].  That is why there has been general consensus among economists and policy experts that in the near term, as a response to the recession, targeted tax cuts and government spending are a desirable form of economic stimulus [even though I will oppose them].  Although balanced budgets must be an essential piece of any long-term economic strategy, the responsible use of short-term stimulus provides a much-needed "shot in the arm" for our struggling economy [more Kenyan Keynesian garbage that I will help to give America in an effort to maintain my personal power.]

As the economy returns to sustainable growth [after OUR lost decade], and once we have pushed closer to full employment, we must take a serious look at all elements of spending and tax revenue in order to return to fiscal responsibility.  Last year, we made progress by enacting a statutory Pay-As-You-Go law to ensure that non-emergency spending or tax cuts are fully paid for elsewhere in budget [spend as you please bill in an effort to create more market chaos then the Country Class can deal with at one time].  Pay-Go was applied during the 1990s [by a more conservative Republican Congress and a pragmatic Bill Clinton] and, along with strong economic growth [which we now know was just another bubble created by the shameless Federal Reserve], helped us achieve the budget surpluses of that decade [that were raided social security funds that continue to perpetuate unfunded liabilities in the trillions of dollars].  But the law was allowed to expire in 2002.  I am also encouraged by the President's decision to create a national commission that will make independent recommendations to the Congress about policies to get our fiscal house in order [who's report is being withheld until after the November Elections].  The Commission's recommendations are likely to include tough choices about entitlements, tax revenue, and discretionary spending.  Make no mistake, enacting measures that will truly improve our fiscal condition will require shared sacrifice and real tradeoffs between government services and tax policy.  I will come to this debate [assuming that the gerrymandered district reelects me with overwhelming cemetery support] with the perspective that our budget policies should reflect our nation's values— ensuring opportunity and strengthening communities, promoting private enterprise and innovation [for later confiscation], and sharing the costs of government equitably [while redistributing to buy votes].  I look forward to your continued input on this issue and I will keep your views in mind when the [your letters of fantasy so I can have a good laugh over them with the good ole boys of both parties when] Congress considers relevant measures.

Again, I appreciate [am disgusted that I am] hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other issues of concern to you in the future.

John Sarbanes
Member of Congress

Officers Admit Concealed Carry Makes Their Job Better

I'm sure that there is a collective "well DUH!" response from the concealed carry advocacy community.  Now, it appears that this is also finally sinking in to the thick skulls of two states that do not allow any form of concealed carry.

From the Peoria PJ Star:
During a recent 10-week stint at the FBI's National Academy, which brought 250 worldwide law-enforcement executives to Quantico, Va., Peoria Police Chief Steven Settingsgaard said, "Everyone I spoke to was in favor of concealed carry."
Just going to show, that cops on the street, understand that citizens who are armed, make their jobs safer and easier! 

Voting With Your Dollars

Over the last week, we've seen several articles that have cropped up detailing the intertwining of the Washington Game.  Henceforth, no longer will we consider anything in Washington political, but merely a game by which the Ruling Class plays to continually hold it's absconded power.

Prior to my article and the American Spectator's article last Friday detailing the Country Class's plight and struggle in dealing with one party rule, I considered how in reality it is not just Washington that is against "we the people."  We must also consider that crony capitalism has become another tool with which the Ruling Class uses to assume more power and confiscate our dollars.  This was further reinforced by blogger Laurel over at Politics Guns and Beer, who has been following a story (updated here) about HS Precession using advertisements with the glowing endorsement of FBI, Ruby Ridge trigger man, Lon Horiuchi.

Considering it is election season, there are a plethora of local businesses who have been proudly displaying signs for candidates of either or both parties.  Often, local businesses are forced to support the political campaigns of either or both candidates in one form or another (advertisement signs or campaign contributions) as a "pay for play" to prevent the further denigration of their business opportunities.  That said, today's political athlete might as well just be another member of the Mafia; at least then we can readily identify them as a criminal.  Instead, small businesses are forced into making a harsh decision of galvanizing their customer base and potentially loosing sales or, drawing the eye of their political capo who strong arms them through regulatory or inexpeidant approval processes.

The question it raises to me is "How should I approach these businesses who proudly display candidate signs?"   It is not only limited to the party with which I disagree, but more and more, I have become suspect of those within my own "party" (loosely based).  As Laurel pointed out, she is refusing to do any business with companies who promote policies or pay people with whom she disagrees.  Unfortunately, I have to ask is this even a reality considering the entire supply chain in modern commerce?   Somewhere along the lines, we are going to support a company, even if by proxy, that disagrees with and/or outright attacks American tradition and principles.

Is it even feasible to research every single company or business we patronize?  If you figure that in the normal course of your life, you probably shop at primarily the same grocery store, the same soft-goods box store (or a handful of them), the same online retailers, the same auto repair shop, ect, it's pretty easy to identify what businesses are for or against your ideals.  Will I go out of my way to alter every aspect of my life to avoid doing business with a company that disagrees with my political philosophies? 

As a capitalist, when it is economically convenient to do so, I will try to avoid doing business with those who undermine my positions.  Unfortunately, I can't compile a complete list of "do business with and don't do business with" such and such companies.  If Trucker Dan's Beer, Bait, and Guns gives me the best price on .45, even though Trucker Dan is a former union shill and votes for every Democrat that walks down the road, chances are, I will probably patronage his store.  If Uncle Ted's Tackle & Ammo across the street advertises a Republican for Governor of Maryland sign, I might choose to spend an extra penny per round and keep some of my personal pride knowing that I have done the moral thing. 

As capitalism goes though, the larger the company, the larger the tenticales in the market place.  Trucker Dan and Uncle Teds reach is limited in their customer base, as well as the clout they have with the politcal atheletes.  Being a member of a local bank might not be great for accessibility of your money, but at least you have the chance to shape the institution, where as Bank of Amigo [America] is nothing more than one of the stores being afforded Mob protection.  With the stories linked previously, we can bicker back and forth all day as to whether one should do business with Remington and Savage (who use HS Precision products) as apposed to say Winchester.  Sure, they potentially give to Demicans and Remocrats alike but in reality, all are firearms manufactures have to support the 2A in a majority position because their business models depends on it. 

The point is, if you know someone is doing something against your ideals, then you should take all precautions to avoid doing business with them.  Unfortunately, sometimes you are forced to contradict yourself for the sake of a better product or a good price or both.  In the end, you have to sleep at night knowing you've made a good purchase.  Realistically the primary focus of the conservative / libertarian's efforts should be on those who have made the rules of the game unfair for the Country Class.  Attacking the policies that allow the Ruling Elites to advance to the position of political mafia boss is key.  Sure, using commerce as a weapon can achieve some wanted changes, but in the end, we only really hurt fellow Country Class Americans, but shifting away the market share from their employers.  

Only when the unwinding of arbitrary regulation is complete and crony capitalism's love affair with the political Mob killed, can the consumer actually vote with their dollars for the best product at the market price. Until then, everyone plays within the same rules of the game, no matter what the individual company's polices.