Depending on the Government

There have been a lot of misconceptions about the term "self-reliance," and how much the government gets involved in our lives. You've all heard the term "Nanny State," and many of you have agreed with me when I've decried it, be it the effect on lemonade stands, how we feed our children, bringing sweets to school, or even how we raise our kids to begin with.

Yesterday, I was reading Charles C.W. Cook's excellent National Review article, "Why I Despair", and something jumped out at me that I would like to address. Actually, my wife read it first and pointed this one out to me, but it jumped out even more after I read it myself.

So many in our society are rolling over and not only letting government take over their lives, but actively demanding it.

What have we become?

Post-election reaction

It seems that a majority of the country just stomped on the accelerator to oblivion.

God (if He exists) help us all.

An Informed Vote - What You Owe the Country

Some of you may be aware that there's this "election" thing coming up next Tuesday. It's kind of a big deal. Of course, some of you may *not* be aware of it, and that's actually kind of sad (unless you don't live in the US, of course, in which case it's semi-understandable).

Many people are out there encouraging people to vote. "Have your say!" they proclaim, trying to get as many people out there to vote. "You shouldn't complain about how things are going if you don't take the time to vote!" they also say.

While this is all well and good, I would add a caveat to all of that. Yes, voting is important. However, to me it's most important that your vote be an informed vote. Take the time to learn a little bit about the candidates and what they stand for. Listen to them; read about them. This applies whether it's a local election or an election for President.

(This is not a political blog, so I'm not going to advocate one way or the other. Those who know me know which way I lean, of course).

When you consider voting, you should ask yourself why you're voting for that candidate. If your reason boils down to "he's a great speaker!" or "I'd love to have a beer with him" or "he's so cool" or even "old white guys have to stick together," then I'd hazard to say that your vote is not an informed one.

It doesn't have to be a deep understanding of *all* the issues. It can even be one issue that you feel strongly about. At least it's an issue and not something frivolous, though I think that's not seeing the bigger picture if you do it that way. It doesn't even have to be a deep understanding of some of them, as long as it's at least somewhat of an understanding.

Arizona Congresswoman Killed in a Shooting

*Update: Sheriff's office says Giffords is still alive and in surgery. Let's hope all goes well, but still, my condolences to those whose family members have died. And this doesn't change the point of my post*

*Update 2: Apparently the prognosis is good for at least some kind of recovery. That's great news! My best wishes go out to her as she works through the difficult process. And my heart goes out to those who were killed and their families.

*************

I normally don't do "Breaking News" posts on this blog, but this one (and the reaction to it) has really affected me.

Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was shot in the head, along with some other people (I'm hearing differing reports, but the last number I heard was 12) at an outside political event. As I type this, I just saw the news that she has died. What a horrifying incident this is, and all of my thoughts and condolences go out to her family (and the families of the other victims, of course).

Giffords was a Blue Dog Democrat who had just won re-election in 2010. I can't comment on her politics other than that, as I don't know her or know her history.

Thankfully, it appears that the gunman is in custody, so hopefully we'll find out the motivation behind this incomprehensible atrocity.

But you know what's horrifying me about this incident as well?

The reaction to it.

Pat Sajak - how politics and celebrity should meet

In Saturday's post about Ricochet, I mentioned that Pat Sajak was a contributor to the site. Even before that, I had read a few articles by him, but not a whole lot.

I remembered vaguely that I had heard that he was a Conservative, but I had never really thought about it before.

Instead, I just knew him from Wheel of Fortune. He's been hosting that show since 1981, and to most people that's all he is: a game show host. Very innocuous, kind of dweebish, actually. I had never really thought much of him. I don't like the show (though I sometimes stop when I'm channel-surfing to see if I can solve the current puzzle), but I thought "it's nice that he's had a job for so long."

But then I read a political article by him, and I was floored.

Female politicians and blasts from the past - double standard?

Yet another politician has been caught on camera doing something he/she shouldn't be if they want a political career. Something truly embarrassing, though whether it should make a difference in a political campaign is debatable.

This time, it involves Krystal Ball (an unfortunate name, I would think), Democratic candidate for Congress from Virginia. A series of pictures from a party shortly after college, of a scantily-clad Ball, along with her now ex-husband, have been posted on the Net.

Personally, I don't like these "gotcha" type of stories, where stuff from the past is dredged up to try and sway current voters, rather than addressing the issues. Anybody who grew up from the 60s onward has to have some extremely weird stuff in their background, given the permissiveness of society nowadays. (Ok, I don't, but that in itself is weird). If the person in question is unfortunate enough (or stupid enough) to let it be caught on film (or even video!), then it's even worse for them.

But does something that happened years ago, when we were young, really matter? I don't think so.

There is one place where Ball gets this totally wrong. She says that the release of these photos is "sexist" and reflective of how female politicians are treated today compared to male politicians.

That just ain't so, Krystal. (Can I call you Krystal?)

Obama in Madden 11? A different take

Wow, lots of controversial comments and vitriol in response to Game Informer's post about President Obama making a cameo in Madden 11.

For those of you who don't know, EA Sports has revamped its Super Bowl celebration when your team wins that Super Bowl trophy.  In addition to team-specific commentary and the appearance of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, the team takes a trip to Washington D.C. and meets President Obama, giving him a team jersey and everything (you can see videos of this on IGN's site).




(This is a horrible rendition of Obama, by the way)

Of course, this news sparked outcries of "boycott Madden!" and "You're just a bunch of rednecks!!!" in the comments section.

I'm a conservative who has no love for Obama whatsoever, but that's the most political I'm going to get in this post.  I think calls of boycotting the game are ridiculous.

Outrage is one thing, but threats of violence are intolerable

I was catching up on my @mashable reading and ran across this little tidbit:

"Tweets calling for Obama's assassination prompt Secret Service investigation."

This, of course, is beyond the pale and should not be tolerated.  Righteous outrage and anger over the bill that passed on Sunday is one thing, but violence should never be advocated.

From the article:

Your tax dollars at work

IRS horror stories have been around forever, but in this time where some of the biggest tax cheats error-prone people are now in the President's cabinet, stories like this take on an added emphasis where I just have to do this:

According to the Sacramento Bee, two dark-suited IRS agents showed up outside the door of Harv's Metro Car Wash to collect on the massive debt that the owner (a man not named Harv, but Aaron Zeff, and isn't that convenient?) owed the Federal Government.  Seriously, if this horrible tax cheat had just paid his taxes on time, this whole "federal deficit" thing would be a thing of the past!

At least you would think that, considering the relative harshness with which they came down on him.  Why do I say "relative?"

Because he owed four cents.

That's right, he owed four cents, so the IRS sent the suits after him!

Inexplicably, penalties and taxes accruing on the debt – stemming from the 2006 tax year – were listed as $202.31, leaving Harv's with an obligation of $202.35."

These unpaid taxes were supposedly from 2006, though he has a letter from the IRS dated October 22, 2009 stating that he "has filed all required returns and addressed any balances due.

Surely the IRS has better things to do then go after people like this?  And how did those penalties accrue if he only owed 4 cents to begin with?

As Mark Steyn says, "If they'd subjected Secretary Geithner to those rates on what he owed, we could have wiped out the deficit."

New 9/11 images released

September 11, 2001 radically changed our outlook on the world.  Seeing the images of the Twin Towers toppling is enough to put a lump in your throat.  This horrible attack still affects us to this day, no matter what side of the political aisle you find yourself on.  I have a feeling it will for some time to come.  I wrote about my thoughts at the time last September.

Yet I would also say we've kind of forgotten it.  Not in a sense that people don't remember it, but in the sense that we've mentally moved away from what it truly meant for us as a country (I say "us" because I'm still an American, even though I'm also Canadian now).  Also what it truly meant for Western society as a whole.  It was a wake-up call, but too many people seem to have gone back to sleep.

Part of the reason for that is while 9/11 is often mentioned in the abstract when talking about our foreign policy, most of the images from that fateful day have been relegated to the back room of our minds.  You never see them on the news.  Television networks never run them, and haven't for years.  You might see the odd documentary that has them, but even then you only see a few of the shots.  You don't see the pictures of people who would rather jump to their deaths than be burned alive.

Through an ABC news Freedom of Information Act request, a series of new images of that horrible day have been released.  These are pictures taken by NYPD helicopters that were flying around the city that day.  These have never been seen before, and I still don't know why.  

Bush & the Giant Banana (or "When Government Funding of the Arts Goes Bad")

I really don't get modern art.

I thought I'd heard it all in the art world.  Art awards for a room where the lights are going on and off, artwork that looks so much like garbage that janitors actually mistakenly threw it out.  You get the idea.  This type of "art" is bad enough, but what happens when the government gets involved?  

Most countries (even the US) have government funding of the arts.  Sadly, too much of these art grants go to projects like the infamous "Piss-Christ" (a crucifix submerged in a jar of the artist's urine) and other projects of that ilk.  They're usually morally objectionable, and the only reason they get government funding is that nobody in their right mind would actually pay for it themselves.  One thing you can say about these projects, no matter how reprehensible they are, is that they were actually produced.  They may be crap, but they're physical crap that you can actually see.

What happens when you don't get what you pay for?  The taxpayers get screwed even more.

Does the BCS need government intervention?

So the Obama Justice Department has stated they're going to "look into" the legality of college football's "Bowl Championship Series" (BCS).  I know there have been a lot of complaints about it, from many people, including Republican senators (hello, Orrin Hatch!).  I get the fact that legitimately successful teams have been screwed out of appearing in the "championship" game because they're not on some list of approved teams.  I don't know how that list is set up, either, so I'm certainly not going to base this post on the facts of how college football works.  I have no dog in this hunt, as I haven't followed college football more than in passing for quite a few years.

No, my complaint is this:  Obama, WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING?  And if it's really Justice people like Attorney General Eric Holder or even some people under him, then I have to ask that he get grip on his people and keep them focused on what they're supposed to be doing.  Since Obama said during the campaign that he didn't like the BCS system, it wouldn't surprise me if he's perfectly ok with Holder doing this, even if he didn't actually instigate the investigation.  It seems like, for Obama, the answer to every problem is "the government should get involved."

Government intervention into college football would be a horrible precedent.

Ellie Light: Obama Astroturfer? Or Very, Very, Very Energetic But Independent Letter Writer? With Houses All Over the Nation?

Wow, I wish I could afford this many houses! Go to the link, because it's very interesting. Evidently, this letter writer, who's a big fan of Obama, currently lives in 18 states, District of Columbia, and Bangkok, Thailand! Ok, maybe she doesn't live in the last one, but she's concerned enough to send her letter there.

Ellie Light: Obama Astroturfer? Or Very, Very, Very Energetic But Independent Letter Writer? With Houses All Over the Nation?

Posted using ShareThis

Also, a hat-tip to Hot Air for pointing me toward this. C'mon, Obama fans. There are enough of you that one person doesn't have to do all of the work, you know.

Update: now it's up to 62 publications in 29 states and District of Columbia. Also a couple of national publications and 2 foreign ones. This lady gets around! With an IP address that's routed through Saudi Arabia (so either she's from there, which is *really* strange, or she's a grandmother who is techie enough to know how to use and IP Spoofer? That's talent!

And incidentally, who is Mark Spivey? Same situation.

Population control rears its ugly head again

The National Post is, relatively speaking, one of the more conservative newspapers in Canada, or at least as conservative as you can probably get in Canada.  I used to get the paper for a long time, but gave it up because I wasn't reading it as much as I used to.

It's too bad I gave it up, because that takes away the opportunity I would otherwise have to cancel it with disgust after reading Diane Francis' latest piece, "The Real Inconvenient Truth."  I had thought that the idea of "population control" had pretty much waned in the Western world, with the exception of those radical environmentalists who would gladly get rid of all humanity in order to save the planet.  But those theories never reached the mainstream.

Until now, that is.

Jessie Ventura Antics

I see former wrestler and Minnesota governor, not to mention Navy SEAL, Jessie Ventura is adding luster to his sterling reputation.  He was on the Opie & Anthony show on Sirius FM yesterday and got into an animated discussion with comedian Jim Norton, who is a regular on the show.  Jim Norton is often on Fox News' Red Eye, and I've always liked watching him.  Sure, he can be crude and some of his humour can be a little forced, but I still like watching him and it's nice to see a conservative voice in the comedy field.

After this argument, I have even more respect for him.

Another Hollywood celebrity spouts off

This time, it's Jim Carrey.  In promoting his (at least opening weekend, anyway) box office bomb A Christmas Carol, Carey told the Chicago tribune:

"I was thinking about it this morning, how this story ties into everything we’re going through,” says Carrey, who, thanks to the technology, plays Scrooge as well as the three ghosts haunting him. “Every construct we’ve built in American life is falling apart. Why? Because of personal greed and ambition. Capitalism without regulation can’t protect us against personal greed.. . ."

This would mean more if it wasn't coming from an actor who makes $20 million a film, even though the quality of these films has been dropping drastically from an already low platform.  As Mark Steyn notes, he could have easily stayed up in his native Canada, making films for a lot less money but, some would say, much more "artistic" quality. I haven't seen enough Canadian films to know whether that's true, but it's definitely true that this is the object of them.  You don't see any FX-ridden blockbusters with no plot and less acting ability in Canadian films, I bet.

But no, he headed down south instead, because that's where the big payday was.  And more power to him, if he can convince a studio that he's still worth $20 million.  But when you're taking advantage of the capitalist system, it's kind of sad when you slag off the system that's putting that money in your pocket.  What's that word I'm looking for?  It's on the tip of my tongue.

Oh yes.  Hypocrite.

Can Robert Gibbs truly be this clueless?

And is this him being clueless or the entire administration?

Mary Katherine Ham has the details over at the Weekly Standard, but here's what he said:

"I will continue to say what I’ve said before. You hear in this debate, you hear analogies, you hear references to, you see pictures about and depictions of individuals that are truly stunning, and you hear it all the time. People — imagine five years ago somebody comparing health care reform to 9/11. Imagine just a few years ago had somebody walked around with images of Hitler."

Follow the above link to see Mary Katherine's response, including links to the many, many, many Hitler signs that were at anti-Bush protests.

Did he not know this or does he not think before he talks?

(h/t: Hot Air)

Amazingly ignorant Macleans article on Chicago

I'm a regular subscriber to Macleans magazine, Canada's foremost newsmagazine.  First, I love that it has columns from conservative pundit Mark Steyn, Scott Feschuk, Paul Wells and Andrew Coyne.  While I don't read every article, I usually like its take on Canadian politics as well as international stories.  I don't always agree with it, but it's always thought-provoking.

Which is why I was shocked to read Jaime Weinman's article in last week's issue called "Target: Chicago - Conservative pundits have a real hate on for the Windy City"  Whether or not the premise of Weinman's article is true, he makes it sound like everything you hear about Chicago politics is a product of Conservatives' imaginations.  There's not one mention of the rampant corruption that takes place in that city, and in Illinois in general.  I found that omission rather egregious.

Politics-Free Safe Zones: Do They Exist Anymore?

National Review's Jay Nordlinger has a really nice column today about how politics seems to be seeping (seeping?  More like gushing) into the world of sportswriting, not to mention so many other areas that should ultimately be politics-free.

Last month, I complained about celebrities thinking that we want to know what their politics are.  This is kind of like that, but not really.  I don't really care what Joe Sportswriter thinks about Obama or Bush or whatever.  And if he wants to spout off with his opinion, that's fine.  But do it in a more appropriate venue!  I read the sports page to find out about the Canucks, or the Cubs or the Cardinals or whatever.  I don't appreciate little jibes or jokes or what have you sneaked in there just to prove that you're able to think about more than just sports.  They're out of place, and I would say this even if they were making an Obama joke (like this:  The Canucks, after going 0-2 in their first two games of the season, are seeming to be as effective in playing hockey as Obama is in passing health care legislation).

See?  I would start cursing if I saw that in a sports column, even though I would probably laugh at it in a more appropriate venue.

Chicago Losing the Olympics - Good or Bad?

Personally, I think it's a good thing, and that's because I love Chicago.

First of all, this appears to have been a Richard Daley maneuver all the way, with lots of cronies buying up property either where Olympic buildings would end up going or near them, anyway.  It's just more kickbacks for a political structure that's been poisoned for generations and will remain that way until somebody does something about it.  There's a reason they call it "The Chicago Way." Incidentally, does Chicago hold the record for most aldermen indicted?  I'm sure they're up there.