September 14-15, 2009
Sep 14 02:16 TEA Party Recap Sep 15 01:13 More On Obama's (Where's the Beef?) Speech Sep 15 02:08 More TEA Party Observations Sep 15 12:46 The State Fair Poll & the DFL's Unseriousness Sep 15 23:26 Is the Baucus Bill Doomed Already?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
TEA Party Recap
Saturday, the Central Minnesota Conservative Coalition sponsored a TEA Party rally at Lake George in downtown St. Cloud. The 1,000+ people that attended participated in a freedom celebration. They also heard a number of great policy speeches. The policy speeches centered on giving people choices while letting them prosper. Other important components of the event centered on accountability, personal responsibility and prosperity.
Another theme of the event was that we pledged each other that we'd hold all elected officials accountable to the things they say on the campaign trail. That commitment was directed at everyone from President Obama to U.S. congressmen and women to members of city councils, school boards and county commissions.
The highlights were plentiful. King Banaian provided the first highlights with a speech about William Graham Sumner's story of the forgotten man , which reads like this:
The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.King's speech focused on never letting ourselves be forgotten again. (Follow this link to read King's speech.) This is especially timely considering how dismissive the Democrats have been of the American people. Congressional Democrats and President Obama are trying to ram health care reform down our throats like they did with the stimulus bill. they're attempting this despite We The People's sending an unmistakeable message that their health care reform legislation is a clunker.
In this respect, it's no different than when Democrats insisted on ignoring us about the failed stimulus bill.
The first theme that emerged was NO NORE!!! It started with King's speech. Michele picked up on that theme in her speech, followed by Steve Gottwalt's speech, then mine, finally concluding with Ross Ueckert's (pronounced eckert) speech. If you aren't familiar with Ross, that needs to change ASAP. The best way to do that is by visiting Ross's website and immersing yourself in the information there. (That or have lunch with him after the event, which I had the privilege of doing.)
Steve Gottwalt's speech on health care reform was impressive, which I expected. Steve laid out a plan that people can get on board with. The centerpiece of that plan is his Healthy Minnesota Plan, which is actually a policy with a private insurance company that is owned by the individual, which makes it portable. Because Steve's plan uses health re-imbursement accounts, you only pay for the health care you use while providing catastrophic insurance for individuals.
What we frequently call health insurance really isn't when compared with car insurance or homeowners insurance. It's more accurate to call our current health insurance system prepaid health care.
The applause that Steve got made it apparent that the crowd appreciated Steve's presentation. After the event, I spoke with several people in the audience about the highlights of the presentations. Steve's presentation was among the speeches that drew praise.
Another speech that drew rave reviews was Rep. Mike Beard's presentation. Mike's presentation was about Cap and Trade. Mike used the speech to teach an economics lesson in addition to the energy lesson. Mike said that affordable, plentiful energy is what powers expanding economies. Mike then noted that Cap and Trade won't create a surplus of energy or make it affordable. Mike also noted that you can't conserve your way to a prosperous economy, that prosperous economies are "economies of surplus."
Dan Severson gave a stirring speech about how liberty is part of America's DNA, something I wholeheartedly agree with.
I talked with Dan Hollenhorst during the event. Dan and I are part of an organization called Citizens For a Free America . Dan reported that copies of the U.S. Constitution were a hot item at their booth, as were their bumper stickers .
Many thanks go out to Dave Thompson for the terrific job he did in emceeing the event and to the CR's. Yesterday's event wouldn't have run so smooth without their behind-the-scenes work.
Thanks also go out to State Sen. Michelle Fischbach, Second Amendment expert Joel Rosenberg and Chaplain Dan Hall, my friend and SCBA cohort Leo Pusateri and others for their inspirational speeches. (My apologies for those people I didn't list. My memory isn't what it used to be.)
Other Observations
Something that can't be overlooked is the fact that a substantial part of the audience were young people, with perhaps as much as one-third of the group being twenty-somethings.
A small group of liberals stood behind the crowd with a sign saying that they were disappointed by "the 6th District representative." The good news is that people ignored them while we let them exercise their First Amendment rights. In other words, we didn't go SEIU on them.
A number of great signs could be seen. My favorite said "Subsidizing ACORN is NUTS", though the sign that said "LIBERTY is the only STIMULUS I need" came in a close second. During Mike Beard's speech on Cap And Trade, a woman held a sign aloft that said "Cap And Trade = Trap and Raid", a sentiment Mike immediately agreed with.
Many of the people attending got to listen to several policy speeches that answered their questions on health care, taxes, Obamanomics and energy.
This was the second event sponsored by the Central Minnesota Conservative Coalition, aka CMCC. CMCC will attempt to hold monthly topical events throughout the year. Possible think tank discussions include education reform, energy policy, health care and economics.
If you're interested in attending CMCC events, please leave a comment at this blog. I will add you to my e-mailing list for future events. (I'm the only person who will see your email address.)
Thanks to the hard work of many, many people, Saturday's TEA Party was a huge success.
Posted Monday, September 14, 2009 2:16 AM
Comment 1 by hockeycoach at 14-Sep-09 11:29 AM
I'm always amused at how right wingers wave the Constitution around and completely ignore it in their actions.
Forgotten man? King Banian must be pretty impressed with himself - like all the righties who are on this blog. He says, "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man."
Um, hello, we all have the right to vote in the Constitution and it's up to us with our vote to put "A and B' in place. If we haven't done so, it's because we haven't taken the steps to do so.
George Bush with his disinterest in the policies that help the "forgotten man" created an environment that discredited conservatives and made it impossible for Republicans to win in 2006 and 2008.
This "we are a victim of who we elected" is pap. We're all part of the same process and system. Righties were discredited and the electorate chose a new President. It's how the Constitution works people. It may charge up the troops, but the system says that A and B are chosen by C (and even D). If you don't like who A and B are, then work to change it. Quit being a victim, and quit patting yourself on the back for posing as representives of all people in the C group. You're not.
Comment 2 by eric z at 14-Sep-09 02:31 PM
Sounds like a real hootenanny.
Please put me on the emailing list.
More On Obama's (Where's the Beef?) Speech
The longer I've thought about President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress, the more I'm thinking the speech should be titled President Obama's Where's the Beef speech. I'll quickly admit, though, that giving it the title of President Obama's Alice In Wonderland speech would be equally fitting.
Think about President Obama's contradictions in Wednesday night's speech. President Obama promised seniors that their health care wouldn't be rationed even though he's proposing cutting $500,000,000,000 from the Medicare budget over the next 10 years. President Obama promised promised all of us that his health care reform wouldn't add a single penny to the deficit. President Obama promised us that we could keep our existing coverage if that's what we preferred.
In the aftermath of President Obama's speech, several columnists have started questioning President Obama's credibility. One columnist doing this is Robert Tracinski :
Remember Barack Obama's famous speech on race, back in March of 2008? Obama had spent 20 years listening to the sermons of Jeremiah Wright, full of venomous anti-Americanism and attacks on "white America." Yet when the reverend's rants were revealed to the public, Obama tried to convince us that he just happened to be missing from the pews on any well-documented Sunday, and that the Jeremiah Wright we saw and heard was not the Jeremiah Wright he knew.Sean Hannity was the first to question President Obama's credibility and ties to radicalism. People looked past President Obama's fanciful statements and his radicalist bent and elected him anyway. NO MORE will We The People let him get away with his centrist speeches and his radical leftist advisors pushing his radical leftist agenda.
It was a giant, implausible lie. Yet the speech was smoothly delivered and well-turned, perfectly balanced to seem to empathize both with the grievances of blacks and with the concerns of whites. So most people seemed to believe it.
It isn't possible to believe that the man who pushed through the $787,000,000,000 pork-filled stimulus bill without legislators reading the bill is the man who's going to wring out $500,000,000,000 of waste from the Medicare program. That simply isn't credible.
The notion that the president who is racking up the biggest single year deficit in U.S. history is proposing deficit-neutral health care legislation is insulting. The thoughtful people who heard his speech heard that part either laughed heartily or were upset mightily. If they laughed, it was because they didn't take President Obama's statement seriously. If they were upset, it's because they believed that President Obama was treating them like idiots.
I've said on this blog that President Obama's credibility is being questioned. In truth, it's been questioned to varying levels since President Obama and Prime Minister Pelosi rammed the stimulus bill down our throats. If President Obama continues telling whoppers, what little is left of his credibility will disappear.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:16 AM
No comments.
More TEA Party Observations
Sean Trebus's article in the SCSU Chronicle offers an additional perspective to Saturday's TEA Party rally well worth examining. Sean takes note of some of Rep. Michele Bachmann's statements that are worth taking a closer look at. Here's one statement that stood out for Mr. Trebus:
Bachmann made reference to her coming to speak at the University of Minnesota campus on Sept. 25 with Libertarian spokesperson, Ron Paul. The goal of that specific trip will be to inform the 18 to 25-year-olds about the possible misfortunes the current administration's policies may hold for them in the future.What should worry college students is this forecast by Larry Summers , President Obama's chief economic advisor:
"Once they know what the federal government is doing to their future, condemning them to a lifetime of very few choices, high unemployment and low wages, I think we're going to see them rise up and instead of 1,000 or more people for our tea party, we won't be able to fill this park once they understand what's been lit under them," Bachmann said.
"The level of unemployment is unacceptably high," National Economic Council Director Larry Summers said Friday. "And will, by all forecasts, remain unacceptably high for a number of years."That quote was taken Eamon Javers' article in Politico from this past Saturday. The thing that should trouble DFL strategists is that Summers is probably right, which would cause young people to turn against the DFL in substantial numbers.
Imagine being a college student getting ready to graduate this quarter. Then picture that student having a bunch of student loans to pay off. Next picture that student looking at a depressed jobs market awaiting you when you graduate.
The DFL will accuse me of fearmongering. My reply to that accusation is simple: It's impossible to scare people if things are going well. If people are frightened, it's possible that they're frightened because the situation warrants it. It's possible that that's the proper intellectual response.
I'll say this much: College students looking at that situation are more likely to think that I'm being realistic and that I've got a pretty good read on the situation.
Trebus also quotes King extensively:
Among local guest speakers in attendance were SCSU Economics Professor King Banaian.While President Obama grows the size of government by orders of magnitude, We The People understand that that sized government isn't accountable to We The People. When government gets too large, corruption is the inevitable result. The other inevitable result is that government grows unresponsive and doesn't represent our priorities once it reaches a certain point.
"Today's a reminder to those we send to St. Paul and to City Hall and to those in Congress and the White House that we feel have forgotten," Banaian said. He was the first guest speaker to approach the podium, following Thompson.
"When the government gets larger, citizens get smaller. People forget to take care of themselves. They rely on government. They don't feel like working when they can't keep what they earn. Besides, government will give it to them," Banaian said.
I'd suggest that government, especially the federal goverment, reached that stage years ago but that it's gotten exponentially worse during President Obama's administration.
The people attending Saturday's TEA Party understand these things all too well. That's why one of Saturday's biggest rallying cries was "NO MORE!!!" NO MORE will We The People let career politicians ignore us. NO MORE will We The People let politicians ignore their campaign promises without them paying a price at the polls.
The thing that Michele Bachmann's detractors don't admit about her is that she understands people exceptionally well. She's a great listener and a great political educator, too. That's why people at Saturday's TEA Party responded enthusiastically to Michele's speech.
Another thing that I haven't mentioned until now is how Michele's mood changed the minute she arrived. I had a great backstage seat to watch her vehicle pull up. The minute Michele got out of the car, a woman with her three daughters told Michele that she "thanks God every day that" Michele represents her in Congress and that she prays for Michele always.
Michele's immediate reaction was to thank this woman, then to suggest they take a group photo including the woman's 3 young daughters, the oldest of which was maybe six. What I saw is that Michele is a great retail politicker and a person who just generally loves interacting with people.
Simply put, Saturday's TEA Party was an amazing event, one which will have a profound effect on the 2010 election.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:08 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 15-Sep-09 06:45 AM
Is the notion that the government should not have pushed so hard on Wall Street to create all those whacked out devivatives and should not have pushed so hard on AIG to take on massive swaption positions its resources could not cover and should not have pushed Bernie Madoff to do crooked business, so that had the private sector held free rein none of that stuff would have happened? I do agree, had the government not lied about yellow cake and such, we'd be better off these days, but how do you stop a GOP resident from lying? Especially, if you say corruption is inevitable when government and accompanying military machinery grows out of scale to defensive need. It is a problem, and the running continuity from the Clinton presidency onward through intervening times to Obama is problematic. What's the real answer, absent inflamatory rhetoric, what's the policy? Cut taxes further for the rich so prosperity can trickle down? Had that been sound policy would we be where we are now with unempolyment high, Hemsley at UnitedHealth prospering so much but also taking so much that less is left to trickle down.
Is diverting the "trickle" to personal pockets and pocket books why the newbies face challenge and risk beyond what newbies back in the 1950's faced? Or is it globalization, backed by both parties, causing a more competitive world where all but the very rich in this nation are reduced to the global least common denominator? If that, how would you in the GOP fix it? Would you repudiate globalization and want protective tariffs? Import quotas?
Severe taxes on US capital invested abroad? Besides Bachmannian bloviating, yes we'd like a solution - so give one, but not smoke and mirrors.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 15-Sep-09 07:22 AM
What's the real answer, absent inflamatory rhetoric, what's the policy?The policy is limiting government to its constitutional duties as prescribed in the Ninth & Tenth Amendments.
The federal government should only do those things that the Constitution says are its duties. State governments shouldn't things that cities & counties should do, etc.
Yes, cutting taxes is part of the formula. Where you see only the rich getting richer, the reality is that healthy profits give businesses an incentive to grow & employ more people.
The reality is that government is utterly inept in discovering the next Microsoft, the next Dell or the next FedEx. If you have high taxes, capital stays on the sidelines & small businesses don't get created.
The State Fair Poll & the DFL's Unseriousness
A couple of weeks ago, my representative, Larry Haws, touted the House of Representatives' State Fair Poll questions. Now that the results have been tabulated, Rep. Haws has an LTE in this morning's St. Cloud Times. Here's the first State Fair Poll question :
Should the use of medical marijuana for terminally ill patients be allowed in Minnesota?Almost 62 percent of people polled said that it should be permitted. My question for the people saying it should be permitted is simple: why is it important that we make marijuana available when there's a limitless supply of other painkillers available? During CMCC's recent health care forum, Dave Borgert said that there's a synthetic option of medical marijuana that should be preferred because its manufacture can be monitored.
Here's another question:
Do you generally support budget cuts as opposed to increasing certain taxes in times of economic distress?By a 47.5 percent to 43.8 percent margin, those taking the poll said they preferred budget cutting over raising taxes. I'm certain that that wasn't the result that the DFL was looking for.
Though I find some of these question interesting, I think that it's appalling that there weren't more substantive questions included in the polling. Why didn't the poll include questions on whether the legislature should reduce the number of health care and health insurance mandates? Why didn't the poll include questions that asked whether the legislature should rework the fees system? Why didn't the poll include a question on whether Minnesotans preferred lowering taxes on small businesses so they have an incentive to stay in Minnesota?
At last night's BPOU meeting, Rep. Marty Seifert said that distillers in Minnesota have to pay a $30,000 annual licensing fee to operate. That's compared with Iowa requiring a $350 annual licensing fee. Seifert said that he knows of 4 companies that took their jobs to Iowa for that specific reason, taking with them 20 employees.
If we're interested in creating jobs that don't disappear when the bonding bill funds disappear, we need to improve our fee structure and modernize our tax system. We need regulatory reform, too, especially for health care and health insurance.
This poll is mostly fluff that contains little in terms of information by which the legislature can set its priorities for the next session. At a time when the DFL insists that a leadership forum is important to solving impending deficits, why didn't the DFL poll include serious questions about the biggest issue facing Minnesota's government and Minnesota's families?
Last summer, the DFL held dozens of out-of-session meetings on a variety of topics, then whined that they didn't have the time to put a budget proposal together. Why is the DFL wasting time, again, on this trivial stuff instead of putting together common sense reform initiatives that save money without cutting services?
This year has seen the outbreak of TEA parties across America. People are saying that they're tired of their elected politicians ignoring solutions to high priority issues. The people are also tired that too many of their elected officials are ignoring them. Apparently, the DFL wants to hear from Minnesotans about frivolous things but they aren't interested in hearing from Minnesotans on the important issues facing the state.
The DFL has had 3 years to establish a set of priorities that fits Minnesota's needs. Thus far, they've failed miserably. Thus far, the DFL's priorities have been to not change the status quo and to reflexively raise taxes. The DFL leadership has refused to rethink how government operates. They've refuses to reform itself. Worst of all, they've said that they'd rather tax us than reform government.
NO MORE!!!
If the DFL won't live within their means, if the DFL won't make high priority reforms, if the DFL won't listen to We The People, then it's time that We The People voted in new majorities in the House and Senate that will live within their means, that will reform how state government operates and that doesn't reflexively attempt to raise taxes.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 12:46 PM
Comment 1 by Liberty at 15-Sep-09 01:48 PM
I would pose the question in reverse: why is it important that we make marijuana ILLEGAL when there's a limitless supply of other painkillers available? To help keep our criminal justice system in the red? To make sure we maintain a nanny state? As John Stossel would say, "Gimme a break!" (and no, I've never inhaled nor would I encourage anyone to)
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 15-Sep-09 04:02 PM
Quit missing the point. The question is a distraction. We've got important questions to to deal with. Dealing with medical marijuana isn't one of those questions.
Let's face facts. This is simply an attempt to legalize marijuana. If people want to fight that fight, then they should have that fight.
Comment 3 by Jennifer at 16-Sep-09 09:04 AM
And you think the other major party WILL live within their means!?! Yeah - RIGHT! They've proven to be so financially responsible. (sarcasm).
And on the question of medical marijuana and why it should be legal when there are other painkillers. For one, that question is probably thrown in there to get people talking who perhaps aren't old enough, educated enough, etc. to really get into detailed debates on other more complex issues. Second, to some people medical marijuana being legal IS a huge issue! There are lots of other painkillers out there, yes. Pain killers that are far more mood altering, far more addictive and far more damaging to the body!!!
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 16-Sep-09 09:35 AM
Jennifer, Please understand that the State Fair Poll is for the STATE LEGISLATURE, not the idiots in Washington. If you look at the Minnesota House GOP's voting record the last 3 sessions, you'd notice that they'd get high marks for fiscal responsibility. In fact, House Republicans in DC deserve high marks this session for fiscal responsibility, too.
That's the verifiable fact.
Is the Baucus Bill Doomed Already?
Sen. Max Baucus's bill was introduced less than 36 hours ago and it's already taken two major hits...from Democrats. Sen. Wyden, (D-OR), has already raised major objections to Sen. Baucus's bill. Not to be outdone, Sen. Rockefeller, (D-WVA), has announced that he won't vote for the bill as it's currently written:
West Virginia Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, the second-ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said Tuesday he will oppose the proposal from Chairman Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, unless dramatic changes are made to the legislation. Mr. Rockefeller cited in particular the absence of a taxpayer-financed public insurance plan to compete with private insurers.During Tuesday night's panel, Charles Krauthammer said that the Baucus bill was the most transparent bill of all the legislation crafted by Democrats. He said that it didn't hide the cost of the bill. Then he said that the bill will fail because of all the tax increases included in the bill.
The CBO said that the bill as currently configured was deficit neutral. Unfortunately, the only reason that it's neutral is because of it mandates individuals to purchase insurance. The CBO said that that provision would have the same effect as increasing federal taxes by 13 points. That's the bad news for Democrats. The worst news is that that tax increase is aimed directly at the middle class and small businesses.
The Senate's leading health care proposal is seriously flawed, Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden said Tuesday, declaring that it fails to fulfill President Barack Obama's primary reforms and could force millions of Americans to pay more for the medical care they receive.While it's true that Sen. Baucus can claim that the bill is deficit-neutral as it's currently configured, that configuration is sure to be challenged. There's been talk that another option that's being considered is offering subsidies to families that are forced to purchase insurance. If that option is passed instead, then the bill isn't deficit-neutral anymore. It's a classic case of damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't.
"Under this bill as it is written now, more than 200 million Americans would not get choices like the president of the United States called for," Wyden said in an interview. "Middle-class people certainly will pay more, based on the draft we're seeing."
At this point, it's difficult picturing a scenario that gets a sweeping reform bill passed. The one possibility is the one that hasn't been tried yet: actually trying to work with Republicans on a bipartisan bill. David Espo's observation exposes the problem:
Despite numerous gestures to Republicans, Baucus fell short in his quest to assemble a coalition of senators from both parties behind his plan.I suspect that Mr. Espo's statement wasn't intended to expose the Democrats' reform efforts. It's just what happened. Had Sen. Baucus offered to include key provisions in the bill that conservatives are insisting on, he might've attracted Republican support. This isn't just Sen. Baucus's problem, either. It's the same problem Democrats face in the House, too.
September 14-15, 2009
Sep 14 02:16 TEA Party Recap Sep 15 01:13 More On Obama's (Where's the Beef?) Speech Sep 15 02:08 More TEA Party Observations Sep 15 12:46 The State Fair Poll & the DFL's Unseriousness Sep 15 23:26 Is the Baucus Bill Doomed Already?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
TEA Party Recap
Saturday, the Central Minnesota Conservative Coalition sponsored a TEA Party rally at Lake George in downtown St. Cloud. The 1,000+ people that attended participated in a freedom celebration. They also heard a number of great policy speeches. The policy speeches centered on giving people choices while letting them prosper. Other important components of the event centered on accountability, personal responsibility and prosperity.
Another theme of the event was that we pledged each other that we'd hold all elected officials accountable to the things they say on the campaign trail. That commitment was directed at everyone from President Obama to U.S. congressmen and women to members of city councils, school boards and county commissions.
The highlights were plentiful. King Banaian provided the first highlights with a speech about William Graham Sumner's story of the forgotten man , which reads like this:
The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.King's speech focused on never letting ourselves be forgotten again. (Follow this link to read King's speech.) This is especially timely considering how dismissive the Democrats have been of the American people. Congressional Democrats and President Obama are trying to ram health care reform down our throats like they did with the stimulus bill. they're attempting this despite We The People's sending an unmistakeable message that their health care reform legislation is a clunker.
In this respect, it's no different than when Democrats insisted on ignoring us about the failed stimulus bill.
The first theme that emerged was NO NORE!!! It started with King's speech. Michele picked up on that theme in her speech, followed by Steve Gottwalt's speech, then mine, finally concluding with Ross Ueckert's (pronounced eckert) speech. If you aren't familiar with Ross, that needs to change ASAP. The best way to do that is by visiting Ross's website and immersing yourself in the information there. (That or have lunch with him after the event, which I had the privilege of doing.)
Steve Gottwalt's speech on health care reform was impressive, which I expected. Steve laid out a plan that people can get on board with. The centerpiece of that plan is his Healthy Minnesota Plan, which is actually a policy with a private insurance company that is owned by the individual, which makes it portable. Because Steve's plan uses health re-imbursement accounts, you only pay for the health care you use while providing catastrophic insurance for individuals.
What we frequently call health insurance really isn't when compared with car insurance or homeowners insurance. It's more accurate to call our current health insurance system prepaid health care.
The applause that Steve got made it apparent that the crowd appreciated Steve's presentation. After the event, I spoke with several people in the audience about the highlights of the presentations. Steve's presentation was among the speeches that drew praise.
Another speech that drew rave reviews was Rep. Mike Beard's presentation. Mike's presentation was about Cap and Trade. Mike used the speech to teach an economics lesson in addition to the energy lesson. Mike said that affordable, plentiful energy is what powers expanding economies. Mike then noted that Cap and Trade won't create a surplus of energy or make it affordable. Mike also noted that you can't conserve your way to a prosperous economy, that prosperous economies are "economies of surplus."
Dan Severson gave a stirring speech about how liberty is part of America's DNA, something I wholeheartedly agree with.
I talked with Dan Hollenhorst during the event. Dan and I are part of an organization called Citizens For a Free America . Dan reported that copies of the U.S. Constitution were a hot item at their booth, as were their bumper stickers .
Many thanks go out to Dave Thompson for the terrific job he did in emceeing the event and to the CR's. Yesterday's event wouldn't have run so smooth without their behind-the-scenes work.
Thanks also go out to State Sen. Michelle Fischbach, Second Amendment expert Joel Rosenberg and Chaplain Dan Hall, my friend and SCBA cohort Leo Pusateri and others for their inspirational speeches. (My apologies for those people I didn't list. My memory isn't what it used to be.)
Other Observations
Something that can't be overlooked is the fact that a substantial part of the audience were young people, with perhaps as much as one-third of the group being twenty-somethings.
A small group of liberals stood behind the crowd with a sign saying that they were disappointed by "the 6th District representative." The good news is that people ignored them while we let them exercise their First Amendment rights. In other words, we didn't go SEIU on them.
A number of great signs could be seen. My favorite said "Subsidizing ACORN is NUTS", though the sign that said "LIBERTY is the only STIMULUS I need" came in a close second. During Mike Beard's speech on Cap And Trade, a woman held a sign aloft that said "Cap And Trade = Trap and Raid", a sentiment Mike immediately agreed with.
Many of the people attending got to listen to several policy speeches that answered their questions on health care, taxes, Obamanomics and energy.
This was the second event sponsored by the Central Minnesota Conservative Coalition, aka CMCC. CMCC will attempt to hold monthly topical events throughout the year. Possible think tank discussions include education reform, energy policy, health care and economics.
If you're interested in attending CMCC events, please leave a comment at this blog. I will add you to my e-mailing list for future events. (I'm the only person who will see your email address.)
Thanks to the hard work of many, many people, Saturday's TEA Party was a huge success.
Posted Monday, September 14, 2009 2:16 AM
Comment 1 by hockeycoach at 14-Sep-09 11:29 AM
I'm always amused at how right wingers wave the Constitution around and completely ignore it in their actions.
Forgotten man? King Banian must be pretty impressed with himself - like all the righties who are on this blog. He says, "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man."
Um, hello, we all have the right to vote in the Constitution and it's up to us with our vote to put "A and B' in place. If we haven't done so, it's because we haven't taken the steps to do so.
George Bush with his disinterest in the policies that help the "forgotten man" created an environment that discredited conservatives and made it impossible for Republicans to win in 2006 and 2008.
This "we are a victim of who we elected" is pap. We're all part of the same process and system. Righties were discredited and the electorate chose a new President. It's how the Constitution works people. It may charge up the troops, but the system says that A and B are chosen by C (and even D). If you don't like who A and B are, then work to change it. Quit being a victim, and quit patting yourself on the back for posing as representives of all people in the C group. You're not.
Comment 2 by eric z at 14-Sep-09 02:31 PM
Sounds like a real hootenanny.
Please put me on the emailing list.
More On Obama's (Where's the Beef?) Speech
The longer I've thought about President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress, the more I'm thinking the speech should be titled President Obama's Where's the Beef speech. I'll quickly admit, though, that giving it the title of President Obama's Alice In Wonderland speech would be equally fitting.
Think about President Obama's contradictions in Wednesday night's speech. President Obama promised seniors that their health care wouldn't be rationed even though he's proposing cutting $500,000,000,000 from the Medicare budget over the next 10 years. President Obama promised promised all of us that his health care reform wouldn't add a single penny to the deficit. President Obama promised us that we could keep our existing coverage if that's what we preferred.
In the aftermath of President Obama's speech, several columnists have started questioning President Obama's credibility. One columnist doing this is Robert Tracinski :
Remember Barack Obama's famous speech on race, back in March of 2008? Obama had spent 20 years listening to the sermons of Jeremiah Wright, full of venomous anti-Americanism and attacks on "white America." Yet when the reverend's rants were revealed to the public, Obama tried to convince us that he just happened to be missing from the pews on any well-documented Sunday, and that the Jeremiah Wright we saw and heard was not the Jeremiah Wright he knew.Sean Hannity was the first to question President Obama's credibility and ties to radicalism. People looked past President Obama's fanciful statements and his radicalist bent and elected him anyway. NO MORE will We The People let him get away with his centrist speeches and his radical leftist advisors pushing his radical leftist agenda.
It was a giant, implausible lie. Yet the speech was smoothly delivered and well-turned, perfectly balanced to seem to empathize both with the grievances of blacks and with the concerns of whites. So most people seemed to believe it.
It isn't possible to believe that the man who pushed through the $787,000,000,000 pork-filled stimulus bill without legislators reading the bill is the man who's going to wring out $500,000,000,000 of waste from the Medicare program. That simply isn't credible.
The notion that the president who is racking up the biggest single year deficit in U.S. history is proposing deficit-neutral health care legislation is insulting. The thoughtful people who heard his speech heard that part either laughed heartily or were upset mightily. If they laughed, it was because they didn't take President Obama's statement seriously. If they were upset, it's because they believed that President Obama was treating them like idiots.
I've said on this blog that President Obama's credibility is being questioned. In truth, it's been questioned to varying levels since President Obama and Prime Minister Pelosi rammed the stimulus bill down our throats. If President Obama continues telling whoppers, what little is left of his credibility will disappear.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:16 AM
No comments.
More TEA Party Observations
Sean Trebus's article in the SCSU Chronicle offers an additional perspective to Saturday's TEA Party rally well worth examining. Sean takes note of some of Rep. Michele Bachmann's statements that are worth taking a closer look at. Here's one statement that stood out for Mr. Trebus:
Bachmann made reference to her coming to speak at the University of Minnesota campus on Sept. 25 with Libertarian spokesperson, Ron Paul. The goal of that specific trip will be to inform the 18 to 25-year-olds about the possible misfortunes the current administration's policies may hold for them in the future.What should worry college students is this forecast by Larry Summers , President Obama's chief economic advisor:
"Once they know what the federal government is doing to their future, condemning them to a lifetime of very few choices, high unemployment and low wages, I think we're going to see them rise up and instead of 1,000 or more people for our tea party, we won't be able to fill this park once they understand what's been lit under them," Bachmann said.
"The level of unemployment is unacceptably high," National Economic Council Director Larry Summers said Friday. "And will, by all forecasts, remain unacceptably high for a number of years."That quote was taken Eamon Javers' article in Politico from this past Saturday. The thing that should trouble DFL strategists is that Summers is probably right, which would cause young people to turn against the DFL in substantial numbers.
Imagine being a college student getting ready to graduate this quarter. Then picture that student having a bunch of student loans to pay off. Next picture that student looking at a depressed jobs market awaiting you when you graduate.
The DFL will accuse me of fearmongering. My reply to that accusation is simple: It's impossible to scare people if things are going well. If people are frightened, it's possible that they're frightened because the situation warrants it. It's possible that that's the proper intellectual response.
I'll say this much: College students looking at that situation are more likely to think that I'm being realistic and that I've got a pretty good read on the situation.
Trebus also quotes King extensively:
Among local guest speakers in attendance were SCSU Economics Professor King Banaian.While President Obama grows the size of government by orders of magnitude, We The People understand that that sized government isn't accountable to We The People. When government gets too large, corruption is the inevitable result. The other inevitable result is that government grows unresponsive and doesn't represent our priorities once it reaches a certain point.
"Today's a reminder to those we send to St. Paul and to City Hall and to those in Congress and the White House that we feel have forgotten," Banaian said. He was the first guest speaker to approach the podium, following Thompson.
"When the government gets larger, citizens get smaller. People forget to take care of themselves. They rely on government. They don't feel like working when they can't keep what they earn. Besides, government will give it to them," Banaian said.
I'd suggest that government, especially the federal goverment, reached that stage years ago but that it's gotten exponentially worse during President Obama's administration.
The people attending Saturday's TEA Party understand these things all too well. That's why one of Saturday's biggest rallying cries was "NO MORE!!!" NO MORE will We The People let career politicians ignore us. NO MORE will We The People let politicians ignore their campaign promises without them paying a price at the polls.
The thing that Michele Bachmann's detractors don't admit about her is that she understands people exceptionally well. She's a great listener and a great political educator, too. That's why people at Saturday's TEA Party responded enthusiastically to Michele's speech.
Another thing that I haven't mentioned until now is how Michele's mood changed the minute she arrived. I had a great backstage seat to watch her vehicle pull up. The minute Michele got out of the car, a woman with her three daughters told Michele that she "thanks God every day that" Michele represents her in Congress and that she prays for Michele always.
Michele's immediate reaction was to thank this woman, then to suggest they take a group photo including the woman's 3 young daughters, the oldest of which was maybe six. What I saw is that Michele is a great retail politicker and a person who just generally loves interacting with people.
Simply put, Saturday's TEA Party was an amazing event, one which will have a profound effect on the 2010 election.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:08 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 15-Sep-09 06:45 AM
Is the notion that the government should not have pushed so hard on Wall Street to create all those whacked out devivatives and should not have pushed so hard on AIG to take on massive swaption positions its resources could not cover and should not have pushed Bernie Madoff to do crooked business, so that had the private sector held free rein none of that stuff would have happened? I do agree, had the government not lied about yellow cake and such, we'd be better off these days, but how do you stop a GOP resident from lying? Especially, if you say corruption is inevitable when government and accompanying military machinery grows out of scale to defensive need. It is a problem, and the running continuity from the Clinton presidency onward through intervening times to Obama is problematic. What's the real answer, absent inflamatory rhetoric, what's the policy? Cut taxes further for the rich so prosperity can trickle down? Had that been sound policy would we be where we are now with unempolyment high, Hemsley at UnitedHealth prospering so much but also taking so much that less is left to trickle down.
Is diverting the "trickle" to personal pockets and pocket books why the newbies face challenge and risk beyond what newbies back in the 1950's faced? Or is it globalization, backed by both parties, causing a more competitive world where all but the very rich in this nation are reduced to the global least common denominator? If that, how would you in the GOP fix it? Would you repudiate globalization and want protective tariffs? Import quotas?
Severe taxes on US capital invested abroad? Besides Bachmannian bloviating, yes we'd like a solution - so give one, but not smoke and mirrors.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 15-Sep-09 07:22 AM
What's the real answer, absent inflamatory rhetoric, what's the policy?The policy is limiting government to its constitutional duties as prescribed in the Ninth & Tenth Amendments.
The federal government should only do those things that the Constitution says are its duties. State governments shouldn't things that cities & counties should do, etc.
Yes, cutting taxes is part of the formula. Where you see only the rich getting richer, the reality is that healthy profits give businesses an incentive to grow & employ more people.
The reality is that government is utterly inept in discovering the next Microsoft, the next Dell or the next FedEx. If you have high taxes, capital stays on the sidelines & small businesses don't get created.
The State Fair Poll & the DFL's Unseriousness
A couple of weeks ago, my representative, Larry Haws, touted the House of Representatives' State Fair Poll questions. Now that the results have been tabulated, Rep. Haws has an LTE in this morning's St. Cloud Times. Here's the first State Fair Poll question :
Should the use of medical marijuana for terminally ill patients be allowed in Minnesota?Almost 62 percent of people polled said that it should be permitted. My question for the people saying it should be permitted is simple: why is it important that we make marijuana available when there's a limitless supply of other painkillers available? During CMCC's recent health care forum, Dave Borgert said that there's a synthetic option of medical marijuana that should be preferred because its manufacture can be monitored.
Here's another question:
Do you generally support budget cuts as opposed to increasing certain taxes in times of economic distress?By a 47.5 percent to 43.8 percent margin, those taking the poll said they preferred budget cutting over raising taxes. I'm certain that that wasn't the result that the DFL was looking for.
Though I find some of these question interesting, I think that it's appalling that there weren't more substantive questions included in the polling. Why didn't the poll include questions on whether the legislature should reduce the number of health care and health insurance mandates? Why didn't the poll include questions that asked whether the legislature should rework the fees system? Why didn't the poll include a question on whether Minnesotans preferred lowering taxes on small businesses so they have an incentive to stay in Minnesota?
At last night's BPOU meeting, Rep. Marty Seifert said that distillers in Minnesota have to pay a $30,000 annual licensing fee to operate. That's compared with Iowa requiring a $350 annual licensing fee. Seifert said that he knows of 4 companies that took their jobs to Iowa for that specific reason, taking with them 20 employees.
If we're interested in creating jobs that don't disappear when the bonding bill funds disappear, we need to improve our fee structure and modernize our tax system. We need regulatory reform, too, especially for health care and health insurance.
This poll is mostly fluff that contains little in terms of information by which the legislature can set its priorities for the next session. At a time when the DFL insists that a leadership forum is important to solving impending deficits, why didn't the DFL poll include serious questions about the biggest issue facing Minnesota's government and Minnesota's families?
Last summer, the DFL held dozens of out-of-session meetings on a variety of topics, then whined that they didn't have the time to put a budget proposal together. Why is the DFL wasting time, again, on this trivial stuff instead of putting together common sense reform initiatives that save money without cutting services?
This year has seen the outbreak of TEA parties across America. People are saying that they're tired of their elected politicians ignoring solutions to high priority issues. The people are also tired that too many of their elected officials are ignoring them. Apparently, the DFL wants to hear from Minnesotans about frivolous things but they aren't interested in hearing from Minnesotans on the important issues facing the state.
The DFL has had 3 years to establish a set of priorities that fits Minnesota's needs. Thus far, they've failed miserably. Thus far, the DFL's priorities have been to not change the status quo and to reflexively raise taxes. The DFL leadership has refused to rethink how government operates. They've refuses to reform itself. Worst of all, they've said that they'd rather tax us than reform government.
NO MORE!!!
If the DFL won't live within their means, if the DFL won't make high priority reforms, if the DFL won't listen to We The People, then it's time that We The People voted in new majorities in the House and Senate that will live within their means, that will reform how state government operates and that doesn't reflexively attempt to raise taxes.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 12:46 PM
Comment 1 by Liberty at 15-Sep-09 01:48 PM
I would pose the question in reverse: why is it important that we make marijuana ILLEGAL when there's a limitless supply of other painkillers available? To help keep our criminal justice system in the red? To make sure we maintain a nanny state? As John Stossel would say, "Gimme a break!" (and no, I've never inhaled nor would I encourage anyone to)
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 15-Sep-09 04:02 PM
Quit missing the point. The question is a distraction. We've got important questions to to deal with. Dealing with medical marijuana isn't one of those questions.
Let's face facts. This is simply an attempt to legalize marijuana. If people want to fight that fight, then they should have that fight.
Comment 3 by Jennifer at 16-Sep-09 09:04 AM
And you think the other major party WILL live within their means!?! Yeah - RIGHT! They've proven to be so financially responsible. (sarcasm).
And on the question of medical marijuana and why it should be legal when there are other painkillers. For one, that question is probably thrown in there to get people talking who perhaps aren't old enough, educated enough, etc. to really get into detailed debates on other more complex issues. Second, to some people medical marijuana being legal IS a huge issue! There are lots of other painkillers out there, yes. Pain killers that are far more mood altering, far more addictive and far more damaging to the body!!!
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 16-Sep-09 09:35 AM
Jennifer, Please understand that the State Fair Poll is for the STATE LEGISLATURE, not the idiots in Washington. If you look at the Minnesota House GOP's voting record the last 3 sessions, you'd notice that they'd get high marks for fiscal responsibility. In fact, House Republicans in DC deserve high marks this session for fiscal responsibility, too.
That's the verifiable fact.
Is the Baucus Bill Doomed Already?
Sen. Max Baucus's bill was introduced less than 36 hours ago and it's already taken two major hits...from Democrats. Sen. Wyden, (D-OR), has already raised major objections to Sen. Baucus's bill. Not to be outdone, Sen. Rockefeller, (D-WVA), has announced that he won't vote for the bill as it's currently written:
West Virginia Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, the second-ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said Tuesday he will oppose the proposal from Chairman Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, unless dramatic changes are made to the legislation. Mr. Rockefeller cited in particular the absence of a taxpayer-financed public insurance plan to compete with private insurers.During Tuesday night's panel, Charles Krauthammer said that the Baucus bill was the most transparent bill of all the legislation crafted by Democrats. He said that it didn't hide the cost of the bill. Then he said that the bill will fail because of all the tax increases included in the bill.
The CBO said that the bill as currently configured was deficit neutral. Unfortunately, the only reason that it's neutral is because of it mandates individuals to purchase insurance. The CBO said that that provision would have the same effect as increasing federal taxes by 13 points. That's the bad news for Democrats. The worst news is that that tax increase is aimed directly at the middle class and small businesses.
The Senate's leading health care proposal is seriously flawed, Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden said Tuesday, declaring that it fails to fulfill President Barack Obama's primary reforms and could force millions of Americans to pay more for the medical care they receive.While it's true that Sen. Baucus can claim that the bill is deficit-neutral as it's currently configured, that configuration is sure to be challenged. There's been talk that another option that's being considered is offering subsidies to families that are forced to purchase insurance. If that option is passed instead, then the bill isn't deficit-neutral anymore. It's a classic case of damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't.
"Under this bill as it is written now, more than 200 million Americans would not get choices like the president of the United States called for," Wyden said in an interview. "Middle-class people certainly will pay more, based on the draft we're seeing."
At this point, it's difficult picturing a scenario that gets a sweeping reform bill passed. The one possibility is the one that hasn't been tried yet: actually trying to work with Republicans on a bipartisan bill. David Espo's observation exposes the problem:
Despite numerous gestures to Republicans, Baucus fell short in his quest to assemble a coalition of senators from both parties behind his plan.I suspect that Mr. Espo's statement wasn't intended to expose the Democrats' reform efforts. It's just what happened. Had Sen. Baucus offered to include key provisions in the bill that conservatives are insisting on, he might've attracted Republican support. This isn't just Sen. Baucus's problem, either. It's the same problem Democrats face in the House, too.
These problems pale in comparison to the fight that'd happen if the Senate tries using reconciliation to pass health care reform. Tonight on Hannity, Speaker Gingrich said that he's been told that there are so many points of order that would be launched that the resulting legislation would be totally incoherent. If that's true, and I'll trust Mr. Newt that it is, then the Democrats' uphill fight just got infinitely more challenging.
That's before considering the fact that President Obama is trying to sell something that the American people aren't interested in buying. Rightly or wrongly, the American people think that the Democrats' health care reform bills will either add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficits or it will trigger massive middle class tax increases or rationing of health care for seniors on Medicare or a combination of these things.
That isn't how to win elections and influence legislators.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:29 PM
No comments.
These problems pale in comparison to the fight that'd happen if the Senate tries using reconciliation to pass health care reform. Tonight on Hannity, Speaker Gingrich said that he's been told that there are so many points of order that would be launched that the resulting legislation would be totally incoherent. If that's true, and I'll trust Mr. Newt that it is, then the Democrats' uphill fight just got infinitely more challenging.
That's before considering the fact that President Obama is trying to sell something that the American people aren't interested in buying. Rightly or wrongly, the American people think that the Democrats' health care reform bills will either add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficits or it will trigger massive middle class tax increases or rationing of health care for seniors on Medicare or a combination of these things.
That isn't how to win elections and influence legislators.
Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:29 PM
No comments.
