I’ve never met Matthew Goldstein, but judging by his bio I don’t think it’s something I’d like to do. It reads like a stereotype of the elitist, leftist intelligentsia. A B.A. in English and History, an M.A. in World and Comparative Literature (whatever that means) and a Ph.D. in English, all from über-liberal universities, and a job at a community college in Oakland, California.

Dr. Goldstein has commented about blogs written last week criticizing Warren Buffett’s recent pronouncement that he doesn’t pay enough taxes (like mine):

Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett heated up the blogosphere with a recent New York Times op-ed piece, “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich.”

. . .

But when the Sage of Omaha starts offering old-fashioned soak-the-rich rhetoric, people take notice. And support from those who stand to lose the most from a tax hike can only help the cause of so-called class-warriors, right?

Well, maybe.

When taxes on the nation’s highest earners become an expression of noblesse oblige, they may only reinforce existing economic inequalities. Doesn’t any middle-class society worthy of the name need to make the super-rich pay their taxes?

Well, actually, no. You see, middle-class societies depend on the “super-rich”. Those super-rich people are the ones investing the money in job-creating new businesses, like the investment groups behind Google and Twitter. They invest in existing corporations, like the people buying out the shares of GovernmentGeneral Motors and yes, investors in Berkshire Hathaway. Their money, sitting in banks, is loaned to mom-and-pop stores and workshops, and to middle-class families buying new homes. When that money is ripped-away in the form of taxes to pay for phantom “green jobs”, nanny-state policies and to “protect the poor”, it’s not available to create new or grow existing businesses and hence, new jobs for poor and middle-class workers.

Read More →

Warren Buffett took the time to write an op-ed piece in the Sunday New York Times and give Barack Obama some cannon fodder for his taxpayer-financed campaign bus trip. Not being a regular Times reader (I prefer the Journal), I heard about the piece after news reports of Mr. Obama quoting it on the campaign trail. It seems Mr. Buffett doesn’t think he and other wealthy Americans like him are taxed enough.

Oh, he phrases it in his polite, even-handed manner that has made Buffet both an investment and media darling. I met Buffett a few years ago and found him to be both charming and generous. He’s really quite funny and personable. He regaled my group of graduate students from the University of Southern California and the University of Georgia with stories of making quick hundred thousand dollar deals on companies in Korea and smart investment decisions going back to his youth. In the op-ed, he’s calm and seemingly even-handed as he chastises Congress for its “coddling” of millionaires and billionaires like him. He even mentions the liberal focus-group-tested phrase, “shared sacrifice.”

Here’s the problem with your views, Mr. Buffett: I want a chance at what you’ve got. I did long before I met you, and I still want it today. Just a piece of it would be nice. Yes, I’d like to be a successful millionaire or even a billionaire someday, but what you’re asking for makes it harder for me to get it.

Here’s just a portion of what Warren Buffett had to say:

Read More →

Seems the Lamestream Media is scared stiff that Texas Governor Rick Perry may run for President. Jennifer Rubin (the “conservative” blogger at the Washington Post) initially writes a piece rightfully decrying the New York Times Op-Ed about Perry speaking at the Prayer Response Event last week, then had an unfortunate piece criticizing Perry for not being inclusive:

In his comments at the event, Perry specifically disclaimed partisanship. He kept his comments generic: “His agenda is not a political agenda, his agenda is a salvation agenda. . . . He’s a wise, wise God, and he’s wise enough to not be affiliated with any political party, or for that matter, he’s wise enough to not be affiliated with any man-made institutions. He’s calling all Americans, of all walks of life, to seek him, to return to him, to experience his love and his grace and his acceptance, experience a fulfilled life regardless of the circumstances. I want you to join with me as I share his word with you.”

However, this is not to say there weren’t problems with the event.

For starters, Perry had previously insisted that the event welcomed persons of all faiths. But this is what he said on Saturday: “Like all of you, I love this country deeply, and thank you for being here. The only thing you love more is the living Christ.” Not so pluralistic after all.

Why is this “conservative” Jennifer Rubin attacking Rick Perry for expressing his faith at a Christian event? Rubin is basically stating that because this non-denominational Christian event welcomed non-Christians, Perry shouldn’t be mentioning God or Jesus at all. And it gets worse:

So to recap, his words at the event were restrained but not ecumenical. And his use of public office to promote the Christian event was, to me, inappropriate.

…

A a practical matter, the event suggests that Perry, a man of considerable confidence, is not accustomed to operating on a national, rather than Texan, stage. One of his key problems is the degree to which he can expand beyond a base of Christian conservative supporters. This will make the task somewhat more difficult.

However, the most unfortunate aspect to this entire matter is that he has given a club to the left-wing contingent that thinks religion should not be discussed in the public square and that reference to one’s faith as the basis for public-policy positions is somehow illegitimate. In that sense, Perry has done more harm than good to those who believe, that with appropriate modesty and restraint, religious values and viewpoints have a place in the great national debates of our time.

So in other words, because he might upset the fringe Left (who’d never vote for him anyway) by publicly displaying his religion, Perry isn’t qualified to be a Presidential candidate. Instead of defending Perry’s right to be a Christian and express his faith openly, even as a public official, Rubin suggests that Perry is in fact not qualified to be a candidate because he actually embraces his Constitutional rights!

Read More →

My very first “Intemperate Thoughts” post came just after an Independence Day holiday, so it seems appropriate to have another during this holiday.

For those unfamiliar, this is a list of random, often cynical and (hopefully) humorous thoughts that I’ve been collecting for the past few months.  They’re insensitive and meant to irk you.  And if you’re really offended by them, then I’m really, really happy about that.

Here we go!

1. For the Left, why is it that after 60 days in Iraq it was, “Bush lied, who died?” when after 60 days in Libya it’s, “GET OFF OBAMA’S BACK!!!1!1!!!11eleventy!!!
2. It seems the new immigration law has the illegals leaving Georgia.  Now farmers complain no one wants to work their farms.  Of course not!  Why work in the hot when you can sit on your bum, eat McDonald’s and collect a welfare check?!
3. I don’t feel any need to defend Halperin or go after MSNBC.  After all, if Rachel Maddow or even Bill Kristol had said the same thing about Paul Ryan, we’d be calling for their heads.
4. Speaking of BIll Kristol, today he suggested a Bachmann/Lieberman ticket.  So, just when did he escape from his straight jacket?
5. I haven’t watched one second of the Casey Anthony story on Fox News and I just don’t care.
6. Today was a “day without immigrants”.  Illegals stayed home to show their solidarity.  The only thing that seemed different was that I made it to work without being cut-off by a beat-up minivan with 74 ladders scotch-taped to the roof.

Read More →

I’m not a huge fan of Michele Bachmann. I don’t dislike her and if she’s the GOP candidate in 2012 I’ll support her, but she’s doesn’t excite me the way she excites much of the Tea Party constituency. That being said, I’m also not a fan of journalists misrepresenting history in a “Gotcha!” game with candidates.

George Stephanopolous interviewed Congresswoman Bachmann after Politifact rated several statements by her to be false (partial video in linked article). Primary on Stephanolopolous’ mind was her statement that the Founding Fathers worked “tirelessly” to end slavery. Stephanolpolous, like any historically ill-informed liberal, assumed that because the United States ended up with legal slavery after the ratification of the Constitution that this statement must be false.

For what it’s worth, I couldn’t even find an assessment of this particular statement from Bachmann on slaveryby Politifact, which has rated many statements by Bachmann as false.  Though her association of John Quincy Adams with the Foundational period doesn’t hold muster, Stephanolpolous is showing his greater ignorance of history.

In the full interview, Stephanopolous cited the instances of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as being slave holders. He’s right that they were and so were many others, but he seems to be thinking that because these two Founders were slave holders, it summarily damns the rest of the founding group and that it means slavery wasn’t a contentious, hard-fought issue among the Founders.

The problem with this concept is that it assumes that the Founders came together at the Constitutional Convention as a singular, amorphous group with the same goals and ideals driving their actions. It suggests that the actions of the Founders were largely pre-ordained and that the Constitutional Convention was merely puppet theater.

In reality, the founders had diverse views and goals on many issues, and far from a puppet theater the Convention was held largely in secret with negotiations that were both contentious and heated.

Read More →

As any fan of Star Trek will tell you, we get the word “Sabotage” from the Dutch word for shoe, “Sabot”. In Star Trek VI, we are informed, technophobic workers threw their shoes into the gears of new machines due to their fear of losing their jobs to the new mechanical contraptions.

It also seems the President shares the technophobic sentiments of those laborers of yore. In a statement to NBC News, the President stated (h/t Fox Nation and @Keder):

“There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate.”

So, says President Obama, the reason you’re unemployed isn’t because of poor government policy. Blame those pesky automated kiosks. Except for one thing: Advances in technology and efficiency have always led to more jobs in this country in the past.

Read More →

Carlos Santana was so moved by his “Beacon of Change” award that he took the opportunity to call the state in which he received it “racist” and “anti-American”.

From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Santana took his turn at the podium on the field in a pre-game ceremony before the Braves-Phillies game to criticize the immigration bill just signed into law by Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal Friday.

“I represent the human race,” the Mexican-born Carlos Santana said. “The people of Arizona, the people of Atlanta, Georgia, you should be ashamed of yourselves.”

The Georgia immigration law, HB 87, cracks down on illegal immigration by increasing enforcement powers and requiring many employers to check the immigration status of new hires.

Ashamed?  Really, Carlos?  What is there in the law that we should be ashamed of it?  Never mind that there are between 10 million and 15 million people living in the United States who have never been screened for disease, crimilar history or terrorism ties.  Never mind that the law is similar to Arizona’s law, which merely requires state and local governments to do what the Federal government should already otherwise be doing.  Never mind that it requires employers to use the Federal e-Verify system to ensure that employees are legal residents of the United States.  Never mind that the law is innocuous in comparrison to Mexican immigration law.  According to Carlos Santana, this is just a return to the 1960s race wars:

“It’s an anti-American law. It’s a cruel law, actually,” Santana said. “If you all remember what it was like here with Martin Luther King and the dogs and the hoses, it’s the same thing, only it’s high tech. So let’s change it.”

That’s right!  Requiring employers to verify their employees are legal residents is just like releasing the dogs and fire hoses on Civil Rights activists!  Requiring government offices to ask for ID before giving out welfare benefits is just an extension of Jim Crow!  The only difference is it’s “high tech”!  It’s just about RAAAAACISM!™

Oy.

Read More →

I just spent 90 minutes watching the Republican primary debate.  Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul each answered about a dozen questions on topics ranging from the war in Afghanistan to Obamacare to the economy.  Tonight’s big winner?

Herman Cain.

The loser(s)?

Gary Johnson and every candidate who didn’t attend.

Read More →

Even before the news that Barack Obama’s birth certificate was being released to the public, I wanted to write a piece on why Donald Trump’s potential candidacy for the GOP nomination was a joke at best and intentionally harmful to the conservative movement at worst. Now he’s claiming credit for Obama’s release of the birth certificate and says he’s “proud” and “honored”.

Donald Trump, whose popularity as a possible Republican presidential contender shot up after he started questioning the whereabouts of President Obama’s birth certificate, said Wednesday he is “so proud” the president has finally released the forms.

“I am so proud of myself because I’ve accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish,” Trump said from Portsmouth, N.H., where he was giving early primary voters a close-up look at a potential presidential campaign.

“I feel I’ve accomplished something really, really important and I’m honored for it,” Trump said.

The billionaire real estate mogul and host of “Celebrity Apprentice” brought the issue of the president’s birth certificate to the forefront after years of complaints from a small segment of society, come to be known as “birthers,” who said it is not satisfied with the short-form version of the president’s certificate provided during the 2008 presidential campaign.

There is only one reason why Barack Obama would release his birth certificate now after more than three years since Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign brought it up: Because it benefits him politically to do so.

Since the “Birther” issue came up, Barack Obama, the Democrats and the Leftist media have milked it for all it’s worth. Despite the small number of vocal proponents of the idea that Obama was born outside the United States, the Left has made political hay of the derranged individuals who cling to the idea that if, somehow, some way, Obama could be proved not a U.S. citizen, he could be removed from office! The fact that his mother was a U.S. citizen which gives him birthright citizenship is meaningless! These people are on a mission!

The Birthers, of course, are quite different from regular skeptics. After the question was raised and after the months and years dragged on without a birth certificate, it was healthy to simply wonder about whether Barack Obama was actually born in the United States. Once again, however, his mother was a U.S. citizen, so even if he’d been born in Kenya or Indonesia or Bhutan or on the planet Vulcan, he’s still be a birthright U.S. citizen by virtue of his mother’s citizenship.

None of that has mattered to the Birthers, nor did it matter to Donald Trump whilst he cavorted about the evening news programs, bringing back to the forefront an issue that had long-since faded into the background.

Read More →

President Obama recently stated he would be forming an inquiry into petroleum futures markets to ensure there has been no price fixing or gouging that might have harmed consumers. The President (and many on both the Right and Left) have made “Speculators” their on-again/off-again scapegoat for high fuel prices for at least the last decade. They posit that speculators have driven up the price of petroleum outside of normal supply and demand and have done so to line their own pockets.

“The truth is, there’s no silver bullet that can bring down gas prices right away,” Obama said in prepared remarks for his opening statement at a townhall-style meeting in Nevada.

“The Attorney General’s putting together a team whose job it will be to root out any cases of fraud or manipulation in the oil markets that might affect gas prices – and that includes the role of traders and speculators. We are going to make sure that no one is taking advantage of the American people for their own short-term gain,” Obama said.

This simply isn’t true. In fact, futures traders have an important job of ensuring that the supply of fuel, food or other products never run out as long as people demand them. Rather, if the President wants to know who is responsible for high fuel prices, he need only look in the mirror. It is the government that has played a heavy hand in raising the cost of fuel and other products to the high levels we see today. The “speculators” are just doing their job and dealing with the consequences of poorly-conceived goverment actions.

Read More →