Greece: Even worse than you thought

September 13th, 2010

This piece by Michael Lewis in Vanity Fair is a real eye-opener. No matter how fiscally inept and corrupt you thought Greece’s government, the picture it paints is much worse, of a country where no one blows the whistle on tax cheats because everyone is a tax cheat, and everyone still expects to get their 14 monthly paychecks a year. Everyone is in on the game, even the monks.

Especially the monks.

This is the endpoint of Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, the final pre-collapse state of socialism: Everyone wants to grab their share, but no one wants to pay for it, and the supply of other people’s money is finally running out. This is the where Obama’s Big Government economic policies must inevitably lead: A declining state with huge budget deficits run for the benefit of bureaucrats.

(Hat tip: Instapundit.)

An Explanation for the Left’s Irrational Hatred of Sarah Palin

September 12th, 2010

“Oooo, I don’t like that woman,” said a non-conservative of my acquaintance when Sarah Palin’s name came up. And indeed, the reason for the American left’s pathological hatred of Palin, a reaction based on a visceral emotional reaction rather than intellectual disagreement, is one of the great mysteries of our time. Kevin Burke suggested that one reason was repressed shame over themselves not living up to Palin decision not to abort Trig.

This essay over on Chicago Boyz suggests that the real reason is status anxiety:

Status-anxiety occurs when a person believes that their position in a real or imagined social hierarchy is threatened. Leftists react emotionally to Palin because of the threat she poses to their own individual sense of status. All their other arguments are just put forth to rationalize that emotional reaction.

In short, it is not the ideas she puts forth, its that someone like her is significant at all.

Status-anxiety occurs most strongly when a group has no meritorious claims to its social position. The classic example would be the pre-WWII European aristocrats who inherited their wealth and position, and who therefore had no right to status in an industrial society other than from cultural inertia. Closer to home, the most vicious white racists were poor and working-class whites who knew full well that only racism kept them from being on society’s bottom status tier. As long as all non-whites were judged inferior to any white person, a poor white person still had some status. They bitterly resisted losing what little status they still had.

Leftism at its heart holds that a small percentage of humans have a vastly superior understanding of everything compared to ordinary people. The point of leftism is to empower these superior individuals to impose their superior understanding upon society by the force of the state. Leftists must be viewed by themselves and others as superior human beings if they are to have a claim to power and status.

Also:

Since they have few meritorious indicators of a personal and group claim to status remaining, leftists are forced to fall back on the same standards employed by the European upper classes. They try to restrict status not by merit but by conformity to their own life pattern. They demand that people go to the right elitist schools. They demand that people live in certain communities. They demand that people have the right recreational interests. They demand that people enjoy uniform kinds of art and music. They demand that people have the proper modes of speech, accent and allusion. They demand that people have the right religious beliefs. And so on.

On this basis Palin is a nightmare: She went to a state college. She lives in the “backwoods”. She likes hunting, fishing and sports. She likes country music and representational art. She doesn’t have the right accent. She doesn’t dress appropriately. She’s a Pentecostal instead of atheist, Unitarian, Episcopalian, etc.

Palin’s success stabs them in the heart of their anxiety. If Palin can be a successful political leader, what does that say about the leftists’ claims of intellectual and moral superiority? If people don’t just instantly assume that leftists are smarter and better than everyone else, why would people trust a leftist government to make so many decisions about the people’s live, e.g., medical care?

That is why leftists see Palin as a genuine and significant threat of unusual magnitude. In the emotional thinking of leftists, she is a personal threat to everything each individual leftist has attained in life. They feel a sincere, visceral sense of danger about her because she attacks the very core of their egos. They feel the same hatred towards Palin that the European upper classes felt towards the upstart middle-class. They feel the same hatred that poor whites felt towards non-whites. They feel that way for the same reasons. If she succeeds, worse, if she is right, then they become nobodies.

As long as she is viewed as a significant political figure, the left’s obsession with Palin will never wane because it does not spring from rational roots. She threatens something too deep and too profound in a political subculture built around the belief that a small percentage of human beings have a vastly superior understanding of the world compared to all the rest.

1. Buy Booze, 2. Get Liquored Up, 3. Buy Gun While Drunk, 4. Pass Background Check, 5. ???

September 8th, 2010

So the city council of Carrollton, TX, in their infinite wisdom, is trying to decide whether to ban gun stores within a certain distance of a liquor store.

Like many gun-grabber ordinances, this one has a certain facile logic working on it (liquor + firearms = BAD), but deeper consideration of the subject reveals how illogical and unnecessary such a law would be.

First, under Texas law, it is already illegal for consumers to even open an alcoholic beverage inside a liquor store, much less drink it. Those same stores are also prohibited from selling alcohol to obviously intoxicated patrons.

So, apparently the only people this law will actually target are:

  1. Entirely sober people who want to buy a gun in the same center that just happens to house a liquor store, or
  2. People who are buying booze, downing it in the parking lot, and then wandering over to the gun store to pick up some heat because it just seemed like a good idea.

Somehow, I’m not seeing the sort of person who shotguns a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 in a parking lot as being the same sort of person who has either a few hundred dollars burning a hole in their pocket, or a valid credit card. (The only possible exception I can think of, someone on the gang-banger/drug-dealer continuum, aren’t very likely to pass the automatic background check (or, for that matter, purchase firearms through a legal dealer), now are they?)

And that’s assuming the store is foolish enough to sell a gun to someone obviously intoxicated.

The ordinance as described doesn’t make a lick of sense, and should shelved.

(Hat tip: Alphecca.)

Man Confronts 20 Gang Members Outside Home with AK-47. Guess who gets arrested?

September 8th, 2010

Right after one of the gang members said “Oh you’re dead. I’m gonna kill your family and your babies. You’re dead.”

If this was Texas, we’d be reading about how police arrested the gang members, or maybe how a grand jury no-billed the home owner after he ventilated the guy who just threatened to kill his family.

But since this took place on Long Island, New York, you know exactly how it turned out: Police arrested the man defending his home with “felony reckless endangerment” for firing four warning shots into the ground.

“There are no moderate Democrats in Congress”

September 2nd, 2010

This Jim Geraghty piece up on NRO, in which he he interviews longtime GOP insider “Obi Wan” about the coming election, is well worth a read.

This is the quote I found most striking:

“There are no moderate Democrats in Congress, because when you vote for a supposed Blue Dog you are voting for the enablers-the ones who keep the House and Senate run by liberals”

For much the same reason there’s no such thing as a pro-gun Democrat.

Went Over Like a Lead Balloon

September 1st, 2010

Dwight was one of many people to point out that the EPA’s plan to ban lead ammo appear to be dead for now. But the fact they even considered it says a great deal about the Obama Administration’s hostility to guns…

Because Obama just wasn’t unpopular enough among gun owners…

August 25th, 2010

…the EPA is considering banning lead ammunition. This would, in essence, kill off sport shooting entirely.

This is yet another example of why there’s really no such thing as a pro-gun Democrat. No matter how much they may personally swear up and down they respect the second amendment, the leadership they elect, the judges they appoint, and the bureaucrats they hire will inevitably tilt toward gun-grabbing causes far more than people chosen by Republicans. It’s simply their nature. After all, “clinging” to guns, like clinging to religion, is something those NASCAR retards do, not a fit preoccupation for fashionable liberal elites.

Between this and their refusal to enforce immigration laws, it’s almost like Obama and his minions want to turn off their few remaining supporters among moderate voters in advance of the November elections. Someone more prone to conspiracy theories than myself might surmise that Obama blames Reid and Pelosi for his unpopularity, and sees having them replaced by a Republican congress to run against (ala Bill Clinton in 1996) as the only way he can win reelection in 2012. But even I’m not quite that cynical.

Yet.

The Obama Administration Seems to Regard Immigration Enforcement as Optional

August 24th, 2010

Again.

The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts.

[snip]

Critics assailed the plan as another sign that the Obama administration is trying to create a kind of backdoor “amnesty” program.

[snip]

“They’ve made clear that they have no interest in enforcing immigration laws against people who are not convicted criminals,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for strict controls.

“This situation is just another side effect of President Obama’s failure to deliver on his campaign promise to make immigration reform a priority in his first year,” said U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “Until he does, state and local authorities are left with no choice but to pick up the slack for prosecuting and detaining criminal aliens.”

Between this and the lawsuit against Arizona, I wouldn’t say that the Obama Administration is indifferent to controlling the border, I’d say they’re actually hostile to it.

Report on Rep. John Carter’s Open House on August 17, 2010

August 24th, 2010

My congressman, Rep. John Carter (“Warlord of Mars”) of Texas House District 31 held an open house in Round Rock on Tuesday, August 17. Here’s my brief report. (I’m quoting from memory, so please forgive me if I get any quotes slightly wrong.)

This was a standing-room only crowd (my rough estimate would be 300-400 people), predominately older (not uncommon for political events), and 95% conservative (this is, after all, Williamson County). Save one liberal that shouted questions from the audience rather than waiting to use the microphone, it was also very well-behaved. (It would probably be unfair to compare Rep. Carter’s open house to those of Russ Carnahan or Claire McCaskill or even Ciro Rodriguez, all Representatives catching flack from their constituents for voting for the Obama-Pelosi agenda.) I think about two people in the Q&A session voiced approval for ObamaCare, but even those two were against cap-and-trade.

Indeed, there seemed to be overwhelming sentiment for smaller government in the room, and there were probably more hardcore libertarians than liberals. One attendee suggested the abolition of all federal departments except those (War (now Defense) and State) listed in the Constitution.

Carter, a former Williamson County judge, himself looks a bit older than his website’s official photos, and is a solid public speaker, if not a natural one.

Rep. Carter talked about how he had voted against TARP, the Stimulus, ObamaCare, Frank-Dodd, and cap-and-trade (the first four of which passed anyway). He said they had about two days to consider TARP, with the Bush Administration saying the banking system was about to collapse. He voted against it anyway, despite the pressure brought to bear for him to vote for it. “I told them I had presided over five death penalty case, three of which resulted in the death penalty being carried out, and compared to that their pressure was nothing. After that, they agreed I wasn’t going to change my mind, went away and left me alone.”

He also told us that worst effects of Obama’s policies may not have been felt yet, which is an ominous thought.

He showed off the infamous ObamaCare chart with its myriad array of boxes and new federal entities. He said he had experienced socialized medicine firsthand in The Netherlands (his wife is Dutch) and wanted no part of it.

He said that Washington was destroying small businesses. He talked about a subdivision developer in Bastrop who was making money, had sold half the lots in the subdivision, and was current on all his payments, but because of Dodd-Frank, the bank said he had 30 days to take his loan to another bank because Dodd-Frank said they had too many real estate loans in their portfolio. He said he had to take on a partner just to move the loan.

He also said that Republicans had pleaded with their Democratic colleagues not to let the Bush tax cuts expire. “Where I come from, when you pay more money, that’s a tax increase.” He also said that lower-income earners were going to be some of the hardest hit.

Come question and comments time (Carter appeared as part of the GOP’s “America Speaking Out” tour), there was the usual mixture of personal issues: one small business owner said she thought the government was trying to drive her out of business, questions about having to pay taxes on social security, a recent veteran (standing ovation) relating how he had a job offer pulled at the last minute due to a credit check, exhortations to read the constitution, etc. The usual panoply of grassroots American democracy. (At least in a Republican district. Perhaps speakers at Nancy Pelosi’s town halls exhort people to read Karl Marx or Howard Zinn.)

When it came my turn to ask a question (I was about 15th in line), I asked how, if Republicans were to recapture the majority, they would ensure they showed more fiscal restraint than the last time they were in the majority. Carter flatly admitted “We screwed up,” including himself in some votes early during his tenure when colleagues had urged him to vote for big spending bills “because we have to govern.”

I feel fairly confident that Rep. Carter has repented of the free-spending ways of the late Dennis Hastert-led Republican House, but I’m not sure his colleagues have.

I had to leave shortly after that, but I had a chance to say hi to Republican State House District 52 candidate Larry Gonzales, who I interviewed and endorsed (and have since contributed to) on the way out. I asked him how the campaign was going, and he said “Great! We’re loaded for bear.”

Blanche Lincoln Polling at 27%

August 20th, 2010

How unpopular are Democrats this year? Incumbent Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas is polling at 27%, compared to Republican challenger John Boozman’s 65%. I’m struggling (and failing) to think of non-indicted incumbent senator polling so low before the general election. As far as I know, Lincoln has not been struck with and personal or bribery scandals. No, she’s just this unpopular for supporting the Obama agenda in general, and for casting the deciding Senate vote in favor of ObamaCare specifically. This year, that’s enough to make you a pariah in red states.