A phenomenal study. Check it out for yourself but here is a quick synopsis.
The study finds that Ron Paul stands entirely alone among the Republican candidates in calling for spending cuts. In fact, Paul´s proposals would cut the federal budget by $150 billion.
John McCain´s proposals would result in a $6.9 billion spending hike.
Mitt Romney´s programs would result in a $19.5 billion spending hike.
Mike Huckabee´s proposals would result in a $54.2 billion spending hike.
As for the Democrats:
Hillary Clinton´s proposals would result in a $218.2 billion spending hike.
Barack Obama´s proposals would result in a $287.0 billion spending hike.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
California Debate
Tonights debate...
McCain-It seems like he is so happy with the Wolfowitz/Bush doctrine, Bush's economic policy, the current state of our economy. I can't help but wonder if his cognitive functions are all there. He blatantly lies, doesn't respond to the questions actually asked and name drops in place of presenting a defense for deviation from his party line. He kept making that awful smile in place of what you know he really wanted to do, which was light up Romney and Anderson the same way that he has to numerous Republican Senators and aides. Seemed to be running toward Bush while everyone else was running away. Kept Romney on the ropes and the spotlight off of himself.
Huckabee-So funny. Starting to take off the gloves a bit in his differences with Bush. Potentially has an old right streak he is trying to keep under wraps? He almost hints at, especially with his NRO article that he may think we should take a non interventionist approach in the future but with Iraq, "we broke it, we bought it." Sounding more and more Teddy Roosevelt every debate as well. Laid off the focus on his faith which is to his credit largely but may make some question his credibility. The Clintons talk about God a lot in the south too. Seemed a little whiny and much less in control with his not enough question bits.
Romney-"Facts are stubborn things." He did well. While I may disagree with him on some issues, he is a great speaker, a great debater and wears better suits than all the other candidates combined. Probably needed a much stronger night than he had. Should have tried turning the tables on McCain and focused on the economy. Paul showed during the last debate that the economy is a HUGE weakness of McCain's. Romney needed to go for the jugular here and didn't.
Paul-Not given many questions tonite. Didn't handle the ones he did receive very well. As most of you know I strongly support Ron Paul, but don't need to hear him rehash the same points with every question. I do agree that our occupation of over a hundred countries impacts our economy in severe and unneccessary ways, I also know that I am in the minority opinion. One must never hide the truth or lie, but taking every opportunity you get to talk to share those things which keep you in the minority is just bad strategy. But one of the best moments of the night had to be when he said, "I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with," he said. "They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy."
McCain-It seems like he is so happy with the Wolfowitz/Bush doctrine, Bush's economic policy, the current state of our economy. I can't help but wonder if his cognitive functions are all there. He blatantly lies, doesn't respond to the questions actually asked and name drops in place of presenting a defense for deviation from his party line. He kept making that awful smile in place of what you know he really wanted to do, which was light up Romney and Anderson the same way that he has to numerous Republican Senators and aides. Seemed to be running toward Bush while everyone else was running away. Kept Romney on the ropes and the spotlight off of himself.
Huckabee-So funny. Starting to take off the gloves a bit in his differences with Bush. Potentially has an old right streak he is trying to keep under wraps? He almost hints at, especially with his NRO article that he may think we should take a non interventionist approach in the future but with Iraq, "we broke it, we bought it." Sounding more and more Teddy Roosevelt every debate as well. Laid off the focus on his faith which is to his credit largely but may make some question his credibility. The Clintons talk about God a lot in the south too. Seemed a little whiny and much less in control with his not enough question bits.
Romney-"Facts are stubborn things." He did well. While I may disagree with him on some issues, he is a great speaker, a great debater and wears better suits than all the other candidates combined. Probably needed a much stronger night than he had. Should have tried turning the tables on McCain and focused on the economy. Paul showed during the last debate that the economy is a HUGE weakness of McCain's. Romney needed to go for the jugular here and didn't.
Paul-Not given many questions tonite. Didn't handle the ones he did receive very well. As most of you know I strongly support Ron Paul, but don't need to hear him rehash the same points with every question. I do agree that our occupation of over a hundred countries impacts our economy in severe and unneccessary ways, I also know that I am in the minority opinion. One must never hide the truth or lie, but taking every opportunity you get to talk to share those things which keep you in the minority is just bad strategy. But one of the best moments of the night had to be when he said, "I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with," he said. "They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy."
A Potential Path to the White House for Ron Paul
Rudy's concession speech declared "Ron Paul Won!" I agree! This is how Ron Paul WILL Win!
by Natalie Schultz(Libertarian)
Members of Congress: It is My Privilege to Present to You the 44th President of the United States of America: The Honorable Dr. Ron Paul!
I have just had an epiphany! Thanks, ironically, to Rudy Giuliani!
Tonight, in his concession speech, Rudy gave Ron Paul his best endorsement yet: "Ron Paul Won!"
Rudy basically told the entire nation that Ron Paul is the most popular Republican in the race. Of course, we already knew that!
So, here is our Ultimate Plan: Ron Paul will stay in the race all the way to the end. Then, at the last minute, Ron Paul will pull out of the Republican race and go Third Party!
Ron Paul will run against the Republican McCain - Huckabee ticket AND the Democrat Clinton - Obama ticket and WIN!!!!!!
This is our Revolutionary TV ad that will run for 2 weeks straight before Election Day in November:
Intro: Rudy Giuliani: "Ron Paul won all the debates!"
***
Background picture: American soldiers STILL dying in Iraq. Then Obama voting "Present" on Iran.
Sound: Clips of McCain saying that we will be in Iraq for 100 more years. Then a clip of Pat Buchanan saying that a McCain presidency will guarantee even more wars.
***
Background pics: The stock market crashing, oil prices rising, gold prices rising.
Sound: A clip of Jim Cramer telling Ron Paul that he is the only candidate who knows anything about the economy.
***
Then: A clip of Romney calling McCain a liberal.
***
Then: Rush Limbaugh (on McCain and Huckabee): "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it. A lot of people aren't going to vote. You watch."
***
Then: A clip of Huckabee telling his voters: "If you're not going to vote for me, well then we'll make sure that you don't make it out of the driveway." (after Florida, I think he was in Missouri).
***
Then: Rush Limbaugh: "I can see possibly not supporting the Republican nominee this election, and I never thought that I would say that in my life."
***
Background picture: Obama snubbing Hillary when she went to shake Ted Kennedy's hand.
Sound: Lou Dobbs: One of his rants on both Party's candidates not caring about the people.
***
Finale: Lou Dobbs "It's Independent's Day!"
***
I'm Ron Paul and I approve this message because it's high time we take our country back from all these politicians who do not care about YOU, the American People. This Election Day I am asking for your vote because we need to return to a government FOR the PEOPLE, BY the PEOPLE. Vote for me because I am the ONLY candidate who consistently upholds the Constitution of the United States of America!
******
This ad will probably be 2 minutes long, so it will be expensive, but it will be the ONLY ad we will need to run because it is a direct attack, using the words and images of others, of the utter incompetence and hypocrisy of both Parties.
I have no video / computer skills to do this, but I know there are RP supporters who do.
Now, our real problem will be getting Ron Paul on the ballot in all 50 states. Here in NY we are allowed fusion tickets - cross-nominations by multiple Parties. So, in NY Paul can be on the Reform, Libertarian and Constitution tickets. In other states fusion tickets are illegal, so ONE 3rd Party will have to nomiate Ron Paul and all the other 3rd Parties will have to NOT RUN another candidate. So, the better established Party should nominate Ron Paul and the other Parties should work together with that Party, at least this year. Please, for once, let's just put our petty differences aside. We all support Ron Paul. Even though each Party has a slightly different platform, these difference cannot come between us at this moment.
Here are links to Third Parties that support Ron Paul. The only ones that do not, as far a I know, are the Greens and various Socialist and Communist Parties.
http://www.reformparty.org/
http://www.americanreform.org/Note: neither Reform Party seems active, but I know some chapters have endorsed Ron Paul.
http://www.lp.org/
Most Libertarians support Paul. The Libertarian candidate for President has said he will not run if Paul gets the Republican nomination. At this point, we must convince the LP to just nominate Paul because that is the only chance for both the country and the LP to actually elect the RIGHT candidate to save ourselves from utter annihilation.
http://www.usiap.org/(possible endorsement)
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
http://constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=613(possible endorsement)
http://www.americafirstparty.org/(Buchanan Brigade) Buchanan's personal website, http://www.buchanan.org/ is ALL Ron Paul.
http://www.jeffersonrepublicanparty.com/(endorsed)
http://www.americanfreedomagenda.org/About/vigueriebio.htm(founder of Conservative movement; endorsed)http://www.ultimateronpaul.com/
***Websites about 3rd Parties:
http://www.independentvoting.org/
http://www.3rdparty.org/
http://thirdpartywatch.com/
***
http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/20/do-sore-loser-laws-apply-to-presidential-candidates/
There MAY be a problem in some states regarding "Sore Loser" laws. Personally, my interpretation of these laws is that they do not apply to the PRESIDENTIAL election ballot, because right now Ron Paul is running for the NOMINATION, not the actual presidency, as a Republican. Therefore, in my opinion, these are two completely separate races. Also, I believe these laws are a direct violation of First Amendment and voter's rights because if say, the Libertarian Party wanted to nominate Ron Paul no matter what, how can any state prevent them from doing so? That is completely unethical and should be illegal. We will need a very good lawyer to take this on though.
We must focus on National Third Parties, but I know there are tons of state Third Parties as well. Here in NY we have a Conservative Party that is actually the 3rd largest and a very powerful Party. The problem, in my opinion, is that they are no longer much more "conservative" than the GOP. Also, they usually focus on state and local candidates. They were going to endorse Thompson, but I do not know where they stand now. I think I will send them my Precinct Leader letter; even though it is aimed at Republicans, it may help sway them, although I will have to add my theological reasons for Huckabee being horrible for true Conservative Christians (Orthodox, Catholics, and Lutherans).
If you know of any other good Third Parties, please add them in the comments section and I will add them to the list. Also, we are seriously at the point where we must also come together in a concerted effort to get this done. Yes, we will continue in the Republican debates / primaries, but we must acknowledge at this point that we started too late with not enough of a professional campaign strategy to make a real impact on the Republican campaign early on. We have learned from our mistakes. This is DO or DIE time: We must start a serious 3rd Party strategy NOW!
So, please, if you truly believe that this can work, like I do, leave comments at the bottom, and then we can get a hard-core organization going strong!!!
There is ONE RNC (Republican National Committee) and ONE DNC (Democratic National Committee). We need ONE UNITED RPC (Ron Paul Committee)!!!
by Natalie Schultz(Libertarian)
Members of Congress: It is My Privilege to Present to You the 44th President of the United States of America: The Honorable Dr. Ron Paul!
I have just had an epiphany! Thanks, ironically, to Rudy Giuliani!
Tonight, in his concession speech, Rudy gave Ron Paul his best endorsement yet: "Ron Paul Won!"
Rudy basically told the entire nation that Ron Paul is the most popular Republican in the race. Of course, we already knew that!
So, here is our Ultimate Plan: Ron Paul will stay in the race all the way to the end. Then, at the last minute, Ron Paul will pull out of the Republican race and go Third Party!
Ron Paul will run against the Republican McCain - Huckabee ticket AND the Democrat Clinton - Obama ticket and WIN!!!!!!
This is our Revolutionary TV ad that will run for 2 weeks straight before Election Day in November:
Intro: Rudy Giuliani: "Ron Paul won all the debates!"
***
Background picture: American soldiers STILL dying in Iraq. Then Obama voting "Present" on Iran.
Sound: Clips of McCain saying that we will be in Iraq for 100 more years. Then a clip of Pat Buchanan saying that a McCain presidency will guarantee even more wars.
***
Background pics: The stock market crashing, oil prices rising, gold prices rising.
Sound: A clip of Jim Cramer telling Ron Paul that he is the only candidate who knows anything about the economy.
***
Then: A clip of Romney calling McCain a liberal.
***
Then: Rush Limbaugh (on McCain and Huckabee): "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it. A lot of people aren't going to vote. You watch."
***
Then: A clip of Huckabee telling his voters: "If you're not going to vote for me, well then we'll make sure that you don't make it out of the driveway." (after Florida, I think he was in Missouri).
***
Then: Rush Limbaugh: "I can see possibly not supporting the Republican nominee this election, and I never thought that I would say that in my life."
***
Background picture: Obama snubbing Hillary when she went to shake Ted Kennedy's hand.
Sound: Lou Dobbs: One of his rants on both Party's candidates not caring about the people.
***
Finale: Lou Dobbs "It's Independent's Day!"
***
I'm Ron Paul and I approve this message because it's high time we take our country back from all these politicians who do not care about YOU, the American People. This Election Day I am asking for your vote because we need to return to a government FOR the PEOPLE, BY the PEOPLE. Vote for me because I am the ONLY candidate who consistently upholds the Constitution of the United States of America!
******
This ad will probably be 2 minutes long, so it will be expensive, but it will be the ONLY ad we will need to run because it is a direct attack, using the words and images of others, of the utter incompetence and hypocrisy of both Parties.
I have no video / computer skills to do this, but I know there are RP supporters who do.
Now, our real problem will be getting Ron Paul on the ballot in all 50 states. Here in NY we are allowed fusion tickets - cross-nominations by multiple Parties. So, in NY Paul can be on the Reform, Libertarian and Constitution tickets. In other states fusion tickets are illegal, so ONE 3rd Party will have to nomiate Ron Paul and all the other 3rd Parties will have to NOT RUN another candidate. So, the better established Party should nominate Ron Paul and the other Parties should work together with that Party, at least this year. Please, for once, let's just put our petty differences aside. We all support Ron Paul. Even though each Party has a slightly different platform, these difference cannot come between us at this moment.
Here are links to Third Parties that support Ron Paul. The only ones that do not, as far a I know, are the Greens and various Socialist and Communist Parties.
http://www.reformparty.org/
http://www.americanreform.org/Note: neither Reform Party seems active, but I know some chapters have endorsed Ron Paul.
http://www.lp.org/
Most Libertarians support Paul. The Libertarian candidate for President has said he will not run if Paul gets the Republican nomination. At this point, we must convince the LP to just nominate Paul because that is the only chance for both the country and the LP to actually elect the RIGHT candidate to save ourselves from utter annihilation.
http://www.usiap.org/(possible endorsement)
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
http://constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=613(possible endorsement)
http://www.americafirstparty.org/(Buchanan Brigade) Buchanan's personal website, http://www.buchanan.org/ is ALL Ron Paul.
http://www.jeffersonrepublicanparty.com/(endorsed)
http://www.americanfreedomagenda.org/About/vigueriebio.htm(founder of Conservative movement; endorsed)http://www.ultimateronpaul.com/
***Websites about 3rd Parties:
http://www.independentvoting.org/
http://www.3rdparty.org/
http://thirdpartywatch.com/
***
http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/20/do-sore-loser-laws-apply-to-presidential-candidates/
There MAY be a problem in some states regarding "Sore Loser" laws. Personally, my interpretation of these laws is that they do not apply to the PRESIDENTIAL election ballot, because right now Ron Paul is running for the NOMINATION, not the actual presidency, as a Republican. Therefore, in my opinion, these are two completely separate races. Also, I believe these laws are a direct violation of First Amendment and voter's rights because if say, the Libertarian Party wanted to nominate Ron Paul no matter what, how can any state prevent them from doing so? That is completely unethical and should be illegal. We will need a very good lawyer to take this on though.
We must focus on National Third Parties, but I know there are tons of state Third Parties as well. Here in NY we have a Conservative Party that is actually the 3rd largest and a very powerful Party. The problem, in my opinion, is that they are no longer much more "conservative" than the GOP. Also, they usually focus on state and local candidates. They were going to endorse Thompson, but I do not know where they stand now. I think I will send them my Precinct Leader letter; even though it is aimed at Republicans, it may help sway them, although I will have to add my theological reasons for Huckabee being horrible for true Conservative Christians (Orthodox, Catholics, and Lutherans).
If you know of any other good Third Parties, please add them in the comments section and I will add them to the list. Also, we are seriously at the point where we must also come together in a concerted effort to get this done. Yes, we will continue in the Republican debates / primaries, but we must acknowledge at this point that we started too late with not enough of a professional campaign strategy to make a real impact on the Republican campaign early on. We have learned from our mistakes. This is DO or DIE time: We must start a serious 3rd Party strategy NOW!
So, please, if you truly believe that this can work, like I do, leave comments at the bottom, and then we can get a hard-core organization going strong!!!
There is ONE RNC (Republican National Committee) and ONE DNC (Democratic National Committee). We need ONE UNITED RPC (Ron Paul Committee)!!!
Monday, January 28, 2008
A New Low
A new low has been reached. I am praying fervently for an end to the writer's strike. I think I could handle almost any concession just please please please stop the reality tv/game show blitz.
The lastest assault on reason and good sense. My Dad is Better Than Your Dad. Really. Its going to be on NBC. Sounds riveting, right?
Please do not watch this show. Don't let the networks think that this is what the American people want to see on TV. I can't take it anymore. My Dad is Better Than Your Dad?!?!
The lastest assault on reason and good sense. My Dad is Better Than Your Dad. Really. Its going to be on NBC. Sounds riveting, right?
Please do not watch this show. Don't let the networks think that this is what the American people want to see on TV. I can't take it anymore. My Dad is Better Than Your Dad?!?!
Tom McClintock's Position
Given the concern that was raised over McClintock being for the Indian Gaming agreements I felt it would be good to make sure his vote and his rationale was fairly represented. Here are his thoughts pulled right from his blog...
Propositions 94-97 Indian Gaming Compacts: YES! These propositions ratify the compacts that allow four tribes to expand their casinos. I’m not a gambler, but it’s none of government’s business how people spend their money. I’m tired of government restrictions on enterprise, and I’m tired of government telling us what we can and can’t do. And our economy desperately needs the new jobs and investment.
Propositions 94-97 Indian Gaming Compacts: YES! These propositions ratify the compacts that allow four tribes to expand their casinos. I’m not a gambler, but it’s none of government’s business how people spend their money. I’m tired of government restrictions on enterprise, and I’m tired of government telling us what we can and can’t do. And our economy desperately needs the new jobs and investment.
Indian Gaming Agreements
My friends over at ateamblog.com asked for my feedback on the California Indian Gaming Agreements coming up here in the Golden State. Popular Republicans like the Governator (a centrist) and Tom McClintock (a conservative by today's standards) approve. The public sector unions approve. Some Democrats are for them and the dissenters do so because of a lack of casino worker's provisions (ie union protection, etc). It seems like most feel this is pretty good for the state. So lets break it down and see.
I have scoured the propositions themselves, the articles written for and against and the funding for ads for and against. Here is a brief look at the pros and cons (somethings appear on both due to ideological differences).
PROS
Increases the allowed size of 4 major casinos around 3.5 times. (more slot machines)
Increases the amount of revenue sharing among tribes. (Indians provide welfare for Indians)
Increases amount of revenue given to the state of California.
Keeps Californians money in Ca, and away from Vegas.
Not too often that the unions are happy with Republicans.
No tax increases on Californians.
Deficit Reduction.
CONS
More local gambling. (moral objection and some would argue crime increases).
Potentially gives tribes some leeway in calculating their share.
Big 4 tribes given an advantage over other tribes.
Big 4 tribes grow to size of Vegas casinos.
Recreational money spend at the casinos rather than at California businesses.
Revenue claims exaggerated.
I am not entirely decided on my eventual vote on these props, but here are my initial thoughts. I look forward to your feedback.
I am leaning towards a yes. The state seems incapable of reducing spending to sustainable levels and I am strongly opposed to any compulsory taxes. While I will probably never be income tax free, I certainly prefer to vote in that direction. Thus, in a state where spending is out of control and even a popular Republican Governor who went in with a mandate can't get spending cuts we must do something. I think this may be the answer.
Tribal lands are essentially sovereign, so not too much can be made of the objection that the agreements give them too much control on the accounting side. I think we would really have trouble flexing enough muscle to try to turn them into just another tax payer. I think that they have enough at stake with us controlling how much they can expand as to not have a stake in dishonest income reporting.
I have not seen any definitive link between crime and gambling. Given that a lot of casino revenue goes to infrastructure it may even reduce it. Whether you are morally oppose to gambling or not, should not be the basis for your vote regardless as this is not what is at stake here. Also, it is not likely that even if it was there are enough people willing to forgo the income it brings to the state to get rid of it.
I fail to see why the states are allowed to make laws for or against Indian Gaming in the first place as the Fed declares them sovereign. That being said as long as they operate at our discretion I fail to see why we wouldn't utilize that funding.
I also disagree that recreational funding would go to Calif. businesses if we don't pass these props. I think the majority of gamblers choose to gamble not choose to have fun, thus they would just wait in line at one of the locals, or take their money Vegas.
I think a lot of the opposition really is based on a either a moral objection to gambling or idealism. The moral objection is moot. The idealism is some of why we have such problems with partisanship. While I believe radical centrism is also a problem I think that when agreements can be made that lots of people can find something to like about we should embrace that as a way forward. There are somethings we will never agree on. But balancing the budget without tax increases? Everyone should be pretty excited about this.
This seems like the kind of creative solution that people keep claiming they want to unleash in politics. Bringing people together. You don't get a much more divided group than public sector unions and Republicans when it comes to politics.
All that being said this seems like a good effort. Of course, my ideal is quite a bit different (I want to see gambling restrictions lifted, the tax revenue would boost local economies in areas that are currently economically depressed) but there are a lot of people in California and a lot of different opinions, if a majority of people are "ok" with an idea why wouldn't we jump on it?
I have scoured the propositions themselves, the articles written for and against and the funding for ads for and against. Here is a brief look at the pros and cons (somethings appear on both due to ideological differences).
PROS
Increases the allowed size of 4 major casinos around 3.5 times. (more slot machines)
Increases the amount of revenue sharing among tribes. (Indians provide welfare for Indians)
Increases amount of revenue given to the state of California.
Keeps Californians money in Ca, and away from Vegas.
Not too often that the unions are happy with Republicans.
No tax increases on Californians.
Deficit Reduction.
CONS
More local gambling. (moral objection and some would argue crime increases).
Potentially gives tribes some leeway in calculating their share.
Big 4 tribes given an advantage over other tribes.
Big 4 tribes grow to size of Vegas casinos.
Recreational money spend at the casinos rather than at California businesses.
Revenue claims exaggerated.
I am not entirely decided on my eventual vote on these props, but here are my initial thoughts. I look forward to your feedback.
I am leaning towards a yes. The state seems incapable of reducing spending to sustainable levels and I am strongly opposed to any compulsory taxes. While I will probably never be income tax free, I certainly prefer to vote in that direction. Thus, in a state where spending is out of control and even a popular Republican Governor who went in with a mandate can't get spending cuts we must do something. I think this may be the answer.
Tribal lands are essentially sovereign, so not too much can be made of the objection that the agreements give them too much control on the accounting side. I think we would really have trouble flexing enough muscle to try to turn them into just another tax payer. I think that they have enough at stake with us controlling how much they can expand as to not have a stake in dishonest income reporting.
I have not seen any definitive link between crime and gambling. Given that a lot of casino revenue goes to infrastructure it may even reduce it. Whether you are morally oppose to gambling or not, should not be the basis for your vote regardless as this is not what is at stake here. Also, it is not likely that even if it was there are enough people willing to forgo the income it brings to the state to get rid of it.
I fail to see why the states are allowed to make laws for or against Indian Gaming in the first place as the Fed declares them sovereign. That being said as long as they operate at our discretion I fail to see why we wouldn't utilize that funding.
I also disagree that recreational funding would go to Calif. businesses if we don't pass these props. I think the majority of gamblers choose to gamble not choose to have fun, thus they would just wait in line at one of the locals, or take their money Vegas.
I think a lot of the opposition really is based on a either a moral objection to gambling or idealism. The moral objection is moot. The idealism is some of why we have such problems with partisanship. While I believe radical centrism is also a problem I think that when agreements can be made that lots of people can find something to like about we should embrace that as a way forward. There are somethings we will never agree on. But balancing the budget without tax increases? Everyone should be pretty excited about this.
This seems like the kind of creative solution that people keep claiming they want to unleash in politics. Bringing people together. You don't get a much more divided group than public sector unions and Republicans when it comes to politics.
All that being said this seems like a good effort. Of course, my ideal is quite a bit different (I want to see gambling restrictions lifted, the tax revenue would boost local economies in areas that are currently economically depressed) but there are a lot of people in California and a lot of different opinions, if a majority of people are "ok" with an idea why wouldn't we jump on it?
Friday, January 25, 2008
Senator Robert Taft
"As a matter of general principle, I believe there can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government ... too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think that it will give some comfort to the enemy to know that there is such criticism. If that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments, they are welcome to it as far as I am concerned, because the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a great deal more good than it will do the enemy, and will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur."- Robert Taft
A Word for Conservatives from Tom McClintock
From LA Times Online
Top of the Ticket -->
« David Letterman and the Democrats Main Barack Obama and the Clinton hydra »
With Thompson out, Tom McClintock leans to Ron Paul
With Fred Thompson out of the presidential race, who's a self-respecting conservative to go for? Could it be, maybe, perhaps, a certain Republican-libertarian from Texas?
That's one question perplexing California state Sen. Tom McClintock, possibly the second-most-famous California Republican currently in office after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
McClintock created a stir two months when he endorsed Thompson’s presidential candidacy. Having run for governor, lieutenant governor and state controller, McClintock has shown that while he has not won a statewide contest, he can win GOP primaries, which conservatives tend to dominate. So heading into the Feb. 5 primary, McClintock’s endorsement is seen as important in California.
Now McClintock is mulling his choices. And it comes down to the basics: "Who will respect our Constitution, defend our borders, and reduce the burdens of government on our people?" McClintock said Thursday in Sacramento as the Senate wrapped up its week. "If I were to vote today, I probably would be casting a vote for Ron Paul. I’m not voting today."
Why Paul?
"I do believe he will respect our Constitu-" McClintock said, then stopped midthought. "I don’t want to go too far. I am still looking."
Why not former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney? "I want somebody with a consistent record," McClintock said. "I want someone who didn’t have to go through a political epiphany the day before he announced his candidacy."
-- Dan Morain
January 25, 2008 in Campaigning, Candidate Character, Candidate foibles, Conservative Groups, Endorsements, Immigration, Political History, Presidential Campaign, Republican Politics, Ron Paul Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/816965/25455574
Top of the Ticket -->
« David Letterman and the Democrats Main Barack Obama and the Clinton hydra »
With Thompson out, Tom McClintock leans to Ron Paul
With Fred Thompson out of the presidential race, who's a self-respecting conservative to go for? Could it be, maybe, perhaps, a certain Republican-libertarian from Texas?
That's one question perplexing California state Sen. Tom McClintock, possibly the second-most-famous California Republican currently in office after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
McClintock created a stir two months when he endorsed Thompson’s presidential candidacy. Having run for governor, lieutenant governor and state controller, McClintock has shown that while he has not won a statewide contest, he can win GOP primaries, which conservatives tend to dominate. So heading into the Feb. 5 primary, McClintock’s endorsement is seen as important in California.
Now McClintock is mulling his choices. And it comes down to the basics: "Who will respect our Constitution, defend our borders, and reduce the burdens of government on our people?" McClintock said Thursday in Sacramento as the Senate wrapped up its week. "If I were to vote today, I probably would be casting a vote for Ron Paul. I’m not voting today."
Why Paul?
"I do believe he will respect our Constitu-" McClintock said, then stopped midthought. "I don’t want to go too far. I am still looking."
Why not former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney? "I want somebody with a consistent record," McClintock said. "I want someone who didn’t have to go through a political epiphany the day before he announced his candidacy."
-- Dan Morain
January 25, 2008 in Campaigning, Candidate Character, Candidate foibles, Conservative Groups, Endorsements, Immigration, Political History, Presidential Campaign, Republican Politics, Ron Paul Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/816965/25455574
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Stimulus Package
All of the candidates are bringing forwards their plans for the economy. Here is Ron Paul's.
Introduction
America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.
Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.
Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican congressman from Texas's 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named "Taxpayers' Best Friend" for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers' Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.
The Four-Point Plan
Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.
Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.
Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness with the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.
Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.
1. Tax Reform
Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.
Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.
Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.
Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
Pass H.R. 4995 and amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.
Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.
Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
Eliminate Taxes on Tips.The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on "estimated income" is unfair and should be ended.
Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.
Support Mortgage Cancelation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.
Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.
2. Spending Reform
Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil.
It's time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.
Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels
I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.
3. Monetary Policy Reform
Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.
Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve
Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.
Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.
Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.
4. Regulatory Reform
Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK the financial center at our expense.
Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States
Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.
Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors.
We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.
Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.
Introduction
America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.
Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.
Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican congressman from Texas's 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named "Taxpayers' Best Friend" for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers' Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.
The Four-Point Plan
Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.
Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.
Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness with the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.
Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.
1. Tax Reform
Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.
Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.
Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.
Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
Pass H.R. 4995 and amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.
Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.
Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
Eliminate Taxes on Tips.The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on "estimated income" is unfair and should be ended.
Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.
Support Mortgage Cancelation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.
Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.
2. Spending Reform
Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil.
It's time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.
Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels
I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.
3. Monetary Policy Reform
Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.
Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve
Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.
Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.
Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.
4. Regulatory Reform
Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK the financial center at our expense.
Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States
Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.
Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors.
We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.
Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.
A Few Thoughts on the US Economy
As this economic crisis looms, we are hearing answers from everyone as to how to stave off recession but no one is looking at the root causes. We as a nation no longer embrace (beyond lip service) the historical values that made us the richest nation on earth.
As a nation we affirm the concept of economic liberty but in practice we are increasingly repackaging socialism on both the right and the left. A brief look at the Communist Manifesto follows...
10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
As a nation we affirm the concept of economic liberty but in practice we are increasingly repackaging socialism on both the right and the left. A brief look at the Communist Manifesto follows...
10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Public Domain Laws are being used more and more and with less and less rational justification. The National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the National Forest Service all to differing degrees rent out logging rights, picnic rights, hiking rights, camping rights, hunting rights, etc. We even do this abroad by taking over other countries and building bases bigger than the vatican in them.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
April 15th ring a bell.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
While not yet done in full we do have the euphemistically named estate tax or "death tax" that seriously infringes on inheritance. Then the receiver of said inheritance is taxed on the "income."
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Throughout modern history we have found enemies to do this to. Communists, Asians, Mexicans, Muslims etc.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Federal Reserve.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
The FCC. Also, the Federal Gov't cuts highway funds to states who don't comply with their wishes thus regulating transport.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
EPA.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Farm subsidies.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
Social welfare, corporate welfare, callous disregard for 9th and 10th Amendments.
10. Free education for all children in public schools.
Department of Education.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Article on Green Countries
http://www.newsweek.com/id/97279
Please check out this article. One of the points Daniel C. Esty, head of the Yale Center and a former policy maker at the EPA, makes largely forms the basis of what many call free market enviornmentalism.
Right now the the debate is centered around those who hate the enviorment and don't want regulation and those who love the enviornment and want more regulation.
For those of us who love the outdoors and the enviornment but believe in smaller central gov't, it is refreshing to hear these words from an "enviormentalist."
Please check out this article. One of the points Daniel C. Esty, head of the Yale Center and a former policy maker at the EPA, makes largely forms the basis of what many call free market enviornmentalism.
Right now the the debate is centered around those who hate the enviorment and don't want regulation and those who love the enviornment and want more regulation.
For those of us who love the outdoors and the enviornment but believe in smaller central gov't, it is refreshing to hear these words from an "enviormentalist."
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Fred Thompson Exits Stage Right
Now that Thompson has dropped out where do his votes go? Due to the friendship factor some will undoubtedly go to McCain. The social conservatives may go to Huckabee. But I think Ron Paul will get a bump as well, due to his unwavering support of the 9th and 10th amendments. Thompson talked a lot about returning to our republican states rights type goverance. While this essentially actually alienates a lot of the social conservatives (though they don't always realize it) it is something that many people like to hear about. Regardless, it will be interesting to see what happens and where his 5-10% goes as the field is so muddled right now.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Election Ramblings
Well, I have to say a few weeks ago every newstory out of Iowa and New Hampshire mentioned that no candidate can be considered viable if Ron Paul beats them. As of Nevada though that means the last man standing is Mitt Romney. Every other candidate has lost at least once to Ron Paul. Or in Giuliani's case 3 times.
I am not delusional enough to think this means Paul is on his way to the White House, but think that it may be time to place him in the Reagan 76 or McCain 2000 category rather than the "crazy uncle ron" category. He may not be quite young enough to run against Obama in 2012 (a guess of course) but I think that after the next four years of socialism, a constitutional candidate will emerge. If I get my way it will also be one who wants to check our imperialistic ambitions.
We can only hope that our constitution and our checks and balances are not so eroded that it is too late.
I am not delusional enough to think this means Paul is on his way to the White House, but think that it may be time to place him in the Reagan 76 or McCain 2000 category rather than the "crazy uncle ron" category. He may not be quite young enough to run against Obama in 2012 (a guess of course) but I think that after the next four years of socialism, a constitutional candidate will emerge. If I get my way it will also be one who wants to check our imperialistic ambitions.
We can only hope that our constitution and our checks and balances are not so eroded that it is too late.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Grrrr...
Being a nerd, I read a lot of political commentaries. The right and the left, the conservative and liberal splits are starting to get fairly annoying...
The longer this primary season drags out the more clear it gets that our country just does not fit into neat little cookie cutter ideologies. It brings down the entire level of discourse and sets up straw men. We live in a sound bite culture. Arguments are meant to hit at a strictly emotional level. They may be right or wrong. They may have logical rationales for their positions, but we never get to that level. We just get the soundbite and then the commentators tell us what to think about it based on whether we are right or left. What's worse is that over the years, the definitions change. So without the commentators, we are lost as to what we are suppose to believe as a party, movement or subculture.
Much easier for the left to say the right don't care about the poor than for them to express a lack of trust in charity. Much easier for conservatives to say liberals don't have family values, than to explain why they think that gays cannot get married.
The examples can go but the point is that people tend to disagree and with good reason. By saying all people fall into one of two categories it creates a mob mentality where critical thinking ceases and the other side becomes an enemy rather than an ally with a different strategy.
We all want a better economy. We all want strong families. We all want social equality (in opportunity not outcome necessarily). We all differ strongly on how to accomplish these goals. Its time we come together and have a civilized discourse on the how to's.
(On a side note, I think that the Nolan chart being made the norm rather than right/left would go far in helping to ease tensions in our nation. Check it out @ http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php)
The longer this primary season drags out the more clear it gets that our country just does not fit into neat little cookie cutter ideologies. It brings down the entire level of discourse and sets up straw men. We live in a sound bite culture. Arguments are meant to hit at a strictly emotional level. They may be right or wrong. They may have logical rationales for their positions, but we never get to that level. We just get the soundbite and then the commentators tell us what to think about it based on whether we are right or left. What's worse is that over the years, the definitions change. So without the commentators, we are lost as to what we are suppose to believe as a party, movement or subculture.
Much easier for the left to say the right don't care about the poor than for them to express a lack of trust in charity. Much easier for conservatives to say liberals don't have family values, than to explain why they think that gays cannot get married.
The examples can go but the point is that people tend to disagree and with good reason. By saying all people fall into one of two categories it creates a mob mentality where critical thinking ceases and the other side becomes an enemy rather than an ally with a different strategy.
We all want a better economy. We all want strong families. We all want social equality (in opportunity not outcome necessarily). We all differ strongly on how to accomplish these goals. Its time we come together and have a civilized discourse on the how to's.
(On a side note, I think that the Nolan chart being made the norm rather than right/left would go far in helping to ease tensions in our nation. Check it out @ http://www.nolanchart.com/survey.php)
Friday, January 11, 2008
The Good Luck Myth
It never ceases to amaze me when moderately successful people attribute their wins to luck. "I was just in the right place at the right time." "I just got lucky this time."
Have you found yourself falling into this trap? It seems fairly innocuous but it is a sign that a deeper problem exists. Attributing our success to an outside "force," inoculates us against the more painful task of accepting responsibility for our failures.
As managers, salespeople, and leaders, we will have our fair share of successes. We should be humble. But never forget who closed that deal or trained that team. Luck is opportunity coupled with preperation. When we fail we can say "What is there to learn from this? What can I do better next time?"
But never can we attribute it to bad luck.
Have you found yourself falling into this trap? It seems fairly innocuous but it is a sign that a deeper problem exists. Attributing our success to an outside "force," inoculates us against the more painful task of accepting responsibility for our failures.
As managers, salespeople, and leaders, we will have our fair share of successes. We should be humble. But never forget who closed that deal or trained that team. Luck is opportunity coupled with preperation. When we fail we can say "What is there to learn from this? What can I do better next time?"
But never can we attribute it to bad luck.
The Profit Equation
Profit=revenue-cost. In order for profits to grow, costs must be cut. You must manage cost, reduce cost. This is the most obvious way to handle the Profit Equation. Many companies do this. Your company may be doing this. Companies downsize, outsource, improve technology to make the organization more efficient, more profitable. Cut costs to the bone. But at what cost? For what gain? Do these anorexic companies really increase profits? No. They stay in the game. They stay in business. But cost cutting is not enough to be the best.
The way to really increase profits is to alter another part of the equation. We must increase revenue. I know what your thinking, "Thanks, bud. Real helpful." But with costs being slashed companies must sell more. We then are faced with the question, "How do we increase sales?" We can try to sell more of the same old thing. But if we really want to see double digit growth, something more needs to be done.
New products. New services. What does the consumer want? Innovation and creativity. One person at 3M was disappointed when his adhesive was not sticky enough. One saw the product that went on to define life in the cubicles for billions. Post-it notes. Recognizing opportunity, being creative, owning our lives…this will be the hallmark of the new economy. Winners will see every failure as a chance to create something fantastic.
It may not be very attractive to you, but in business, family, ministry (insert any other community you can come up with) to be successful, even to survive, change must occur. Who we are, what we do, how we do it…We must deconstruct these concepts and start fresh; start anew. Change or die. Stagnation will lead to failure. What do you need to change in your life, family, business, etc. in order to be more effective.
Profit=Creativity +Innovation
The way to really increase profits is to alter another part of the equation. We must increase revenue. I know what your thinking, "Thanks, bud. Real helpful." But with costs being slashed companies must sell more. We then are faced with the question, "How do we increase sales?" We can try to sell more of the same old thing. But if we really want to see double digit growth, something more needs to be done.
New products. New services. What does the consumer want? Innovation and creativity. One person at 3M was disappointed when his adhesive was not sticky enough. One saw the product that went on to define life in the cubicles for billions. Post-it notes. Recognizing opportunity, being creative, owning our lives…this will be the hallmark of the new economy. Winners will see every failure as a chance to create something fantastic.
It may not be very attractive to you, but in business, family, ministry (insert any other community you can come up with) to be successful, even to survive, change must occur. Who we are, what we do, how we do it…We must deconstruct these concepts and start fresh; start anew. Change or die. Stagnation will lead to failure. What do you need to change in your life, family, business, etc. in order to be more effective.
Profit=Creativity +Innovation
Positive Reinforcement for Work, Home, and the Dog Park
Animal trainers, management consultants and psychologists all seem to agree that positive reinforcement (or operant conditioning or Whale Done or etc.) is the best way to deal with people. And yet we still scream at employees, spank our kids and choke our dogs.
Pavlov, Dale Carnegie, Ken Blanchard, BF Skinner, they all recognize that by rewarding correct behavior and redirecting incorrect behavior we can sustain radical long term change. And judging by the cultural influence and sales volume of these thinkers, we know what they said has merit. So the question is, "Why do I consistently focus on the negative in my staff, family, spouse, dog, friends, tiger, etc.?"
The answer lies in our inability to deal with our pride. Someone does something incorrectly, we freak out and chew them out. Later we remember that we were supposed to have reaffirmed them as a person, showed them what it was that was expected and helped them get there. Then praise progress and celebrate success. Not only is this more effective than our natural reactions, but it also feels better for the giver and receiver. Better relationships are formed. When people like you, they are much more likely to do what you want. Earn their trust, respect, friendship, and you do not have to struggle in this area.
Pavlov, Dale Carnegie, Ken Blanchard, BF Skinner, they all recognize that by rewarding correct behavior and redirecting incorrect behavior we can sustain radical long term change. And judging by the cultural influence and sales volume of these thinkers, we know what they said has merit. So the question is, "Why do I consistently focus on the negative in my staff, family, spouse, dog, friends, tiger, etc.?"
The answer lies in our inability to deal with our pride. Someone does something incorrectly, we freak out and chew them out. Later we remember that we were supposed to have reaffirmed them as a person, showed them what it was that was expected and helped them get there. Then praise progress and celebrate success. Not only is this more effective than our natural reactions, but it also feels better for the giver and receiver. Better relationships are formed. When people like you, they are much more likely to do what you want. Earn their trust, respect, friendship, and you do not have to struggle in this area.
Covert Persuasion: Psychological Tactics and Tricks to Win the Game—Kevin Hogan, James Speakman.
Covert Persuasion: Psychological Tactics and Tricks to Win the Game—Kevin Hogan, James Speakman.
While the title may sound sinister, this book is really about how to communicate. It deals with bypassing the critical, biased, defensive part of the brain and getting your point heard, getting your product sold, getting your intended result. It is written in an incredibly practical format with tips to put into practice at work or in your personal life as soon as you read them.
While the title may sound sinister, this book is really about how to communicate. It deals with bypassing the critical, biased, defensive part of the brain and getting your point heard, getting your product sold, getting your intended result. It is written in an incredibly practical format with tips to put into practice at work or in your personal life as soon as you read them.
The Little Red Book of Sales Answers—Jeffery Gitomer.
Practical real world answers and advice from the Chief Executive Salesman. Easy to pick up, choose a topic, and put it into practice in your business immediately. Not just for those in sales, but anyone who has to build up any organization. Recruiters, financial planners, non profits, etc. Build value in yourself and people will come to you.
On a More Civil Discourse
If you believe the candidates and pundits you know that depending on your political preference that you hate...
Poor people, rich people, working people, unemployed people, taxes, spending, saving, the middle class, minorities, immigrants, Christians, Muslims, Jews, and every other political topic under the sun...
That being said, I have to wonder why all of this hostility exists. As your friend and mine once said, "Can't we all just get along?" We are a nation in need of reconciliation.
It is time that the bloggers, pundits, candidates, and voters recognized that most people have the sames basic principles. Everyone wants the poor to be taken care of. Everyone wants our nation to be safe. Everyone wants our economy to thrive. So on and so forth...
So again, why all the hostility? If we want the same things how is it that we argue so much? Why is it always characterized as such vast differences between us?
The differences are real. They are vast. But we must recognize that those who disagree with us usually have the same goal. A controversial but simple example is abortion. Everyone values life. The disagreement is whether or not a fetus is a life. No one really thinks murder for convenience is ok or that people shouldn't have control of their own lives.
Please remember as you listen to your friends, family, relatives and enemies that while they may want to do the exact opposite of what you want to "save the children" (or any other popular political position) they still do really want to save the children. Cut them some slack and kill the personal attacks.
Poor people, rich people, working people, unemployed people, taxes, spending, saving, the middle class, minorities, immigrants, Christians, Muslims, Jews, and every other political topic under the sun...
That being said, I have to wonder why all of this hostility exists. As your friend and mine once said, "Can't we all just get along?" We are a nation in need of reconciliation.
It is time that the bloggers, pundits, candidates, and voters recognized that most people have the sames basic principles. Everyone wants the poor to be taken care of. Everyone wants our nation to be safe. Everyone wants our economy to thrive. So on and so forth...
So again, why all the hostility? If we want the same things how is it that we argue so much? Why is it always characterized as such vast differences between us?
The differences are real. They are vast. But we must recognize that those who disagree with us usually have the same goal. A controversial but simple example is abortion. Everyone values life. The disagreement is whether or not a fetus is a life. No one really thinks murder for convenience is ok or that people shouldn't have control of their own lives.
Please remember as you listen to your friends, family, relatives and enemies that while they may want to do the exact opposite of what you want to "save the children" (or any other popular political position) they still do really want to save the children. Cut them some slack and kill the personal attacks.
Ron Paul
I think that regardless of where he finishes he brings to the table long (very very long) forgotten ideals of the Republican party, and seeing that he received 8-10% in each election so far can, a movement of true Jefferson, Taft, Goldwater, Reagan conservatism can start up. Many career politicians change their positions, and it would not be very hard for some of them to move towards liberty for an extra 10% of the electorate. If the RLC grows as a result of his candidacy, if we get more members of the House and Senate who want to invite the creativity and innovation of the American People to solve the extraordinary problems that face us, rather than tax us for yet another ineffective program. Ron Paul may not win. But the American people still can. 2012 will bring us "Ron Paul Republicans."
It takes a spark to start a fire.
It takes a spark to start a fire.
George W. Bush and Non Interventionism
Just 8 shorts years ago, Bush 43 was running against Clinton's legacy by railing against Clintons "wars" in Iraq, Serbia, Yugoslavia, Somalia, etc. Today, saying these things makes you (depending on which pundit or politician you ask) naive, crazy, evil, uneducated, etc. I am sad to report that I took him at his word in this regard and long for a foreign policy of freedom. A nation that leads the world by example, and not force. Here is what our President ran on. Who running today is saying this? When did these ideas become crazy. Who historically said this?
If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road.~George W. Bush
Free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction.~George W. Bush
About the quote: from a speech on 10/3/03
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.~George W. Bush
About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.
We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.~George W. Bush
About the quote: from a UN Speech in Sept 2004
If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road.~George W. Bush
Free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction.~George W. Bush
About the quote: from a speech on 10/3/03
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.~George W. Bush
About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.
We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.~George W. Bush
About the quote: from a UN Speech in Sept 2004