He used to be known as “Richard Nixon’s favorite Mayor” when he was Mayor of Indianapolis and while the New York Times says he’s a “conservative” there is little in his record to indicate this. Indiana Senator Richard Lugar has always been a “moderate” Republican and has drifted further left as time goes by.

The Times also speaks of Lugar’s “affection” for Ronald Reagan which wasn’t reflected in his Chairmanship of Senator Howard Baker’s campaign for President in 1980. While there is no doubt that Lugar is a decent man and dedicated public servant, thirty years in the Senate is enough. The election of Dan Coats to the Senate from Indiana is proof the state can sustain the election of a real conservative.

Lugar is defying his party on an earmark ban, a bill that would create a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants, a military spending authorization bill and an arms control treaty with Russia, the Times noted on Sunday. He even declined to sign a brief supporting state lawsuits against President health care law.

Talk of a challenge from Governor Mitch Daniels are false.

(more…)

It’s that time of year again — that festive time when jolly elves put up Christmas Trees, Christmas Villages and advertise Christmas sales.  All is merry and bright for a few days until those abominables with their frosty souls terrorize the town square screaming bloody murder about the word “Christmas.”  These misers and their deplorable lawyers tear down the signs, trounce on cherished religious symbols and conspire new ways to ‘censor the season’ while politicians scurry like mice and the merry citizenry scratch their heads.

The abominables latest conquest: the Philadelphia Christmas Village.

A group of well meaning German Americans recently decided to set up a private outdoor Christmas Village in Philadelphia reminiscent of the 15th Century German markets that are still popular today where merchants peddle all sorts of treasured items, many of them hand-made.  A popular celebration of a cultural tradition that mixes in capitalism — what could be more American?   The problem was the word: Christmas.  The reason given (and used frequently) is that the term is “offensive.”  While it is apparently considered less offensive to inflate giant union protest rats outside businesses, fly gay pride banners, hold naked flashmobs, or build Mosques steps from Ground Zero… in a free country something is always offensive to someone, so get over it!

This year, the abominables didn’t even wait until December 1st.   While Germans have celebrated Christmas Villages for over 500 years with little problem, The American Christmas Village was barely in its third year before the screams and protests began toppling the traditions.  Crews were dispatched yesterday to remove the word “Christmas” from the sign that welcomes visitors to the market – did I mention it’s a private market?  It will be replaced by the word: Holiday.

(more…)

The Chairmen of President Obama’s Fiscal Commission have a new draft proposal that is filled, according to Reuters, with “sharp spending and benefit cuts.”

That’s music to my ears, so I quickly flipped to the back of the report in hopes of finding hard numbers showing that the federal government will be smaller in future years.

Much to my chagrin, it turns out that the federal government will increase by about $1.5 trillion between 2010 and 2020 according to the Commission’s numbers. Here’s a chart based on the data from page 57.

As I explained in the video below, this disconnect between supposed spending cuts and actual spending increases is the result of politicians creating a system where a spending increase can be called a “spending cut” if outlays don’t climb as fast as previously planned. This “baseline” or “current services” budgeting is a great gimmick for the politicians since they can simultaneously give more money to special interest groups while also telling voters that they are cutting the budget.

(more…)

It’s an eerie echo of last year’s health care debate, but without nearly as much public attention.  Another Christmas Eve, another sixth of the economy taken over by Washington.

This time it’s so-called “network neutrality” regulation.  President Obama’s Federal Communications Commission is obsessed with regulating the Internet.  They apparently won’t be stopped by common sense, courts of law, public opinion, or a resounding electoral defeat for big government policies.  They made it official last night at midnight when they announced the agenda for their December 21 meeting: the FCC is going to regulate the Internet.

Network neutrality (also known by the even more lovely sounding marketing term “open Internet”) is an outgrowth of the larger so-called media reform project of radical left-wing activists like Robert McChesney, the socialist founder of the misnamed group Free Press, which has enormous influence on the FCC, where its former communications director, Jen Howard, is FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s press secretary.

McChesney explained where net neutrality leads to SocialistProject.ca:

You will never ever, in any circumstance, win any struggle at any time. That being said, we have a long way to go. At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.

The FCC’s new rules, likely to be approved on a final 3-2, party-line vote on December 21, take McChesney’s first step.

Network neutrality sounds simple – force phone and cable companies to treat every bit of information the same way – but modern networks are incredibly complex, with millions of lines of code in every router, and constantly evolving.

(more…)

Last week I calculated that CalPERS would increase its pension charges to cities, counties, and the state of California over 30% to regain massive investment losses over the last decade.  My initial estimate was drawn from a presentation by Kung-pei Hwang, CalPERS Senior Actuary, which I recorded mid November.  My report also detailed the gimmickry that CalPERS used to hide the 50% shortfall in their planned assets.  However, it looks like my estimate was way low because we now have new video of the CalPERS board stating in their own words that the costs to cities, counties and the state will increase a GINORMOUS 55% by 2013 and the increased rate will need to be in place for at least the next 19 years.

And, this will only provide a 50/50 chance of getting to where they need to be to fulfill pension obligations for municipal and state workers.   In aggregate for all municipalities and the state this could equal a $4 billion a year drag on the economy of cities and counties as each spends less for local government functions.  Many cities and counties are already struggling to meet the current pension costs.  The new rate threatens to put many governments into serious financial trouble.  For the City of Los Angeles alone this means an increase of $340 million each year in payments to CalPERS!

Listen at the 57 minute and 37 second mark of this video as a board member adds up the financial hit cities and counties in California are about to take……

In addition, CalPERS admits earlier in this video that they have not built into their forecast the fact that restrained government budgets will likely result in layoffs and/or early retirement which will further strain the pension system.  Less municipal & state employees means less payments made into CalPERS to refill its underfunded coffers.  Their financial model does not reflect this reality.

(more…)

On March 23rd, 1775 in Virginia, the largest colony in America at that time, a meeting of the colony’s delegates was held in St. John’s Church in Richmond to vote on resolutions of defense for the colony as the war with England loomed and on its participation should war break out.

Patrick Henry, before a vote was taken on resolutions he presented in support of joining the other colonies in a war for freedom, spoke without any notes in a voice that became louder and louder, climaxing with the now famous ending,

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Have we come so far from those words and the meaning of liberty itself, that we are now a nation of people who would accept chains in return for a government providing for our every need?  Are we a people who would give up our principles and perhaps most of our own sovereignty in exchange for peace defined as not having to take any individual action or responsibility?

We are burdened with crushing debt and even heavier unfunded liabilities necessary to support an expanding central government that is attempting to control every aspect of the lives of the American people.  Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education, the environment, health care and business regulation are not found in the Constitution as powers of our central government.  However, liberal interpretation – false interpretation if one reads the Federalist Papers – of the Commerce Clause and the Social Welfare Clause of the Constitution opened a back door for the central government to assume powers well beyond the seventeen outlined in the enumerated powers specifically granted therein.  Each time a new power was taken, it was in return for some form of entitlement or relief from self-reliance.  It has reached a point today where it is difficult to distinguish who has the greater hand, the central government or the people.

(more…)

Today, in 1955, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a public bus to a white man in Montgomery, AL. She was arrested. Yes, you read that right. It really was in the 20th Century.