Ralston: The ‘1 percent’ really to be feared
Richard Ralston: The ‘1 percent’ really to be feared | care, medical, percentThere is a great threat to medical care in America from a small group of our fellow citizens. They are not the top 1 percent of the wealthy, but a group of elitists and their allies who see government power as the means to determine what every American is allowed to earn and keep. Control over medical care is central to their objective of imposing control over every detail of our lives.The 1 percent of Americans who really threaten our freedom in medical care and everything else is a small and relentless cadre. They follow ancient precedent; Plato thought that "philosopher kings" should rule us (the New York Times agrees).They subsequently have taken the form of Inquisition interrogators, witch hunters, Leninist enforcers of the "dictatorship of the proletariat," fascist followers of "the leadership principle," and the modern and most-hideous manifestation: intellectuals. The latter range from moral exhibitionists in Hollywood to the political-correctness police teaching in universities.By contrast, the top 1 percent of wealthy Americans pay at least one-third of the income taxes – far more than their "fair share" by anyone's standards except those pursuing power over others. The wealthy spend their after-tax wealth on what they buy from the rest of us, or they invest it. That is far more beneficial to the economy than what the government would do with the money.Read the rest at the The Orange County Register.
Professor fired after expressing climate change skepticism
Professor fired after expressing climate change skepticism | Fox NewsAfter Drapela was fired, Dr. Gordon Fulks, another anthropogenic global warming critic, began circulating a letter in defense of Drapela. To Fulks, it seemed obvious that Drapela’s global warming skepticism was the reason behind his firing.
“We can only speculate as to how the decision to fire Drapela was made,” Fulks wrote, adding, “I would suspect that Dr. Phil Mote (Director of their Climate Change Research Institute) had a hand in the decision, because he has previously been highly intolerant of those who oppose his ideas and could potentially threaten his business empire.”
Salsman: Fiscal Austerity And Rational Morality
Writes Richard Salsman on Fiscal Austerity And Rational Morality in Forbes:[...] To produce income for oneself and one’s family, to plan ahead and budget, to borrow only when it makes sense to do so (but not in order to consume beyond one’s current or near-future means), and to save some income, are all acts that are rational, selfish, and thus moral. None of them is an ascetic act of self-sacrifice performed from duty or a hatred for one’s life, self, health or wealth. The result of producing, saving, and investing is not the miser’s life nor the cartoonish life of Mr. Scrooge but the life of earned success, supreme comfort, and guilt-free happiness. “Austerity” seems much too harsh a name for this kind of wonderful life.
To live this way used to be called “economizing.” It was the life of the virtuous – and prosperous. Yet most economists today, Keynesians as they are, deride economizing. Saving, they insist, constitutes a “leakage” from the “spending stream;” saving allegedly drains an economy of its lifeblood, of that unaffordable gusher known as “consumer spending.” Consume! is their sole advise to all who will listen, consume early and often, consume on credit, if necessary, and “shop ‘til you drop,” then pick yourself up and shop yet again. Somehow, all of this will revive a weak economy. If it’s weak, we’re told, it’s because there’s “insufficient demand,” insufficient consuming, too little senseless shopping. Households, businesses and governments alike should spend more, say these anti-economizing economists, not save more; they should spend beyond their means, and somehow that will create the means. If all must borrow to spend beyond their means, then banks must lend more; if they don’t, they must be “induced” to lend more; if needed, they must be forced.
Bosch Fawstin Releases Infidel#2
It's been a long wait, but Bosch Fawstin's The INFIDEL #2 is out -- and it is full of surprises.
THE INFIDEL, a story about twin brothers whose Muslim background comes to the forefront of their lives on 9/11. One responds by creating a counter-jihad superhero comic book called PIGMAN, as the other surrenders to Islam. Pigman's battle against his archenemy SuperJihad is echoed by the escalating conflict between the twins.Bosch Fawstin is not only a great illustrator -- he is an even better story teller. If you like Frank Miller's original Dark Knight books you will love Fawstin's THE INFIDEL.Visit this page to order it online for only$3.BBC Bows to Mecca
Here's a piece about the BBC's (Bend over Backwards Corporation?) self-censorship over Islam and Muslims as an explicit, mandated policy under its current director, Mark "Run Away!" Thompson. (The nickname is mine, from the knights' battle cry in Monty Python's "Holy Grail" movie.) I'd like to see a similar exposé of its counterpart here in the U.S., the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (or PBS) "a private corporation funded by viewers like you," through donation and tax dollars.Anyone see the contradiction in that assertion? I've not seen a single program that portrays Islam in its true light, only programs about animals and struggling illegal aliens and global warming and bringing technology to poor countries that couldn't sustain it anyway because they're mired in collectivism and socialism. or just plain primitivism. We don't have a TV license tax here, but we may as well have for all the hidden taxes that go into the purchase of a TV. The CPB is the federal government's propaganda arm; PBS affiliates are its local branches, and the MSM its private and willing auxiliary, all hoving to the
gentleman's agreement to "never speak ill of Islam." -- Ed Cline
http://www.islamist-watch.org/9972/the-bbc-broadcasts-its-own-dhimmitude