Huge Financial Losses in Romneycare portend even Greater Losses for Obamacare

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 11th, 2014

Week in Review

Mitt Romney is a Republican.  He was governor of the predominantly Democrat state of Massachusetts.  The first to implement universal health care.  Something the Democrats kept saying during the Obamacare debates.  And since.  Calling the universal health care system in Massachusetts Romneycare.  In fact they said that Obamacare was nothing more than Romneycare writ large.  Basically Romneycare at the national level.  And that the Democrat Obamacare will be as successful as the Republican Romneycare.  Well, it turns out Romneycare isn’t that good after all (see Report finds billions wasted on health care by Liz Kowalczyk posted 1/9/2014 on The Boston Globe).

It’s no surprise that money is routinely wasted on unneeded medical care, but for the first time, officials have estimated just how many health care dollars may be squandered in Massachusetts. It could be as much as $27 billion a year…

One large chunk of that went toward readmitting hospital patients who could have stayed home if their discharge planning had been better, such as having proper instructions for taking medication…

It also blamed emergency room visits that could have been prevented with better primary care and treatment for hospital-acquired infections. Other factors included inappropriate imaging tests for low back pain, and unnecessarily inducing labor early in women, which can increase health problems for infants…

In its report, the group pointed out that per-person spending on health care in Massachusetts is the highest in the nation and grew far faster than the national average until 2009. After that, increases in both national and state spending slowed…

The commission also analyzed high-cost patients, providing the first statewide attempt at “hot-spotting’’ — the identification of chronically ill patients who repeatedly visit emergency rooms and are often hospitalized…

It found that 5 percent of patients accounted for nearly half of all medical spending among those covered by Medicare and commercial insurance.

Because of the inefficiencies of universal health care Massachusetts may waste up to $27 billion a year.  That’s about $4,063 per person in Massachusetts they throw away each year.

Massachusetts had a 2012 population of 6,646,144.  The 2012 U.S. population was 313,914,040.  The U.S. population is about 47.2 times (313,914,040/6,646,144) the population of Massachusetts.  If Obamacare is truly Romneycare writ large then we can forecast the Obamacare losses at $1.3 trillion ($27 billion X 47.2) EACH year.  Which is greater than the original cost projection over 10 years.

Romneycare is a financial disaster.  And Obamacare will be an even greater financial disaster.  Which may add a trillion dollars to the deficit each year.  Which will push the United States to a Greece-style bankruptcy.  Only worse.  Making Obamacare the program that bankrupts the United States.

President Obama wanted to change the United States.  And he will.  Into a bankrupt third-world banana republic.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Expressing Conservatism Poorly loses the 2012 Election for Republicans

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 8th, 2012

Politics 101

Few Liberal Women would want their Daughter appearing in Playboy after all they did to Empower Women

After the massive Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections Peggy Noonan wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Americans voted for maturity.  That is, the grownups voted and got their way.  While in 2012 it would appear the children voted and got their way.  More free stuff.  Regardless of the consequences of more massive deficit spending.

Children want their parents to buy them everything they desire.  And the parents have to say no.  Because most parents just don’t have the money to buy their children everything they want.  They have to make difficult spending decisions because of their limited income.  Children don’t understand this.  They just want their stuff.  It takes time for children to grow up and understand they can’t have everything.  This usually sets in when they start working and raising a family.  Until they do, though, they still want things without regard to their costs.  Which is why the Democrats go after the youth vote.  Before they start voting for maturity.

Young people often make errors in judgment.  Because they’re young.  Krysten Ritter who plays Chloe in Don’t Trust the B—- in Apartment 23 did a modeling job when she was 15 that she felt later was inappropriate for someone her age.  In a Playboy interview she said, “At the time I didn’t think about it, because kids don’t. They say your brain doesn’t develop fully until you’re 25. When kids do crazy stuff, it’s because they really are crazy. I just wasn’t aware; I had no fear. But I have not one single regret or feeling of resentment, because of where I am now. I have a good head on my shoulders. I learned all my lessons on my own.”  Kind of an odd thing to publish in a Playboy interview considering that a lot of the women appearing in Playboy are under 25 years old.  Who do crazy stuff.  Like objectifying themselves for money.  And voting Democrat.  For most women appearing in Playboy probably vote Democrat.  Even though few liberal women would want their daughter appearing in Playboy after all they did to empower women so they could build a career.  So they didn’t have to use their sexuality to earn a living.  Or to find a husband.  But when these kids grow up and get a good head on their shoulders they can learn their lessons.  And go on to great success.

Young Single Women were Voting Against their Future Married/Mature Selves

The Obama campaign successfully turned young single women away from Mitt Romney.  By saying that Romney would take away their birth control.  And their access to abortion.  Something they believed.  And it wasn’t just their birth control and access to abortion they were worried about.  Some liberals took to Twitter after President Obama won the election saying that they were relieved as they didn’t have to hoard tampons with the Romney defeat.  As well as birth control pills.  Don’t know how many or how serious they were.  But some were saying that.  For they believed a Republican administration would take women back to Victorian times.  Denying them everything except having babies, cooking and cleaning.

Meanwhile married women favored Romney.  Not by as large a margin as single women favored President Obama.  But a majority.  The difference being that maturity.  Married women raising children care more about how high taxes increase their cost of living.  How the growing federal debt will affect their children’s future.  How the high cost of gasoline is consuming more of the family budget.  And raising the cost of food.  That is, they are thinking like a grownup.  And as a grownup birth control pills, abortion and tampons are not high on their list of concerns.  For they were there since the Sixties.  When women empowered themselves.  And there have been a few Republican administrations since then.  Other things are more important to them.  Like making the mortgage payment.  Paying for braces for their children.  And taking care of an elderly parent.  Things few women think about until after the age of 25.  So basically young single women were voting against their future married/mature selves.

This is something that the younger generation doesn’t understand.  The generation they are voting/rebelling against?  It’s not a fixed constant throughout time.  The older people today were once the younger generation of a previous time.  And a lot of them voted/rebelled against the older generation then like the younger generation is today.  Just as many in the younger generation will become the very people they bitterly oppose today.  This doesn’t change.  The rift between the grownups and the children.  Just the people in these generations change.  And as they mature and grow wiser more responsibility and less having fun fills their days.  And they vote accordingly.

Hispanic Families are little different from the 1950s American Nuclear Family

President Obama got 71% of the Hispanic vote.  He did similarly well with Asians.  A common conclusion is that the Republicans lost these voters because of Romney’s more ‘extreme’ position on immigration than Governor Perry during the primary election.  And for using insensitive language like ‘illegals’ and ‘amnesty’.  Which may have turned Hispanics and Asians away from Romney.  While others say that a lot of these immigrants are here only for the free ride.  And will vote for the party that offers the most free stuff.  The Democrat Party.  And, yes, there may be some truth to that.  But those who are here for the free stuff are probably a small percentage of the total.  For most of these immigrants have strong conservative values.  Who don’t seek handouts.

The Hispanics breaking the law to come here are doing it to find work.  So they can provide for their families.   And will take some of the hardest and lowest paying jobs to provide for their families.  Working long hours in some of the most grueling conditions.  So their kids can have a better life.  Their labors and sacrifices for their family sustained by a deep religious faith.  A strong Catholic faith.  That respects life.  And opposes abortion.  Making Hispanic families little different from the 1950s American nuclear family.  And the Asian family is as strong as the Hispanic family.  Who work as hard so their kids can have a better life.  And their kids work hard and sacrifice, too.  Graduating college at the top of their class.  And this while taking the hard program degrees.  Not film.  Or gender studies.

So a good portion of President Obama’s voters seem to be conservative.  Or will become conservative over time.  Which means Romney didn’t lose the election because the nation is becoming more liberal.  He lost it because he did not articulate conservatism well enough.  Unlike Ronald Reagan.  Who did such a good job of explaining conservative policies (reducing costly regulations, lowering tax rates, keeping inflation from raising gas and food prices, etc.) that even Democrats saw that their lives would improve under these policies.  And they voted Republican.  Becoming Reagan Democrats.  If conservatives articulate these policies well enough they should appeal to the conservative values of Hispanics.  Asians.  Even single women.  Who eventually learn there is more to life than birth control, abortion and tampons.  But only if conservatives communicate this well.  Which Romney didn’t.  As proven by a lower turnout of Republicans than John McCain got in 2008.  In an election that was far easier to win.  As the Obama economy was little different from the Carter economy.  Allowing Ronald Reagan to sweep into office thanks to those Reagan Democrats.  Who understood his conservative message.  And liked it.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2012 Endorsements: John Adams

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 24th, 2012

2012 Election

John Adams was descended from the Puritans who landed at Plymouth Rock

John Adams was the Rodney Dangerfield of the Founding Fathers.  He got no respect.  However deserving he was of respect.  The man was brilliant.  Well read.  Honest.  Virtuous.  But irascible.  And vain.  He knew he was right when he was right.  And was more than eager to argue with anyone that was wrong.  Which was most of the time.  Tending to make most people not love him.  A lot.  Earning him monikers like His Rotundity.  Because he was portly.  Irascible.  And not really loved.  Which bothered Adams.  For he was one of the greatest of the Founding Fathers.  But others got all the love.  Such as Thomas Jefferson.  The junior Congressman they delegated the writing of the Declaration of Independence to after Adams did all the heavy lifting in Congressional debate to lead the nation to declare their independence.  While Jefferson sat through all those heated debates silently.  For, unlike Adams, Jefferson did not like public confrontations.  He preferred stabbing people in the back through surrogates.  Or in the press.  As Adams would learn firsthand during the 1800 presidential election.

Adams was a very religious man.  His family descended from the Puritans who landed at Plymouth Rock.  Who stressed filling your day with hard work and going to church.  And if you had any time left in the day you might get a little eating or sleeping in.  Adams was a farmer.  And had the hands of a working man.  But he was also a lawyer.  A very good lawyer.  Who had as much reverence for the law as he did for his religion.  So much so that he represented the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre.  After the Stamp Act (1765) things were getting a little heated in Boston.  Adams then wrote the Braintree Instructions in response to the Stamp Act.  Stating that there should be no taxation without representation.  Calling for trial by jury.  And an independent judiciary.  Things the British denied the good people in the American colonies.  But things Adams insisted that the Americans shouldn’t deny to the British soldiers who shot those Americans in Boston.  So he represented the British on trial when no one else would take the case.  And he got a jury of Bostonians to acquit all but two who they found guilty of manslaughter.

Just about every Bostonian wanted the British soldiers found guilty of murder and hung.  Bu the rule of law prevailed.  As Adams convinced  the jury that the British did not just open fire on innocent bystanders.  There was a mob harassing the British.  Throwing snowballs and chunks of ice.  And other projectiles.  Someone knocked a British soldier to the ground.  While the mob grew in size.  And in intensity.  Provoking the British to discharge their weapons.  As much as the British killing these Americans bothered Adams so did an unruly mob.  His religious teachings emphasized hard work and prayer.  Not drunkenness and mob violence.  However, Boston had always had drunken, unruly mobs.  But they didn’t always get shot by British redcoats.  So why did they this time?  Because British redcoats were quartered within the city of Boston.  This was the kindling that led to the mob action.  Which was yet another British violation of the good people of Boston.

A Strong enough Naval Force acts like an Impregnable Fortress Wall to any Hostile Power

When the British marched to Lexington and Concord to seize some weapons in 1775 and exchanged shots with the Americans a state of war existed.  The Revolutionary War had started even though their declaration of independence was another year away.  Up to this time most of the trouble with the British was in Massachusetts.  And some states wanted to leave it in Massachusetts.  Which was a problem for Massachusetts.  For they couldn’t take on the British Empire by themselves.  But if the states united together they had a chance.  Adams understood this.  So when it came time to choose a commander for the Continental Army he looked to a Virginian.  George Washington.  After they voted to declare their independence he looked at another Virginian to write the Declaration of Independence.  Thomas Jefferson.  Understanding that they had to make this an American Revolution.  Not just a Massachusetts one.  For only a union of their several states could withstand the mightiest military power on the planet.  But not just any union.  One that would release all the latent energies of the several states.  A republican union.

After declaring their independence the first order of business for the states was to replace the British governing structure.  And that started with the writing of new constitutions.  To make those new state governments.  That could join in a republican union.  Something Adams had given much thought and study to.  He believed in the separation of powers between the executive, the judicial and the legislative branches.  To provide checks and balances.  And a bicameral legislature.  A lower house to represent the common people.  And an upper house to represent the rich people.  With an executive to represent the state.  Such that the interests of the many, the few and the one were all represented.  Similar to Great Britain’s two houses of Parliament (House of Commons and House of Lords) and the king.  Though, of course, having versions of these that weren’t corrupt.  Thus not allowing one group of people (or person) to dictate policy to the other group of people (or person).  Thereby avoiding a pure democracy and mob rule.  A characteristic of a single-house legislature.  As France would demonstrate during their French Revolution.

After delegating the busy work of writing the Declaration of Independence to the junior member from Virginia, Thomas Jefferson, Adams dove into the work of building a navy.  What he liked to call ‘wooden walls’.  For a strong enough naval force acted like an impregnable fortress wall to any hostile power.  The British Empire ruled the world because the Royal Navy was the most powerful navy in the world.  She could protect her coasts.  Prevent the landing of armies.  Keep foreign warships out of canon range of her cities.  And even protect her trade routes.  In a day of competing mercantile empires dependent on their shipping lanes having a navy to protect those shipping lanes made the difference between empire and former empire.  As few picked fights with the nations with the big navies.  Adams understood this.  And he believed in it.  Peace through strength.  For a strong navy was a deterrent to aggressive nations.

If John Adams were Alive Today he would Likely Endorse the Republican Candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

But Adams was no warmonger.  During his presidency Napoleon came to power in France and was waging war across Europe.  And against American shipping.  Once again Adams fought to build up the navy.  To erect those wooden walls.  To be able to protect American shipping on the open seas as France and Great Britain returned to war.  President Washington maintained a policy of neutrality in their latest war.  Adams continued that policy.  Which infuriated the French.  And the American people.  As the French had helped the Americans win their revolution the French and the American people believed the Americans should help the French win theirs.  So the French seized American shipping.  And demanded tribute from the American ambassadors in France before beginning any peace discussions.  When news of this leaked out to the American people (known as the XYZ Affair) the public sentiment on France changed.  And soon everyone was demanding a declaration of war on France.  Adams tried one more peace commission while at the same time the growing American navy fought back against French naval aggression in an undeclared war.  The Quasi-War.  Eventually peace came.  Through strength.

Adams was pretty much everywhere in the making of the American nation.  From the Braintree Instructions to supporting George Washington to winning the debate for independence to the writing of states’ constitutions to building a republican union.  He helped build American naval power.  And he avoided war with France when just about everybody wanted war with France.  But one place he was not was in Philadelphia in 1787.  Even though his constitution writing skills were second to none he did not help draft the U.S. Constitution.  For he was busy in Holland.  Getting the first foreign power (the Netherlands) to recognize the United States following their victory in the Revolutionary War.  He negotiated a Dutch loan.  Negotiated a treaty of amity and commerce with the Dutch.  And established the first American-owned embassy on foreign soil.

If Adams were alive today he probably would not be a fan of the Democrat Party.  And their constant use of class warfare.  Especially when the top 10% of earners pay about 70% of all federal income taxes.  While about 50% of the population pays no federal income taxes.  This does not represent the interests of the many, the few and the one.  The few pay the majority of tax revenue and have the least say in how that money is spent.  Taking the nation closer to a pure democracy.  And mob rule.  While at the same time the Democrats use the courts to write unpopular legislation they want but can’t pass in Congress.  Where a few judges can write law through court opinions.  A great offense to a pure jurist like Adams.  And transforming ‘the one’ into a leviathan of special interests and cronyism.  Knowing how hard it was to secure loans to pay the nation’s war debt in his day he would be appalled at the size of the annual deficits and the accumulated debt today.  And the constant refrain that the rich need to pay their fair share even though about 10% of all Americans are already paying approximately 70% of the tax bill.  The character assassination of Mitt Romney by the Obama Campaign would be too reminiscent of the abuse he suffered through in the 1800 election.  And as a firm believer in the policy of peace through strength he would not like the massive cuts in defense spending.  Which will only encourage more attacks like the one on the American embassy in Benghazi.  An obvious sign that our enemies don’t fear us.  And are not deterred by our strength.  No, if John Adams were alive today he would likely endorse the Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2012 Endorsements: Alexander Hamilton

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 18th, 2012

2012 Election

When Hamilton looked out Across the Vast North American Continent he saw Great Economic Opportunity

Alexander Hamilton was born in the British West Indies.  At the age of eleven he had to get a job.  As his father abandoned his family after losing all the family money.  Young Alexander worked at Cruger and Beckman’s.  a New York trading house.  A window onto the world.  And international trade.  Where young Alexander learned about the world.  And business.  He had a gift for numbers.  He was bright.  And driven.  Born in the British West Indies he was also something else.  A Founding Father without any state lineage.  With no provincial views.  During the prelude to American independence when other patriots talked about the states going their own way he was already thinking of an American union.  And only of an American union.

The British response to the Boston Tea Party was the Intolerable Acts.  Or the Coercive Acts in Britain.  Where the British put the hurt on Boston.  And Massachusetts.  To separate it and isolate it from the rest of the colonies.  Reverend Samuel Seabury took to the papers and argued against uniting the other colonies to support Massachusetts.  That the people should support their king.  And Parliament.  And not the spoiled, trouble-making people of Boston.  Hamilton took to the papers and argued in support of union.  And Boston.  Warning the people that this was just the beginning for Britain.  More taxes would certainly follow.  Hamilton warned the people to put away their sectional differences.  As this attack on one was an attack on all.  And that if they gave up on Boston it would only be a matter of time before other colonies met the same fate.

That was all well and fine during the warm months of summer.  But the American colonies were part of the British Empire.  Which was a mercantilist empire.  Whose colonies shipped raw materials to the mother country.  And the proceeds from those sales were used to buy manufactured goods made from those raw materials in the mother country.  Making the colonists dependent on Britain for their clothing.  The lack of which would make a very cold and miserable winter.  Which led a lot of people to agree with Reverend Samuel Seabury.  But not Hamilton.  For he looked out across the American colonies and saw something else.  Economic independence.  The South had cotton.  The North could raise sheep for wool.  And they could build factories in the cities to make cloth and clothing.  Staffed by skilled immigrants from European factories.  This is what Hamilton saw when he looked out across the vast North American continent.  Great economic opportunity.  Made possible by an American union.

Hamilton spent the Winter Seasons at Valley Forge and Morristown Reading and Studying Economics and Public Finance

When the Revolutionary War came Hamilton joined the Continental Army.  Fought bravely.  Then ended up as General Washington’s aide-de-camp.  Serving in Washington’s inner circle he knew what the commanding general knew.  And he knew the sorry state of the army.  Half-naked, hungry and unpaid.  While some civilians were living the life of Riley.  Making a fortune off of hording commodities and selling them at high prices.  Which they could do with impunity as the Continental Congress was powerless to stop them.  As it was at the mercy of the states.  The national congress was broke and had little legal authority.  Which let the speculators run roughshod over it.  Leaving the people sacrificing the most for independence half-naked, hungry and unpaid.  Diminishing the fighting ability of the army.  Which greatly increased the risk of defeat.

Hamilton learned an important lesson.  The stronger the national government was, and the richer it was, the easier it was to wage war.  And the easier it was NOT to be defeated in war.  The problem here was that the national government was too weak.  While the state governments were too strong.  Which was fine for the people living normal lives in their states.  But not the soldiers in the field fighting for the nation.  Making things worse was inflation.  The Continental Congress was printing money.  As were the states.  And the more they printed the more they depreciated it.  Which led to even higher prices.  More profits for the speculators.  And even more hardship for the army.  Which had to at times take things from the local people in exchange for IOUs.  Making these people hate the army.  And the army hate the people.  As they were the ones risking life and limb for what was to them an ungrateful people.

Hamilton spent the winter seasons at Valley Forge and Morristown reading and studying economics and public finance.  And set out to solve the inflation problem.  What he learned was that a lot of people were benefiting by the rampant inflation.  Debtors loved it.  For the greater the inflation was the easier it was to repay loans in those depreciated dollars.  Especially the farmers.  They sold their produce at ever higher prices.  Borrowed money to buy land (and repaid those loans in depreciated dollars).  While escaping much of the ravages of inflation themselves.  Because they were farmers.  And were self-sufficient.  Eating what they grew.  Even making their own clothes.  For some inflation was a way to get rich quick at the detriment of others.  To help dissuade such activity Hamilton suggested high taxes in kind (if a farm grew wheat that they turned into flour they would pay a portion of their flour to the government as a tax) on those benefitting from inflation who where destroying the confidence in the dollar.

If Hamilton were Alive Today he would likely Endorse the Republican Candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

Hamilton also suggested a plan for a national bank.  To help restore the credit of the United States.  And to provide a source of credit for the national government.  The bank would be owned half by the government and half by rich investors.  By letting the rich investors make money on the bank it would, of course, encourage them to invest in the bank.  And provide capital the government could borrow.  Hamilton believed in bringing the rich people closer to the government.  So the government had access to their money.  Both would win in such a partnership.  And both would have a vested interest in seeing the government succeed.  The Continental Congress used some of Hamilton’s ideas.  But not enough to bring his vision to life.  He would get another chance, though.  When he became America’s first Secretary of the Treasury.

At the end of the Revolutionary War the United State’s finances were in a mess.  State governments and the national government owed money.  As they used that money to prosecute the war Hamilton believed the national government should assume the states’ debts and roll in into the national debt.  And, more importantly, the new national debt would help strengthen the union.  By binding the states to the national government.  These actions also helped to restore the nation’s credit.  Allowing it to borrow money to repay old debts.  As well as finance new spending.  Hamilton also got his bank.  And he produced a report on manufacturers.  A plan to use government funds to help launch American industry.  So they could catch up to Great Britain.  And even surpass the former mother country.

Hamilton pushed for these things because he wanted to use the power of government to make America strong and fiercely independent in the world of nations.  With an economic plan that would make the nation wealthy.  And allowing it to afford a military that equaled or surpassed Great Britain.  He did not want to make America wealthy to implement a massive welfare state.  His idea of partnering government with business was to make an American Empire modeled on the British Empire.  Making it a rich military superpower.  Able to project force.  Maintaining peace through strength.  Much like the British did with their Pax Britannica that he didn’t live to see.  And to protect what it had from anyone trying to take it away from them.  So based on this who would he endorse in the 2012 election?  The party that had business-friendly policies to encourage economic growth.  The party that was more anti-inflation.  The party that would best exploit the nation’s resources.  And the party that favored a strong military.  Which is NOT the Democrat Party.  No, if Alexander Hamilton were alive today he would likely endorse the Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2012 Endorsements: Thomas Jefferson

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 17th, 2012

2012 Election

When the Radicals attacked Parliament and the King’s Ministers Jefferson’s Summary View attacked King George

When Thomas Jefferson entered politics he was still a quiet and shy awkward young man.  He was not the public speaker Patrick Henry was.  And did not enjoy being in the spotlight.  That said he was incredibly book smart.  When he was in college he spent up to 15 hours a day reading.  And another 3 hours practicing his violin.  Which probably explained why he was quiet and shy.  And not a real lady’s man.  His first love was and always remained his books.  And it was this insatiable thirst to read and learn that made him one of the greatest writers of the Revolutionary era.  It was also where he was most comfortable.  For it was something a quiet and shy young man could do best in his solitude.

After earning a law degree he went into law.  Then he won a seat in the Virginian House of Burgesses.  And joined the opposition against the taxing efforts of British Parliament.  As well as their regulation of trade.  Going so far as to join a boycott of British imports.  Unless it was something really nice that he really, really wanted.  For he was a bit of a dandy who enjoyed the finest fashions, furnishings, wines, pretty much anything French, etc.  If it was fashionable in high society Jefferson probably had it.  But you wouldn’t believe he was a dandy by his writing.  For he wrote some powerful stuff while still in the House of Burgesses.  Especially his A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774).  Published at a time when there was a lot of friction between the colonies and the mother country.  As furious debate raged about Parliament’s right to tax and regulate trade in the colonies.  To summarize his Summary View Jefferson stated, “The British Parliament has no right to exercise authority over us.”  Like many of the Revolutionary generation, Jefferson did not like some distant central power imposing their will on them.  But Summary View went even farther.

At the time most British Americans still wanted to be subjects of Great Britain.  They just wanted the same rights subjects living in England had.  Namely, representation in Parliament.  Denied that they attacked the dictatorial powers of Parliament.  And the king’s ministers.  But they didn’t attack King George.  Jefferson did.  When the other radicals attacked Parliament and the king’s ministers Summary View attacked King George.  While the other radicals wanted fair and equal treatment as subjects of the British Crown Jefferson was already moving beyond that.  He was ready for independence from the British Crown.  For he had no love of monarchy.

The States drafting their own Constitutions was a de facto Declaration of Independence

Much of the trouble in the colonies began with the Stamp Act of 1765.  But in Summary View Jefferson said their problems went further back.  To 1066.  To the Norman Conquest of England.  A time when, according to the Whig interpretation of history that Jefferson had read, things changed.  All land belonged to kings after 1066.  Not to the people.  But before the Norman Conquest there was the Saxony model of government.  Tracing its lineage back to Saxony Germania.  Along the North Sea.  Where once upon a time in a mystical place the good people of Saxony enjoyed representative government.  A beautiful system of government under which people lived in harmony and bliss.  Until feudalism came along.  And kings arose.  Who snuffed out these old ways.  So Jefferson hated all monarchies.  The nobility class.  And birthrights.  He didn’t believe in the divine rights of kings.  To him they were just a bunch of bullies who came along and changed the rules of the game by force for personal gain.  And King George III was no different.

When Peyton Randolph left the Continental Congress Jefferson replaced him.  At the time he was a very minor player in Virginian politics.  But his Summary View created a reputation that preceded his arrival.  And he was warmly welcomed.  Especially by the more radical elements.  The Americans had not yet declared their independence but they were already at war with Great Britain.  Blood was spilled at Lexington and Concord.  And General Washington was now in command of the Continental Army then laying siege to the British in Boston.  More importantly, some states were already drafting their own constitutions.  To form new governments to replace the royal government.  Which to many (including Jefferson) was the most pressing business.  As it was a de facto declaration of independence.  Which was even more important than the drafting of the Declaration of Independence.  Something the more senior members delegated to the junior member from Virginia.  Because they had more important things to do.

In May and June of 1776 Jefferson’s mind was back in Virginia.  And he wrote three drafts of a new constitution for Virginia.  His constitution was similar to the future U.S. Constitution.  It included a separation of powers.  A 2-house (i.e., bicameral) legislature.  An independent judiciary.  And, most importantly of all, a WEAK executive.  Leaving political power in the hands of the people via their representatives in the legislature.  There would be no royal governors or kings in the new state government.  Just pure self-government.  Just like in that mystical place where the Saxons lived in harmony and bliss.  And so it would be in Virginia.  There would be democracy.  At least for the people who owned property and paid taxes, that is.  For if you wanted to tell government what they could do you had to have skin in the game.  And pay taxes.  But after taking care of this Virginian business he got around to writing the Declaration of Independence.  And that thing that no one wanted to waste their time doing?  It became the seminal document of the United States.  Making Jefferson a superstar among the Founding Fathers.  In posterity John Adams regretted that he didn’t waste his valuable time to write it.

If Jefferson were Alive Today he would likely Endorse the Republican Candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

After the Americans won their independence Jefferson accepted a diplomatic post in France where he accomplished little.  Jefferson championed open markets and free trade.  And he worked tirelessly with the French to adopt a free trade agreement.  So cheap raw materials (like Virginian tobacco) could flow to France.  And cheap manufactured goods could flow to the United States.  But the political reality in France stymied him.  The French refused to lower tariffs so they could protect their domestic markets.  Not to mention that those high custom duties allowed corrupt officials to pocket more for themselves.  His only success in France was a Dutch loan John Adams secured while Jefferson was tagging along.  Adams understood the complex world of international finance.  Jefferson did not.  Other than large sums of money tended to corrupt people.  Custom agents.  And governments.  So it was a wise thing to keep the centers of finance apart from the center of government.  Which is why the federal capital is in Washington DC and not in New York City.

Jefferson was in France during Shay’s Rebellion.  An armed protest against new taxes imposed by Boston.  Those in the fledgling government worried about suppressing this uprising (the Continental Congress had few resources other than to ask states for contributions) to prevent the collapse of the new nation.  While Jefferson said, “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive…I like a little rebellion now and then.”  And, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.  It is its natural manure.”  Later, serving as Secretary of State in the Washington administration, he battled with Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton over the size of government and the meaning of the Constitution.  Hamilton wanted to expand the power of the federal government to help jumpstart America into becoming a mighty empire like the British Empire.  With the government partnering with the private sector.  Pooling great amounts of capital together to build incredible things.  While Jefferson wanted all Americans to be yeoman farmers physically working their own land.  With as small a federal government as possible.  And one that spent as little money as possible and remained debt-free.  In fact, when he was president he slashed spending so much that the nation could barely afford the navy to protect its shipping from the Barbary pirates.

So it is pretty clear that Thomas Jefferson hated big government.  He spent his entire political life trying to limit the power and scope of government.  To make government as impotent as possible.  To the point where he even supported a little rebellion every now and then to keep government in its place.  What would he think of the federal government today?  It would probably make him physically ill.  The spending?  The debt?  The federal register?  These would make him long for the responsible governing of King George.  And his pro-American policies.  If he were able to vote today he would vote for the lesser of two evils.  And that would be the party of limited government.  To stop the out of control growth of the federal government.  And hopefully reduce its size.  If Jefferson were alive today he would likely endorse the Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for president and vice president.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

With no Successful Record to run on Team Obama ramps up War on Women, attacks Mitt Romney by Comparing him to Womanizing Don Draper

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 14th, 2012

Week in Review

You know a campaign is grasping at straws when they have to compare their rival presidential candidate to Don Draper on AMC’s Mad Men.  They don’t talk about their job creation.  Or how much better off you are than you were 4 years ago.  Primarily because President Obama lost more jobs than he created.  And except for the rich and connected few are better off than they were 4 years ago.  No.  Instead, they go to Don Draper (see The Draperizing of Mitt Romney by JONATHAN MARTIN and MAGGIE HABERMAN posted 4/13/2012 on Politico).

He may not drink or cheat, and he lacks the fictional ad-maker’s charisma, but Democrats, despite the potential perils of such a strategy, remain determined to paint Romney as a throwback to the “Mad Men” era — a hopelessly retro figure who, on policy and in his personal life, is living in the past…

To be fair, Romney’s governmental record, as well as his campaign, generally reflect gender inclusion. His gubernatorial chief of staff and campaign senior adviser, Beth Myers, is female, as are his deputy campaign manager and communications director. In 2003, Romney’s first year as governor, Massachusetts ranked number one among all states for the highest ratio of women policy leaders appointed by governors, according to a 2004 study by the Center for Women in Government and Civil Society. The suggestion that Romney’s world is cloistered from women is not a fair one.

Don Draper.  The guy women want.  And the guy men want to be.  So Mitt Romney is like that guy and will take us back to the Fifties?  Interesting as Mad Men is set in the Sixties.  At the beginning of the women’s liberation movement.  For if you’re not familiar with the show here are a couple of tidbits.  Don Draper promoted the first woman to a ‘man’s job’ at his agency.  He promoted his secretary to copy editor.  And not because he was sleeping with her.  For she was one of the few women Don didn’t cheat on his wife with.  He promoted her because he saw her talent.  And in the latest season he hired the first black woman into the firm as his secretary.  When others made some snarky remarks he said with annoyance, “Come on.  She was the most qualified.”

The Democrats said the Republicans have a war on women.  And that stay-at-home moms don’t know what real work is like.  Something I think most stay-at-home moms will take issue with.  But that’s their strategy.  Because they got nothing else.  Especially a good record.  So they portray Mitt Romney as Don Draper.  The bad boy that women love.  Men want to be.  And the guy who has hired more women and minority women than any other at his make-believe firm.  Apart from the womanizing and infidelity, then, yeah, Mitt is just like Don Draper.  Successful.  Confident.  And as bad he is outside of the office he is all business inside the office.  Hiring women and minorities not because of affirmative action (which there wasn’t any back then).  But because he respected their talent.  Just like the real life Mitt Romney.  Whose record of hiring women is even better than President Obama’s.

Comparing Mitt Romney to Don Draper?  Bring it on.  Unless there is some strange plot twist in the current season, the Don Draper comparison may only make him more favorable to women.  Smart, handsome, confidant, successful, feminist – apart from the womanizing and the infidelity he’s the perfect man.  Which just happen to be the last two things you’d expect from Mitt Romney.  Making him indeed the perfect man.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Bachman and Paul do Well in Iowa, Obama goes on Bus Tour

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 13th, 2011

Bachman wins Iowa Straw Poll with Ron Paul a very Close Second

All eyes were on Iowa.  At least the eyes that were interested in the Ames straw poll.  For after great mirth, merriment, food and entertainment, we have a winner (see Bachmann wins Ames straw poll; Ron Paul takes second place by Michael O’Brien and Cameron Joseph posted 8/13/2011 on The Hill).

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) emerged victorious Saturday in an influential straw poll of Republican voters in Ames, Iowa, cementing her status as the early frontrunner for February’s caucuses in the state…

A House member has never finished in the top two at Ames; extraordinarily, two House lawmakers finished nearly neck-and-neck toward the top. Bachmann is the first woman to ever win the straw poll.

And here’s how the other candidates did.  Note that those marked with an asterisk did not participate in the straw poll.  Still they garnered some write-in votes.

  1. Michele Bachmann (4,823 votes)
  2. Ron Paul (4,671 votes)
  3. Tim Pawlenty (2,293 votes)
  4. Rick Santorum (1,689 votes)
  5. Herman Cain (1,520 votes)
  6. Thaddeus McCotter (35 votes)
  7. Rick Perry* (718 votes)
  8. Mitt Romney* (567 votes)
  9. Newt Gingrich* (385 votes)
  10. Jon Huntsman* (69 votes)

Michelle Bachman won.  But Ron Paul was a close second.  One is a Reagan conservative.  The other is a libertarian.  There are similarities between these positions.  Both believe in a solid, anti-Keynesian monetary policy.  And there are differences.  Such as the use of military power.  Paul is okay with Iran getting nuclear weapons and wouldn’t use the military to prevent this from happening.  Bachman is not and would use the military.  With Iran being one of the major sponsors of terrorism, the people may side with Bachman on this one as the primaries unfold.  It will be interesting to watch how this develops.

History has Shown the Iowa Straw Poll is not the Strongest of Indicators

So is Bachman now the Republican frontrunner?  Perhaps in Iowa.  But history has shown the Iowa straw poll is not the strongest of indicators (see Bachmann triumphs at Iowa straw poll as Perry joins Republican presidential race by Mike Glover and Philip Elliott, Associated Press, posted 8/13/2011 on the Toronto Star).

The straw poll has a mixed record of predicting the outcome of the precinct caucuses.

In 2008, Romney won the straw poll, but the big news was the surprising second-place showing of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses, but dropped from the race soon after. Sen. John McCain, who eventually won the nomination, didn’t compete in the straw poll and finished in 10th place.

So the straw poll probably doesn’t mean a whole lot. Other than who had the best food and entertainment in their tents.  Perhaps this is why Romney didn’t participate this year.  Because winning didn’t help him last time.

Maureen Dowd apparently doesn’t like Mitt Romney or Corporations

And speaking of Mitt Romney, Maureen Dowd wrote a slam piece on him in today’s New York Times (see Power to the Corporation! By Maureen Dowd posted 8/13/2011 on The New York Times).

At the fair, Romney — whose net worth is between $190 million and $250 million — once again went manly by flipping a pork chop on a grill and facing down hecklers worried about cuts in Social Security. When a man in the audience yelled that corporations should be taxed more, Romney replied, “Corporations are people, my friend…”

Of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation. We the corporation. Corporations who need corporations are the luckiest corporations in the world. Power to the corporation!

Interesting this hostility to corporations.  For she works for a corporation.  The New York Times Company.  In fact she’s one of those ‘people’ Romney referred to.  Those are people who work for corporations.  Those are people who manage corporations.  Those are people who own the stocks of corporation.  And corporations make things for the people.  Like The New York Times publishes a newspaper for the people.  I mean, without corporations, there’d be a lot less stuff in the world.  A whole lot fewer jobs.  And a lot less pay for Maureen Dowd.  Guess she just doesn’t understand how business works.

Obama takes a Page from the Sarah Palin Handbook and goes on his own Bus Tour

And here’s someone else who doesn’t know how business works.  President Obama.  After some two and a half years in the White House he doesn’t have much to show after making jobs job one.  Remember that laser-like focus on jobs?  Well he failed miserably.  The economy is in the toilet.  So he is going on a bus tour (ala Sarah Palin) of states important for his reelection.  Where he is losing popularity.  From Independents.  And even from those on the Left (see Obama sets sights on rural America to talk jobs by Ken Thomas, Associated Press, posted 8/13/2011 on The Washington Times).

Yet Obama also finds himself under pressure from the left to generate jobs and raise taxes on the wealthy.

Most Democrats, said MoveOn.org’s Justin Ruben, “have not been offering a clear prescription for actually getting the economy moving.”

Obama told workers in Michigan that he plans to roll out more economic plans “that will help businesses hire and put people back to work.” That’s an approach Democrats hope will set the tone for next year’s election in the Midwest and beyond.

More economic plans?  You mean like all you did these past two and half years, Mr. President?  Shutting down the oil industry and pouring money into green energy?  To subsidize cars people don’t want to buy and aren’t buying?  More stimulus for ‘shovel ready’ jobs?  When that last stimulus was approximately 88% pork and earmarks?  And your signature accomplishment?  Obamacare?  That pushed spending in the next decade so high that S&P downgraded our credit rating?  Gee, thanks but no thanks.  We’d rather weather this without any more help from you thank you very much.

The Only Thing Important now is the 2012 Election

Everyone is focused on the 2012 election.  The Republican presidential candidates.  And the president.  Who has apparently fixed all of the nation’s problems that he can take a leisurely bus ride through the Midwest.  And why not?  It’s not like there’s any pressing business back in Washington.

No, everything is super fine.  The only thing important now is the 2012 election.  So it’s time to go out there and get some pats on the back.  And tell everyone how he’s going to make things even better.  The best is yet to come.  And you don’t want to miss the second act.  So remember to vote for me.  Especially if you want more of the same.  Oh, and anything you’re not happy with?  It’s George W. Bush‘s fault.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,