To all Californians,
We are told that when our congregational representatives do something we don't like we should call and tell them. Well we have been calling them until the phone lines melted, we have emailed until our keyboards broke, and we have written them until our fingers bled, all to no avail. But now they are coming back for a "recess", and they will have no choice but to face us. So some ideas...

Signs:

Taxation or Extortion
Education or Indoctrination
Accountability or Corruption
What has your vote cost us?

TARP -$700Bln
Stimulus - $800Bln
Fed. budget - $3.1Trln
Healthcare - $1.3Trln->?
My vote is not for sale.

The last line should be what they hear in reply every time they start talking about how much money they have brought into the state.

We should also all watch these clips:
Fienstein
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZFwRAfkV1g

Note:I knew exactly what I was calling about.

Boxer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE_jGD5nZ6U

Anyone have a clip of Pelosi's promise to have the most ethical congress ever? This should be accompanied by the question about why the investigation into Charley Rangle in being dragged out.

If I had the means I would love to put together a commercial putting the three clips above together followed by three stills from them across the top half of the screen. At the bottom half of the screen just a black background with the word ARROGANCE in white.

So the young, i.e. incoming investors, pay the bills for the old, i.e. existing investors. So can somebody explain to me how this is NOT another government run ponzi scheme?

I have been thinking about the political spectrum a lot recently and while I agree with Glenn Beck's depiction I don't think he goes far enough. If you will allow me to engage in some ASCII art I will explain.

The mainstream depiction:

---------------
1 2

1=Communism
2=Fascism

I agree that this is hopelessly inaccurate, I only show it because I will be coming back to it at the end.

So a more realistic depiction:

---------------
1,2 3

1&2 = as above
3 = Anarchy

Now I agree with this depiction but I find it lacking. Specifically there is nowhere to put "Conservative" and "Liberal". First we need to look at what these two words mean. According to my dictionary "Conservative" means "One favoring traditional views and values" and "Liberal" means "Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas". Setting aside the obvious bias on the part of the writer of the second definition it is clear that neither of these two terms has a clear place on the one dimensional spectrum described above, but if you include a second dimension you get what I think is a much more accurate depiction of the political spectrum:

|2 4
|
|
|
|1 3
------------

1 = Liberal Left (i.e Communism)
2 = Conservative Left (i.e. Fascism)
3 = Liberal Right (i.e. True Anarchy)
4 = Conservative Right (i.e. Tribalism)

I refer to 4 as tribalism because that is the best term I can find for the point. Essentially we're talking about no formal structure, but behavior is dictated (note the small 'd') by tradition. From what I have read of small tribal groups this seem to fit pretty well.

Now watch what happens when we rotate this 90 degrees clockwise:

--------------
|1 2
|
|
|
|
|3 4

Now ignore everything below the top line and you see where the mainstream depiction comes from and how they got away with it.

So now that we have a more accurate depiction (actually I would add a third axis but that is another article for another day) we can see what the real argument in politics is about these days and why it leaves the rest of us scratching our heads. The PTBs are all over on the left hand side. Which means they aren't arguing aver how much government we should have but where the rules for it are going to come from, the mob or "tradition". From our vantage further to the right they seem to be arguing over red delicious apples and granny smith apples, but they're still only discussing apples!

Okay, so all the above is only about theory, but one of the favorite tricks of the progressives is to redefine and/or expunge language so as to control the debate. Until we recognize the true extent of the playing field we are stuck playing by their rules which they have rigged to their advantage.

I think people are missing the real danger behind the "Pay Czar". Everyone is focused on the limits on executive compensation. I think the real danger is on the other end of the pay scale. Once the government establishes itself as having jurisdiction over the top of the pay scale it will be a logical extension to control the bottom of the pay scale as well. Only they won't be pushing wages down, rather they will push them up. At that point unions will cease to exist, the government will be the union. In one fell swoop the progressives will have accomplished wealth redistribution and over ruled the right to work laws in some states.
The more I think about it the more sense it makes.

The reason we aren't hearing any "outrage" over this is that Fannie and Freddie are favored programs of the PTB. This ties to a post I made elsewhere regarding Obama's comment to the bankers et al. at their meeting last week that he was the only thing standing between them and the pitchforks. Since Fannie and Freddie or "good" companies the thugs won't be set on them.

In my opinion the only people that should get any benefits from the government are veterans, they put everything on the line for us so we owe them no less, and they are the least likely to become parasites. Even politicians shouldn't get any benefits.

I don't know about you but I'm not mad at the Bankers et al. I'm mad at the politicians, and I certainly wouldn't listen to Obama to decide who to be mad at.

I just saw a report that Obama told the bankers at their meeting last Friday that his administration was the only thing standing between them and the pitchforks. If he actually said that I find it very troubling.
1) It could be interpreted as a threat that he either
a) wouldn't prevent the Acorn goons or
b) would send his Acorn goons to protest.
2) By extension one could conclude that the AIG protests, including at people's homes, were directed from the White House.

I don't want to believe this could be true, someone please tell me why my reasoning is flawed. Otherwise we are in more trouble that even I thought and fascism is only a few short steps away.

Have you ever noticed how when the police conduct some high profile raid the media always reports how many guns were found? They never report on how many hammers were found, yet both are legal to own and can be used to cause grave bodily harm. It's also legal to have cash, yet that always gets reported as well.

This is my list of proposals for how to fix this mess. I've posted most of these in various other places, but not in a single post. So here goes:

1) Personal - don't take any federal or state money, it always comes with strings even if they aren't apparent. "He who has the money makes the rules." I have been below the poverty line my entire life and have never taken any welfare or other government assistance.

2) Elections - start at the local level and only elect people that support
a, Take as little state and federal money as absolutely required, preferably none.
b. Eliminate services that are not required by the state & federal Constitution.
c. Fully fund the services that are required by the state & federal Constitution.
d. Tie supervisor pay to County GDP.
The same principles should be applied to the state level with appropriate alterations.
In my opinion we're looking at 10-15 years to have a significant impact at the federal level.

3) Recalls - make the PTBs pay attention by recalling those that don't. This option is not available in all states, but it should be used where it is available. Once one or two are recalled, just filing notice of intent with get their attention. Caution must be employed however as the 15%'ers will employ it as well if they see it beginning the work. So we must take care not to react with a knee jerk response to a recall effort. A recall effort against a politician that supports our positions should be actively opposed.

4) Constitutional Ammendments
a - term limits for congress. I prefer 2 and 2 but would support something less.
b - balanced budget. The government shouldn't be able to spend money they don't have, and borrowing is not a acceptable means of balancing the budget.
Will take a minimum of 5 years in my opinion.

5) Redistricting. Take the power to draw elected district boundaries away from politicians. Put it n the hands of the judiciary or the citizenry. We have a new round of redistricting coming up probably 2011 so we could see dramatic changes in a short period with this one.