PART TWO: My Personal Romney Campaign FUBAR

It turned out, the shipment that came after the election, was only a partial shipment.

The rest of the order for Romney campaign bling – which I made well before the election – shipped today 27 Nov 2012.

Idiots.

My Personal Romney Campaign FUBAR

This is a sign of a poorly run campaign.

Weeks ago, I ordered some Romney/Ryan campaign buttons. I was going to keep one on a jacket, one on my satchel, and have a few extra to hang out.  I followed the link on the Romney campaign site and placed my order.

I never got the order.  I assumed it had been lost or stolen.

Oh well. Shit happens.

Then I got this email earlier today:

 

 

 

The buttons were not even shipped until several days after the election.

Idiots.

Dang.

Obama is reelected.

My fellow Americans, this is going to be bad for our present and for our future.

 

 

USA Election 2012: I Am Voting For Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

I am voting For Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

You can read summaries of what I believe here, here and here. In short it is something like: Strong on National Security, Pro-Entrepreneurial Capitalism, against big government central planners, for domestic lifestyle tolerance – especially in private, for free trade, against global governance and so on. The continuing US financial crisis (e.g. rising debt and USGOV spending, Bureaucratic regulations gone wild, increasing anti-entrepreneurial incentives, Inflation, increasing dole numbers, the BigBiz/BigGov cronyism nexus) is issue number one for me.

Romney was not my first choice in a hypothetical POTUS candidate (and Zeus knows I am no Paul Ryan fan), but when I consider the likely direction of a Romney administration vs. the likely direction of a second Obama administration I see a clear distinctive choice for all us of Americans.

In 2008, I did not support Obama/Biden and I believe my analysis was spot on. The Obama administration has been pretty bad and has moved the country in the wrong direction on almost every important issue. I have no reason to believe a second Obama administration would be an improvement.

The Romney/Ryan ticket is the best fit to my policy views and I will enthusiastically vote for him.  I urge you to do so as well.

(source ABC News)

Wow! PJ Media Commenter Winslow’s “The Sixth of November”:

Wow:

 

The Sixth of November

Remember, remember, this sixth of November,
The radicals’ treasonous plot.
I know of no reason the radicals’ treason
Should e’er be forgiv’n or forgot.

The Sixties were waning, and Leftists were claiming
That radical changes were due.
Their Marxist solution was armed revolution:
The Weathermen made their debut.

The radicals raged on the national stage, and
Horrific explosions ensued.
Their bombs were dramatic, but also erratic;
They sometimes killed radicals, too.

The Leftists grew older, the underground, colder,
And so they came in from the cold.
“Subvert from within – in the long run, we’ll win,” said
The Leftists, determined and bold.

And thus it began – this nefarious plan – and
The radicals slowly took charge:
Complete infiltration of all education;
The long institutional march.

The journalist schools would produce useful fools, for
The Left would need media shills.
And Hollywood, too, would assist in the coup, with
Its slick propagandizing skills.

“Community action” would build a new faction;
’Twould organize proles on the street.
A smooth politician would front for the mission,
And run for the president’s seat.

The radicals’ goal, which they proudly extol, is
A communist U.S. of A.
Collectivist schemes lead to brutal regimes, and
For this do the radicals pray.

But Jefferson’s aim, with the charters he framed, was
To guard individual rights.
And “redistribution” was not a solution,
But one of the evils to fight.

So let us remember, this sixth of November,
Just what is at stake on this date.
Will Jefferson’s dream, or the radicals’ scheme, now
Determine America’s fate?

 

He gets it.

How to Avoid a Possible Tie in Future US Presidential Elections Without Amending the Constitution

There is no need to amend the Constitution. The next Congress can just increase the size of the House by one from 435 to 436 to begin with the next next Congress.
BTW, I like the electoral college. I don’t want it abolished by amendment.  I would suggest this change:

Presidential Election Adjustment Amendment

What

• Replace Electoral College, but keep state electoral votes.
• States must bind electoral votes to a President/Vice-President candidate pair among only those on the legal state ballot or that were written in sufficient quantity to win the state-wide contest automatically as the election result is certified.
• The above is true, even if one or both candidates on a ticket have died.
• If a an electoral vote is certified to a presidential candidate that has passed away, the new vice-president shall assume the presidency at the beginning of the term under normal succession rules, and nominate a new VP per normal vacancy replacement procedures.
• If an electoral vote is certified to a vice-presidential candidate that has passed away, the president shall nominate a new VP per normal vacancy replacement procedures after the term begins.
• If both candidates have passed away, normal rules of presidential succession apply, beginning with the speaker of the house upon the term beginning.
• Explicitly state that the “Acting President” cannot appoint a Vice-President or Acting Vice-President.

Why

The electoral collage changes are just for the sake of efficiency and to avoid a potential constitutional crisis in the form of faithless electors. The sections involving death of a candidate who wins are introduced to avoid a potential constitutional crisis by defining the solution ahead of time.

 

Capturing my thoughts from ChicagoBoyz re Paul Ryan

Here was the Link:

 

Ryan is just a pretty boy from a rich family. He has only ever been a politician. He has never run anything. He was (and maybe still is) a BigGov/BigBiz GOPer. Only recently has he been presenting as a fiscal conservative.

I don’t trust him. I do not understand why conservatives trust him. The media likes him because he is telegenic.

I have no reason to think he would be a successful POTUS. If he ran for Gov or Senate I would have voted against him for anybody else.

Ref:
[1]

On “The Bailout”, Part 15: Wisconsin Congressman Ryan – “vote for bailout went against his principles”

[2]

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan – Fake Conservative

[3]

Fakery: “Sen. Russ Feingold and Rep. Paul Ryan officially unveiled their proposal for a line-item veto…”

[4]
https://purpleslog.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/another-reason-i-dont-like-rep-paul-ryan/

 

 

 

Where is the Purpleslog 2012 POTUS Candidate?

I am looking for a candidate that…

– is of good moral character
– has executive experience
– has an adult lifetime that includes significant time outside of DC
– embraces the principles of the US constitution
– is a fiscal conservative and will focus on the fiscal/financial as US President
– supports a balanced budget amendment
– is pro-entrepreneur
– has a plan on how to roll back job killing/anti-entrepreneurial regulations
– is not a Keynesian of any flavor
– wants the Fed to focus on anti-inflation measures to protect the currency
– is pro-federalism
– has a preference for individuals and markets over central planning
– ruthlessly against corruption/cronyism/ethic-less-ness in gov and has a record to back that up
– is a social moderate or has libertarian social leanings
– does not engage in overt gratuitous religious displays and pandering
– will not continue to abandon our international allies
– doesn’t feel a need or desire to apologize or be ashamed of America for  being America
– does not wish for a US that is more like China, nor  embraces a USA future where we are China’s little subservient buddy
– is not soft on, nor an apologist of Islamism
– will not accept a weaker or backwards-looking us national security capability
– is not a “slave” to biggov/bigbiz interests
– is not “climate change” or “global warming” zealot
– is for more energy from more sources, not less,  especially including nuclear power
– is willing to push tax system reform to make it flat, transparent and cheaper (e.g. fair tax, Forbes flat tax, purple tax reform)
– is willing to address retirement and de-coupling of pensions from employer (e.g. a super IRA or PRA)
– is willing to push replacement of Obamacare with something like this and addresses at least Paul Ryan’s plan
– wants a smaller federal government and can name some specifics cuts
– names 2 cabinet departments or major agencies targeted for elimination
– if there were in the US congress, they did NOT vote/support tarp, the faux-stimulus, and the various bailouts (or they better have  a good reason for me to over look this)
– has a plan for the US  in space
– wants to address border security and immigration…and doesn’t call others who want to racists
-has not graduated from an ivy league university (or at least seems free of that taint)

Lastly: I want somebody who when they read this post and the post at this link won’t consider me to be a fucking hobbit/terrorist/racist.

So.

Who is this person?

Via ChicagoBoyz: Possible Tea Party logo for 2012?

Via ChicagoBoyz:

I like it.

I put them on Flickr.

I am in sync with the Tea-Party types.

Balanced Budget Amendment?

When I was younger and just becoming political aware, I was against the idea of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the US Constitution. After all, congress can balance the budget when they need to….or so I thought.

Since then, I have come to realize that congress has acted irresponsibly during my entire adulthood. It can not be trusted to balance the budget. It has not the skill. It has not the wisdom. It has not the will. Bottom line: Congress is filled with Assholes beholden to public choice economic effects.

As Americans, we should not continue to reply upon a broken system to get the results we want  after decades of failure.

It is time for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the US Constitution.

Here is the outlines of a possible version from Orrin Hatch:

1. Its mandates that total budgetary outlays for any fiscal year not exceed total revenues unless you have a two thirds vote to overturn it.
2. It caps federal spending at 20% of GDP.
3. It requires the President to submit a balanced budget to Congress every fiscal year.
4. It prohibits revenue raising measures (like increasing taxes) that are not approved by two thirds of both the House and Senate.
5. Provisions can be waived if there is a formal declaration of war or if the US is engaged in a military conflict constituting a threat to national security or if two thirds of both the House and the Senate approve.

The above works for me.

The time is now for this sort of thing!

Come on Tea-Partyers, make this happen!!! Demand pledges from candidates for this any other related measures!!!

“Can you govern yourself, or do you need a Federal Czar to govern your life for you?”

ChicagoBoyz has a must read post entitled “This is the FRAME that wins 2012”.

No quarter. No respite. Time for the takeback.

The American System isn’t supposed to be about Crony Capitalism to reward the Elites and the political connected. The elites hate and disdain the rest of us. They need to come to fear us. Time for the takeback has come. It will take a while – years. Relentless small-steps must be taken over time on fronts to rollback the elites back bit my bit. No quarter, no respite.

 

Found via TDAXP.

I wouldn’t vote for “President Bloomberg”

I read of the idea at The Corner.

 

I can’t imagine any realistic circumstances under which I could vote for him.

 

He seems to be a firm believer in extending the state’s control and regulation of  as many personal decisions as possible.

 

About the only decision he doesn’t want the state involved with is when a Muslim Brotherhood associated guy wants to build a mosque near 9/11’s ground zero site with murky/hidden sources of funding and with a design that looks suspiciously like shattering glass (many in the shape of stars of david and pentagons) falling from twin towers.

 

 

No Thanks.

“The Tea Party represents…”

A quote noted at HotAir on the Tea Party Movement:

The Tea Party represents stakeholders in the American system; people who were never involved in politics or thought they had to be, yet realized that political corruption and incompetence threatened not only their families, but the future of the nation itself. Economic collapse, the shocking spending by an Obama administration that most analysts agree is in over its head, combined with remarkable contempt shown citizens during the debacle of the healthcare debate and legislation, have mobilized those stakeholders – including women and their families – to take action.

Me and Mitch Daniels: Crossing him off for 2012

I like what Mitch Daniels is doing in Indiana -Fiscal fixer with the  social conservative agenda not being that important. So far so good, right?

Alas, he likes the VAT Tax – a type of consumption tax.

In general, consumption tasks are a good thing (only non-savings, non-investment gets taxed).

A VAT though is a hidden tax. It is a little tax at each stage of the production and delivery of a good or service. The tax burden is hidden from the view of voting citizens.  A tax system based on hidden taxes can be manipulated  by the elites and the “connected” for their own benefit and to reward their supports.

Implementing a Hidden Tax System goes against the principles of what I hope the next USA will become.

I will not support a VAT or anybody who does.

Even if they ride a Harley.

Here is my understanding of the Tea-Party(ish) Principles

I need to write these down and think some more about these. I am essentially in agreement with the principles.

– Public Policies must be at their core fiscally responsible/conservative

– Ruthlessly end corruption/cronyism/ethic-less-ness in GOV

– Preference for Individuals and Markets over Central Planning

– Yes for Free Markets and Entrepreneurial Capitalism; no for Crony Capitalism

– Federalism…more please.

– Reduced complexity and quantity of GOV laws, regulation, and programs.

– America doesn’t need to apologize or be ashamed for being America

– Remember and follow the principles in US Constitution, e.g:

Government of the people, by the people, for the people”
[…]
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…
[…]
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
[…]
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
[…]
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
[…]

– Rollback  (not just reduce the speed toward) the march to a Nanny-State/Proto-State-Capitalism|Neo-Socialist state. [updated/added 9/26/2010]

Watch and Understand

Found via Dr. Sanity:

A way forward for Republicans

Socmodfiscon writes at HotAir:

If republicans would run on deferring social issues to the states while focusing strictly on fiscal conservatism and strong defense they would win big.

They don’t have to deny social conservate agendas just campaign that the legislation of morality (which is exactly what social conservatism is) should be conducted solely within the individual state governements.

Then you would see independents crossing the aisle in droves.

That idea works for me.

The Dem party is turning into a European Social Democrat (EuroSocialism+ soft on National Security) party.

That doesn’t fit me at all.

If the Repubs, think the way back is through being more hard-core on Social (religious) Conservatism + Populism (think Huckabee and his anti-capitlaism beliefs), then there is no home for me there either.

What I believe isn’t terribly complex.

Take Socmodfiscon’s twin focus of National Security and Fiscal Conservatism. Add in being big time friendly/supportive to Entrepreneurial activity. Leave the social morality to the states and local communities and to private individuals.

That would work for me.

“The party can still be for limited government, but a government effective in providing tools to support innovation and entrepreneurship”

…so it is written in this CSM editorial: “Do Republicans have a ‘Yes, we can’?”:

But it will be a party out of power and one that cannot keep riding this elephant in the direction it’s been going. Republicans have too many splits, from libertarians in the West to social conservatives in the South to Rockefeller moderates in the Northeast.

No wonder a “maverick” was able to win the nomination, slipping through those political cracks. The GOP is now at risk of becoming a white, rural party whose core geographic base stretches only from Georgia to Idaho.
[…]
The GOP brand has been reduced to one word – freedom – in the way that the Democrats were stuck with the one-dimensional brand of equality. But if there is one reason for Obama’s victory, it is that he seeks to move his party, and the country, toward that classic American brand: opportunity.

What are their suggestions?

If Republicans want a comeback, they could become the loyal opposition that debates Democrats on the best way to create more opportunities for Americans, allowing them to increase their social mobility through hard work and education.

The party can still be for limited government, but a government effective in providing tools to support innovation and entrepreneurship.

The above in in sync with my beliefs.

Update: I would map closest to what Smitten Eagle call’s a Western Republican:

3) Western. The Western Republican is the Republican of libertarian leanings, generally favoring non-intrusive government in terms of social issues, and also favoring fiscal discipline. They tend to oppose nationalization of anything. They often, but not always, favor a strong national defense. Reagan was a western republican. This is the future of the Republican party, because the Western Republican can capitalize on the whims of the Independent Voter, who is usually fiscally conservative, libertarian socially, and for a strong national defense.

What I Believe

This started out as a comment at Soob, but quickly grew in length.

I did a very short post on this once before. Let me go into more detail.

Let me be clear: I am not a Republican. I consider myself an Independent. I have mostly voted Dem in the past. The first time I voted for a Republican for President was 2004, though if I could vote again, I would have voted for Reagan in 1984 (and Bush in 2000 – update). I was 18 and surrounded by liberals and communists. I had always had strong pro-national security beliefs and much to the horror of those all around me, I was OK with Reagan calling the Soviets the “Evil Empire”. I also had the pleasure of being denounced in front of a room full of people (mostly fellow travelers and useful idiots) as an American-stooge by a Pro-Soviet Afghan Communist in 1988 (a proud day for me).

As far as policy, I am future oriented. I have no policy nostalgia for small family farms or big manufacturing industry and their labor unions or other such things. I love reading history and exploring retro culture and I am a big early jazz fan (real jazz, not smooth jazz), but that does not carry over to policy.

I am for a strong national security but I don’t think the Dems are anymore. On national security, the Dems are the party of McGovern, not the party of Roosevelt, Truman, and JFK. I am not deluded by “yes we can” and “change, change, change” into thinking otherwise.

That all said, America must continue to develop and exercise its other elements of national power besides that of military (which needs to keep developing and advancing too). US diplomatic and intelligence capabilities are pretty bad considering the money spent on them. Also, US Influence Warfare capabilities are atrocious. Right now, the US is really the only western country willing act. The lesson in that is we have to keep our expeditionary capability…and we can’t count on “allies” for support.

I am pro-globalization economically (big yes on global free trade) and pro-strong international state system. I favor strengthening the state system, not continuing to weaken it.

I am anti-Global Governance. Global Governance institutions (and the movement itself) are mostly non-democratic, and do not serve to protect the fundamental rights of Americans and frankly other humans. Governance bodies are unelected non-democratic (and often anti-democratic, anti-American) bureaucrats often serving their own purposes and see themselves in opposition to to USA. It would be dangerous to invest to much of America’s and the world’s future in their hands.

I am pro entrepreneurial capitalism, pro-growth, pro-tech, pro-innovation, pro-higher productivity and progress. This is possibly the most important thing for the American System. The unleashing of human capital through entrepreneurialism (business, social, cultural, heh and political) will continue to make us economically and cultural rich. The rest of the world is better off for this too.

Domestic policy should be changed to increase, support and create incentives for this activity. This mean changes to the legal and financial systems. It also means a pension system not tied social security and long-term single employer employment. It also means a health care system not tied to a particular employer or type of employment (this does not mean government run national health care though). All Americans should should have a stake in and profit from the success of the American System. Also, the American K-12 education system is obsolete and needs to replaced with something best summed up as “vouchers, charters schools, and mass customized education for all”.

I am moderate on social issues with libertarian leanings. I am all “equality of opportunity”, not “equality of outcome”. Most government handouts and social programs do harm in that the create bad incentives and they don’t really accomplish their goals (other then making some do-gooders and politicians feel good about themselves). All of the “feel good” programs should be examined and if found lacking, abolished (and maybe replaced with something new or something like vouchers or a negative income tax system).

I was also raised Catholic and I tend to be a bit of a prude on moral issues when pushed. Mostly though I have a sort of libertarian attitude – “don’t ask, don’t tell”, and “if its weird do it in your house and don’t shove it my face”. Don’t mess with children though – they are off limits for indoctrination into the weird.

I am not gay but I have had gay friends and I don’t like the idea of them being pushed around or being denied normalcy. I may find homosexuality uncomfortable at a certain broad intellectual level, but not when interacting with homosexuals as direct real individuals. Love is hard enough to find in this world, I am not going to stand in the way nor support policies to do so.

I care nothing for elites or the eastern establishment. They do great harm to this country.

I am pissed off by the continued presence and influence on society by Marxists/Marxism and socialists/socialism under what ever labels they hide under. I don’t buy into “Global Warming” because the science isn’t there and the supporters all seem to be Communists or their contemporary useful idiots.

I don’t like paying taxes on wasteful things and bloated bureaucracies, but I don’t mind paying them for efficient government activities. That being said, the tax system is too complex, costs too much and has too many bad incentives and loopholes. I favor switching to a flat tax system for individuals based on either income or consumption. I favor switching to a flat tax of cash flow system for C-style Corporations (if we are still going to tax C Corps, that is). This can be revenue neutral, but will have the positive effects of costing less in compliance and regulation, and will reduce the distortion of economic activity.

There is more detail of course. This should give you an idea of where I come from though. I may update this or add links occasionally.

Updated: grammar and spelling fixes.

Update: If you think I am an Islamaphobe, read this including the comments.

Update: Here is a quick hit on Federalism.

Update: I am mostly in sync with the Tea Party principles (as I understand them).