Principle over Party

I’m with Texas and Gov. Perry

Jeremy — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:27:11 +0000

Texas and Governor Perry make a statement to demand state’s rights. Whether it is political posturing or not, it’s still the right statement.

We The People Stimulus Package

Jeremy — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:10:08 +0000

There is nothing that I can say about this but WOW. Not sure that I agree with everything but I do like the majority of it and the passion behind it!

What do you think??

You want to hear principle??

Jeremy — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:10:00 +0000

Ronald Reagan was a statesman and principled man. Here is an amazing recording of his opinion of socialized medicine (today’s translation: Universal Healthcare).

It is a beautiful thing and I can only hope that another Reagan rises! Viva la Reagan Revolution!!

That Pesky Capitalism

Jeremy — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:42:32 +0000

Well apparently Obama is not even hiding his disdain for that pesky idea of “Capitalism”. It is just a pain and we shouldn’t keep doing it. Let’s get off the train now. Obama said that we can’t keep following the system of “endless cycles of bubble and bust”. Do you mean cyclical markets? That is kinda how they work… well unless we implement central planning, comrade.

Obama Says U.S. Can’t Afford ‘Bubble-and-Bust’ Cycles

Capitalism was cool. I am going to miss it.

Surprised By Rising Unemployment numbers??

Jeremy — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:40:01 +0000

Are you surprised by rising unemployment numbers? Do you still see “Now Hiring” signs in windows of businesses?? Doesn’t make sense does it? Or does it?

The first reason that I think this makes total sense is that jobs are a “trailing number”. The term trailing number is pretty simple it means that the job numbers won’t react until after the economy reacts. So, when the economy is booming and starts to slow, jobs will remain solid for a while then will start to fall. The opposite is also true. When the economy rebounds, the jobs won’t rebound for a period of time after the economy starts. It’s for a very simple reason, businesses have to get busier before hiring people.

The second reason why we shouldn’t be surprised by increasing unemployment rates is because the politicians in Washington increased the length of unemployment benefits. This really has two impacts:

People can be counted for a longer period of time in the numbers
People can survive longer on unemployment

By extending unemployment, people can stay on the numbers longer. When it used to be a shorter duration, people stayed on for that period of time and then once it was done (whether they found a job or not) they were removed from the numbers. Now that it has been extended the people stay on the rolls longer while they look for a new job.

Also if people CAN stay on them longer it gives them the ability to hold out longer. Before you get mad about that statement read on… As an example, if you were making $30 an hour and unemployment is now providing you 60% or the equivalent of $18/hour are you going to take a $10 job to be “employed”. No. But when unemployment stops and you are making $0/hour the $10/hour job starts to look much more appealing. Even though it’s not your ideal job or salary, it is better than $0.

So, the numbers that we use in the U.S. for unemployment don’t actually represent the people who are out of work. They represent the number of people who take unemployment benefits. So by altering the unemployment benefits you alter the numbers.

Education System

Jeremy — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:09:55 +0000

So I read about Obama’s big education speech and I am not really that impressed. Here is someone who has his kids in private school because he believes it is the best for his kids. Shouldn’t everyone else be afforded the same opportunity? I am not singling out Obama most politicians fit in this category.

It is time that we allow educational choice. We need to allow market forces in the education “market”.

Here is the new section that I added to the principles page:

“

Education

While I believe that education would be best left to the private sector, I will say that is probably not a realistic option in our current society. Public education is ingrained. So in this realm I am Pro-Choice. I believe in the concept of Educational Choice for kids and their parents. By introducing competition into the education “market” you will achieve better results and accountability.

Parents should be allowed to enroll their children in any school in the public system or should be allowed the option of vouchers or opting out of public school funding to fund private education. By doing this, you provide a scenario where market forces can increase the accountability.

Benefits:

Increased accountability through market forces for schools
Competition for good teachers. Teachers are rewarded for excellence instead of seniority.
Kids get best education available instead of just the only education available
etc.

See The Friedman Foundation for more information about this concept.

“

If Mr. Obama wants change…. this would be a great place to show leadership instead of just following the same ole worn out path.

Rush’s view of Conservatives

Jeremy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:18:08 +0000

If you don’t know what conservatives stand for. If you have questions on what it means. Drop your biases and listen to Rush’s speech. You can hate him afterwards but at least you will better understand him and us.

Rush’s First Televised Address to the Nation

Obama’s Lack of Economic Understanding

Jeremy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:44:17 +0000

Personally, I am not certain if the Obama administration doesn’t understand the economy or if they truly have ulterior motives. But this article does a great job of debunking the current course of action:

Obama Placing the Economic Cart Before the Horse

Excellent Article about Principle OVER Party

Jeremy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:03:42 +0000

Over the past weeks since Obama passed the “Stimulus” bill I have heard a couple of silly arguments of why he should be allowed to.

First: “Bush spent billions on a war so at least Obama is spending it on our country”

Second: “Republicans sure liked the spending when Bush was doing it, but now they are complaining because Obama is doing it”

I think that the first argument is insanity. Just because Bush was nuts with spending shouldn’t give every President after him a blank check.

The second argument has validity. Many Republicans are extremely guilty of that. Just a few short months ago they were voting FOR the TARP bill but now they’re complaining about spending too much money.

I just read an article on HumanEvents that outlines the situation like few that I have read. I am 100% on-board with the ideas that D.R. Tucker discusses. You have to take a look at this one!!

The Second Arrangement

A couple of key points stand out to me:

The conservative movement let its guard down in the 2000s. The American right decided to embrace George W. Bush despite explicit evidence that he was closer ideologically to his father than he was to Ronald Reagan. Looking back at the 2000 primary, it’s clear that Bush and John McCain were two sides of the same moderate coin.

And

It’s good to see conservatives standing foursquare against socialism now. However, the electorate will not suddenly forget how conservatives tolerated socialism when a big-spending Republican was advancing it.

All I can say is AMEN. Both quotes are dead on. Conservatives need to get back to principles and stop electing people (Republican or Democrat) that don’t meet the views! Stop acting like this is the NFL and picking a team and sticking with it through good and bad years. This is much more important.

Ron Paul speaking Common Sense

Jeremy — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:23:40 +0000

Well, apparently only Ron Paul wants to discuss the facts in this economy. What a great excerpt from Rep. Ron Paul. He is head and shoulders above most of the people in Washington.