Clairemont Debate - Part 1 Clairemont Town Council

Tonight's debate was actually part of a regularly scheduled meeting of the Clairemont Town Council. To be honest, I have heard of these town councils before, and am not really sure what their raison d'être is. However, they performed a good service by getting candidates together for a well-moderated and useful debate. Before I get into the debate, I wanted to report on the Council meeting itself, because it had both uplifting and jaw dropping moments.

We started the evening with Boy Scout Pack 277 color guard presenting the colors and the pledge of allegiance. It was good to hear everyone say "under God" without hesitation.

Some other pre-debate business:
From Assemblywoman Kehoe's office, her rep, Andrew Kemmerly told us a few things. She is introducing legislation to create a Del Mar greenway to preserve a buffer zone between the fairgrounds and the river as well as self defense training in high schools, still in draft. The self defense training is in response to the murder of Chelsea King in Poway. Information on where to view the district's stimulus spending breakdown was provided. Christine Kehoe is claiming that about $631 million was spent in our little state senate district. Jobs saved? 684. When I quizzed Andrew about this, he helpfully explained that this also includes infrastructure, so the million dollars per job was not really accurate. Glad to see the state senator's aide can do math. And the finale was the announcement of a California cash for appliances program; good grief, I thought we were broke.

Becoming A Champion getting cut off was unintentionally ironic.

From the City Attorney's office was a reminder of something entirely forgettable.

Donna Frye was the only pre-debate speaker greeted with applause. She passed out handouts of Fryelights. She recently filed a lawsuit against the city of San Diego over the financial analysis of the "strong mayor" city proposition D. The mayor's financial analysis required for the proposition said the cost was any where from zero to a million. Donna made the entirely reasonable point that zero was probably not happening when part of the deal was creating a new city council district. The city settled the next day and I presume the language will be changed. I have often disagreed with her positions, but I must say that Donna Frye was amazingly short and sweet; I can see why she is so popular.

Fire Capt. Praizner brought handouts to explain fire safety and the brown out issue. More on that some other post, perhaps.


The Debate:

Questions were collected from the audience members at the start of the debate. I had no way of knowing if my question would be asked. Candidates were allowed short opening statements.

Introductions by the moderator, Gina Lew, were straight out of the candidates' web sites. Each candidate was then allowed to make their own opening statement.

Steve Hadley: Really emphasized his years as Donna Frye's chief of staff, ten years? He has been endorsed by Frye, but didn't over play that card. Claimed to be a fiscal conservative and socialyl progressive. Talked about serving as a former pastor and really emphasized all the constituent service he has performed. Initial impression: Consummate insider.

Ryan Huckabone: Talked about his background growing up in San Diego, going to Chico State, serving as an army linguist in Mandarin Chines in Hawaii. He said specifics about the issues are important. How will that contractor fix your fence? It's important to make sure candidates know specifics. Initial impression: Regular guy.

Howard Wayne: Talked about the importance of neighborhoods. He served many years as a Deputy Atty General, some years in the Assembly. Big contributions are monitoring of beach water cleanliness and funding for curbside recycling in San Diego. He emphasized his local roots: Hoover high, SDSU, Clairemont Town Council member. Initial impression: Regular politician.

Lori Zapf: Starting talking about raising school age daughters. Talked about Clairemont being a great community, but is in decline the past few years. Library hours, roads and potholes, fewer police and firefighters. Talked about running her own natural foods company, and restoring fiscal sanity. Initial impression: Tough cookie, publicly inexperienced.

My debate notes need to get typed, and I'm not sure if I should just summarize or go into each question chronologically. I'll post more tomorrow. I'd like your input on how to summarize the rest of the 90 minute debate.

Programming Alert - District 6 Debate

Quick reminder that I will be covering the San Diego City Council District 6 debate tonight at 7:00 p.m. at Clairemont High. No guarantees on when I will get a post put together, but I will monitor this space for new questions. Also, I see no need for breathless Twitter updates, it's just a city council race for cryin' out loud.

Betting Against America?

All of my life I have been optimistic about the future and a firm believer that we live in the greatest country in human history. When I was only ten years old, my uncle was repeating some of the stupidity in Paul Ehrlich's "The Population Bomb" and trying to frighten me into believing I would be dead before I was 30. My argument at the time was simple, we always invent new stuff. As I grew older I came to understand that we in fact "invent new stuff" because of the freedom we enjoy in America. We use technology to solve the problems created by older technology. (As an aside, Norman Borlaug, the father of the green revolution in Indian agriculture probably saved hundreds of millions of lives. He was awarded the Nobel Peace prize in 1970, one of the picks the committee got right.)

We interrupt this post to show a picture of one of the greatest Americans of all time.

This bullishness on the future led me to put our savings primarily in the stock market, after we purchased a home. I always felt that investments like gold, commodities or Treasuries were a bet against the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit of Americans, and that always seemed like a bad bet to me. (Similarly, I have never shorted a stock.) After the election of Obama, Mrs. Daddy was in a fine fiddle. She was very nervous about the combination of Obama in the White House and Pelosi leading the House, smart woman. But I cautioned her that the country is great and the people would only stand for so much. The rise of the Tea Parties confirmed my optimism, even though Obamacare was slammed through. I am also optimistic that it can be undone. We significantly reformed welfare after all.

However, today my optimism is under assault not by specific policies of Obamacare or cap and trade but by the looming problem of government bloat at all levels. When we examine the unfunded liabilities of employee pensions at the local and state levels and federal unfunded liabilities in social security and medicare. I haven't the energy to trot out the mind numbing numbers, but the graphs I displayed for the federal problem in a previous post tell only one unsettling story of a government borrowing to pay current expenses (that's like using your credit card to buy groceries and pay the rent every month and not being able to make payments.) One story at Bloomberg estimates the collective state problem at $3 trillion. A number being bandied about for local pensions underfunding is $2 trillion.

The public employees unions have significant power, influence and even sympathy from the public. Locally all politicians seem to vie for the police and firefighters unions endorsement, even if that is disqualifying in the eyes of B-Daddy. But ultimately this financial path is unsustainable and we all know it. Compare our situation to Greece (as has Dean); here in America economic hard times gave rise to a movement that called for dramatic reductions in the size of government. In Greece, there has been a childish demand by the public to save themselves from their own folly of voting for leaders who refused to balance the books and engaged in some Enron style accounting.

Will there be some pain as we work out how to reduce the size of all of our government? You betcha! But am I going to bet against America? No way, I am counting on the same ingenuity to work out these problems as well. Not without pain, because we have dug ourselves a hole, but dig out we will. The Tea Party's emphasis on the need for smaller government is VERY important. As the house of cards starts to topple, the prescience in identifying too much government as the source of our ills will swell our ranks and provide the power needed for reform.

Sean Hannity Nukes Himself

As I feared, Sean Hannity led his show tonight with an hysterical over the top criticism of Obama's recently announced nuclear weapons policy. He also managed to drag the usually more thoughtful Newt Gingrich into the mix, declaring the latest Presidential announcement evidence that Obama is "dangerous." It was as if all they knew about the case was the Drudge headline. Perhaps they suffer from Obama derangement syndrome.

The New York Times has a pretty decent piece on the thinking of the administration in announcing the new policy, and as I suspected yesterday, it is aimed primarily at North Korea and Iran. But the Times thinks the policy may be intended to influence the leadership, I doubt that it will have any effect on them. However, the people of Iran may be a different story. For those inclined to be disenchanted with the regime, the fact that Iran's nuclear program puts them in the cross hairs of a large nuclear arsenal may give extra energy to their opposition. In the long run, only regime change in Iran is going to produce lasting peace in the region. I hold out hope that the people of Iran will eventually topple a regime that is so antithetical to any aspirations of better material conditions.

The one part of the new policy that I disagree with is the decision not to develop any new nuclear weapons. New weapons designed to burrow deep into underground bunkers are needed to disrupt the nuke/chem/bio development capacity of rogue states. A credible threat to be able to shut down their programs is a necessary piece of nuclear deterrence.

Slate does a good job of explaining the issues as well.

No Nukes? No Way!

The Drudgereport has what seems to be a disturbing headline:

NO NUKES: EVEN IN SELF-DEFENSE!

implying a change in policy regarding the use of nuclear weapons. From the linked New York Times article:

For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack.

I beg to differ, and I have some personal knowledge of this subject. First, we will still use nukes against anyone who uses nukes against us, so we aren't giving up nukes in self defense. Further, the non-retaliation with nukes has been the policy of the United States for a long time; because the language of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NNPT) requires this. The treaty makes no mention of an exception to its precepts with regards to biological or chemical weapons. Perhaps it is news because we announced this publicly, but it is not really a change. I hope conservative commentators don't get worked up and display their ignorance (I'm thinking Sean Hannity).

HotAir has some reasoned debate, good for them. When you think about the countries that worry us over chem/bio (Iran, North Korea), they are probably also the countries who are in actual or technical violation of the NNPT, so if they use chem/bio weapons we are still free to turn rain some mushroom clouds on their critical military infrastructure.

24 Empty Missile Tubes, a Mushroom Cloud, Now, it's Miller Time!

Tax Increases By Any Other Name

Dick Morris was on Hannity tonight making a very important point about the costs of the health care bill. The lead in was Obama's rambling incoherent answer to a woman's question about being taxed too much. Note that she is a lot smarter than Obama really gives her credit for. She is not asking about her own taxes, but is worried about her employer going under. Notice how politically tone deaf the President is. (I've only posted part one, he rambles on twice as long after saying "my final point is.")



Apart from all the lies, he also fails to address key ways that citizens pay more under the bill. First, by requiring the states to add more to the medicaid rolls, he is imposing a de-facto state tax increase. Here in California, you know this will be seized upon to usher in other taxes as well. Second, by requiring the insurance companies to accept everyone with a pre-existing condition, he is raising insurance rates for everyone. Americans know instinctively that such a massive intrusion by big government will hurt their wallets. This is why Obama's answer is so long and rambling, but in the end never addresses the issue.

Stealth taxation like that in Obamacare is quite in vogue in other areas. Consider:

• Cap and trade is really a tax on businesses, but not advertised as such. This is why the mocking nickname "crap and tax" illuminates the issue. Even better for the Democrats, by passing out "credits" to favored pals, they can buy more votes.
• Amnesty for illegals will result in more taxes or higher insurance premiums as millions are added to the stealthcare rolls who currently lack insurance.
• Trans fat bans increase the cost of doing business for restaurant owners, despite the dubious science behind the ban and the fact that saturated fats have their own risks.
• Finally, all the "jobs bill" and pork laden stimulus will only lead to higher debt, which is inevitably leading to higher taxes or inflation, itself an insidious tax on the accumulated wealth of all Americans.
  

Obama's supporters are always yelling at the Tea Party, "Obama didn't raise your taxes." But we know better, don't we?

Meanwhile Doc Zero has an impassioned plea for going all out for repeal of this bill. I agree, failure to repeal Obamacare puts us much further down the road to European style socialism with permanent high unemployment and low growth. (H/T Dean.)

It’s true that the GOP cannot completely dedicate itself to the repeal of one piece of legislation for the next three years. Instead, they should dedicate themselves to slaying the blasphemous, rotting leviathan that gave birth to ObamaCare, and whose tentacles are visibly squeezing the life out of the American economy. Big Government is a parasite that is more than willing to kill its host. Ordinary people are beginning to see it for what it is. They understand that something is terribly wrong with their government. Now is the time to explain the origins of this leviathan, and put ObamaCare in its proper context… as the final, absurd contortions of a philosophy that acts in complete ignorance, and sometimes outright contempt, for what free people can achieve. Behold the toxic wonder of a bill that forces people to buy a product that it will also cause a shortage of.

I don't believe I have been reading enough of Doctor Zero, he has some solid prose and great explanations.

Scheduling Alert - San Diego

April 8 - San Diego City Council District 6 debate at Clairemont High School at 7:00 p.m. I will be covering and asking the following question, if allowed: "What action will you take that will save taxpayer dollars but will be opposed by the employees unions?" Four of the five candidates in the race will be there. See my earlier post on the candidates here. So far, the candidates are not impressing me. Kim Tran has not responded to my request as to why she is not participating, but a commenter, who seems to be working for/with Kim had this to say in the comments:

Most community organizations are comprised of Democrat and or Republican Partisans. Kim understood early on after she was not invited to the North Chamber candidate forum that these venues were not friendly to her campaign or any other campaign not funded by the local County Parties.

My personal opinion is that candidates have to get in there and slug it out, no matter what. This is going to be a different election year and I think that if Kim is truly the outsider candidate, she has a great chance, but she needs to make the case. I am inclined to support her, but I don't have enough information and her lack of participation in the debate isn't helping.

April 11 - Brad Dacus, founder of Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) will be speaking at Clairemont Christian Fellowship (4570 Mount Herbert 92117) at 10:30 a.m. PJI has defended family and religious freedom though out the western states. Nice discussion of their work that prevented Rancho Cucamonga from shutting down a home Bible fellowship here. Mr. Dacus will be available at 9:00 a.m. to answer questions on religious freedom and family rights issues. I will cover this event.

April 15 - Tax Day Tea Party protest at the Midway Post Office at 3:00 p.m. I see there is a suggestion to start at Rosecrans and Midway where there will be a lot more traffic. Plenty of time to stop in and protest since folks will be dropping off there tax returns until midnight. Unfortunately, that might include B-Daddy. Sarah wants you to come decked out in your finest protest gear. Depending on how my taxes are going, I may provide coverage. Maybe I can convince the mighty Waynok to get some more video.

God Bless Your Easter

Light blogging this weekend, because we are spending some extra family time together. God bless you this Easter weekend. Jesus' message of redemption and resurrection remains as relevant today as it was 2000 years ago. He is risen, and calls on us to spread his gospel, using words if necessary.



Image from Unfinished Christian's Blog.

Weekend Music Chill

I grew up in Orange County before it was the O.C. and when it was definitely not cool. So as a tribute to the new and cooler image of the O.C., here are the Orange County Supertones doing "Away From You."




Here is a live version for the ADHD impaired, sound quality isn't quite as good, but you can see them performing.

As If We Needed More Proof

... that lefty MSM is out of touch and suffering from PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome). Here is Hank Stuever at the WaPo mocking some items that most Americans would take pride in:

I dunno, but hush: The mother of the dead Marine is talking about the day a naval destroyer was named after her son. The millionaire is about to give away millions to send underprivileged minority kids to college for free. The loyal service dog is going to help the sweet little boy walk again. A woman is about the save a man from a burning tanker truck. Toby Keith is singing about patriotic veterans. Flags are billowing. A piano is playing.

What is it about Palin that so offends the left? I admit to being a big fan, but not believing I would contribute to a future Presidential run by her. I mostly like watching her unhinge the left.

Supposedly she is subversive, and I guess she is.

Part of the liberal hatred (or fear) of Palin lies in her ability to draw passionate crowds that are impassioned by the wrong kind of politics. Although American elites are not inherently suspicious of crowds, they are, quite naturally, fearful of those that are ungovernable. And since Palin’s crowds—many of whom are adherents of the Tea Party movement—do not respond to the slogans and shibboleths of the liberal elite, the latter views them as alien (ergo, ungovernable).

She is also the only politician to lay a glove on Obama during the campaign. But I don't think the subversive explanation quite covers the whole story. Maybe there is a little misogyny and racism on the left as well. Ever notice how the worst vitriol is reserved for women and blacks. Think of not only Palin, but Michelle Bachmann and Michelle Malkin. And blacks who are conservative are made to suffer mightily as well, I think of Clarence Thomas and Michael Steele when he ran for Lt Gov in Maryland. It is an affront to the self-proclaimed champions of women and minorities when they say no thanks, you don't really represent my interests.

The other thing is that she is self confidently sure of herself and her beliefs. She pays not the slightest obeisance the ruling intellectual orthodoxy, and does not even acknowledge its authority in any way. That she has been so successful after not attending the right schools, nor living the right lifestyle set the left on edge.

Finally, the fact that she seems so happy with her traditional life style with a large family, hunky husband, and that she is good looking to boot, just crushes the lefties. She is the woman who is "having it all" in a way that modern feminists can only dream of, and for that she is reviled.

The Census and the Constitution

Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America (in part):

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

Enough said.

Every household should fill out the census. It is used for the legitimate and lawful purpose of determining the apportionment of the Congress. If you don't like the question about race, write in "American" or any thing else truthful, but fill it out. It's a legitimate exercise of the Congress' authority.

Debt and the Deficit

In the video linked in the post below, Pam Stout reminds us that a big reason that the Tea Party came into being was a sense of dread over the size of the national debt and deficits. At just the right moment Donnald B. Marron puts this into scholarly perspective with pictures in National Affairs. (As an aside, those, like Letterman, who complain that the Tea Partiers weren't active when Bush was President, should notice how much worse the trends are under Obama.)

First, to help me get your attention I offer two graphs from the article.

Obama towers over his predecessors.

Obama - Up, Up and Away!

Unfortunately, voters still aren't paying attention and don't seem to care about the impending disaster. However, just as a Republican might have won the 2008 Presidential election if they had listened to Rasmussen and positioned themselves on economic issues, so now, Republican candidates could start winning, and positioning by taking on the debt issue. More from Mr. Marron:

Before we can hope to make a dent in our deficits and debt, there must be broad agreement among the public and the governing class that we even need to. There are still some commentators on both the right and the left who continue to insist that deficits and debt do not matter much. It is important to understand why they are mistaken.

Running deficits can certainly be appropriate — and even beneficial — at times of particular stress, such as wars and recessions. But in the long run, persistent large deficits and growing debts undermine our nation's prosperity.

He goes on to point out seven key reasons why long term deficits and debt hurt the United States. Summarizing:

1. Debt undermines growth by crowding out investment.
2. Debt fuels inflation, a hidden tax and destroyer of wealth.
3. Foreign holding of our debt gives them leverage to negotiate in other areas.
4. Use of shorter and shorter term debt puts interest rate risk on the budget.
5. Rising debt limits our ability to raise money to combat a new crisis or our ability to go to war (not always a bad thing I guess.)
6. Due to the magic of compound interest, debts grow on their own. Especially when you are financing current operations out of debt.
7. We're screwing our children and grandchildren. (Marron uses the PC "intergenerational fairness.")

This is why we should applaud Jim Bunning for his insistence on pay-go. This is why we should mock every stimulus boondoggle. This is why we should demand an end to earmarks. This is why we should demand less spending everywhere. This is why we need to get the Democrats out of the majority in Congress and Obama out of the White House.

Tea Party Explained on National TV

I posted a video of Pam Stout on the David Letterman show at B-Daddy's Other Blog. A little more about Pam's evolutions here, of all places.

Racism and the Tea Party - Update with Video Rebuttal

Scroll down for update.

Image courtesy of Tea Party blogger Nice Deb.

I had hoped not to blog on this topic, but the left won't let it die. Gratuitous, mindless, endless and unfounded cries of racism are injecting even more poison into the body politic. David Paul Kuhn has an excellent rebuttal to the likes of Frank Rich, Jimmy Carter, Maureen Dowd, and lesser lefty lights.

For decades, leading liberals explained white concerns about urban upheaval, crime, welfare, school bussing, affirmative action and more recently, illegal immigration, as rooted in racism. Not safer streets or safer schools. Not concern about taxes for welfare, as working class whites (like all races) struggled in their hardscrabble lives. Not regular men who never knew "white male privilege" but were on the losing end of affirmative action (recall Frank Ricci). Not job competition or economic class. Instead, leading liberals constantly saw the color of the issue as the only issue.

I further add this absurdity. When Obama took office in January 2009 he had an approval rating of 76%, while his approval numbers are now down to 48%. Assuming about 225 million adult Americans, that means that 63 million Americans suddenly turned racist in just over one year? I'm not buying it.

More importantly, since this meme will have to be refuted day after day for the next two and a half years, we must inculcate an intolerance for racism in the Tea Party. Since the movement is self organizing, the only way to enforce this is through peer pressure. It is important to our movement, and important that Americans start to see what liars that criers of racism really are.

I leave with you some thoughts that Jay Nordlinger published in NRO's The Corner, quoting a letter from a reader (Nordlinger is not sure if he agrees, BTW.)

As everyone sweats out the final Obamacare tallies, I’m struck by a couple of other stories. In one case, someone reported hearing an anti-black epithet used at a political rally. In another case, dogged police finally arrested the perpetrator of an intolerable crime. The perp is a 16-year-old kid who made a potentially offensive comment on a Wal-Mart overhead speaker. That these things are even remotely newsworthy leads me to one conclusion: Racism in America is dead. We had slavery, then we had Jim Crow — and now we have the occasional public utterance of a bad word. Real racism has been reduced to de minimis levels, while charges of racism seem to increase. I’ll vote for the first politician with the brass to say that “racism” should be dropped from our national dialogue. We’re a good nation, among the least racist on earth . . .

VIDEO UPDATE

Andrew Ian Dodge provides a link in the comments to an incredible video in which the whole racism and violence meme is entirely debunked and MSNBC is again shown to be utter tools, shilling shamelessly for the Democrat party in total denial of the facts.

Next on the Menu - Amnesty

That the administration's next big push will be amnesty should not surprise anyone. Dick Morris warned of this during the campaign in 2008 and others have pointed out that the costs of Obamacare will seriously explode if covering illegals were part of the calculus. But now that Obamacare has passed, exploding its costs will just put pressure to raise taxes. Further, it will help buy votes from the newly amnestized. This is why I will oppose any efforts by the administration on this issue; no matter how reasonable they try to sound. They will lie about their real intention to get millions of new voters on the rolls hooked on government subsidies and voting Democrat for life.

Many of you know that I once favored some kind of immigration reform and I still do; but not under this administration and not while this health care legislation is on the books. I also want to be clear that there should NEVER be a path to citizenship for those who have entered the country illegally. I guarantee you that if you talk to a Democrat leader today about this issue and you propose any solution, but indicate your unwillingness to compromise on the citizenship issue, they will call you racist and refuse any negotiation.

We'll see what comes next. Any Republican that cooperates should be challenged in the primaries. Lindsay Graham, that means you.

The Nanny State's New Target - Calories on Menus

Dean posts about another nice little surprise that no one bothered to tell us about before the Obamacare bill was signed. Specifically, a new requirement that every chain restaurant publish its calorie count on its menu. The Nanny State is coming into its full glory and I'm feeling like Jack.

I must be crazy to be in a loony bin like this.

What Ails Us - Part 2

Much has been made recently about all the anger over matters politic today. Peggy Noonan, in yesterday's WSJ, talks about the temperature being too high and Democrats and Republicans alike appear to be using the anger for partisan advantage. But we should examine the causes of the anger and not be dismissive. And I think that we find at its roots, a moral crisis of our own making.

Starting with the current health care debate, there is a sense of entitlement by those who argue in favor of a national program. Health care is a right they cry, and given that we have enshrined other goods as rights, how can we argue effectively that they are wrong. Other goods delivered by the government have become de facto rights, Children's education, a minimum income for the elderly and Medicare. And no one argued to end Medicare in the latest debate, as a matter of fact, the harm to be done Medicare under Obamacare was a key argument against its implementation.

However, in a free society, we have no right to the fruits of the labor of others; it is not our right to live by the sweat of another's brow. Doctors are not obligated to save our lives without just compensation, nor is the general population obligated to pay for that which we should be responsible ourselves. Ultimately, this is the moral code that we all instinctively live by, that we should be responsible for our own welfare and that of our families. We are angry because we are being punished for our integrity and figuratively spat upon and told that we are selfish and racist. We know that both our taxes and our insurance premiums will rise, we don't like it, because we have done nothing to deserve this and have made clear our desires. That many are angry is understandable. I do not condone threats or actual violence, but merely point out that the anger behind it is understandable.

Those on the other side believe that this moral code has a failing; because it does not guarantee that the less fortunate will be spared suffering. Further, they do not believe that a system of free enterprise is actually free, because people are fools, easily manipulated by those with corporate power and unable to make choices to free themselves of its tyranny, especially in the work place. They argue that we must hand over power to the "wise" who will establish an order of fairness and upend these evils through their benevolence. Hayek called this the fatal conceit. What they fail to acknowledge is that freedom and responsibility are damaged, and the "wise ones" in government will be even more self serving than any corporate leader ever can be, because of the power of competition. The self serving nature of the ruling class, even in a democracy, has long been understood.

But the problem gets even worse, because the "wise" have abandoned all pretense at having any moral compass of tradition, religion or constitution to constrain their desires. In order to gain power, they promise an electorate that we can have something for nothing; that we can take from the rich to meet our needs, nay to meet our rights. And as an electorate, we have bought into this.

Consider some history. Social Security, from the start, was never fully funded by its beneficiaries. Those who benefited in the past typically paid in far less than they received in benefits, burdening future generations with a system that returns to current workers 2% or less. Medicare was funded the same way, through a tax on current workers for the benefit of the elderly who had already retired. Both are now enshrined as rights.

More recently, home ownership became a quasi-right, propped up by easy money from the Federal Reserve and a structure that removed the risk of default on mortgages from those making the loans. It was the perfect con, everyone was getting what they wanted. No one cared that people lied on mortgage applications, no one cared that credit rating agencies had no clue about the value of mortgage backed securities, but rated them anyway. No one cared that the Federal Reserve's job of maintaining the value of the currency, a moral imperative that prevents theft by stealth, decided its job was to prevent stock market collapse or falling home prices.

Finally, we must ask why there is such a large population of people who need so much public assistance, such as subsidized health insurance, that our nation can't easily afford a small social safety net for an unfortunate few. KT has argued well and repeatedly that our culture devalues men and fathering which results in vast numbers of children lacking a father in their lives, and we are reaping a bitter harvest of underachieving, highly incarcerated youth as a result. And a typical moral failing of the incarcerated as well as those who can not complete high school is the seeming inability to take responsibility for their own lives. We see sex as recreational and wonder why so many men are then uninterested in ties that truly bind.

What can be done? Repealing Obamacare is probably the only place to start, because it has not really kicked in, so it is the easiest piece. But in the long run, merely repealing this one instance of overweening government will do nothing to dampen demand for ever more programs. We must change the culture of entitlement, to call it out for what it is, and to argue effectively, logically and passionately that this culture of entitlement and responsibility-shirking will wreck our country.

I leave with you an email that was forwarded to me by 'Dawg, but whose original authorship is unknown.

The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.

I might no have used the word fools, but I do agree that we the people elected a man who promised us more government goodies paid for by the rich not us. I guess those who believed that are indeed fools.

San Diego District 6 City Council Elections

I am taking a time out from national politics, to explore the San Diego City Council race in District 6. I am just getting started looking at the candidates and will report from the debate on April 8 at Clairemont High School. Right now, the Clairemontonline.com flyer shows four candidates, although I could swear there were five only a week ago. When I saw the flyer, I had little knowledge about the candidates, so here is my preliminary round up:

Howard Wayne

Former Assemblyman (78th district East Countyish, Lemon Grove, Spring Valley, Bonita) and Democrat. His experience and fundraising probably make him the favorite. On his web site he touts the endorsement of the firefighters and police unions, so right away, I am highly prejudiced against him. This means he won't take on firefighter work practices or the pension problems crippling the city budget, or so it would seem.






Lori Zapf

Her website has some pretty decent proposals; reform pensions, balance the budget (but that's the law). But she also cow-tows to the firefighters and police. She also touts making "quality of life" and neighborhoods her first priority. San Diego City Beat is trying to paint her as some kind of anti-gay bigot, so she is making the right enemies. She was also involved in an organization called Californians Against Lawsuit Abuse, another plus. She is also, horrors, the only Republican in the officially non-partisan race.






Steve Hadley

Steve Hadley is Donna Frye's chief of staff. Frye is the current District 6 council member. He will come with her mixed baggage, she was occasionally the voice of sanity on the council but I always felt that she was too close to the unions. Hadley's issues page on his web site
takes on a number of issues regarding pension that show his knowledge of the real problem. I was pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately he also seems anti-development with his emphasis on mitigation plans and other minutia of urban planning.






Ryan Huckabone

The last candidate also seems the least likely to win. The platform page of his web site calls for shifting to a defined contributions pension system for new employees; I wholeheartedly agree. (But dude, get some professional help for your web page.) He also calls for limiting spending, but offers very little concrete, other than capping expenses at 2% below projected revenue. Maybe not a bad idea, but more needs to be done. He also takes on water reclamation as a key initiative. He may be very far sighted, but I don't think this will generate excitement, unless water rationing gets way worse. Finally, he states that he will work very hard to keep the Chargers in San Diego; I couldn't disagree more. I would like to see some other city deal with the financial subsidies that come with supporting an NFL team, so I am not thrilled.






My options aren't looking so great, but I will be attending the debate on April 8.For any readers residing in San Diego or absentee voting in San Diego (CZ?), I invite you to comment on what questions I should ask. My proposed question is, "What action will you take that will anger the public employees union but save the taxpayers significant money?"

Look forward to your comments.

Weekend Music Chill

We're having a little bit of a torpedo theme this weekend, and I always liked Tom Petty's breakthrough album "Damn the Torpedoes." So here he is with Here Comes my Girl, from 1979.



And since we're playing Tom Petty, I couldn't resist adding "American Girl" even if my girl half Aussie.

Did He or Didn't He?

Was Dear Leader behind the sinking of the Cheonan? I look at the evidence so far on B-Daddy's Other Blog.