July 30, 2010
To see what State Senate District you live in Click below:
To see what State Assembly (State house of Representatives) District you live in click below:
To see Candidates for Missouri State Offices click here : http://www.votesmart.org/election_state.php?state_id=MO
To see Candidates for Federal Office Click here:
To Find out WHERE you Vote click here:
Ballot Measures include:
Constitutional Amendment 1 Election of County Assessors
Constitutional Amendment 2 Former Prisoners of War Property Tax Exemption
Proposition C Participation in a Federal Health Care System WHICH I WILL BE VOTING YES ON…we want this so we can avoid the personal mandate of Obamacare.
There are 7 Candidates for US House Of Representatives 7th District running on the Republican Ticket. I will not say who I am voting for. What I will say is that there are 4 Good Candidates in my Opinion, they are: Jeff Wisdom, Jack Goodman, Gary Nodler, and Michael Wardell. I have spoken to these four each briefly and only long enough to make a first impression (with the exception of Wardell who I have spoken to quite a bit). Any of these four would be acceptable if they do as they have stated they will do. I do have a candidate picked out, he is the one I believe balances ability to win in November with true constitutional values.
Who I WILL NOT be voting for is Billy Wrong…er I mean Long. A vote for Billy Long = terrible decision on the part of the 7th district.
For the State Senate we have one Republican Candidate running unopposed…RON RICHARD
For US Senate the only real Choice for me is Roy Blunt
For Auditor we have : ALLEN ICET or TOM SCHWEICH
There has been some nasty ads and accusations for the auditor job. Schweich supposedly gave 500 dollars to Claire Bear in 2001…which makes me gag, but he worked for John Bolton and John Ashcroft, and is a bit of an outsider.
Icet is a term limited Missouri state representative…. with just about all the Missouri Congress behind him. He seems to be the GOP establishment favorite…
THE MAIN THING IS BE AN INFORMED VOTER AND VOTE!
July 29, 2010
A reader sends breaking news and asks a question. In the LCR mailbox:
Lawyers have reached a tentative deal to settle ethics charges against Rep. Charles Rangel. If approved by the House ethics panel, the deal would stop public hearings on alleged ethics violations.
The buck stops no where with these guys - what do you think?
I simply wrote back, "every infringement stacks up to more electoral losses for the Democrats in November."
To expand upon this - perhaps a public trial would not be as damaging for the Democrat party and leadership (and potentially at the ballot box in November) as yet another smoke-filled-backroom-attorney-power-broker-deal is. I recall similar antics played out during the train-off the-tracks Republican congress and we all recall how that turned out.
Charles Rangel cutting a deal to avoid a public trial may just incite more anger from independents, Tea Partiers, libertarians, moderates and conservatives than the ruling class is estimating.
If only I had photoshop skills, images of Charlie Rangel and a three ring circus are flooding my mind:
Cross posted to War Planner, Proof Positive, Rational Nation, Allied Liberty News.
"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal..."
That is a loaded phrase in itself. We can argue the meaning of nearly every word. Whether you believe in an actual Creator or not, it is hard to dispute that we are created. Perhaps a more modern way (although not better) of saying it would be "...all people begin life equal". That is not exactly what "created" means to me but it is an acceptable paraphrasing if creation would offend someone. But what about this "equal" thing.
Equal does not mean "same". Surely no rational person would argue we are all the same. Even when we are first born we are all different. Life is wonderful because of diversity. Anyone who would prefer to live in an ant colony has a bleak outlook at best. So equal does not mean that we look or behave the same. As we grow we become more different. This results in the long limbs and torso narrow waist and broad shoulders that make an Olympic swimmer; the size, musculature, and near preternatural quickness that makes an NFL linebacker; the innovative, questioning, and exacting mind of an inventor, or the compassion and intelligence it takes to become a doctor. With these differences in ability and structure come different levels of capacity for achievement. I will never be an NFL lineman, a great painter, a ballerina, or invent the next iPhone. But there are many things that I am quite good at, and my opportunities are wide and varied, if not actually infinite.
We are not physically or mentally all the same.
Not to burst anyone's bubble but realistically speaking we are not even all born with the same opportunities. If Paris Hilton had not been born a Hilton it is unlikely she would have had a tv show, been in a movie, had a recording deal, or been a fashion icon. If Chelsea Clinton was not the daughter of Hill and Bill she would not be getting married at the old Astor estate. I was born with more opportunity than almost anyone born in Zimbabwe or China. Malia Obama has a much different position in life than any other little girl from Chicago just by virtue of who she is.
So even when we are born we are not equal in actual position.
So we are not equal in ability or position but we are also not equally different:
The range is not all or nothing. It is different by intricate and infinitesimal degrees. A person not born into Paris Hiltons position could very well become more successful or famous. Rags to riches stories still happen here everyday. But what separates Ussain Bolt from Tyson Gay as fastest man alive? Less than Milliseconds.
So in what way are people equal? How can men be equal when they are so different?
Because of our differences in ability and position the only way to MAKE us the same is to treat people differently. To give to some and take from others and, yet, we will all still be different. Because we really cannot give; we can only take.
So if people are born different, have different opportunities by birth, and the only way to make people the same is to treat the differently then how can we be Equal?
By controlling the only thing we actually have control over. Our interpersonal dealings. The dealings of people can be dealt with equally. We can TREAT all people equally. We can do unto others; how we would like others to do unto us. And being that we are not all equally moral or ethical and must create governments to protect the non-aggressive from the aggressive evildoers in our midst then the best we can do is to create such a government where all people are treated equally under the law. That is all I ask for.
To take it one step further we have to decide as a species if we are going to seek material equality (as Obama and the socialists are for) or equality under the law (as the founders were for) because you cannot have both. If we decide on material equality then we must treat everyone differently under the law. And if we choose equality under the law then we will necessarily have to accept differences in material possessions.
And if we choose material equality then we will remove the wide and varied opportunities that now exist to better ones position than that which they received at birth.
It would likely keep the Norma Jeans of the world from becoming Marilyn Monroe, or Elvis A Presley from becoming the King of Rock and Roll; or of Cassius Clay becoming Muhammad Ali. Of course, it would also limit the ability of Paris Hilton to be, well, Paris Hilton.
We can't have it both ways.
-via my iPhone
July 28, 2010
Left Coast Rebel
Yesterday evening I had a little free time. I decided to write up another op-ed and I got published again at the Daily Caller!
Way to go!
9. JournoListers are mostly from the Coasts and Urban; RightieBloggers are from Coast to Coast including the Flyover and the South (according to my map), and many are Rural (like me)…
8. JournoListers hail from dying newspapers, dying network news broadcasts, failing magazines, obscure blogs, and PMSNBC; Rightybloggers are independent and may affiliate themselves with booming talk radio, Fox news, and BOOKS…
7. JournoListers wait to see what the consensus is, formulate it, homogenize it, and then Present it; RightyBloggers seem to usually have a consensus on a topic when the topic is presented, presumably stemming from shared principles and beliefs…
6. JournoListers try to Shape public Opinion by spinning the news of the Day; RighyBloggers respond WITH their Opinion on the news of the day, which according to the polls, IS Public Opinion…
5. JournoListers worldview is shaped by the writings of Marx, Engels, Sanger, Roosevelt, Wilson, Keynes, Alinsky, Cloward, Piven, and Soros; RighyBloggers worldviews are shaped by Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Smith, Paine, Goldwater, Reagan, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, Hayek, Thatcher, Human Nature and History…
4. JournoListers Worked hard to hide the fact the administration is failing; RightieBloggers simply comment on the fact that the ship is going down…
3. JournoListers believe that Perception is Reality; RightieBloggers know truths and facts are stubborn things…
2. JournoListers have every failed Socialist Experiment on their Side; RightieBloggers have history on their side…
And the number one Difference between Journolisters and the Residents of Right Blogistan?…
1. Journolisters did their work behind a secure firewall by invitation only; RightieBloggers do their work out in the open in a Come-one-come-all fashion, allowing all comments and viewpoints, but as one of our members so rightly says “all comments are welcome but not all will be Right.” We do our work out in the open sunshine where everyone can see and contribute; they do theirs behind closed doors with the shades drawn low.
Makes you think they thought they had something to hide doesn’t it?
There are two different approaches to innovation that will soon be on vivid display at car dealerships near you. On one side is Obama government motors, taking massive amounts of taxpayer federal government bailouts; closing many non minority republican operated dealerships; and with a fedzilla subsidized R&D effort, GM has now released the Chevy Volt pricing. They have set the price at $41,000 but Obama is providing a $7500 tax credit towards the purchase which as many from “right blogistan”, including Maha Rushie, have said is a steep price for feeling morally superior. The Volt can run forty miles on li-ion batteries and then a little gas motor starts to regenerate the batteries. I am not clear on if this is forty miles at highway speed, stop and go, or town speed; four NFL lineman or one little old lady riding inside, but GM claims one out of four drivers drive less than forty miles a day. If that is true how often do they trade cars? If I only drove 40 miles a day my truck would last me a 13 years easily. My three year average is 54 miles a day.
To GMs way of thinking if you drive forty miles a day or less that is unlimited mileage and if you drive more then they claim the volt can achieve 240 mpg, but this is NOT an EPA rated number. Even with the 40 miles a day unlimited fuel mileage, it is not free. It just shifts the cost from the pump to the electric meter, however much that may be. And because of where we get our electricity from the Volt is not an electric powered car; it is a coal powered car. That aside, how many of our workplaces will jump to supply owners with free charging? Lastly, this is not a vehicle you simply plug into your house or the neighbors outdoor receptacle, it is 240 volt, meaning you have to have special service in your house for it. What of the city dwellers who park on the street or parking garage? How will that work? So there are several points of failure readily apparent in the Volt.
But what else can you get for your $30k? Across town is a Ford dealership which did not take federal bailout money and which has been making profit ever since. What is their approach to innovation? How about a v6 producing 300hp and with an EPA rating of 31mpg. Which is admittedly not unlimited or 240 but is legit and in a car the people will love. 300hp is more hp than most supercars of the eighties. The v6 mustang has better performance in every category than any standard v8 mustang ever. And it looks HAWT to boot, it might even help your ability to mate, well I guess the Volt might also…if you are into those kinds of people.
I contend that the Volt is not even as much of a game changer as a Prius. The Prius gets 40+- mpg and is run on proven technology. The Volt is a rehash of the early nineties GM EV1 which was also government funded and never gained any real customer support… in fact, they were all destroyed. No in order to be a game changer the car would have to a) plug into a standard outlet, b) cost the same as a Honda Accord, and c) go 100 miles on a charge. Then it would be a game changer. As it is now it is just another sure to fail concept, from a failing company, run by a failing administration, headed by a failed president.
-via my iPhone
July 27, 2010
To read the back stories go here:
Update: Costner's machines working "fantastic"
Actor Kevin Costner fought tooth and nail to get his centrifuge devices deployed in the Gulf to battle the ever-growing oil slick.
Now that some of the machines are in place, just how are they working?
"They're doing fantastic," said John Houghtaling, Costner's chief partner in the project. "The three that we have in the deep water are now processing 600,000 gallons per day...and those are just with three machines."
Houghtaling said that two other machines have been deployed in shallower waters.
According to Houghtaling, crews are working at a fever-pace to get the remaining 27 machines ordered by BP into action in the Gulf of Mexico.
UPDATE: Latest news on “A Whale”:
The verdict on the A Whale super oil skimmer is not yet in. Fifteen-foot waves in the Gulf are hampering Coast Guard tests of the 10-story-tall, 1,100-foot-long ship that started its journey to the Gulf oil spill as a "lightbulb moment" of inspiration for Taiwanese shipping magnate Nobu Su, its owner.
Though early tests of the ship's oil-collecting ability were inconclusive, spirits are reportedly running high among the 35-member crew maneuvering the A Whale near the Deepwater Horizon spill, where the oil is the thickest. Whether Mr. Su's mega ship gets hired by BP depends on the kind of oil-sucking efficiency the retrofitted iron ore tanker can demonstrate while working on a widely dispersed spill under less-than-ideal conditions.
The A Whale's capacity is said to be 300,000 barrels of oil (12.6 million gallons) collected in a 10-hour period, a 125-fold improvement over the next-largest skimmer working the spill. But that's a best-case scenario, experts say.
UPDATE: EVTN Receives Order to Trial its Underwater Voraxial Separator
LAUDERDALE, Fla., July 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ Enviro Voraxial Technology, Inc. (OTCBB: EVTN) today announced that it has received a purchase order to deploy the innovative, underwater version of EVTN's high volume Voraxial 4000 Separator. EVTN envisions its unique underwater design as the core technology for an advanced generation of skimmer vessels to facilitate the Gulf clean-up effort and to effectively protect the environment from future offshore oil spills. Other technologies that have been deployed in the Gulf followed a similar trial process
-yep, free market still functioning when allowed and government still doing it wrong…
July 26, 2010
Charles Sherrod, "Finally We Must Stop the White Man and his Uncle Toms from Stealing our Elections"
I chastised Andrew Breitbart in regards to the out of context nature of the 'chopped' Sherrod video that he released. So did two of my best friends in the fifth estate - Les Carpenter at Rational Nation and Dean at Beers With Demo. Raise your hand if you did as well.
So as a liberty-minded political blogger I quickly moved on from the story as the leftist press cabal heightened it into the end of the week to flex their Alinsky muscles.
Late to the party, cue Washington Post's E.J. Dionne today and his pathetic, nasea-inducing drivel calling for the Obamanation to 'stand up' to the 'right wing machine' and such.
Enough Right Wing Propaganda!, Dionne writes.
How utterly predictable. Useful idiots like Dionne want to keep the Sherrod meme alive (perhaps to excite the nutroots base, among other things) so I am forced to carry a new angle to the Sherrod story.
This time though it's Shirley Sherrod's husband, Charles Sherrod, not out of context and clearly radical, racist stuff. Dan Riehl took the 'google skills' out of the tool shed and uncovered a video that showing Charles Sherrod ranting that “finally we must stop the white man & his uncle toms from stealing our elections.”
Dan found some other juicy details as well so go here to read his article.
Cross posted to Left Coast Rebel.
July 23, 2010
(Editor's Note - LCR here, KOOK has invited me to post from time to time which I greatly appreciate. The following is a shameless, self-serving promotion eminent, be aware!)
I decided to do it and submit it. Big, shiny, million-reader Daily Caller intimidation be damned!
In about an hour and a half I wrote up a fairly decent opinion piece and then subsequently spent nearly two hours editing and re-editing the darn thing. It was a lot of work but I was proud of the final result. I've learned a lot writing so much in the last year and half and covering (typically with dismay and outrage) the body-politic around us.
So please pass along my first (of hopefully many) Daily Caller pieces, it's titled, "Ringing the bell at the top: Paging Chris Christie"
This post is simply fantastic, I have shortened it slightly, to read this excellent post and many others check out his blog...Telemachus
"But with respect to future debt; would it not be wise and just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt, than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 19 years?" -Thomas Jefferson, September 6, 1789
Maybe we should listen to Mr. Jefferson, don't you think?
Don’t read this post if you are not completely serious about reducing these gargantuan federal budget deficits and the national debt for us and our children before they do irreparable harm to our economy and nation.
Don't read this if you still believe that Santa Claus drops presents down the chimney at Christmastime; the Easter Bunny really lays Easter eggs or that we can: A) cut taxes a lot more AND B) not reduce spending or make major reforms to our entitlement programs and come out of this all right.
And please don’t read this if you think we can just spend whatever we want whenever we want without incurring some big-time consequences down the road as a nation.
Now that we have winnowed the audience down to perhaps a handful of responsible adults out there, let’s think honestly and openly about how we can get this thing solved once and for all. Then we can all go on about the rest of our lives without ever hearing anyone talk about the ‘federal budget deficit’ again. (Lord! Let It Be So!)
Just one final reminder of just how seriously incompetent we have been as a nation over the past 30 years:
We are the very first generation of American citizens (‘We’re #1!’ ‘We’re #1!) who have rung up such an enormous debt without fighting a major war to: gain our independence (1776-1781); keep our nation intact (1861-1865) or save the world from megalomaniacal madmen like Hitler (1941-45).
Even during the Great Depression, we ‘only’ ran up the national debt to 35% of a crashing GDP. We are now have a debt load at 80%+ of GDP…and still growing .
Here are some over-arching principles we would like to see going forward:
- Let’s take corrective actions today in one fell swoop and correct our fiscal imbalances…before the Chinese and Japanese stop buying our debt and force us to make these same decisions we need to make on our own without any foreign country dictating to us what to do.
- Let’s set a course of fiscal sanity that will last us not through the end of the next fiscal year, but through the whole century so our kids and grandkids can get a chance to ‘secure the blessings of liberty’ as promised to them in the Constitution.
- Let’s adopt an attitude that the federal government should be limited in scope and allow state and local governments to fund and administer programs tailored to their specific needs.
- Let’s return to the concept that federal assistance, in any form or manner, should be reserved to very narrow dictates of providing for the common defense; providing for some semblance of the common welfare for the nation as a whole, and helping to provide for people who really can not provide for their own selves or families for whatever physical, mental or sociological reason there might be.
- People who have the means and wherewithal to provide for themselves will not be included in any federal entitlement program going forward. The Founders never envisioned billionaires such as Warren Buffett or Bill Gates drawing a ‘measly’ $3000/month from Social Security or being subsidized to the tune of $12-15,000 per year for ‘mandatory’ Medicare Part B coverage like the average senior.
- Use the tax code to raise funds solely for the purpose of paying for federal programs we approve of and have in law, not to punish or advantage any one group of people versus another.
Actions to Take:
We don't like higher taxes any more than you do. But we fear continued accumulation of humongous and dangerous levels of national debt much more. Particularly when the real danger is compounding interest payments on the national debt when we know that the only direction for interest rates to go is 'up' from their near-zero levels of today. We are now spending close to 12% of our budget on net interest, or $400 billion in FY 2010.
- Establish a target of 19% of GDP for federal tax receipt in total (since that is what is has been close to for the past 30 years anyway)
- Delay the expiration of the Bush tax cuts under current law for one year. (Obama is going to veto any complete repeal of these tax cut expirations anyway so why not use it in some form of a deal?)
- Raise the eligibility age of SS and Medicare to 70 in 3-month increments starting in 2011. We could have SS at 70 by 2023 and Medicare at the same threshold by 2026. (if you don't let the Bush Tax Cuts expire, you might as well advocate raising both threshold ages to 80 tomorrow morning because you would have $3 Trillion more to cut in spending over the next decade)
- Transition to a consumption tax to replace, not augment, the current failed income/corporate/payroll/estate and excise tax system starting in 2016. (no income tax/no tax loopholes or deductions to protect. Pay taxes on what you buy and consume/No hindrance to saving and investing)
- Restore PAYGO; entitlement spending increases have to be offset by entitlement spending decreases elsewhere or tax hikes somewhere; tax cuts have to be offset by entitlement spending cuts and discretionary cuts for the duration of the tax cuts and their effect on baseline projections; discretionary spending hikes have to be offset by discretionary spending cuts elsewhere.
- Establish a hard cap on all discretionary spending, including defense and homeland security, for the next 5 years almost as if a CR (continuing resolution) were passed at the end of each fiscal year to keep funding at the previous year's levels.
- Get Congress take one 2-year session to analyze and evaluate every single federal program and decide which are working and which are not. And then produce a bill to eliminate all programs that are not working and fund the ones that are working at their minimum effective level.
- Pass a balanced budget amendment (with war/economic hardship exceptions) to the Constitution as Mr. Jefferson suggests above.
What happens 'when', not 'if', interest rates go to 5%, 7%, or 10%+? We will be looking at net interest payments of over $1 trillion...per year...forever.
Here's what we know about taxes: they can be raised or lowered by the legislative process in a new Congress every two years. So if they go up as a result of the Bush tax cuts expiring, they can be reduced one day when the deficits look like they are under control again.
But paying ever-escalating amounts of interest payments on a continually expanding debt can not be changed by legislative fiat. Once interest payments hit the 'tipping point' of out-running a nation's (or a business or an individual for that matter) ability to make the debt service payments, 'that is all she wrote' if you look at history even in a passing manner.
And we think that is a devastating possibility no one wants to even come close to messing with.
We didn't say this 'Compromise' was going to be 'easy' or 'a marginal step' or 'an iteration'; we said it was going to be 'massive' and it is. But it would have the greatest chance of returning our federal budget to balance in the shortest amount of time and prevent our children from desecrating our tombstones after we slip these mortal coils of earth.
Because if we don't do this, they will...and it will be deserved.
and that is all that needs said about that….
This is expanding on Opus6’s Post on MaInfo why she isn’t dancing in the streets…
The good news is…
By the War Planner
#1… the Democrat-socialists have dropped the holy grail of their neo-Bolshevik agenda and nobody's talking. It's called cap and trade and it's gone the way of the dodo, at least for now (Politico via Memeorandum):
“Senate Democrats pulled the plug on climate legislation Thursday, pushing the issue off into an uncertain future ahead of midterm elections where President Barack Obama’s party is girding for a drubbing.
Rather than a long-awaited measure capping greenhouse gases — or even a more limited bill directed only at electric utilities — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will move forward next week on a bipartisan energy-only bill that responds to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and contains other more popular energy items.”
So seriously, conservatives, libertarians and indies - you should be popping a cork on this news today, instead of chasing Sherrod-barbecuing-pomeranian-rumors.
WASHINGTON — After a nearly two-year investigation, a House investigative panel has found that Representative Charles B. Rangel probably violated a range of ethics rules, dealing a serious blow to Mr. Rangel, a Harlem Democrat, in the twilight of his political career.cares about honesty, transparency, ethics, trustworthiness and otherwise, (not to mention adherence to limited government and the Constitution) should be popping the cork on a top-shelf bottle of something tonight. Only in the Congress of the United States of America would it take 2 years to prove this:
The investigative subcommitee did not disclose any details about the nature of the violations that it found evidence, but one House official who has been briefed on the findings said that they included some of the most serious allegations that had been examined.
Now for the Bad News, and why we aren’t dancing in the streets…
What makes me think we are in big trouble?
The Health Care Law--
This thing took over 1/6 of our economy. We still don't know everything that is in it, but the more we see, the worse it gets.
How about Sec. 9006 which will require small businesses to submit 1099 forms for the purchase of any good or service over $600? And they claim to wonder why there are no jobs. This addition to the tax code may affect your ability to buy gold. FDR took all the gold in 1933; this regime is nudging you away from it.
The wannabe dictator signed this one yesterday at the Ronald Reagan Building. Nice thumb-in-the-eye there, Barack.
Check out my previous posts on the topic. Chris Dodd said of the bill, "It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done." and "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works."
National Popular Vote--
The folks over at NationalPopularVote.com sure want me to shut up about this. The organization's leaders have said, “When people complain that it’s an end run,” Dr. Koza said, “I just tell them, ‘Hey, an end run is a legal play in football.’ ’’ and "Barry Fadem, the campaign's president, believes the 20-25 states needed to control the Electoral College will adopt the compact before the 2012 election."
Internet Kill Switch--
The left already owns the media. Those of us who want to learn the real truth have to find it ourselves. Where do we look? The internet and Fox News. They are well on their way to giving the president the power to kill the internet for as long as six months!
Presidential Assassination Program--
The regime is defending their right to kill citizens off the battlefield for being suspected terrorists. What?
Attacks on Private Business--
From the auto industry to the oil industry to the fishing industry. American businesses are under attack. Despite Nancy Pelosi's views on unemployment benefits, there are no benefits if there are no employed people left to pay taxes. God help us when they get a climate bill passed!
Sounds benign doesn't it? This cancerous bill is an assault on the 1st Amendment and will basically ensure that only unions will be able to contribute to campaigns. Even the NRA sold out on this one.
If you were trying to push the government over the brink while buying yourself more voters, what better way than to stop enforcing the border and grant millions of illegals amnesty. This regime is going so far as to sue Arizona for trying to enforce the law and protect the border.
Infringe on the 2nd Amendment--
Obviously some of these things are going to tick off the populace, so better make sure that the little people are not able to defend themselves from tyranny. The 2nd amendment was upheld by a slim 5-4 margin this year. If you can't go through the Constitution, go around it with treaties and international law.
Stack the Courts--
Sotomayor, Kagan. Enough said.
Folks, this is after only 18 months and I am sure I am forgetting stuff that should be here (like the Wannabe ordering BP to pay). We have a lame duck congress we are going to have to contend with soon, and with an 11% approval rating, they ain't got nothin' to lose. I can only pray that most of this can be undone and undone before it is too late for the Republic.
I will take the good news, but there is still too much bad news for celebration just yet
July 21, 2010
Well, he has gotta piss with the pack. And when the pack is a group of ruthless, power mad, bad men hell bent on world domination, you better hope you can keep up. When you become a liability to the pack, you are own your own. Such is the lesson Al Gore is learning in recent weeks. Tip: if you are a two bit political figure with fading looks, limited intelligence and really, really limited likability factor, perhaps retiring and taking up an adjunct professor gig would have been a better long term plan. Sales pitch man for a really iffy, junk science based scam to pilfer a huge chunk of western wealth that is apt to be exposed is probably not a safe long term plan.
Two more massage therapists have come forward to expose Al's propensity for chakra healing, standing naked in their presence and asking for "additional services". It seems these latest requests were a little more clear than asking for simple chakra releasing. You have to admit, the unravelling of Al Gore is a little suspect.
I have to question the clarity of thought of the person who first said, "We need a pitch man, any ideas? How about failed presidential candidate and clear lunatic Al Gore?" Perhaps there were reasons we can only suspect. He was probably easily malleable, just corruptible enough and he did seem to have some sort of passion for this sort of anti-progress environmentalism. Having written a book on the topic in 1992, Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit, he had just enough knowledge on the subject to seem somewhat convincing and trainable in the newer areas of the sciences based on mankind destroying the earth.
And it worked for a while. He made a movie, people went and saw it and went to hear him speak. He won some awards. The fact that he was amassing wealth like a prohibition liquor distiller still didn't seem to dissuade most. He was jetting around the world, leaving a carbon wasteland in his tracks and still the awards and accolades kept coming. Last we knew, he was reaching billionaire status.
Then it all came tumbling down. Leaked emails from the East Anglia University revealed it was all based on faulty and manipulated data. Then emails surfaced showing cover ups were institutionalized to suppress these facts. Climate Gate, though never covered by the old media, put Al Gore's circus side show in jeopardy. He was being met with ridicule and taunts in airports in city after city. For a brief time, he was not making public appearances.
Here we are a few short months later and Chakra Gate emerges. Coincidence? We can only surmise. While I don't doubt he has engaged in this behavior, you have to question the timing.
July 20, 2010
Ofcourse, the only motivation for Player Two to reject the offer is to punish Player One. It is also in Player Two's best interest to accept whatever sum is offered him, knowing he will receive nothing if he does not. Surprisingly, most offers resulted in about half of them money with cooperation and mutual benefit being the outcome.
Now, what gets really interesting and should help you destroy any argument any Marxist can muster is the results where the game was played with fifteen varying tribal societies. The societies that were most closed off, less engaged in trade and more advanced economic systems were the least generous and rational about the outcome.
Machiguerna (slash and burn) farmers from the Amazon averaged just 15% give away. And nearly all would be recipients rejected the offer.1
Players most integrated in modern markets such as the Orma Nomads from Kenya or the Achuar subsistence gardeners of Ecuador offered up nearly half, similar to their western counter parts.
What can we take from this game? That self interest raises all boats. Trade and commerce based on mutual self interest results in more generosity and the more people have access to these ideas and their results, the more people will prosper and work in cooperation. Self interest was the motivating force in the cases were the people gave more, not altruism.
1. Matt Ridley, The Rational Optimist-How Prosperity Evolves (New York: Harper Collins, 2010) 87-88
Tonight on The Rachel Maddow Show[to Ezra Klein]:
“On the issue of deficits do-does the base, either, as articulated, through the tea party movement, or not, care enough about deficits that proposals like Marco Rubio’s, like all of these other, er ah um ah, candidates who are proposing BIG TAX CUTS WITHOUTH PAYING FOR THEM…”
[insert furious profanity filled arm flailing rage here] WTF?! Paying for what….So, the government could not possibly function with out all of the current taxes we have levied against us as of right now? We would run up the deficit if we didn’t pay for a tax cut….a “paid for” tax cut is NOT AN EFFIN’ TAX CUT!!! It is a….what in good gravy’s name would you call that?!? It’s a shift, a tax shift from one group or business to another. To “cut” implies some sort of removal, not exchange. An exchange would result in no real cut at all.
This is some sort of “Freudian Admission”,(I think I made up a new phrase) where people who are incredibly ignorant of reality say something that to them is non-controversial and perfectly logical which spins rational knowledgeable logical humans off in apoplectic fits of slack jawed rage. They do this all the time.
For a person who has a freaking PhD in Political Science this is utter willfull denial of all rational political reality, as proven by history. Raising taxes while simultaneously increasing spending, no matter what group you shift the weight of the tax burden to, will a) LOWER actual revenue, and b) increase the deficit.
No, Maddow, and all her cohorts, are in complete denial of the Laffer Curve, and History.
According to their theory of how the world works, you can NEVER reduce government spending, unless it is on the Military, and you can NEVER actually lower the effective tax rate across the board, and yet they somehow think that by raising taxes and raising spending we can lower the deficit. Which of course, you know, you could, if you could remove human nature and incentive from the equation.
But here in the real world the only way to reduce the deficit is to simultaneously reduce SPENDING and raise Revenue…which history has proven to be accomplished by lowering the tax rate below the tipping point as illustrated by the Laffer Curve. It seems to me that the T.E.A party movement is all about tax and spending cuts. Cut Spending and Cut Taxes, or you know, Reaganomics.
Well, I got that out of my system,
I guess I should add a post script to explain who this mystery guest blogger is: I am the cousin of the KOOK
July 19, 2010
Remember back when ObamaCare collectivism was being debated? Recall that the"One", and his Democrat minions, declared that the mandate to purchase health care was not a tax? Surprise! Now that the progressive collectivist have won another for the books they are switching the tune.Rational Nation USA
The Obama administration is now declaring in open court the mandate requiring an individual to purchase health insurance, scheduled to take effect in 2014, is simply an exercise of the government's "power to lay and collect taxes." In addition, their belief is that this power exceeds even the federal government power to regulate interstate commerce.
In a brief filed by the Justice Department in response to the challenges in court by over twenty states ans several private concerns the Obama administration take the position the mandate to purchase health care coverage is "a valid exercise" of Congress's power to impose taxes. The department said the Congress can use its taxing power "even for purposes that would exceed its power under other provisions" of the Constitution.
Here is what Obama had to say earlier during the debates over collectivist ObamaCare in an interview with G. Stephanopoulos on ABC's program "This Week."
"For us to say that you've got to take responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase." When Mr. Stephanopoulos stated, referring to a dictionary, the mandate appeared to fit the definition of a tax the President replied, "I absolutely reject that notion."
Okay, first it was not a tax. Now that the collectivist Obamacare is law it is suddenly a tax the Congress has every right and power to levy. Whew, I guess when you are "Obama the One" your only principle need be one that furthers your agenda. Even if that means being disingenuous or down right dishonest
I don't know if I am correct here. But I am certainly seeing the dark shadow of increasing statist progressive collectivism and it's belief that the tax payers money is the really the governments and therefor they have the right and power to tax whatever the H they so determine is appropriate.
Read the full content of the article in Money & Policy...The New York Times.
Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel.
Now… How does social Security factor in? Because they did the SAME THING before. It was “insurance” when being sold to the american people…until people who were philosophically against insurance spoke up…then it was a tax. It is Insurance when convenient and a Tax when necessary… Read my old post here, snippets of which are below.
“When the bill we call Social Security (OASDI) was first introduced in 1935 it was full of all kinds of Insurance jargon, and it was explained as an Insurance policy, by none other than FDR himself. Why? Well, during the Depression most financial institutions failed, which is why the FDIC was created. Insurance companies were by and large spared from collapse, and most folks trusted them. Also, culturally in 1935 people were against “relief” as welfare was called.”
“BUT, during the the final days of the debate on the bill, the insurance language was downplayed because Congress was afraid that the Supreme Court would declare it unconstitutional as the Constitution had no provision for the Government to run an insurance program. (Oh, for the days when the supreme court could be trusted to do the right thing). So during the passage the tax collecting part and the insurance parts were separated. This is KEY because you need to understand there is nothing binding the two together.”So once again, history is repeating itself with the O-ministration copying the FDR playbook. This is how Obamacare will always work…“no contractual obligation exists on the part of the Government and no contractual right of a beneficiary could coexist with this reservation of power”
The Government stated in its defense that OASDI was
“in no sense a federally adminstered ‘insurance’ under which a worker pays premiums over the years and acquires at retirement…a right to receive…a fixed monthly benefit IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT CONGRESS HAS CHOSEN TO IMPOSE FROM TIME TO TIME…the ‘contribution’ exacted under [the plan] from an employee…IS A TRUE TAX…it is NOT COMPARABLE to an [insurance premium]…” AND “no contractual obligation exists on the part of the Government and no contractual right of a beneficiary could coexist with this reservation of power”
Think about that… They will not need to ration care because there will not be a contractual obligation OF CARE. Remember; IT IS NOW A TAX.
July 16, 2010
Awesome Analysis of the Obamanation by the Left Coast Rebel
I was just over at ProofPositive and caught a post by Andrew Roman (guesting for the Proof) that absolutely hit the ball out of the park.
Well written, concise and absolutely correct. Andrew writes:
That felt good reading that again. Andrew says it better than perhaps I even could, perhaps as well in conflict to Charles Krauthammer's piece today in the Washington Post.
Barack Hussein Obama is a dulcet-toned sponge swollen with leftist rhetoric, knee-jerk anti-capitalist blather, and university-cultivated hyperbole. He is a man who hasn’t a clue about much of anything beyond the campus brain-clutter that keeps his political base (somewhat) satisfied and his teleprompter in business.
He is a polished appetizer-platter of meaningless Vietnam-era clichés. He is a messiah in a world contrived in his mind that neither asked for him nor needs him.
His responses to critical questions reveal a man who is in over his head - a man spinning his wheels in campaign-mode mud - without the ability to be particularly thoughtful or substantive.
He is a man who has contempt for liberty and rugged individualism.
He almost always sounds foolish.
And America continues to pay the price.
No, dear friends, he isn't brilliant.
Rather, he's ignorant and way out of his league.
Exit question - why do many among us take the bait that the Obamanation is so brilliant? Like Andrew, I highly disagree
-KOOK says: while I totally agree with this assessment of the man, and I mean to the point that I feel this should be on Obama’s wiki page…and in textbooks for its accuracy and exactness of connotation; Obama is the product of a Machine and a Method. This Machine & Method has been working towards this 4 years for a long, long, time…the Machine and the Method put him where he is; he is just the figurehead. He is a true believing ideologue of the progressive academian 60’s hippie radical race baiting capitalist hating machine. They could put any smooth talking, decent looking (or so I am told), teleprompter reader in his spot. He is the Berkeley-Churian candidate.
There are really only three ways for a person to generate income for themselves. Obviously the easiest way is to inherit it (and the government is seeing to it that practice is harder and harder to achieve). A very small percentage of people inherit enough wealth to eliminate the need for further income. The second way is the one most would recognize and that is to actually work for it, either through self employment or in someone elses employ. The third way is to capture more of what others produce. This could be through illegal means or legal means. More and more the District of Criminals seems like a wealth creation program for politicians, lawyers, and lobbyists, a profit center for professionals who are in business for themselves. And we see this throughout history, specifically the history of the progressive movement. Regulation in the name of protecting consumers almost uniformly hurts small producers, helps big business, hurts consumers, damages taxpayers, and make politicians more powerful and ultimately more wealthy.
This dodd-frank financial regulation bill is no different. Never mind the insanity of actually listeneing to either dudd or fwank on anything; it will hurt and probably further eliminate the small town banks, make billions for lawyers litigating all the new regs, put money into the politicians who will sooner or later get kickbacks for the beneficiaries of the new regs. And ultimately hurt the little guy.
It is simply another way to swell the size of government make the rich richer and the poor, poorer.
July 15, 2010
Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel
#4 Ronald Reagan – Ronaldus Magnus is without a doubt my personal favorite president and it is with great difficulty I do not put him closer to #1 in this list. He defeated what was arguably our mightiest foe in our short history and he did so without firing a shot while encouraging many of the wonderful technological advances we enjoy today through his push for space supremacy. Reviled by the press, he nonetheless spoke directly to the hearts of the American people. That ability and his wit and charm lead to the biggest electoral landslide in history. He understood the fight we would be in for the hearts and minds of our children’s children. He is the father of modern conservatism. Despite the smear jobs of liberal historians and the press will say, he was extremely well read and supremely knowledgeable of the issues and history. One of his main advantages was that he was nearly always underestimated because of his looks, age, or because of his sense of humor. In my mind, when I picture the President of the United States he is who I suspect I will always see. There is simply no comparison to any president who has come since, and many who came before. I would support cloning if it meant bringing him back. I would like to dynamite Roosevelt’s face right off of Rushmore and put Reagan there.
#3 Abraham Lincoln - warned the South in his inaugural address “in your hands my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of Civil War. The government will not assail you…you have not an oath registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to preserve, protect, and defend it.” After defeating the Confederacy the enemy combatants were for the most part pardoned, the President encouraged southerners to lay down their arms and join speedily in re-union. Reconstruction would likely have been vastly different had Lincoln not been assassinated, in his second inaugural address he said: “With malice toward none, with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nations wounds…” His assassination turned reconstruction into the military occupation and subjugation of the South…creating more wounds instead of healing them…the assassination…not his presidency. I learn and adjust my positions when I am wrong. I have learned much in the last year regarding the civil war, Lincoln helped fulfill the promise of the founding. That being said, I am still not sure it is illegal for states to secede.
#2 Thomas Jefferson - “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man” Jefferson took that oath literally. After the wars and crisis in France passed he reduced the armed forces, cut the budget, eliminated the onerous whiskey tax, and reduced the debt by third. He sent the marines to whip up on the Barbary Pirates harassing shipping in the Med , Responsible for the Louisiana purchase. Sent Louis And Clark on the Voyage of Discovery to map our territory, an endeavor very literally equal to the Moonshot in its audacity for the time.
For the rest of the countdowns:
July 14, 2010
First up, Michelle Obama talking to the NAA(L)CP, In Kansas City yesterday, she tells them that they need to intensify their efforts… and Rush asked an excellent (of course) question…whom do they need to intensify their efforts AGAINST? Who is holding them back, who has their boot on their neck now?
“And we’re working to reauthorize our child nutrition legislation that will make significant new investments to revamp our school meals and improve the food that we offer in those school vending machines, so that we’re serving our kids less sugar, salt and fat, and more vegetables, fruits and whole grains….
…How about replacing all of that soda and those sugary drinks with water? (Applause.) Kids won’t like it at first, trust me. But they’ll grow to like it. Or deciding that they don’t get dessert with every meal. As I tell my kids, dessert is not a right. (Laughter.) Or they don’t get it every day.”
Doesn’t that just sum up the entire Administration’s view of how they feel toward the American people? “They won’t like it at first, but they will learn to like it.” It is similar to the reason so many of us do not like Obamacare, according to Obama, it is because ‘we don’t understand it, but once he explains it, we will like it…or learn to like it’
And I heard again today where in the UK they are evaluating restrictions on what parents can send to school in sack lunches for the same reason…kids are fat. Another thing that is apparently becoming more common is the schools feeding the kids three times a day. Just how far are they from the state raising their kids completely?
Next up, At first when I heard the story I thought they meant the City was taking a stand against Cocaine…and I thought “good for them”, but no, they are taking a stand against Coca Cola; the moonbat mayor of San Freakcisco …has outlawed those same sugary beverages Mobacca is against in all vending machines on public property. I just find this terribly funny in a city where 74% of voters are apparently in favor of legalizing marijuana. So you can smoke grass at city hall, but stay away from the coca cola….
Imagine getting the shakedown in by the SFPD for walking down the street smoking a doobie and drinking a Mtn Dew in two years…and getting the Mtn Dew confiscated… ! HA, talk about a no win situation, smoke all the weed you want but stay away from the fattening doritos…I guess carrot sticks will have to curb the munchies.
So once again, we are learning it is still acceptable to hate on at least one group left…big fat fatties like me.
my list of worst presidents of all time, yesterday I shared with you my picks for Best Presidents of All Time numbers 10 through 8, today I bring you my selections for 7 through 5th.
#7 John F. Kennedy – yes he was a womanizer, yes he was a product of an enormous and vicious political machine not seen the likes of again until the Clintons. Yes he and Bobby were behind the disaster at the “bay of pigs” and probably were detrimental to Marilyn Monroe’s health. Yes he picked as VP the man who would expand welfare beyond all reasonable limits and totally screw up Vietnam…But I can’t help it. Unlike Chairman Zero he really did inspire people. One of the greatest quotes of the 20th century “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” one of the few democrat Presidents to believe in cutting taxes, bringing about a time of prosperity not rivaled since the end of WWII. Championed equal rights legislation (against the democrats in congress). His vision put a man on the moon, the beginning of the end of the USSR. Did successfully keep the planet out of annihilation during the Cuban missile crisis. His strong stance against the Commies in Berlin forced Moscow to ease its pressure on central Europe. I would take him back in a second if I could trade him for Chairman Zero. But I am prepared to take the heat for this pick.
#6 James Madison – The Father of the Constitution, wrote many of the Federalist Papers, helped frame the bill of rights. Presided over the war of 1812 – our second war of independence. This put the US on track to become a real player on the world stage. Foresaw what would happen if things did not change regarding the southern states and civil war. Ranking him #6 will probably be controversial, but I would rank him very near #1 as our leading Founder.
#5 Calvin Coolidge – Became President upon the death of Warren Harding of a heart attack. Alfred E. Smith, a Democrat, said Coolidge was “distinguished for character more than for heroic achievement. His great task was to restore the dignity and prestige of the presidency when it had reached the lowest ebb in our history…in a time of extravagance and waste".” If that is not a glowing endorsement and a prescription for what we will need in 2012 I do not know what is. Dubbed Silent Cal, because he was very stoic and did not waste words, many thought of him as lazy. He refused to speak on the telephone as president. He believed that meddling was the worst thing a president could do, realizing that most issues resolve themselves. He refused to use federal power to meddle with agriculture and industry. He was a believer in cutting taxes on farmers and producers. 1924 was a time known in the day as the “Coolidge Prosperity” Walter Lippman said Coolidge’s political genius was a talent for doing effectively doing nothing “this active inactivity suits the mood and the needs of the country admirably. It suits all those who have become convinced that government in this country has become dangerously complicated and top heavy.” whew…that is conservative porn right there! Following the Presidencies of Wilson and Harding his level of Character, Honesty, and total disdain for social experimentation and government intrusion would have been fresh air indeed. He lowered the debt nearly 25% while in office from 22 Billion to 17 billion. Federal expenditures (budget) of $5.1 billion in 1921 were reduced to $3.3 billion in 1929. He Cut taxes four out of his six years as president. The effective tax rate on the wealthy was 50 percent (1922) and he reduced it to 20 percent. Causing revenue from that tax bracket to rise from $77 million to $230 million.
In a typical display of his famed candor and frugality of words he issued his most famous statement while on vacation in the Black hills stating, “I do not choose to run for President in 1928”
Once again, a man who would have been easily re-elected, choosing to give up the power without struggle.
Have a differing opinion on this list? Who would you have put here? What is your guess for my Top 4?
Next up…The top 4
July 13, 2010
Cross Posted at Left Coast Rebel
So a few days ago I posted my list of 10 Worst Presidents of all Time, I was prompted to do this because of the recent publishing of a ranking of the presidents by someone in the Legacy Obama Echo Chamber media. THAT list was pretty much upside down and inside out, so I thought I would make my own list. You will notice that in my list character and personal honor may take a higher position than some miraculous political achievement, and that is totally by design.
#10 [Tie] two one term presidents (by choice) are tied for #10 To have the power of the Presidency and voluntarily give it up speaks to a man’s character and that is one reason I put these two on the list. One shaped our boundaries in the west. (a blessing and a curse), and the other had undeniable character and a vision for the panama canal.
Polk - was a workaholic who worked long hours. He was elected to the House of Representatives and became Jackson's floor leader in the fight against the National Bank. His term as President was 1845-1849. Polk achieved his four major objectives - the acquisition of California, the settlement of the Oregon question, the reduction of the tariff, and the establishment of the independent treasury. Polk had announced before taking office that he would not seek a second term, a promise he kept.
Hayes – Accepted the nomination for House of Representatives but refused to campaign because he was still commissioned and on active duty in the military. Won the Presidency in an election that seemed to be replayed in 2000. Hayes insisted that all political appointments be based on merit and made his advisors rotate posts so that they did not become complacent. Hayes never planned to run for a second term in office and retired in 1881. He spent the rest of his life devoted to causes of importance to him such as providing scholarships to African Americans and encouraging temperance. He believed in and proposed civil service reform measures. Further, he set down a policy that would eventually lead to the development of the Panama Canal.
#9 Truman – Did not even want to be vice-President, telling FDR’s man to “go to hell, I am for Jimmy Byrne” later was convinced to take it. When FDR died he said, “Boys, if you ever pray, pray for me now. ... When they told me what had happened, I felt like the moon, the stars, and all the planets had fallen on me. I've got the most terribly responsible job a man ever had." George Will called Truman the last great leader the nation has had. As president at a most crucial period in the nation's history, it fell to him to make decisions that would determine the shape of events, both at home and abroad, for the next half-century. He set the course not only for the Free World's resistance to the march of communism, but for the resurgence of Western Europe. His policies laid the foundation for the recovery of Germany and Japan and the integration of Europe. Truman insisted that atomic power should serve the ends of peace and not only war. He took the first steps toward re-integration of the races in the military after Woodrow Wilson segregated them. Maybe one of the most humble presidents we have had, especially in the 20th century.
#8 Eisenhower –Ike understood the battle that would shape the twentieth and, so far, the 21st century: “Now we face a battle to extinction. … Our form of government is under deadly, persistent, and constant attack.” He warned friends about liberals who “would merely advance us one more step toward total socialism, just beyond which lies total dictatorship.” It was time, he proclaimed, to “combat remorselessly all those paternalistic and collectivistic ideas" that would eventually cause "the collapse of self-government.” Eisenhower was the first Cold Warrior, and he understood that the ideological war was very real. In 1953, Eisenhower brought all these views with him into the White House. His first inaugural address set the tone: “Forces of good and evil are massed and armed and opposed as rarely before in history.…Freedom is pitted against slavery; lightness against the dark.” To the end of his presidency, his basic message never changed. Midway through his second term, he was still warning that “the menace of communist imperialism” had “almost unlimited power.” “Peace, national safety—survival itself—demand of America strength in its every aspect.” Yep ,“I like Ike”
How am I doing so far?
Stay tuned for the rest of the list…
July 12, 2010
Socialism, Social Justice, and Collectivist Redistribution schemes only work because the Statist/Collectivist/Socialist/Communist etc. is able to convince people that they cannot make it in the Free Market, Liberty and Freedom loving system that we (used to?) have. But there has never been a wealth creation machine better than our (old?) system. As an aside, I picked Cosby because it is his birthday today.
Bill Cosby, born July 12, 1937, and raised in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He is one of four sons born to Anna Pearl (née Hite), a maid, and William Henry Cosby, Sr., a sailor in the U.S. Navy. During much of his early childhood, Cosby's father was away in the U.S. armed forces during World War II.
As a student, he described himself as a class clown. But he was a devoted athlete, was the captain of the baseball and track and field teams at his elementary school in Philadelphia and was also class president. In Junior High, Cosby began acting in plays as well as continuing his devotion to sports. He went to Central High School, but in addition to the sports, Cosby was working before and after school selling produce, shining shoes, and stocking shelves at a supermarket to help the family. He failed the tenth grade and instead of repeating the 10th grade he dropped out…
…In our collectivist narrative this is where the story would start to play sad music, young Cosby would be forced into gangs and violence, a rich capitalist would be found to blame, and Cosby would have either died of a drug OD, or from Gang violence; living in the projects and on the government dole. Just more glaring proof that what we need around here is more redistribution of wealth. Some Social Justice…
He got a job as an apprentice at a shoe repair shop which he liked, but could not see himself doing it the rest of his life. After deciding the life of a cobbler was not for him he joined the Navy. While serving in the Navy, Cosby worked in physical therapy with seriously injured Korean War vets. This helped refocus his priorities. He soon realized the need for an education and finished his equivalency diploma via correspondence courses.
WHAT? he finished school?!
He won a track and field scholarship to Philadelphia's Temple University in 1961-62, and studied physical education while running track and playing fullback on the football team. Cosby also joined the school's chapter of the Omega Psi Phi fraternity.
HE WENT TO COLLEGE?
Even as he progressed through his undergraduate studies, Cosby had continued to hone his talent for humor. When he began bar tending at a club in Philadelphia, he became fully aware of his ability to make people laugh. He worked his customers and saw his tips increase, then ventured on to the stage.
Cosby left Temple to pursue a career in comedy, and in 1963, he received national exposure on NBC's The Tonight Show. He went on to release Bill Cosby Is a Very Funny Fellow...Right!, the first of a series of popular comedy albums in 1964.
DROPPED OUT OF SCHOOL AGAIN?
In 1965, when he was cast alongside Robert Culp in the I Spy adventure series, Cosby became the first African-American co-star in a dramatic television series, and NBC became the first to present such a series. I Spy finished among the twenty most-watched shows that year, and Cosby would be honored with three consecutive Emmy Awards for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series. Cosby went on tot become a regular guest host on The Tonight Show.
He returned with another series in 1969, The Bill Cosby Show, a situation comedy that ran for two seasons. While only a modest critical success, the show was a ratings hit, finishing eleventh in its first season. Still the show was cancelled.
HE MET WITH SOME MORE FAILURE… And:
After The Bill Cosby Show left the air, Cosby returned to his education. He began graduate work at the University of Massachusetts, qualifying under a special program that allowed for the admission of students who had not completed their bachelor's degrees, but who had had a significant impact on society through their careers. This professional interest led to his involvement in the PBS series The Electric Company, for which he recorded several segments teaching reading skills to young children.
WENT BACK TO SCHOOL?
In 1972, Cosby received a Masters degree from the University of Massachusetts and was also back in prime time with a variety series, The New Bill Cosby Show. However, this time he met with poor ratings, and the show lasted only a season.
FAILED AGAIN….and then….
He was much more successful with the Saturday morning show, Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids. Cosby received his Doctorate in 1976 from the University of Massachusetts. Temple University, where Cosby had begun but never finished, would grant him his bachelor's degree on the basis of "life experience".
During the 1970s, Cosby, made some successful comedy films that countered the violent "blaxploitation" films of the era. However, much of his work could be considered failures such as: Mother, Jugs & Speed (1976) ; A Piece of the Action; and California Suite. In addition, Cos (1976) an hour-long variety show featuring puppets, sketches, and musical numbers, was canceled inside of a year.
Cosby's greatest television success came in September, 1984 with the debut of The Cosby Show. The program aired weekly on NBC and went on to become the highest ranking sitcom of all time. The Cosby Show was unprecedented in its portrayal of an intelligent, affluent, nonstereotypical African-American family.
The Cosby Show is one of only two American programs that have been #1 in the Nielsen ratings for five consecutive seasons. Cosby, always outspoken for his views on the decay of what he considers black culture, the breakup of the black family, people not taking responsibility for themselves, etc., came under sharp criticism for His Pound Cake speech. He was largely unapologetic for his stance when he made similar remarks during a speech in a July 1 meeting commemorating the anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. He further described those who he felt needed help as "blacks [who] had forgotten the sacrifices of those in the Civil Rights Movement." Cornel West defended Cosby and his remarks, saying, "[H]e's speaking out of great compassion and trying to get folk to get on the right track, 'cause we've got some brothers and sisters who are not doing the right things, just like in times in our own lives, we don't do the right thing.”
So from the son of a maid and a Navy fighting man, shoe shine boy, high school dropout…To a college educated, critically acclaimed, wildly successful, multi millionaire ($400m+ est.)… He wasn’t born rich, he was not a great student, no foreign benefactors(cough)….but he made it in the USA
Of course, he was also a failure many times.