Genesis of the "NO" Logo
The “O” within the circle represents collectivism in its various forms. The “N” represents an emphatic repudiation of collectivism. The red, white and blue circles encompassing the “NO” are emblematic of our Republic. It is the responsibility of the individuals in an engaged and enlightened republic to limit the influence of the government, especially one that attempts to wield power outside the boundaries delineated by the Constitution.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Memorial Day - Honoring our Warriors, Surrendering our Civilization
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Bernanke's Economic Time Bomb
Thought for the Day
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Biblical perspective on wealth redistribution
Anyone who wants to speculate on what Jesus might or might not cut from the federal budget needs to begin that conversation by reading the Tenth Commandment: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” Most commandments condemn actions; this one condemns thoughts. Coveting what our neighbor has is bad for us because envy leads to theft and strife rather than working in unity to achieve common goals and mutual success. In other words, class warfare is unbiblical.
In any case, most millionaires, as Dan Henninger of the Wall Street Journal reminds us, are very grateful and generous with their wealth. In 2007, according to the Center on Philanthropy and Wealth at Boston College, “households with $1 million or more in net worth gave 52% [of all money given away in the U. S.], or $126.15 billion.” This lavish giving helps support (according to the IRS) 110,000 grant-giving private foundations in America. And this benevolence extends to stray animals, wounded veterans, distressed college students, and many causes, major and minor. People want to help people–and that help often comes when someone gets rich through a new invention, or just hard work.
When some politicians, using Jesus’ name, campaign to take money forcibly from the rich to give to the poor they are saying that politicians know better how to spend money than the people from whom the money is taken. Just to take one example, in 1932 politicians took $300 million in tax dollars to set up the Emergency Relief Administration–the first direct welfare program in U. S. history. How did the politicians decide to distribute the tax dollars received? Illinois, a swing state, received more than $55 million. Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Nebraska, all of which tended back then to be Republican states, all received zero dollars. Thus, Massachusetts had to raise money to support its own unemployed people as well as giving tax dollars to support Illinois.
If we could cut most of the social programs from the federal budget, we would be returning money to Americans. And some of that money would go to strengthening our private charities and toward one-to-one giving–which benefits givers and receivers alike. That sounds much more like something Jesus would do rather than asking rich people to further support a bloated federal bureaucracy that sends regular checks to politically influential groups of middle-class and poor voters. Burt Folsom
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Twelve Truths about Legislation
2) Any law that is so difficult to pass it requires the citizens be assured it will not be a stepping stone to worse laws will in fact be a stepping stone to worse laws.
3) Any law that requires the citizens be assured the law does not mean what the citizens fear, means exactly what the citizens fear.
4) Any law passed in a good cause will be interpreted to apply to causes against the wishes of the people.
5) Any law enacted to help any one group will be applied to harm people not in that group.
6) Everything the government says will never happen will happen.
7) What the government says it could not foresee, the government has planned for.
8) When there is a budget shortfall to cover non-essential government services the citizens will be given the choice between higher taxes or the loss of essential government services.
9) Should the citizens mount a successful effort to stop a piece of legislation the same legislation will be passed under a different name.
10) All deprivations of freedom and choice will be increased rather than reversed.
11) Any government that has to build safeguards into a law so that it will not be abused is providing guidelines for abusing the law without violating it.
12) Any legislator up for re-election will vote against a bad law if and only if there are enough other votes to pass it.