Turns Out, It Doesn’t Take a Village

From Physorg:

“In the African villages that I study in Mali, children fare as well in nuclear families as they do in extended families,” said U-M researcher Beverly Strassmann, professor of anthropology and faculty associate at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR). “There’s a naïve belief that villages raise children communally, when in reality children are raised by their own families and their survival depends critically on the survival of their mothers.”…

Only in modern, liberal times can it require a study to find out that families raise children and do just fine with it.  Sorry, Hillary, but we don’t actually need a “village” populated with Department of Education and Health and Human Services bureaucrats…

All government policies must be directed towards this end:  making it possible for one man and one women to raise their children as they see fit.  If it helps in that task, it is good and must be done…if it harms that effort, it must be stopped.

HAT TIPInstapundit

Hatch: Who Wrote the SEIU Goon Handbook?

Senator Hatch’s press release:

U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) today wrote to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member and former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) official Craig Becker to inquire about his involvement in union intimidation efforts. The letter sent to Becker comes after the SEIU’s “Contract Campaign Manual” was made public. The handbook tells union members to purposefully try to damage their employers’ reputations by coming up with allegations against their employers and managers and to even break the law to gain leverage in contract negotiations.

In the letter, Hatch writes that, “the manual explicitly advises union members to engage in tactics designed to attack the reputation of an employer as well as its managers and to purposefully damage an employer’s relationship with vendors and customers.  In addition, it advises employees to uncover “dirt” on management officials and publicize the information in order to obtain leverage in contract negotiations.  The manual even goes so far as to encourage union members to disobey certain laws when it serves the union’s purposes.”…

As a matter of free speech, you can write all the books on how to be a union thug you like – but who writes the thuggery how-to books is a matter of public interest.  Did Becker write it?  If not, then who?  Inquiring minds want to know…

As the unions become ever more irrelevant to the average, American worker they do appear to becoming more desperate in their tactics.  Remember, when you intimidate an employer you are also intimidating employees…if you are willing to smash the property of a corporation which can call upon financial resources to fight back, imagine what effect that will have on individual workers who have no such resources?  Essentially, the unions are trying to scare everyone – to prevent anyone from challenging the unions.  And that works out to a prohibition against challenging the union bosses, who often don’t act as if they give a fig for the cares of workers.

Finding out who wrote this manual is a good, first step in trying to curb this intimidation…and to call unions back to their duty.  A union dedicated to representing the legitimate interests of workers who voluntarily belong to the union is  good thing…but a union dedicated to advancing the cause of a particular party and keeping the bosses rolling in wealth, that is another mater, entirely.

Attack on US Embassy in Kabul

From the Wall Street Journal:

Insurgents staged a series of attacks across Kabul on Tuesday, with rocket-propelled grenades, gunfire and suicide bombers targeting the U.S. Embassy, in one of the most brazen Taliban assaults on the Afghan capital.

A spokesman for Kabul police said the Taliban first struck the U.S. and other embassies, then launched assaults at several other targets in the city, including suicide-bomber attacks on a traffic-control office and on a high school. A school bus also was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade, wounding several young children. Police rushed to the scene to unload bloodied children from the damaged bus…

Savages to the end – and  the reason why, no matter how long and hard the fight is, we can’t withdraw…not until at least a semblance of stability is built in to the Afghan regime.  We can’t set a time limit on this – though we can, as time goes on, likely use ever fewer US troops as the Afghan forces become more capable.

Trust me on this, I’m tired of it, too – and I bet the troops are even more tired of it.  But to quit is to turn the people of Afghanistan over to beasts in human skin.  We can’t, with honor, do that.

Columbia Students to Dine With Iranian Tyrant

From CBS News:

A group of Columbia University students are expected to have dinner with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad next week in Midtown.

According to the Columbia Spectator, the school’s newspaper, as many as 15 members of the Columbia International Relations Council and Association were invited.

CIRCA vice president of academics, Tim Chan, told the paper the Sept. 21 meeting is still tentative and none of the members expressed any reservations about breaking bread with the controversial Iranian leader…

Gotta love MSM reporting…”controversial Iranian leader”.  Yeah, like Genghis Khan was just “controversial” rather than, more accurately, a “pestilence”.

But, that aside, here we have a prime example of the lack of education which goes on in our schools – no one with any knowledge of the world would bother to sit down with Ahmadinejad who, by word and action, has long ago proved he brings no truth or wisdom to the public square.  Ahmadinejad is someone to be fended off until such time as he can be removed from power or destroyed.  He is not someone fit for dinner dates…but here come the elite of the elite of Columbia University acting worse than the veriest simpleton out there…having dinner with a dictator.  What’s next?  Lunch with a famed rapist?

HAT TIPAlan Stock

A Doomed Ponzi Scheme

From CNS:

There were only 1.75 full-time private-sector workers in the United States last year for each person receiving benefits from Social Security, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Social Security board of trustees.

That means that for each husband and wife who worked full-time in the private sector last year there was a Social Security recipient somewhere in the country taking benefits from the federal government…

This cannot be sustained – even when you throw in government workers (who are paid out of tax dollars, of course) you still don’t get enough total workers paying in to support those who are taking out.  You probably have to get to at least 4 total workers for each beneficiary for it to be financially stable; and likely 5 or 6 private sector workers per beneficiary.  And it is only going to get worse – even after the Boomers all retire and start to exit the system via death, our rapidly declining birth rate ensures there will be no significant improvement in the worker/retiree ratio.

A Ponzi scheme, just to clarify it for our liberals, is a system where early beneficiaries are paid out handsomely from the proceeds of later entrants.  It all works well until you stop getting enough new people to sustain the generous payouts.  Social Security was first implemented when most people only lived a few years beyond 65 and there were a couple dozen workers for each retiree.  Now we live past 80 as often as not and there are less than 2 workers for each retiree.  This a classic example of a Ponzi scheme…and it is failing just like any other Ponzi scheme.

To be sure, Social Security is too deeply ingrained in American life to be easily or quickly done away with…but it must be deeply reformed just to ensure that older people can get retirement pay and younger people can build up independent means of retirement.  The time to do it was, of course, after the 2004 election…but a combination of Democrats wanting a campaign issue and Republicans who lacked backbone ensured that the Bush’s modest reform proposals were killed.  Now it is 7 years later and things are worse…and they will do nothing but get worse from now on, unless we change.

Additionally, any attempt to get our overall fiscal house in order requires Social Security reform (as well as Medicare/Medicaid reform).  The whole economic future of the United States rests on our ability to develope the courage to act.  Democrats will never do anything but “fear and smear” on the issue, so it is up to Republicans to lead the way…and our first step is to (a) bring the subject up and then (b) so badly beat the Democrats in 2012 that they can’t stand in the way of reform.

At the GOP Debate: The Question for 2012

From Ann Althouse, noted in tonight’s debate:

A young guys asks a classic question: “Out of every dollar that I earn, how much do you think I deserve to keep?”

That is the question to ask – and especially to ask of Obama and the Democrats.  What amount of liberty, at the end of the day, are you prepared to leave with the people?

No, not whether we’ll have the freedom to watch filth in popular culture.  Not whether we’ll have to freedom to suck up money on welfare of bogus disability.  What real liberty – if I work hard and play by the rules, how much of each dollar do you think I should keep?  99 cents?  75 cents?  50 cents?  What?  You tell us  – and then we’ll know who wants a nation of citizens, and who wants a nation of slaves.

Jindal Endorses Perry; Pawlenty Endorses Romney

Getting the Pawlenty endorsement is a good thing for Romney – Pawlenty has excellent social conservative credentials plus a reservoir of support from TEA Party activists.  This will help Romney is his now-uphill climb to beat Perry.  On the other hand, getting Jindal’s endorsement helps Perry with more establishment type Republicans…Jindal is very much the rock-ribbed social and economic conservative, but he’s never been noted as some sort of movement, get out there with the TEA Party activist.

I have to say that the Jindal endorsement will be a problem for me if Perry gets the GOP nomination…my two picks for Veep are Jindal and Rubio; with Jindal as the much-preferred candidate.  Nothing wrong with Rubio, at all – in fact, I hope to vote for Rubio in a Presidential contest one day.  But Jindal’s experience is much greater and I want Jindal to be President one day even more than I’d like to see Rubio as President.  These things will work out as they will…but it will be hard for Perry to pick Jindal due to regional reasons.  On the other hand, Bush picked Cheney and it caused no problem in the long run.

Pawlenty, of course, will certainly remain in the top five of possible Romney VP picks; probably remain in the top ten for Perry, too.  Pawlenty just brings a huge amount of strength to the GOP – and will help any GOP candidate.  Can you imagine a debate between Pawlenty and Biden?  We could make it pay-per-view and raise a billion dollars for the GOP!  Of course, Jindal would mop the floor with Biden, too…the really good news is that we can look forward to having both Pawlenty and Jindal in the next GOP Administration (we do have a wealth of talent which Democrats must envy…whom would Obama dredge up for 2nd Term replacements?  Chuck Schumer?).

Next up may be an endorsement by Jim DeMint…who could end up derailing either Perry or Romney by endorsing the other man.  If he endorses someone else, then it would probably be a wash for Perry and Romney and likely wouldn’t greatly help Bachmann or Cain, as they already have the support of those who back DeMint.

 

Maybe Telling the Truth Works?

According to this CNN poll (PDF), 52% of GOP voters over 65 years old back Perry for the GOP nomination.  Among those 50 and older, 41% back Perry (next in support among this group is Romney, with 22%).  With Pery being the candidate who is correctly identifying Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, this indicates that older voters are ok with the truth…and I wonder if the overall population will be?

It could start a whole, new trend in American politics…where politicians will actually say what needs to be done, regardless of MSM/DNC generated talking points, and the people with a clear eye and common sense just review what politicians say, and then make decisions accordingly.

Imagine what the country would be like?

HAT TIPWashington Examiner

Saudis Give Us Excuse to Ditch Them

From Turki al-Faisal in the New York Times:

The United States must support the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations this month or risk losing the little credibility it has in the Arab world. If it does not, American influence will decline further, Israeli security will be undermined and Iran will be empowered, increasing the chances of another war in the region.

Moreover, Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to cooperate with America in the same way it historically has…

Ok, deal – all we have to do is the right thing, and the Saudis will have to cut their ties with us.  Wonderful!  Best thing I’ve heard in months on the foreign policy scene.  No longer shackled to a corrupt, oppressive, Islamist monarchy which provides bags of money for the Islamo-fascist enemies of the United States.

The linked Op-Ed goes on to claim that bid for statehood by the Palestinians is just basic justice.  I can’t see it as such.  The people of so-called Palestine have indicated no willingness to engage the Israelis in a decent manner.  Whether this is because of a malevolent spirit on the part of the people, or because the leaders of the people are deliberately orchestrating the evil is impossible to know…but until there is a fundamental change in Palestinian actions, not much can be done.  The United States cannot – morally or strategically – mid-wife the creation of an entity determined to massacre the Israelis.  It would be good to see Israel go one full year without a single terrorist attack by Islamists.  No rocket attacks from Gaza or Lebanon; no attempted cross-border incursions; no attempt to run the Gaza blockade.  If that happens, then we could consider backing statehood.  Until then, nothing doing.

As for Saudi Arabia:  good riddance to bad rubbish, I say…unfortunately, watch as our foreign policy “realists” react with horror to the mere thought that the Saudi monarchy might be displeased with us.

Watching the Euro Crisis

Mish notes that Greek 1 year bonds have hit 108% – meanwhile, over in Italy (from Bloomberg):

Italian bond yields surged at an auction today and Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou failed to reassure investors that his country can avert default as the euro region’s debt crisis worsened.

Italy sold 12-month bills today to yield 4.153 percent, up from 2.959 percent a month ago as demand fell…

I seem to remember Greek 1 year bonds being something like 4 or 5% a year ago…this is an economic model starting to unravel.  And it is kind of hard to keep a lid on it when you read stories from Europe of plans for an “orderly default” for Greece.

Could be a very wild, financial ride this week…

UPDATE:  Greek 1 year bonds reach 139%.