Monday, September 26

Operation Fast and Furious - People Will Go To Jail

I haven't commented on Operation Fast and Furious, but I have been paying attention to the developments as they become known. Today's news is that not only did the Obama Administration permit weapons to get into the hands of criminals in Mexico, but they also were directly involved in some of the sales.
According to documents obtained by Fox News, Agent John Dodson was ordered to buy six semi-automatic Draco pistols -- two of those were purchased at the Lone Wolf gun store in Peoria, Ariz. An unusual sale, Dodson was sent to the store with a letter of approval from David Voth, an ATF group supervisor. Dodson then sold the weapons to known illegal buyers, while fellow agents watched from their cars nearby. This was not a "buy-bust" or a sting operation, where police sell to a buyer and then arrest them immediately afterward. In this case, agents were "ordered" to let the sale go through and follow the weapons to a stash house. According to sources directly involved in the case, Dodson felt strongly that the weapons should not be abandoned and the stash house should remain under 24-hour surveillance. However, Voth disagreed and ordered the surveillance team to return to the office. Dodson refused, and for six days in the desert heat kept the house under watch, defying direct orders from Voth. A week later, a second vehicle showed up to transfer the weapons. Dodson called for an interdiction team to move in, make the arrest and seize the weapons. Voth refused and the guns disappeared with no surveillance.  - Read More at Fox News
(Letter Link) According to a number of stories, over 2,000 firearms were permitted to get into the hands of Mexican criminals. Many of these weapons have since turned up at crime scenes, including the murder of a US Boarder Agent. It appears that the Obama Administration intentionally let these weapons get into the hands of criminals. After all, there has been no explanation of how the Government planned to retrieve these weapons, nor does there appear to have been any attempt to arrest any of the subjects of this apparently bogus investigation. Just what was the reward to the Government in this plan? I can't think of anything that could justify giving thousands of weapons to criminals. I guarantee that the Government is not going to have a justifiable excuse either. The big question in my mind is how many Government employees are going to jail for planning and carrying out this operation? (My initial guess is 3)

I also expect this operation to become a real problem for Obama himself, most likely during election season. I do not think he personally knew the details of this operation, but expect that Holder knew. I also expect Holder to get fired over this at some point.. Sadly, this whole scandal is the direct result of Democrat's irrational hatred of the Second Amendment. Oddly enough, it turns out that the biggest gun criminals are anti-gun Democrats. Maybe one day they will wise up and leave gun control to Conservatives. Too bad this requires a level of maturity that Democrats do not seem to possess.
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Globe and Mail: "IRS bearing down on Americans in Canada"

Many Americans both Conservative and Liberal are upset with how their Government is functioning at the moment. I know I am not happy with the idiocy that is going on and the lies being put forward that somehow, we would be able to continue spending the outrageous amounts of money that the Government is currently spending, IF ONLY rich Americans paid a little more. Even Americans living overseas cannot escape the long arm of the US Government, which has decided to extend the arm of the Internal Revenue Service, the dreaded IRS, into the pockets of Americans overseas, even those who have no link to the country other than to have been born in the US or born by US parents. Apparently, there are lots of them. From this story, there are about a million living in Canada alone:
One person who’s off the hook is my brother. He was 11 when we moved to Canada. At 17, he got a draft notice. So he renounced his citizenship (after a long lecture from a consular official). I suppose I could renounce, too – but they won’t let you do that until you’ve filed your back tax returns. As many as a million U.S.-born residents of Canada are caught in this Kafkaesque nightmare. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has written an indignant letter to leading U.S. newspapers. All of us are getting wildly conflicting professional advice. At first, Brian and his wife, who are by no means wealthy, decided to come clean. But when they were told they’d be on the hook for $250,000, they changed their minds. - Globe and Mail
I lived in Finland for three years while doing my MBA. Two of those years I filed a tax return. The third year I didn't because I didn't meet the minimum reporting threshold. It turns out that it was good that I did because a short while later I moved back to the US and applied for a GreenCard for my soon to be Finnish wife. One of the requirements was providing copies of my previous three years Income Tax Returns, or an explanation of why I didn't file.

This experience did result in not pursuing US Citizenship for my wife. We did have plans at the time to eventually move back to Finland, and we knew that it would be better tax-wise if she did not obtain US tax liability.

It is odd however, to see the amount of effort that the IRS is extending to track down money overseas the US thinks it can extort from Citizens, however unfair, while at the same time they do little to nothing to hunt down illegal aliens living within the US who are working without the legal authorization to do so, are conspiring with their employers to not pay/evade taxes (in some cases also committing identity theft) and are simply getting a free pass. 
  • It is not fair. 
  • It is discrimination. 
  •  It cannot last. 
 Unfortunately, I think it is going to get a lot more painful before it gets better. This is an illustration of a pile of $100 bills totaling $15 Trillion. That is $2,500 per person on earth. That is a hell of a bill to pay off and it is still growing. And this is why the US Government is trying to fleece Americans living abroad, they are simply running out of places to rind more revenue.




--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Thursday, September 15

French Fries - Just Another Example of Government Over-Reach

Today, the Drudge Report has this headline:
Yeah, more Government over-reach.
On Thursday, the first lady joined Darden Restaurants Inc. executives at one of their Olive Garden restaurants in Hyattsville, Md., near Washington to announce that the company's chains are pledging to cut calories and sodium in their meals by 20 percent over a decade. Fruit or vegetable side dishes and low-fat milk will become standard with kids' meals unless a substitution is requested. - AP News
I think this is a bit ridiculous. No kid gets fat from eating fries in a restaurant. They will get fat if their parents take them to a restaurant every day and let them eat fries and other fatty foods. This however is an issue of poor parenting, not a menu issue. And is idiotic to try and make regulations to compensate for poor parenting. But hey, Democrats are not big on the traditional family. So this is what we get as a reward.

There is a reason why restaurants serve fries as a side dish. Parents are not going to take their kids to a restaurant for them to be served fresh fruit. Going to a restaurant for my family is a treat. It is meant to be something special for the kids and us. The important thing is that it is tasty, and you can bet the restaurants know this. If we do not have a good experience, we are not going back. So it will be interesting to find out what percentage of these meals end up with the now optional fries instead of the now-standard fruit. My guess is that the percentage will be high. Will this then prompt the Administration to make fruit

And what is the deal with the war on salt? Isn't all the fresh news about salt that it is not the evil that it was made out to be. 

There are a number of reasons why Five Guys is America's favorite restaurant. Two of them are fries and salt;)

--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Saturday, September 10

So Where is the US Government's 2012 Budget?

With all the talk about deficit reduction and job creation, it seems that the simple matter that the US Government does not have a budget for 2012 has not had lots of attention recently. That is a shame given that the 2012 budget year starts in a couple weeks on 1 October, 2011. Are we headed for another last minute showdown?
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Saturday, August 20

Total BS: "These young people should not be punished for their parents’ mistakes."

This week we had President Obama act to give illegal aliens amnesty and work permits. Their excuse is that they want to concentrate on deporting violent criminals. My first problem is that The Government is not following through in it's obligation to enforce the law. My second problem with this is that they even intend to permit criminals to stay, as long as they are not 'violent'. And given the way that these people lie, I am afraid to find out what their definition of 'violent' is. We already know that they like keeping illegal aliens who drive drunk around, at least until they kill someone. And where do they think these violent criminals come from? They are criminals first, and before they were criminals, they were merely an illegal alien.

My next problem is the propaganda being spouted in support of this action. Take Senator Durbin's comment:
The decision would, through administrative action, help many intended beneficiaries of legislation that has been stalled in Congress for a decade. The sponsor of the legislation, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, has argued that “these young people should not be punished for their parents’ mistakes.” - NY Times
I can buy that the children are not the guilty ones. But Senator Durbin, and his Democrat buddies have no intention of punishing the parents of these children either. Hell, he simply calls the actions of the parents to come here illegally 'mistakes'. No, a more accurate statement would be that 'these young people should not be punished for their parents’ crimes.' Their intention is to simply reward all of them, even the criminals, other than a couple token violent criminals which they will use as evidence of being tough on crime. That too is a joke, as we should be putting them in jail, instead of sending them back home to cause havoc there.

The real joke in all of this is that President Obama's actions are going to hurt his supporters the most. It is reported that not only will many illegal aliens be permitted to stay, but they will also be given work permits to compete for jobs against millions of Americans already out of work. The NY times story mentions that there are about 300,000 currently facing deportation proceedings that will be effected, but I suspect that that list will grow once illegal aliens figure out the best way to get in line to see a judge, to be excused from deportation and handed a work permit for a gift. After all, when you reward something, you get more of it. As it is, I have at least two friends overseas looking at ways to get a visa to live here. Clearly, they don't need one.

And remember, this action is all a blatant attempt to buy votes for the next election.
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Tuesday, August 16

Social Welfare is OK, if it results in Lessening the Number of Those in Need

I think many conservatives would have less of a problem with social Welfare if these programs reduced the number of people in need of support.

That said, why is it that it seems that there is a constant growth in the number of people that these programs support? Nobody ever gets off these programs and those receiving support appear to breed more people destinehttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifd to require/receive support. I would say that the mere fact that half of all Americans pay no taxes is evidence of this.

The UK has an even more substantial benefits system and appears that the problems that result are even greater as the riots demonstrate. Take the story of this one benefit recipient's mother:
She is on benefits, does not live with the boy's father and has 10 other children, the court heard. - Mother of 13-year-old who smashed up shop blames government - The Telegraph, UK
AND
But the woman also suggested her son was not entirely at fault, when asked who she blamed for the looting.

''The government,'' she replied, her son by her side, adding: ''There is f*** all for them to do.'' - The Telegraph, UK
Her 13 year old son caused well over $20,000 in damage during the riot and all the mother can do is blame the Government for not finding something more productive for her 11 children to do. This is madness. Let the father(s) of the eleven children support them. People already have to support their own families, why do they have to chip in and support her's as well?

Also, I always found it strange that the UK is supporting this huge families, where the parents have not worked in years, in houses in expensive areas. Why not just ship them out of the cities and house them more cheaply in the countryside?

This brings up another pet peeve of mine. If I am being forced to support others, why can't I get a say in how they are using this support? For all this talk of 'shared sacrifice', it always seems that the tax-payers are always being asked to sacrifice more, but others on the receiving end are not asked to sacrifice at all. Not exactly fair, is it.

So, social welfare programs that over time reduce the number of those in need = Good

Social welfare programs that we (and the UK) currently have = Bad

All we are doing is growing the ranks of the poor. This support needs to come with an expiration date for those who are of working age.
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Sunday, August 14

Liberals Fleeing (and Spreading) Broken Liberal Agenda

The following comments posted on Instapundit struck a cord with me:
"The ideas and beliefs that have decimated California, are in fact, shared by huge swathes of the populace. In spite of their suffering in the world they helped create, when many of these business owners and workers move to other places they bring their dumb ideas with them. Trust me, they may be economic refugees, but they will be the first to start kvetching about the refineries down the road." - Instapundit Commenter
And this:
"Just read your postings about the attitudes that California refugees bring with them. You might note that the same problem has happened in New England. New Hampshire used to be a pretty conservative place – no state income tax, ‘live free or die’ on the license plates, etc. A flood of refugees from Taxachusetts over the past 20 years has changed that. And just as you described, the newcomers seem to have no clue that the policies they support are the very same ones that ruined the state they fled.” - Instapundit commenter
I have had similar thoughts for a while, but didn't really connect the California refugees to it. I had been thinking this about the legal and illegal aliens coming to America from both around the world, Mexico and central and South America. Many of these migrants are fleeing bad conditions in their home country. And still, they want to bring all these bad habits and practices with them. And oddly enough, they find an ally in the Liberals of this country who are also fleeing the utopias they have demanded be created here. Each group looking to the other to support their goals of legal permanent residency and redistribution of wealth through socialist programs.

The trick is stopping this spread of bad ideas. For starters, one can ask these refugees if their beliefs were so great, why is it that they left a place where they already had such benefits?

Update: An example of pushing their agenda on the rest of us, take the push for acceptance of Spanish in the US as a default second language. Americans are being shamed for not knowing Spanish as a second language and Spanish is showing up on all sorts of products. But the shame of knowing only one language only applies to Americans. There is no push for those coming to America to learn English, even though they too only know one language. Only we are being pushed to better accommodate people who are coming here, many of them illegally.
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Sunday, August 7

ObamaCare and Blood Donations

I passed by a blood drive in the area on Saturday. I was asked if I wanted to donate and the first thing that passed into my mind was Obamacare. It was a cynical thought of whether ObamaCare required blood donation. This is how bitter I feel about the crap that is ObamaCare.

You see, when the Government steps in and demands to run the show on anything, like healthcare, then they can go find the blood. As it is, they were out in an area of tax-payers. Why not go and stick needles in the half of the population that does not pay any taxes? Really, if they are not contributing tax revenue, they can contribute in other ways, like giving blood. Of course they won't, unless they get paid to do it. And this is the joke of the whole system and the Democrats pushing it. They repeatedly call for the better (revenue-earning) half of the population to do their 'fair share' and pay more taxes. And yet, there is a huge portion of the population that pays no share towards the common good. They only consume. Even when the contribute, they won't, unless there is something in it for them. Where is the fairness in that.

The only confidence I have is that the unfairness of this system will be it's doom.
--
P.S. No, I didn't donate blood. I do however vow that I will donate once ObamaCare is repealed. At that point I leave it to the nurse to get a full pint out of me. My body stops giving after about a half pint.

--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Friday, July 15

So What Does Obama Plan To Use Gov't Revenue On If the Dept Limit Is Not Raised?

President Obama and his team have been making a number of threats during the discussion on how or whether to raise the US debt limit. These threats included defaulting on debt payments as well as not paying out Social Security benefits.

Now given that Government Revenue (taxes and fees that the Government is receiving each month) exceeds the amount needed to pay for Social Security, Medicaid, Defense and debt obligations, just what does he plan to use that money for if he is not going to use it to pay these items?

Also, it is nice to see questions regarding the $2+ trillion Social Security Trust Fund. As I pointed out last year:

So on the one hand, Social Security has a surplus of over $2 Trillion to meet it's needs. On the other hand, all of that money was traded for Government bonds. The bonds are a promise from the Government to repay Social Security.

The Government took the money and spent it. The Government now either needs to pay that money back to Social Security, and with running a deficit, would need to borrow that money to repay the bonds. That could be a serious problem given that the Government already needs to borrow to cover the current year's spending deficits. And that is a problem with the idea of selling the bonds held by Social Security. Doing so increases the amount that needs to be sold into the market, and the Government is already having trouble selling the bonds it needs to need to cover current-year deficit spending.

Of course they could just print more money. I am not sure exactly how that would work out.

So remember, no matter how the politicians try to claim that Social Security has no problem, keep in mind that these same politicians turned the Social Security Trust Fund of $2 Trillion and turned it into added Government debt. - Link
Once the debt issue is over, the Conservatives in Congress should go back and tackle Social Security reform. The defense that there is no problem was just busted by the Democrats.


--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Monday, July 4

Pirunvuori - Devil's Mountain - Finland

So here I am at my in-laws and even after 10 years of coming here (to what is basically the middle of nowhere), they are still finding new places to take me. This time it was to the Devil's Mountain to see a stone house built by a Finnish painter just over 100 years ago.

It was a nice day trip with the bonus of discovering that the blueberries in the forest are already ripe for the picking.





Pirunvuori (Devil's mountain)

Mythical magic, soughing of the forest and rugged Finnish scenery!

This nature reserve has always been an inspiration for storytellers and poets. By hiking up Pirunvuori everybody can enjoy a trip to the past and be impressed by an untouched nature. In the beginning of the 20th century, the Finnish artist, painter Emil Danielsson built his stone castle on the peak of the mountain as his studio for more than 60 years. Nowadays this castle can be visited by tourists, giving a good impression of the spirit of that time.

Pirunvuori can be reached by walking over a path of about 2km from the hotel. - Link




--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Sunday, July 3

Ignoring the Debt Ceiling vs Passing a Budget

News reports are suggesting that President Obama and his Democrat allies in Congress are setting the stage for the possibility of simply ignoring the country's debt limit by declaring it unconstitutional. This option does not seem so far fetched given the lack of action from the White House to come to some sort of deal in getting the debt limit raised, as well as White House recognition of the simple fact that even substantial tax increases would not be able to effect the massive spending deficit that the Government is committing itself to pay. Regardless of the issue that Republicans are refusing to consider any tax increases. Even if Republicans would be willing to raise taxes, President Obama would only be able to raise taxes on the highest earners, and not on the middle class where the most tax revenue could be collected.

So, in comes the possibility of an end run around Congress to keep the spending going regardless of any debt limit. It is an interesting solution and if done just might help push the US into bankruptcy that much faster.

But Congress does have a weapon to fight against this. Next year's budget. There are a couple options here, from refusing to pass a budget, prompting a Government shutdown, or passing a budget that only spends incoming revenue. Another option would be to pass a budget (Or better yet only propose a budget) that takes into account all spending needs and proposes across-the-board tax increases so that Americans are made aware of the actual bill for the Government services that they are demanding. At a minimum, Congress needs to start speaking up against the Democrat's proposed option of trashing the debt limit.

One more thought. A good portion of our upcoming debt increase and deficit problems are related to promises made to seniors by the politicians that they elected. These politicians failed to tax and save for these seniors. Instead, these seniors and politicians are planning to stick us children and grandchildren with the bill. So I am starting to come to the opinion that part of the solution is to break the promises made to these seniors. The promises that were made to them were in exchange for their votes. In reality, they were little more than lies. Their votes were in effect in exchange for lies. Worse, the money that should have been saved to fulfill these promises were instead stolen by these same politicians to make even more promises. So I think it is time to take a second look at what was promised and what we can afford to keep.

The Democrats will portray this as pushing grandma off the a cliff. However, there is another side to Grandma's story and it involves giving the bill to support grandma to her grandchildren and great grandchildren. That is not exactly fair. Not only that, is this what Grandma wants? I doubt it. This is why the Democrats are being dishonest in suggesting that everything can be paid for by taxing the richest a little more. This however is nowhere near enough. Future generations need to pay more. Lots more.

Now keep in mind the following when judging my comments above - Medicare is going to go bankrupt well before I can take advantage of it and Social Security is going to run out of money about the time that I will be eligible to collect from it. That is a pretty raw deal after having paid into it so far into my working life.
--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------

Friday, July 1

Mannerheim Statue 'Tampere'

I have mentioned the Tampere Mannerheim Statue on this blog before here 'Europe's Lingering Scar of Communism'

You see, Tampere was a hotbed of communists during the Finnish Civel War and Mannerheim was the leader of the 'White' forces and routed the communists from the city. So, back in the 1950's when a statue was going to be erected in his honor, the city leaders stuck it in the forest, nowhere near the city itself.

So for the last couple trips here I had been meaning to visit the statue. I finally got the chance today.












--------------------
Add to Google
--------------------