Yet another reason to dump the SSA

bq. “An internal review at the Social Security Administration found that the agency has paid accused felons between $76 million and $283 million in SSI benefits since 1996, the year Congress banned felony fugitives from receiving them. Auditors also estimate that other Social Security programs, in which payments to fugitives aren’t banned, could be granting fugitives up to $179 million each year.” —The Federalist, 03-06 Digest
For crying out loud. Pick a year, grandfather in every citizen born -before- in or before that year, and let’s work toward paying their retirement benefits and getting rid of the SSA so that future generations do not have to watch their income be siphoned off, never to be see it return at the same rate it was taken.
And how sad is it that it took Congress 40 years to determine that felons should not be receiving Social Security benefits?!?
Update (2:10pm): from Carl Brueckner in the same Federalist issue:

  • Q: Which party took Social Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
    A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democrat-controlled House and Senate.
  • Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
    A: The Democrat Party.
  • Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
    A: The Democrat Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.
  • Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?
    A: That’s right, immigrants moved into this country at 65 and got SSI Social Security. The Democrat Party gave that to them although they never paid a dime into it.
  • Then, after doing all this, the Democrats turn around and tell you: the Republicans want to take your Social Security.

I say good riddance.

Worthy of our honor

The following appeared in the 03-06 Digest of The Federalist:

By now you know that five of the seven astronauts who died aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia were U.S. military officers. The mission commander was Air Force Col. Rick D. Husband. Navy Cmdr. William C. McCool was the pilot of the Columbia. Also on board were Air Force Lt. Col. Michael P. Anderson, Navy Capt. (Dr.) David M. Brown and Navy Cmdr. (Dr.) Laurel B. Clark. The death of all seven crew members was tragic, though given the indelible images of planeloads of civilians being flown into WTC1, WTC2 and the Pentagon, the shock of those horrible images of STS-107 falling from the sky was, somehow, benumbing.
One month ago, seven Marines were killed when their KC-130 fell from the sky in western Pakistan. Their names were not published by any media outlet. No network operating on a 24-hour news cycle had dramatic graphics and music to accompany endless special reports. No flags were flown at half mast, and many are scrambling to set up trust funds for their spouses and college funds for their children. Just two days before the STS-107 breakup, an Army UH-60 broke up in flight 12 clicks east of Bagram, Afghanistan, killing four servicemen aboard. Their names were never in print.
Our point, of course, is not to take away from the honor due and afforded the Columbia crew, but that same honor is no less due every one of our countrymen whose life is given in defense of our liberty. We grieve the loss of each and every one of these courageous Patriots, and our prayers go with their families.

I heartily second this assessment. Remember, respect, and honor our servicemen and women. Freedom is not free.

Don’t forget from where your power stems, pols

“Anyone who has ever been in a government office sees people sitting around doing little if any work. Yet these people are never the first target of government spending cuts. It is the front line police, firemen, teachers, etc.
[…]
“Yet there is never talk of eliminating some of the less essential elements of government in response to shortfalls in revenue. The politicians seem to go out of their way to make sure that any proposed cuts in government spending are going to be painful. This amounts to punishment of voters for opposing the will of the politicians.
“Unfortunately this is totally backwards. Government is elected to serve the people. Our Constitution was carefully written to avoid just this type of thing. Monarchs (believe that they) rule by divine right and the people are subservient to their rules. Communist dictators, military dictators, Islamic dictators all believe that power starts with them and only flows to the people in the quantities that they allow. Our system is supposed to be the opposite.
[…]
“The politicians need to please the voters not the other way around. If we allow politicians to threaten or punish voters who displease them we are walking straight into the arms of tyranny.” —Philip Safran

French voting

“Tony Blair said he and President Bush prefer another UN resolution before a war in Iraq. Their problem is the Security Council. France might command more respect if the French Ambassador didn’t always vote against war with both hands in the air.” –Argus Hamilton

Happy Birthday, Mr. President II

Today is Abraham Lincoln’s birthday. The Great Emancipator was fond of saying that God created all men as equal, and proved as such with the Emancipation Proclamation, and laying the foundation for what would become the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
An evil Republican, Lincoln did more for the black American than any Democrat of his time. They were too busy seceding from the Union and keeping the black American chained in slavery. Lincoln also signed in to law the act of Congress which placed the motto “In God We Trust” on our national currency. Lincoln didn’t have a problem with this because he was educated enough to know that there is no such thing as the separation of church and state, since he was familiar with the principles upon which our nation was founded.
Happy Birthday, Mr. President. May we not squander the legacy you left us, so “that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.”

So are we at war, or aren’t we?

You have to love the Left. When it comes to liberating the Iraqi people, ousting a sociopathic dictator in possession of weapons of mass destruction, hunting down and exterminating terrorists bent on the destruction of the United States, and Western civilization in general, we are “not at war.” They claim it’s not a “real war,” since Congress has not declared such. Right. Like Congress can declare war on a relatively faceless entity with no geographic boundaries (al-Qaeda). Or if we go to war in Iraq, President Bush doesn’t have the authority because Congress hasn’t declared war on Iraq. Gee, just like Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam, right Demos?
Oh, but let the conversation turn to money, and specifically taxes, and the Left suddenly reverses course:

“If Bush is a serious war President he would increase taxes. This is a time for sacrifices. This is a real war and we need money to pay for it.” –Evan Thomas

So evidently we are at war, so long as half of the citizens of this country are forced to carry a larger tax burden while the other half contributes nothing.
I have an idea for Mr. Thomas (Assistant Managing Editor of Newsweek, by the way): how about the federal government end funding of unconstitutional social programs and departments like midnight basketball leagues, the Department of Education, the Social Security Administration, foreign aid to “allies” like France and Germany, and our subsidization of the “United” Nations. Then the government of the United States would have the money to pursue its primary constitutional duty, the defense of our nation “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

French peacenik pervasiveness

“Meanwhile, the peacenik predisposition of the other Continentals is a useful cover for French ambition. Last year Paavo Lipponen, the Finnish Prime Minister, declared that ‘the EU must not develop into a military superpower but must become a great power that will not take up arms at any occasion in order to defend its own interests.’ This sounds insane. But, to France, it has a compelling logic. You can’t beat the Americans on the battlefield, but you can tie them down limb by limb in the UN and other supranational bodies.
“In other words, this is the war, this is the real battlefield, not the sands of Mesopotamia. And, on this terrain, Americans always lose. Either they win but get no credit, as in Afghanistan. Or they win a temporary constrained victory to be subverted by subsequent French machinations, as in the last Gulf War. This time round, who knows? But through it all France is admirably upfront in its unilateralism: It reserves the right to treat French Africa as its colonies, Middle Eastern dictators as its clients, the European Union as a Greater France and the UN as a kind of global condom to prevent the spread of Americanization. All this it does shamelessly and relatively effectively.” —Mark Steyn

Evidence for the French

“How many folks saw Colin Powell at the UN? I thought he was pretty persuasive, but a lot of folks are still demanding more evidence, you know, before they actually consider Iraq a threat. For example, France. France wants more evidence, they demand more evidence. And I’m thinking, the last time France wanted more evidence it rolled right through Paris with a German flag.” –David Letterman

Silver kicks butt and takes names

“Not all Hollywood celebrities are ungrateful, anti-American lefties.” The MRC reports on an interview on Fox News Channel with actor Ron Silver, who offers a few choice bits:
bq. “But at that dinner, the EU had a dinner that night about the ‘new Europe,’ and they were being very self-congratulatory about their values, and implicitly they were suggesting that America was an imperial country, trying to impose their values on the rest of the world, which I don’t think is a bad idea by the way, I kind of think our values are fairy universal and might be helpful.”
bq. […]
bq. “I kind of link Rumsfeld’s ‘old Europe versus the new Europe,’ and we saw it in the last two weeks, with France and Germany, who were not with us on June 6, 1944, I don’t know why we expect them to be with us today.”
bq. […]
bq. “My opinion is that the entertainment community along with other advocates–human rights organizations, religious organizations, are always on the front lines to protest repression, but they’re always usually the first ones to oppose any use of force to take care of these horrors that they catalogue repeatedly, and I find that inconsistent as well.”
Kudos to Silver for standing against the Hollywonk culture. It is a testament to his acting skill that he can play such a leftie on The West Wing.

Mr. Marx, Mr. Turner. Mr. Turner, Mr. Marx

Yet another instance where I am ashamed to share a surname with this moronic windbag:

Monday morning on Today, however, Turner maintained that Iraq is “too small to pose a threat” to the U.S. and kept up the usual liberal mantra about how poverty fuels terrorism as he told Matt Lauer that “trying to make it a better world is my top priority. A more equitable world, that’s really the best way to combat terrorism is to, is to build a world where nobody’s angry enough to want to be a terrorist.”

You can read the full analysis here. I’d like to see poverty erased from this planet as much as the next person, but you don’t go about it in a way that smacks of communism. We have seen that experiment fail in our lifetime, yet people still think it is the answer.