Conservative Monitor

Children’s stories as well as grown-up books should contain a moral or at least teach us something. It is great when story and lesson are both interesting and important. Thomas Wright has a new book called the Fisherman’s Catch. It is about an island community where catching fish is the main means of survival. When one of the islanders developes a new technology called a net and multiplies his catch. The thugish, resentful liberals come out of the woodwork.

This is a great story for children, but it might also turn on a lightbulb in a liberal friend’s mind.  Great as a gift or for reading to your own children (or grand children).

Who says food and politics don’t mix? Susie Iventosch has a new book out called Tax Bites and Tasty Morsels. It is loaded with a lot of great recipes. Susie is the food correspondent for two newspapers in California. But, ssshhhhhh! keep this under your hat, she also moonlights as a tax protester. This book brings together her vocation and avocation in a way that will delight cooks and outrage liberals.

If you get a chance, visit the Tax Bites website for more recipes and insights.

Meanwhile don’t forget my own cookbook, ever on the conservative best-seller list. (Well, of my four books, it is the best seller.) Take another gander at the Real Man’s Cookbook!

We generally think of liberals as being effete snobs. And they are. The fact is they they only know how to enjoy life when they are lording it over someone else. These cookbooks are loaded with great advice on how to enjoy good food, and good times without doing it on the backs of the taxpayers.

The first American Revolution was fought for high principles of individual liberty. Americans fought for their rights as Englishmen against a tyrannical government that was bent on imposing unreasonable taxes and imposing their special interests upon the people.

That is not far different from what is going on today. David and Cathy Burdick note the similarities in their new book, A Broken America. They are pointing up the wrongs done, and have a prescription for the ills of the country. They are calling for Americans to stand together to retake the government by peaceful means.

Will we succeed in “throwing the bums out of office”? It is only a question of solidarity and getting the message out. David and Cathy are doing their part. This book will help you to figure out what you too can do.

All the rage is an article in the American Spectator about the Political Class. It basically says that the bums in Washington are a class looking out for their own self-interest at the expense of the rest of us out here in middle-class America.

No doubt there is truth in this. There is a certain mentality in the higher reaches of government (in all branches) where the people there think they are smarter than we are, and as a consequence feel at liberty to make all our decisions for us. They reason, after all that we have a republican form of government. We elected them to do just that. And of course, the populus generally elects the politicians it deserves.

Unfortunately, all of this is true. We do get the elected reps we deserve, and we do elect them to represent us, and even make SOME decisions for us. But we have to send people who will make the decisions that we want them to make! To do this we need to ensure that they understand that what is wanted, needed, and desired. Washington must allow the people the maximum freedom to make their own decisions appropriate to their level of responsibility.

This means we did elect them to decide questions of international commerce. But we did not elect them to make decisions about what we will eat or drink for dinner this evening. We did elect them to deal with outside threats. We did not elect them to fund art projects that no one in his right mind would give a nickel for. They need to operate within their limited bounds.

The problem with the political class, is not that there is one. It is that they have acreted just a tad bit too much power. Okay, way too much power. It is time to knock them down a peg or two. Let us work together to make sure this happens at the next election by electing candidates who will return freedom to the individual.

I have been reading Bernard von Bothmer’s Framing the Sixties for a book review. The book is about the way our perceptions of the decade of the sixties have been molded by presidential politics. Bothmer brings a leftward slant to the book, but that does not keep it from being interesting. It just causes me to do a lot of scribbling in the margins.

In any case, I ran across a passage (pp 98-99) where GHW Bush was asked if his visits to a flag factory in the 1988 campaign had been a political act, as if it had been meant to show that Democrats did not respect the flag, but Republicans did. I put this question in the category of assinine. As far as it goes every public act is a political one – especially when that person is a candidate on the campaign trail. That likely was the candidate’s intention! But why not? Isn’t that what campaigning is all about? – revealing the differences between the candidates.

In fact it would only highlight the other candidates lack of respect for the American flag, if he did not show respect for it. Besides, there is nothing wrong with public political acts when they are reflective of the truth and remain within civilized bounds.

I should point out here that it is my personal opinion that flag burning should not be illegal, as long as the flag is owned by the burner. It is yet another public political act.

Yes, there is already a Republican vying for candidacy in the 2012 election. This is a man with common sense and determination. Jack Turner is running for president!

Actually Jack Turner is a fictional character from Jason Price’s new novel “Republican Punk”. Jason said he had always wanted to read a book about a common man suddenly running for president. The question is, will he change the nature of national politics or will it change him?

Jason’s approach is an interesting blend of fiction and reality. The issues are those we are facing today. The official site is laid out like a campaign website. I wouldn’t be surprised if we were to see campaign ads on YouTube and bumper stickers soon.

Remember Joe the Plumber? This is Joe in Spades. It’s the novel for the political season. Gripping, thoughtful, and timely. Get it and be ready for 2012, now!

Hey, I like soccer. I have coached AYSO soccer for about seven years. There is much to be said for the sport. I think of it as kind of hockey without ice, no sticks, and a ball instead of a puck. Truthfully, the players score about as much. Ultimately, it falls in that category of sports where people run back and forth over an area trying to score goals. Like basketball.

A Conservative Soccer Player

I have been following the world cup. Although I admit that I haven’t watched a game on television, but this has more to do with the fact that we do not have TV at our house than my inclination. I have watched a lot of the high-lights on the computer. ESPN has pretty good coverage.

It is pretty much a myth that conservatives don’t like soccer. It is more likely that most hard core sports fans already have their autumns taken up with football. The NFL is so all-consuming that it is hard to wedge in any feeling for any other sport. I know there are people who will not even look at a basketball game until football season is over.

Truthfully, part of the soccer thing is probably also that fact that it has only recently become a youth sport in high school. This year more kids in the small town in which I live played on the high school soccer team than played on the football team. The town also has a superlative girl’s soccer team. They field a competitive squad every year. When these kids grow up, conservative or otherwise, they will remember their halcyon days, and their love of the sport. They will have a full knowledge of all the soccer positions. The game will be familiar and exciting.

And it’s not just conservatives, I know of liberals who express an extreme distaste for soccer. I heard Mitch Albom decry the sport the other day on the radio. He basically said that he was glad the U.S. had won their match against Algieria only because it had knocked England out of contention. He was mistaken, England made it to the knockout round. His comment struck a discordant note, first because it seemed petty to dismiss such a great victory for the U.S. on the soccer field, but also because in the course of it he blamed England for the oil spill in the gulf. A man who professes to be so understanding and compassionate should not be so callous as to blame a whole nation for the errors of one company (and also the sins of our own government, which was equally involved in the errors made in the gulf spill and especially the cleanup).

Well, I got off topic there for a bit. Let me just say - Soccer is great, no matter what some conservatives … and Mitch Albom have to say.

I was listening to the radio yesterday in the afternoon. The Frank Beckmann Show on WJR in Detroit. His guest at the time was Peter Schiff. I had reviewed one of his books in the past, Bull Moves in Bear Markets, he is a stock broker and an economist. He has a lot of common sense stuff to say about the ecomomy and the government. This is evidently a big year for Schiff because he has a new book out and is also running for U.S. Sentate from the state of Connecticut. The man deserves all the support that conservatives can give him.

His new book, “How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes” is a home run that explains in simple allegorical terms the way economies really work.

It goes without saying that the United States needs to put strong conservative voices in the Senate and House this election year. One man whose voice will be firm for conservative fiscal policy is that of Schiff. He is running in a relatively liberal state. Hopefully, he can get people to see the light, especially on the economy. Good luck Mr. Schiff.

I have been writing a book on Modern European History. It is basically a high-school text book for home schoolers. I just rewrote the chapter on economic history from Adam Smith through Karl Marx. What I found interesting was how economics as a science started out with the best possible explanation of how economies work and from there slowly degraded over time so that by the time Marx got done with economics, he had created a theory that not only did not work, but when it was applied was totally destructive of economies as well as human lives.

I won’t go into the details of it as you can read the chapter from my book by clicking the link above. However, I would like to explore why such a thing might happen. I think there are several reasons. First, people like to tinker with ideas. Their egos are such that they believe that they can add something constructive. I think this is what drove men like Malthus, Ricardo, Bentham, and Mills. They thought they were adding to a scientific theory, when in fact they were simply muddying the waters.

Second, there is the jealousy factor. Certain elements could not believe that capitalism could create the best of all possible worlds. (Frank Knight, who developed the law of talk, often lamented the fact.) They did not like the idea that allowing the most ambitious and meritorious to rise to the top by rewarding them that the best would actually provide a rising standard of living for everyone. They were jealous, because they themselves had not succeeded.

Third, and on the opposite side of the coin of number two, is those who felt guilt that they or their families were successful. They were imbued with a mistaken altruism that clouded their vision of economics and made them believe that they could benefit all of society by allowing the government to play Robin Hood.

Fourth, there are the academicians and the bureaucrats who, setting in their ivory towers, believe they know better than individuals how people should run their lives. They like nothing better than to play god and run people’s lives for them.

Finally, we have the religious fanatics of the Marxist religion who merely want everyone to live by their code and the dictates of their god and to place no other gods before Karl Marx.

The weight of all this opinion sways many, and the crusty layers of theory they have laid upon economic thought has corrupted it. What they fail to see is that pure capitalism and a free-market system, limited by a government held within reasonable bounds, does create the best of all possible worlds. I think what is common among all these groups who have screwed up economic thought is a reliance upon visceral feelings, and a basic lack of ability or desire to use their brains.

I find it interesting what the press chooses to cover. It seems that the Iraqi Insurgency is still a problem. Yet media figures no longer seems to care much about it. Just some recent incidents:

• Today: 9 Iraqis killed in bombings.
• 3 days ago: Series of suicide attacks kills 33 in Iraq
• 5 days ago: Son kills father who translated for U.S. in Iraq

This is just within the last week according to USA Today.  President Obama says that we will be leaving the country in 2011. Have we accomplished our goal in Iraq? (Setting up a stable representative government.) How long will it last once we leave? How much thought does the administration actually give to these questions?

The firing of General McChrystal today just underscores the administration’s tentativeness regarding foreign policy. Personally, I would have fired McChrystal as well – for sheer fool-hardiness. However, the incident should never have been allowed to happen in the first place. There is no doubt that the administration is as much a bunch of bumbling fools as McChrystal portrayed them in the now notorious Rolling Stone story. Had the president been on top of things…Well, he wouldn’t have to deal with insubordination from one of his best field commanders.

Which brings me full circle from Afghanistan to Iraq. We have made so many strides in Iraq. I wouldn’t put it past this president to let them all slip away.