The Right Lane update 3.04.13

The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Increase in minimum wage may be unwise By Walter Williams

In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama proposed raising the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9 an hour. That would be almost a 25 percent increase. Let’s look at the president’s proposal, but before doing so, let’s ask some other economic questions.  Are people responsive to changes in price? For example, if the price of cars rose by 25 percent, would people purchase as many cars? Supposing housing prices rose by 25 percent, what would happen to sales?

Those are big-ticket items, but what about smaller-priced items? If a supermarket raised its prices by 25 percent, would people purchase as much? It’s not rocket science to conclude that when prices rise, people adjust their behavior by purchasing less. It’s almost childish to do so, but I’m going to ask questions about 25 percent price changes in the other way. What responses would people have if the price of cars or housing fell by 25 percent? What would happen to supermarket sales if prices fell by 25 percent? Again, it doesn’t require deep thinking to guess that people would purchase more.

This behavior in economics is known as the first fundamental law of demand. It holds that the higher the price of something the less people will take and that the lower the price the more people will take.
There are no known exceptions to the law of demand. Any economist who could prove a real-world exception would probably be a candidate for the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and other honors. Dr. Alan Krueger, an economist, is chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers. I wonder whether he advised the President that though people surely would be responsive to 25 percent increases in the prices of other goods and services, they would not be responsive to a 25 percent wage increase.

I’d bet the rent money that you couldn’t get Krueger to answer the following statement by saying either true or false: A 25 percent increase in the price of labor would not affect employment. If anything, his evasive response would be that found in a White House memo, reported in The Wall Street Journal’s article titled “The Minority Youth Unemployment Act” (Feb. 15), namely that “a range of economic studies show that modestly raising the minimum wage increases earnings and reduces poverty without measurably reducing employment.” The WSJ article questions that statement: “Note the shifty adverbs, ‘modestly’ and ‘measurably,’ which can paper over a lot of economic damage.” My interpretation of the phrase “without measurably reducing employment” is that only youngsters, mostly black youngsters, would be affected by an increase. University of California, Irvine economist David Neumark has examined more than 100 major academic studies on the minimum wage. He states that the White House claim “grossly misstates the weight of the evidence.” About 85 percent of the studies “find a negative employment effect on low skilled workers.” A 1976 American Economic Association survey found that 90 percent of its members agreed that increasing the minimum wage raises unemployment among young and unskilled workers. A 1990 survey found that 80 percent of economists agreed with the statement that increases in the minimum wage cause unemployment among the youth and low-skilled. If you’re looking for a consensus in most fields of study, examine the introductory and intermediate college textbooks in the field. Economics textbooks that mention the minimum wage say that it increases unemployment for the least skilled worker.

As detailed in my recent book “Race and Economics” (2012), during times of gross racial discrimination, black unemployment was lower than white unemployment and blacks were more active in the labor market.  For example, in 1948, black teen unemployment was less than white teen unemployment, and black teens were more active in the labor market.  Today black teen unemployment is about 40 percent; for whites, it is about 20 percent. The minimum wage law weighs heavily in this devastating picture. Supporters of higher minimum wages want to index it to inflation so as to avoid its periodic examination.

~~~~~~

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights. About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.  One can likely imagine the SCOTUS will find any infringement on the second amendment unconsitutional and may only get to rule on such if you or I refuse to give up our arms.

~~~~~~

Anti-Gun Protester Says She’d Rather Be Murdered Than Use a Gun in Self-Defense By Jason Howerton

A crowd of people rallied against gun violence at the Georgia State Capitol in honor of Trayvon Martin Tuesday, the one year anniversary of his shooting death. Many of the protesters were speaking out against so-called “stand your ground” laws, which allow gun owners to use deadly force if they feel as if their lives are in danger. During the rally, one female protester — wearing an Obama hat — told WGCL-TV that using a firearm in self-defense “is not an option.” “It’s not an option,” she repeated. The reporter then asked her, “But what if someone is trying to kill you?” She replied, “They’ll just have to kill me.” Don't underestimate the power of propaganda.  Her is a women that is willing to die rather than to exercise her right to protect herself.  I wonder if she feels the same way about the rest of her rights?

~~~~~~

Whoops! White House retreats from doomsday spending cuts

The White House retreated from its doomsday predictions Sunday about the impact of the $85 billion in federal spending cuts that have kicked in — as Republican leaders appeared at least satisfied about delivering on their promise to limit government spending and hold down taxes. Gene Sperling, the White House’s top economic adviser, repeatedly said the cuts will not hurt as much on “Day One” as they will over the long haul. “Nobody ever suggested that this … was going to have all its impact in the first few days,” he told “NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “It is a slow grind.” His remarks are in contrast to weeks of President Obama and his Cabinet warning that the cuts will result in furloughs or pay cuts for middle-class wage-earners such as teachers, Capitol Hill janitors and air traffic controllers, which they said could cause 90-minutes delays at major U.S. airports. Got a better phrase that Lying Propaganda?

~~~~~~

DHS to Purchase Almost 3,000 Tanks for Use in America

This is getting a little creepy. According to one estimate, since last year the Department of Homeland Security has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion bullets, mainly .40 caliber and 9mm.

DHS also purchased 2,717 Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAP).  Modern Survival Blog reported:

The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.

Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the vehicle itself. The new DHS sanctioned ‘Street Sweeper’ (my own slang due to the gun ports) is built by Navistar Defense (NavistarDefense.com), a division within the Navistar organization. Under the Navistar umbrella are several other companies including International Trucks, IC Bus (they make school buses), Monaco RV (recreational vehicles), WorkHorse (they make chassis), MaxxForce (diesel engines), and Navistar Financial (the money arm of the company).

Does this give rise to paranoia or legitimate concern?  We have a government that is hell bent on taking your guns while arming our Homeland Defense as an Operational Military Force on our own soil.  Where have you seen that elsewhere and how did it turn out for the people?

~~~~~~

The Most Influential People In Your Life?  It will not be the Government!

A young lady in once mentioned to me that her grandmother was the most inspiring person in her life.  Always curious, I asked why. Her response: "Because she pushed me to be better every day.  It's how she lived her own life, and she never let me get away with partial effort on important matters.  That's the legacy she passed to me."  I have a similar conversation with a businessman that revealed his drive for excellence came from his high school basketball coach who insisted that in a 2-hour practice, every second counts, and if you waste a minute, you might blow an opportunity in a real game.  For my friend, decades later, that's in his DNA.  Olympic gold medalist Scott Hamilton in an interview recalled his inspiration:  "I had a ninth grade teacher who told me I was much smarter and much better than I was allowing myself to be." 

These are not surprising comments.  I find, time and again, that people who matter most to us, as told to me by others, are often those who hold us accountable, don't let us off easy, give us no free passes, and push us to limits we didn't know we could reach.  Think about it.  Your icons, your teachers, can be anyone:  a relative, a coach, a book author you've never met, a fictional TV character with whom you identify, a famous leader who lived 800 years ago, a keynote speaker you heard in the 1980's (or last week). Sometimes you provide yourself with lessons.  "Your best teacher is your last mistake," claims consumer advocate Ralph Nader.  Says one wise person, "One good teacher in a lifetime may sometimes change a delinquent into a solid citizen."

Why does this matter?  The government has become many people's teacher, the schools are not teaching survival skills or survival needs.  We are taught when things get tough, depend on the government!  Not to look to ourselves.  What is the lesson?  People from all walks have a choice.  We can push ourselves and win or depend upon others and get by.  Which do you choose?

~~~~~~

Obama’s DOJ: Children Do Not Need, And Have No Right To, Mothers

The Obama Justice Department is arguing in the United States Supreme Court that children do not need mothers. [How do all you mom's feel!?] The Justice Department’s argument on the superfluity of motherhood is presented in a brief the Obama administration filed in the case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended California’s Constitution to say that marriage involves only one man and one woman. The Justice Department presented its conclusions about parenthood in rebutting an argument made by proponents of Proposition 8 that the traditional two-parent family, led by both a mother and a father, was the ideal place, determined even by nature itself, to raise a child.

~~~~~~

Global Warming: “Who Cares?” A Huge International Poll Reveals by Gary North

A poll of 22,000 people internationally in 2012 revealed that environmental concerns are at their lowest point in 20 years. The scam is losing traction. This is creating panic among the scammers. While respondents clearly still had grave environmental concerns, fewer people were “very concerned” about various environmental issues than at any point in the last 20 years. The sharpest decrease in global concern occurred over the last two years. The issue of climate change, which 49 percent of respondents rated last year as “very serious,” was the only exception to the general trend. Pollsters found that there was less concern between 1998 and 2003 than today. When the hacker broke into the emails of Great Britain’s #1 global warming propaganda outfit in December of 2009, just before the Copenhagen meeting, he then posted emails showing blatant discrimination against rival views. The head of the outfit, Phil Jones, stepped down. Global Warming defenders dismissed it as meaningless. An example is here. This was whistling past the graveyard. The Copenhagen meeting collapsed. World leaders decided at the last minute not to attend. The Wikipedia article on the Copenhagen conference mentions none of this. [be careful in what you trust on Wikipedia] It portrays it as a great success. It in fact marked the end of the global warming myth. The GW hype'sters will find it difficult to reignite the flame. The public finally got tired of the story. Temperatures have not risen since 1999. The Global Warmers even had to substitute a new slogan, “climate change.” It just does not have the same pizzazz.

~~~~~~

Muslims at Texas Rally Claim They Shouldn’t Be Bound by American Law by John Griffing

A Council on American-Islamic Relations leader told a crowd at a rally for Islam that members of the faith should not be bound by American law. “If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land,” said Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch.  The rally in Austin was part of a nationwide effort to hold “Muslim Capitol Day” events. According to the event website, Muslims from around Texas went to the capitol to “promote civic and political activism throughout the wider Muslim community.” The organizers said one major issue discussed “was the recent House and Senate bill proposals involving the implementation of ‘anti-Shariah’ legislation, where the First Amendment rights and freedoms of Muslims would ultimately be hindered.” Critics argue Shariah prohibits other faiths from free exercise of religion when enforced, giving freedom only to Muslims. Carroll’s statement was similar to a statement allegedly made by CAIR co-founder and former chairman Omar M. Ahmad. He was paraphrased by a reporter saying, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant” and the Quran “should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” Carroll began joking about the widespread concern about Shariah, the religious code that governs Muslim civil and political life. “We tried to downplay Shariah, because we didn’t want to give the other side any excitement for being here,” he said. He dismissed critics who express concern about Shariah, calling them “anti-foreign.” “When you even say the word Shariah, people get nervous. We are not advocating for Shariah. We are not trying to make Shariah the law of the land,” he said. Carroll claimed Muslims only want the “right to practice our faith.”

But he also said, “If you understand Shariah, the foundation of our faith … how we treat our neighbor, how we treat our parents … how we participate in society, all of that is part of Shariah.”

~~~~~~

Who Is CAIR And Why You Should Know?

Let there be no doubt that the Council on American-Islamic Relations is a terrorist supporting front organization that is partially funded by terrorists, and that CAIR wishes nothing more than the
implementation of Sharia Law in America.  CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic Terrorists. CAIR actively supports terrorists and terrorist-supporting groups and nations.  CAIR is an organization founded by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow Constitutional government in the United States and replace it with an Islamist theocracy using our own Constitution as protection.   CAIR was started by Hamas members and is supported by terrorist supporting individuals, groups and countries. CAIR is not in the United States to promote the civil rights of Muslims.
CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States and convert our country into an Islamic theocracy. CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorist supporting countries.

U.S. Senator Richard Durbin:  "[CAIR is] unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect"

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer:  "we know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism" "intimate links with Hamas"

*U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer:  "To praise [CAIR] because they haven't been indicted is like somebody saying, 'I'm not a crook'"

*U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster:    "Time and again [CAIR] has shown itself to be nothing more than an apologist for groups bent on the destruction of Israel and Islamic domination over the West,"

These are not our everyday run-of-the mill right wingers!

~~~~~~

44% Think Sequester Will Have No Impact or a Positive One on Their Lives

Forty-four percent (44%) of Likely U.S. Voters think the sequester spending cuts will have a positive impact or no impact on their own lives in the long term. This includes 18% who view the cuts as a positive, although just five percent (5%) think they will have a Very Positive impact in terms of their own lives.  A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 39% predict the sequester cuts will have a long-term negative impact on their lives, with nine percent (9%) who say it will be Very Negative. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.

~~~~~~

Let’s Starve? No Food or Drink Permitted for Kids During Media Event…per Michelle

A very courageous fifth teacher in the Chicago Public Schools has written a scathing critique of the almost comical misery she and her students endured when they participated in a massive February 28 event kicking off Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! Active Schools campaign. The First Lady’s campaign is an effort to improve (and in some cases, bring back) physical education in American schools. White House officials called the event “a groundbreaking, earth-shattering, awesomely-inspiring day.” Lisa Putnam and her fifth grades most certainly did not experience the event the same way, however. According to Putnam, the event at Chicago’s McCormick Place (the largest convention center in North America) was an unmitigated catastrophe. CPS Chatter — “a forum of CPS parents and teachers” — has Putnam’s full tongue-lashing.

“If you are a parent, imagine that you take your child on a trip and they are very excited,” writes Putnam. “Now imagine they have to wait on a bus and stand in straight lines for three hours straight. Then imagine after one hour of ‘fun’ that they have to sit around and wait for three more hours that bus to pick them up. Oh, did I mention that are not allowed to have a morsel of food the entire time?”

In her devastating piece, Putnam explains that she was initially enthusiastic about her and her students’ participation in the kickoff of the Let’s Move! campaign — not least because it offered a chance to let off steam before a grueling battery of standardized tests next week. However, that enthusiasm waned almost immediately. Most of the 90-minute trip to the convention center was spent sitting behind all the other busses full of kids staffers had shipped in as props.

~~~~~~

Robert Reich Says Tea Party wants ‘To Undermine the Government of the United States’ by Gary DeMar

Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton, compares the Tea Party to a conspiracy “to undermine the government of the United States.” When people like Reich make extreme comparisons, you know they’ve lost the argument. All they can do is pull the racist, homophobe, sexist, Nazi, and extremism cards from the bottom of the deck and try to play them as a legitimate hand. People involved in the Tea Party are not engaged in a conspiracy. Everything the Tea Party does is in the open. Its card-carrying and philosophical members use the political system that anybody can take advantage of to make changes to our government. Reich calls this “infiltration.” Our political system calls it “getting people elected.” The Tea Party’s goal is not to subvert the Constitution, which is the goal of Reich and his fellow-liberals, but to insure that those elected to office and took an oath to uphold the Constitution legislate in terms of the limitations of the Constitution and do no more than that. Here’s Robert Reich’s Tea Party conspiracy theory:

“Imagine a plot to undermine the government of the United States, to destroy much of its capacity to do the public’s business, and to sow distrust among the population. Imagine further that the plotters infiltrate Congress and state governments, reshape their districts to give them disproportionate influence in Washington, and use the media to spread big lies about the government. Finally, imagine they not only paralyze the government but are on the verge of dismantling pieces of it.”

For a moment, I thought he was talking about the left, you know the "progressives" hiding in plain sight!

~~~~~~

FBI Benghazi Interviews Delivered to Senate

A source told CBS News that FBI transcripts of interviews with Benghazi survivors were turned over to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Along with the transcripts, were other documents relating to the deadly September 11 attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi. Members of the committee have not examined the material yet. Senator Lindsey Graham (R – S.C.) initially called for the FBI transcripts of Benghazi survivors back in December. Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R – UT) told Breitbart News that the State Department was not allowing members of Congress to see those who survived the attack.

~~~~~~

Top candidate for EPA head tough on CO2

President Barack Obama’s expected choice to lead the Environmental Protection Agency is Gina McCarthy, who as an assistant EPA administrator has shaped some of the agency’s most contentious rules, including greenhouse gas regulations for new cars and power plants, and air pollution standards for oil and gas drilling. McCarthy, 58, hasn’t made any public statements about what she would do if confirmed as EPA administrator, and the Office of Air and Radiation — which she currently heads — didn’t return a request for comment. To get an idea of how she might lead the agency, InsideClimate News examined some of the speeches she’s given over the past four years. McCarthy’s record shows she’s a strong supporter of climate action.

~~~~~~

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"

--Samuel Adams, 1776

~~~~~~

"The opinion has been very general, that, in order to obtain the blessings of a good government, a sacrifice must be made of a part of our natural liberty. I am much inclined to believe, that, upon examination, this opinion will prove to be fallacious."

--James Wilson, Lectures on Law, 1790

~~~~~~~~~~~~