The first rule of the philosophy of liberty is …

… You Own Yourself [boldfacing mine]:

While self-ownership may seem like a simple and self-evident concept, I believe that most Americans residing in the land of the free would become very uncomfortable when the full implications of self-ownership become evident. We know for example that many of our fellow Americans are Statists in one form or another and the premise of all Statists is that we are actually owned by the state and that all of our liberties and rights come from the state. They also believe that the product of our lives is first the property of the state and what the state chooses to give back to us then becomes ours.

The other group that completely rejects the concept of self-ownership is what I will call the moralists. Most of these people in the U.S. believe that they are Christian. In a country like Saudi Arabia they are Muslims. Either way they are convinced that whatever life choices that they have made for themselves is also good for their neighbors and seek to impose, through the force of government, that way of life on others. What I find so dangerous about these people is that they believe that their right to impose their morality on others comes not from a manmade philosophy, like Socialism or Fascism, but from God himself. Because of this aberrant belief, arguing with these folks takes on the equivalent, to them at least, of the appearance of arguing with God, and we all know only a fool would argue with God.

H/T Red State Virginia. Be sure to read the whole thing.

I’ve only recently started to learn about property rights in relation to liberty and free markets. But the instant I heard of the private property concept of ownership of self it struck me that it applies to gay equality. That’s because the procreation-based arguments against marriage equality assume you are not your own property but rather the property of the state and that the state regulates marriage in exchange for babies. However, it seems to me that government regulates marriage due to the number of property rights and types of agency (such as the powers to make healthcare decisions and post mortem funeral arrangements) associated both with marriage and divorce.

Thoughts, gentle readers?

Note: This was originally posted on August 17, 2011. It was lost by my web host, so I am restoring it manually. I could not recover comments for this post.

Restoring lost posts

On Saturday I will finish manually restoring the posts from Aug. 11 to Sept. 16 that were lost by my web host. Then I will resume posting. I have more to say about Marcus Bachmann, my piece in The Advocate explaining why I think gay equality will come from the Right, and what I think Obama is doing when he’s practically chanting “Pass the jobs bill” (besides positioning Republicans to take the blame for high levels of unemployment as part of his re-election campaign, as others have pointed out).

UPDATED: Michelle Bachmann wins Iowa straw poll, husband still gay

I originally posted the following on August 14, 2011. It was lost on Sept. 17 due to a web host snafu. I am restoring it from Google’s cached copy along with all the original comments (I will be answering objections raised in the comments in a future post):

Dear God in heaven, how does Michele Bachmann not know her husband is gay? As Jon Stewart notes in the video clip, Marcus Bachmann isn’t just gay, he’s “center square gay.” (Note to young whippersnappers: Gay man and king queen of snark, Paul Lynde, sat in the center square of the game show, “Hollywood Squares,” from 1968 to 1981.) How gay is Marcus Bachmann? A question which, by the way, is likely to be a Twitter hashtag soon if it isn’t already. Marcus Bachmann is drag queen gay.

But wait, there’s more:

There are enough conservative gays and lesbians that we will be outing Marcus Bachmann and his ilk. If closeted Republican gays don’t have the honor to come clean about their double lives and come out of the closet, we will dismantle the closet. For example, this video of Marcus Bachmann being confronted at the Iowa State Fair was shot by openly gay Republican candidate, Fred Karger:

How big a deal is it that gays and lesbians are so demonized by people like Michele Bachmann that they marry straight people for the perks of equality? Well, in a cruel example of divine justice, the gay man who married her to steal the life she would deny him with the Federal Marriage Amendment has stolen her life, and is the reason she should not be the Republican nominee.

Luckily, for men, it is easy to determine sexual orientation with some objectivity. Or, technically, a strip of postage stamps strategically applied around a flaccid penis prior to viewing porn. The emotional growth of people who deny their sexual orientation stops in their teens because you can only grow if you are allowed to be who you really are. This is because when your feelings are gay but you are trying to act straight, your behavior is directed entirely by your intellect rather than your heart and hormones. So, if I were going to put Marcus Bachmann through such a test, I would choose a variety of types of gay porn to see what he prefers, but I would expect the models he finds most attractive to be teenagers.

Those 23 foster kids — they’re all girls, right?

H/T: AmericaBlog Gay and Pam’s House Blend (check out the photo of Marcus Bachmann). I know they’re Leftists but I read them to keep up with the gay Left and it’s only honorable to link them when they’re sources.

P.S.

Daniel Blatt at Gay Patriot notes that Michele Bachmann tried to walk back her toxic anti-gay rhetoric on “Meet the Press” today. She says she’s not “running to be anyone’s judge.” Seriously? Despite the video and audio record to the contrary that she’s made anti-gay statements for political gain? Although, come to think of it, her life and the ex-gay “reparative” therapy center she operates with her husband are built on the concept that it’s honorable to pretend to be someone you aren’t, so pretending she’s a moderate to build a broader coalition for her own gain must seem like the right play to her.

Update, 8/15/2011: My friend, Peter Ingemi, aka DaTechGuy, links this post and responds, “Let’s revisit Hell.” He is having me on his radio show this Saturday, August 20, at 10 am, EDT, WRCN AM 830 (phone in at 1-888-9-FEDORA or click the “Listen Live” button at the link) so I expect we shall have a lot to discuss. My reply to Peter is brief:

  1. It’s “all men are create equal.” There’s no exception for lesbians and gays.
  2. “Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” means YOUR religion is not allowed to declare groups of people intrinsically evil and then hijack the apparatus of the government to disadvantage them. Religions are faiths, not facts. You may not impose your religion on others through the coercive powers of government without granting that others should be allowed to impose their religion on you.
  3. I stopped being an ex-ex-lesbian for spiritual reasons. I was trying to be straight, when I was really a lesbian. Trying to be someone I’m not is adharma, which means I could not progress spiritually to enlightenment because I was trying to be something I wasn’t. There is no greater non-good. To incite people to adharma is the worst possible deed you can commit because you are murdering them spiritually. So while you would cast me, and all gays and lesbians, into hell, my life’s purpose is to inspire people to spiritual enlightenment. Equality for lesbians and gays is a necessary condition to fulfill that goal.

The following are the comments on this post, which I’m restoring from Google’s cache:

Liz, 8/15/11, 12:57 pm:

Oh…wow…that’s…uh…

Things like the Daily Show aren’t available where I currently live, and I hadn’t seen pictures of him, so actually seeing them was…wow…that is some gayface.

Gotta say, certain sections of the right are NOT helping either themselves or the cause by whining that he’s being bullied. They’re damaging themselves even more by claiming that this is a sign that the “homosexualist agenda” is just as vicious as the anti same sex marriage agenda.

Because…wow…I might need some time alone. He actually reminds me of a postor I had who started pressuring me, before my father found out and shut him down as only a muscle-fat redneck daddy bear can. (I was seven.)

Cynthia Yockey, reply to Liz, 8/15/11, 7:15 pm:

I am late to this discussion because the subject of anti-gay reparative therapy is so painful to me. However, as soon as I saw Marcus Bachmann for the first time this weekend, I realized he is true to the stereotype of people who push reparative therapy: they are gay. Frankly, I’m starting to doubt that Michele is straight.

I’m so happy your dad protected you. With your family’s protection for your equality, you got a chance to have their support and guidance as you matured so you could go through the milestones of growing up at the age when each one is appropriate. This is absolutely necessary for emotional and psychological health. Please tell your dad I send love and hugs.

Graumagus, 8/16/11, 6:23 am:

First off, let me say that while I think Michelle Bachmann would make a much better president than Obama (that’s not saying much: anyone who can balance a checkbook and manage to not max out their credit cards would make a better president than him at this point), I am not a fan of her social agenda at all.

To me, most social conservatives aren’t “conservative” in my book at all, given that they are just as happy to swing the hammer of the federal government with wild abandon- just at different nails than the left.

Secondly, yes: Marcus Bachmann has some seriously gay mannerisms. He’s probably gay.

That said: Does anyone have any evidence that he is in fact a homosexual other than he seems to be based on speech and mannerisms?

Seriously. I would like to know.

I’m not talking about the “I know a guy who was dating my ex who had a fling with Mark Kirk in a bathroom” or “Obama used to cruise the clubs down in Boystown” winkwink nudegnudge rumors, but solid concrete evidence.

No?

Hmm.

And apparently tried and convicted by you as a pedophile as well.

With no evidence.

Personal attacks geared towards political destruction against those you don’t ideologically agree with based on rumors and innuendo is straight out of the left’s playbook.

I have come to respect you a lot in the time I have been reading this blog, Cynthia, and quite frankly I think this is beneath you.

Attack the Bachmann’s bullshit “pray away the gay” evangelist crap at will with facts and a ringing demand for your equal rights, Cynthia, and you’ll see me and a slew of other fiscal conservative/social libertarian types standing side by side with you.

Engage in unproven (no matter how likely, but still unproven) smears and insinuations and you place yourself in the “Trig isn’t really Sarah Palin’s baby” category.

You’re better than that.

PS: Show me video of the guy making out with another dude, or proof he’s molested kids and I’ll buy the tar and feathers.

Peter, 8/16/11, 10:19 pm:

I gotta confess that my gaydar needs a lot of help, but then gay isn’t really much of a concern of mine. I mean I got hurt a little as a young guy busting up a gaybashing but that was on the job and when I went into it I thought it was an ordinary strongarm robbery. Rest easy, though, back then wee were expected to get fully even, and then ahead if anyone hurt one of us. Too bad that still isn’t the rule, both cops and civilians would be safer. But, I digress.

Here is my problem: Under Don’t ask, don’t tell anyone being hounded out of the Armed Services for looking and acting gay would bring howls of outrage. I mean, yeah the guy does not look like he drips testosterone on giant puddles as soon as the temperature breaks 65 degrees. Um, in my career I met a lot of very masculine looking and acting men who shared housing “to save money”. Sometimes, as when I was investigating a break-in or something I’d notice that only one bedroom was in use. In my Dept, we would never write anything like that down, though,when it wasn’t of any interest in solving the crime.

Things may have changed in the decades since I got enough seniority to get out of the sweeps we had to do when the man plus man outdoor sex would get out of hand and the county would make us rein ’em in. Back then a very large percentage of those men would be cryin’ tears the size of horse turds about what they were going to tell their wives and kids.

So, here we are. Sex is private!!!!! Except when it isn’t. You can’t have it both ways, Cyn. I do not believe that Michelle Backman would countenance violence against people for their sexual orientation or even actions, except in the case of rape or to stop sexual acts against very young children. And, damn it, THAT is all we owe.

Michelle B. has been an elected official for over ten years. Name one time she’s tried to bring the power of government against gays and lesbians.

Rick Perry is the next one that the organized left will be attacking, he’s been in government for thirty years. Same thing. You cannot name an attack either one of those people have made.

All this makes my head ache. All, repeat ALL acts against the life and safety of gays and lesbians as a group by governments in the last hundred years have come from the left or from Islam. My job was never to change hearts and minds, it was to lock up those who harmed the persons or property of others.

The original trackbacks are as follows:

Datechguy’s Blog » Blog Archive » Let’s revisit Hell

08/15/2011 08:13 PM:

[…] came to mind when I saw this post by Cynthia Yockey, I like Cynthia, she is a friend and …

Marcus Bachmann and the Dangerous Modern Myth of ‘Sexual Orientation’ : The Other McCain

08/16/2011 01:07 PM:

Little Miss Attila: Public Sphere, Private Sphere: Know the Difference.

08/16/2011 07:10 PM:

[…] I’m talking to you, Peter and Cynthia. […]

Christian Doctrine Makes People Mad « Truth Before Dishonor

08/20/2011 03:35 AM:

[…] I disagree vehemently.) Little Miss Attila was responding to a blog-debate between Da Tech Guy and Cynthia Yockey. Here’s …

Dan Riehl on why America needs Sarah Palin to run for president in 2012

I originally posted the following on August 13, 2011. It was lost on Sept. 17. I am re-posting it from Google’s cache:

Dan Riehl has been writing some very positive and insightful posts on Sarah Palin, whose interview with Sean Hannity last night at the Iowa State Fair was electrifying. Today he is posting on “Why Sarah Palin needs to run for president in 2012.” I re-cast that statement in my headline because it is America that needs Gov. Palin to run for president. Gov. Palin would not run for president out of her own ambition, so she will never need to run. However, it is easy to see that none of the other candidates have her ability to articulate the principles of fiscal conservatism and fill people with the belief that they can overcome the challenges they face in their own lives and in our nation. In addition, Gov. Palin has the best qualifications of all the prospective candidates, especially her knowledge of what needs to be done to make America energy independent, which will simultaneously improve our economy and national security.

Palin for president in 2012.

Peter W. Davis commented on 8/13/11:

Cynthia, Gov. Palin may well decide that she does need to run for President. Need arises from more than personal desire. The LEO does not run toward the wild man shooting up a crack house out of desire for excitement but out of duty. The mother that jumps into a fast flowing river after a total stranger’s child does not jump out of a desire to cool off but out of duty. And if our Sarah jumps into the race it will not be for personal profit but out of, you guessed it, duty. She does not need more money, nor does she care much about “glory”, unlike others I could name.

If Gov. Palin believes someone already declared can pull our chestnuts out of the fire she will gladly support him or her, meanwhile having a helluva good (and profitable) time in the speaking circuit. She can spend time with Trig and Piper, support PerryChristyBachman??? between very lucrative speaking engagements.

So that is one of only two ways Gov. Palin will jump in. The other? If the Obama attack machine is too much for her preferred candidate, she could jump in and act as a flak catcher. Just by getting near the race she would start absorbing much of the hate and money from the Donkey’s machine, and every penny spent attacking her is not going toward another. So, we shall see.

Technical difficulties and my op-ed for The Advocate on why gay equality will come from the Right

This morning this blog experienced technical difficulties and when it was restored came back missing my posts from Aug. 11 to Sept. 16. These include my posts on Marcus Bachmann and my op-ed for The Advocate on why gay equality will come from the Right. I have been able to save the posts, but not the comments and the comments (on 9/25/11), from Google’s cache. (If anyone has suggestions on how to get the comments back, I would love to have them.) I’m lucky to have as much of the blog restored as I do because my web host tells me it’s had problems this week.

Although many of the comments at The Advocate about my op-ed were pretty toxic, I don’t think my blog was attacked over my op-ed.

Here’s the text of my post about my op-ed as rescued from Google’s cache:

I wasn’t expecting my op-ed for The Advocate on why gay equality will come from the Right to be published until October but just discovered from a Google alert that it is now online. Judging from the stats on referring URLs in my Sitemeter, not many Advocate readers have visited to learn more about how this could be so. I do find that conservatives are more intellectually curious about the people who disagree with them, but then diversity on the Right is a diversity of ideas rather than identity groups who must all toe the same line. But I will point out to the Right that the unwillingness of lesbians and gays on the Left to dialog too often comes from the bitter experience of being rejected by their own families for being gay. Betrayals of that magnitude do not foster trust. And it is very difficult from the Left to distinguish among all the different ideologies on the Right. This is especially so since social conservatism is antithetical to liberty, religious freedom and fiscal conservatism — as well as gay equality — because it is really animated by the desire of religions to be the sole possessors of the one ring the coercive powers of government.

What is bizarre about lesbians and gays not understanding the Right is that no other group in the United States embodies the values of fiscal conservatives more than the lesbian and gay community. This is because we know we cannot rely on the government, our own families or our religion for support or protection. So lesbians and gays in large numbers must be entrepreneurs, self-reliant and resourceful. We also must set up and fund our own non-profits and charities. In contrast, one of the big objections social conservatives have to gay equality that is antithetical to fiscal conservatism is that their churches will no longer be able to get rivers of cash from the government for their evangelical enterprises, such as adoption agencies, which ought not to be receiving any government money, unless they agree to treat gays equally. (Note to progressives/liberals/Leftists: fiscal conservatism is opposed to big government and favors lower taxes, in order for individuals to retain the liberties that go with getting to keep most of the money they earn, so it is not consistent with fiscal conservative values to take money from people by force — which is how fiscal conservatives view taxes — and redistribute it for any purposes that the private sector and free enterprise can handle. This would include both religious adoption agencies and Planned Parenthood, neither one of which should be getting a penny of taxpayers’ money.)

I would appreciate my dear gentle readers checking out my piece and commenting at The Advocate. And, if it’s convenient, please leave a copy of your comment here.

Update, 9/16/11, Friday: The comments at The Advocate indicate a great deal of disbelief that there is a place for lesbians and gays in the big tent of conservatism (to put it mildly). What better way to prove them wrong than to donate to A Conservative Lesbian?

Update, 9/16/11, Friday: Thank you, Roger Simon, for linking both this post and my op-ed at The Advocate at the PJ Tatler. Welcome, Pajamas Media readers!

Update, 9/26/11, Sunday: Google’s cache of the original post along with the comments turned up today. The following are the cached comments:

Peter W. Davis, 9/16/11, 1:22 am:

Cyn, I’m one of those who do not object, in principle, to gay marriage or LBGTs in the military but I remain concerned about how well it will work. Still I will fight, as I have fought, unprovoked violence against everyone. When I got out of the service and joined up with my department one of the problems we had was gay men getting robbed and sometimes beaten in outdoor um, meeting places. Back then many of the victims would not even report the crimes, especially since so many of these victims were married. So many still are and I do not understand that one fully. I’m not sure I really want to but that’s another story.

Here’s my question: how much of this rejection from the family is still going on? Okay, I undertand the disappointment if an only child comes out and the parents realise that there will be no (old fashioned) grandchildren. Still, I suspect that far more parents would be like Dick Cheney.Seriously, aren’t the Cheneys more the norm these days?

Cynthia Yockey, 9/16/11, 9:32 am, in reply to Peter W. Davis:

Peter,

Sadly, it looks to me like family rejection is still common. Social conservatives, both Right and Left, whose religions have told them that homosexuality is a choice are especially willing to throw away their lesbian and gay children, even to the point of putting dependent teens out on the street with reckless disregard of whether that will lead to their own child’s death. For example, I can’t find any conservative criticism of Alan Keyes and Randall Terry for tossing out their gay children when they were teens.

Also, it actually took the Cheneys awhile to get to where they are now — I once saw Lynn Cheney being interviewed on TV denying that her daughter, Mary, is a lesbian, even though Mary had been openly lesbian and a public figure for years. However, the Cheneys do deserve credit for being much more supportive of their lesbian daughter than Cher has been of her lesbian daughter who is now her transgender son. (Just a reminder that Chastity/Chaz got acceptance from her Republican father, Sonny Bono, before her liberal mother, Cher, and Cher is still hardly lifting a finger for LGBT equality compared to what she could be doing given her wealth and popularity.)

For new gentle readers, Peter is a dear frequent commenter here and is retired from his career in law enforcement as a sheriff’s deputy in Texas. He blogs at Shakey Pete’s Shootin’ Shack — the link goes to his insightful post on the Gardasil vaccine controversy.

Peter W. Davis, 9/17/11, 1:25 am, in reply to Cynthia Yockey:

Here’s one thing I have, nothing much to do with gay marriage. Many of the beatings and robberies of gay men were and are never reported. And then the beatings and robberies are supposed to be about “gay hatred” among the robbers when most of the robbers have no particular feelings about gays and are even sometimes gay themselves. It was more a question of what crime is easiest to get away with? Obviously the ones that do not get reported.

We never really got a handle on that. Add that gay men are often more affluent and tend to wear better watches and jewlery while cruising semi-secluded places and there was a situation that was very frustrating to LEOs. Robbers belong in jail. We couldn’t even start to look for them because the crimes wouldn’t be reported, well, not until we found a dead body.

Meanwhile, The Advocate people aren’t much interested in what an old redneck Texas boy has to say, they’d rather live in a dream world of being hated by the right while the left sides with those who hang gay men from construction cranes.

Ggreen, 9/16/11, 9:37 am:

You are delusional and you need to fire your hair stylist, Who is it Pepco?

Cynthia Yockey, 9/16/11, 10:08 am, in reply to Ggreen:

Good one! My hair is naturally curly.

Paul Maršic, 9/16/11, 9:38 am:

A lucid, well-written op-ed! Ms. Yockey, if you ever need a Spanish translation of it, you can count on me (I could work on a first draft).

Cynthia Yockey, 9/16/11, 10:06 am, in reply to Paul Maršic:

Thank you, Paul, for your praise and kind offer. My contract with The Advocate has rules on when I may re-publish my piece. If other readers request a Spanish translation, I’ll let you know and will publish your translation in Spanish when my contract permits me to do so, if you still want to do it.

Silverafc, 9/16/11, 1:21 pm:

I talk to a lot more Conservatives than you or your readers, and other than the Bible toting Evangelicals, who are mostly a pain is the bottom anyway, most Conservatives don’t care one way or the other as long as you don’t expect a check from the taxpayers to go with it, or special rights. Much of the opposition to Gay rights on the Right stems from the impression that Gay advocates are just another front group for the Democrat campaign machine. It is not good politics to shower a group with insults and then ask for their votes.

Given the horror show Family Court has become, I don’t know why any sane Gay person would want to risk getting themselves tangled up in marriage, and take the risk of being financially responsible for your Ex after the relationship has run its course.

Here is my comment at Pajamas Media who linked to your article in The Advocate.

~ ~ ~

As a Libertarian, it is natural to be for Gay rights and marriage.

I voted against gay marriage when I had the chance specifically because I was angry that Democrats repeatedly outed Gay Republicans in elections and the main Gay movement political groups and spokesmen sat on their hands and did nothing. There is a huge double standard supported by mainstream Gay political organizations wherein Gay Democrats are celebrated, while it remains acceptable for Democrats to tar and feather Gay Republicans as they are ridden out of town on a rail.

Observing the behavior of official Gay political groups, it is hard to come to any other conclusion than that they are Democrat operatives first, and only secondly Gay rights advocates. When the majority of Gay political organizations routinely go ballistic when a Gay Republican is outed in the closing weeks of a close campaign, I will vote for the next gay marriage referendum that comes up.

~ ~ ~

I cannot see how gay marriage will have any affect on straight marriage. I does not take one straight person off the list of potential spouses, it does not prevent any straight person from getting married, and it does not bring about divorces amongst straight people.

If religious Conservatives really want to do something to shore up traditional marriages, they need to look to altering the current situation in divorce law and divorce settlements, and bring wholesale reform to the Family Courts. The current system allows women to literally drive their husbands out of their lives while retaining his financial support and use unfounded charges of abuse of themselves and their children to increase their share of his income while restricting his access to his own children.

It is the lopsided legal situation in Family Courts which no longer dispense blind justice, but rather start with the assumption that the woman is a victim of an evil male and entitled to compensation and support, and it is up to the male to prove otherwise in a court rigged against him, that is real cause of the disappearance of lifetime marriage as the social norm.

Cynthia Yockey, 9/16/11, 2:51 pm, in reply to Silverafc:

So your libertarian conscience led you to deny equality to lesbians and gays in order to dispense some kind of justice or wreak revenge for the acts of a few people with life-destroying consequences for the rest of the group innocent of wrong-doing?

My own conscience requires me to do the right thing whether or not I believe someone deserves it because I am neither God nor a court of law. I must do right because it is the right thing to do.

I hope in the future that you will support gay equality measures because it is the right thing to do. Social conservatives are the architects of the Left because they have driven out of the Right three groups that would benefit the most from fiscal conservatism: gays, women and Jews. Social conservatives also are responsible for a great deal of the misbehavior of the gay community because they have denied gays access to age-appropriate social milestones with family support and supervision and deny gays the support of most religions, demonize gays as being intrinsically evil independent of any action, then denounce them for not being socialized to their satisfaction. It’s a sweet catch-22 to destroy a group of people so comprehensively and then blame them for being damaged.

By the way, conservative feminist author Dr. Phyllis Chesler recently updated her book, Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody, and came up with different results than your own apparent experience regarding whether family courts favor mothers or fathers. See her post: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/07/08/what-to-expect-when-are-expecting-divorce/.

Silverafc, 9/16/11, 3:24 pm, in reply to Cynthia Yockey:

“I must do right because it is the right thing to do.”

When it gets to where you and other Gay advocates denounce Democrats and their media stooges for turning the fact that a Republican was discovered to be Gay into a career ending scandal, I’ll believe that.

Ms Chesler is just one more Feminist who blames all the problems in marriages on men. Women are equal contributors to the problems in marriages, and game the system by playing the victim card. You can go to any Men’s Rights site and find the truth. The whole family court system is rigged against men, and any man who marries or conceives any child is a fool.

Cynthia Yockey, 9/16/11, 3:44 pm, in reply to Silverafc:

I favor outing closeted politicians of both parties. It’s not being outed that destroys careers, it’s all the anti-gay activity that closeted politicians use as their cover that does them in. People don’t like being deceived and manipulated.

Instapundit proposes tax increases the Tea Party can support

In his Sunday column for The Examiner, Prof. Glenn Reynolds, aka Instapundit, asks a pertinent question, “Why should Democrats be the only ones to enjoy the fun of taxing people they dislike?” Then he proposes taxes that would clarify the thinking of Hollywood on the effect of taxes on prosperity:

Were I a Republican senator or representative, I would be agitating to repeal the “Eisenhower tax cut” on the movie industry and restore the excise tax. I think I would also look at imposing similar taxes on sales of DVDs, pay-per-view movies, CDs, downloadable music, and related products.

I’d also look at the tax and accounting treatment of these industries to see if they were taking advantage of any special “loopholes” that could be closed as a means of reducing “tax expenditures.” (Answer: Yes, they are.)

America, after all, is facing the largest national debt in relation to GDP that it has faced since the end of World War II, so a return to the measures deemed necessary then is surely justifiable now.

The president’s own rhetoric about revenues certainly suggests so. Perhaps the bill could be named the “Greatest Generation Tax Fairness Act” in recognition of its history.

Should legislation of this sort be passed — or even credibly threatened — I think we can expect to see Hollywood rediscover the dangers posed by “job killing tax increases,” just as pro-tax-increase Warren Buffet changed his tune once his own corporate-jet business was threatened.

And, given the entertainment industries’ role as the Democrats’ campaign finance ATM, it seems likely that the president might soon reconsider his rhetoric as well.

Prof. Reynolds also proposes a surtax on the incomes of political appointees and members of Congress who cash in on their political influence after leaving office. I urge you to read the whole thing and memorize his proposals to use in any conversation with a Leftist who complains about people and industries who ought to be taxed in the service of social justice because they are too rich. In fact, I think Prof. Reynolds doesn’t go far enough. Since Al Gore became a billionaire within 10 years after finishing his term as vice president and his failed run for president, and former president Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary, also quickly made a fortune after he finished his second term, they obviously have more than enough money and ought to be taxed more, so I think this proposal should be extended to the president and vice president as well, starting with Obama and Biden so they can show us how it’s done.

Gov. Palin on ‘Conquering the Storm’

Thanks to dear Dan Collins I read Gov. Palin’s Aug. 8 Facebook essay, “Conquering the Storm,” in which she demonstrates why she is the best candidate for the Republican nomination and has exactly the leadership and vision required as president to restore America to prosperity. While all the other candidates dither or denounce, Gov. Palin clearly explains the problems we face and the practical solutions we must adopt, while inspiring Americans with the courage and enthusiasm needed for the tasks ahead:

First, we need to get serious about our deficit. No more accounting gimmicks. No more cuts in “out-years” that never materialize. The permanent political class in D.C. might be fooling themselves with these Enron-like accounting games, but they’re not fooling the world’s capital markets. And we don’t need any more happy talk from the White House about “investing” in solar shingles and really fast trains. The White House shouldn’t even bother floating these new spending programs. We can’t afford them. Period. We need to stop this deficit spending, balance our budget, repeal Obamacare, cancel all unused stimulus funds, and reform our entitlement programs. We have to have an adult conversation about our spending commitments; circumstances have changed, and we must adapt. I know none of this will be easy, but, “thick” or not, the average American outside the D.C. politico bubble knows that we no longer have a choice! We will have entitlement reform and a balanced budget; it’s just a matter of how. We can do it ourselves in a calm, methodical, and responsible manner, or we can wait for the world’s capital markets to ram it down on us. Let’s be responsible and do it ourselves. And let’s get serious about reducing the size of government across the board and rooting out waste. How many more reports (that today are destined to merely gather dust on the shelf) do we need about duplicative and unnecessary programs before we actually do something about government waste?

We need to get this economy moving again, and the real stimulus we’ve been waiting for is domestic energy development. We must reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil by responsibly developing natural resources here. This will provide good paying jobs, reduce our trade deficit, increase federal and state revenue, ensure environmental standards, and actually stimulate our economy without incurring any debt. That’s real stimulus! Affordable, plentiful, and secure energy is the foundation of every thriving economy. Let’s make it the foundation of ours. Let’s do the opposite of President Obama’s manipulation of U.S. energy supplies. Let’s drill here, build refineries, and stop kowtowing to foreign countries in asking them to ramp up energy production which makes us even more beholden to them as we rely on their foreign product. Let’s move on tapping our massive domestic natural gas reserves. Natural gas is the perfect “bridge fuel” to a future when more renewable sources are available. It’s clean, it’s green, and we’ve got a lot of it. Let’s drill. Let’s build an infrastructure for natural gas cars and power plants. Energy development can help kick start our economic engine.

In addition to energy security, I embrace a pro-growth agenda that can make American corporations far more competitive on the global stage. (I will be writing more about this in the coming days.) We need to tell the world, “America is open for business again!” And let’s welcome industry by reducing burdensome regulations. The Obama administration keeps strangling businesses in red tape. From the EPA’s rulings to that nightmare known as Obamacare, the Obama administration is hanging one regulatory albatross after another around the private sector’s neck. Let’s get government out of the way and give the private sector room to breathe, grow, and thrive. We can provide businesses confidence to expand and hire Americans in a stable environment.

This is the kind of optimism and the sort of checklist that fills people with the energy and clarity they need to triumph over adversity. Gov. Palin is the president America needs to be restored to prosperity.

 

Instapundit turns 10

University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds celebrates the tenth anniversary of his blog, Instapundit, born Aug. 8, 2001, and I wish him and his blog every blessing (and hope one day earn a spot in his blogroll). He was one of the first bloggers I saw at CPAC 2009 speaking with Vodkapundit, Stephen Green, and Scrappleface, Scott Ott, on a panel moderated by Bill Whittle.

As Bill posed various controversial questions, I was impressed by how the three men could express opposing viewpoints with great civility and then return to common ground, accustomed as I was to disagreement generally eliciting a psychotic breakdown from at least one panelist or audience member at Leftist conferences. And I wanted to jump out of my seat a la Horshack when Prof. Reynolds stated he’d welcome gays in the conservative movement as long as they had a closet full of assault rifles since I was a Junior NRA Expert Sharpshooter. I wanted to introduce myself after the panel but the crowd around him was so deep I couldn’t get through before he left. Somehow I came to his attention a couple of weeks later and was blessed with my first Instalanche, which is the inside blogball name for a link from Instapundit since it produces an avalanche of traffic.

From time-to-time Prof. Reynolds also links bloggers in financial distress to rally the blogosphere to their aid. He did that for me at the end of May 2010. The response and donations probably saved my life by meeting the immediate need with enough left over for me to have a much-needed sonogram and consultation with a doctor and then to buy the equipment I needed to follow her orders. It was a relief to learn that I wasn’t in pain because I was dying — the doctor I saw is a gynecologist/oncologist/surgeon, which gives you a clue about what I was afraid of. But I got the best possible diagnosis: I was in pain because I was fat. She gave me a prescription for ibuprofen to control the joint pain that made it too painful to exercise. I got much busier at the gym and started counting calories. Since June of 2010 I’ve lost over 53 pounds and dropped my heart rate from the 80’s to the 60’s. I haven’t wanted to jinx my progress by writing about it — I’ll tell more of the story after I’ve achieved my objective.

Prof. Reynolds has probably given more momentum, in the form of traffic, and more practical assistance, in the form of fundraising links, to fellow bloggers than any other blogger. The bottom line is that over the last 10 years as Instapundit, Prof. Reynolds has lifted and transformed the conservative/libertarian blogosphere with his wide-ranging intellectual curiosity, unflappable nature and sense of humor.