January 7, 2013

Goodbye America

Jeffers M. Dodge President PopModal.com & Editor of AirModal.com

Jeffers M. Dodge President PopModal.com & Editor of AirModal.com

This comment is derived from the book “Plundered: How Progressive Ideology Is Destroying America,” and is written for the rank and file Democrat that follow their leaders in the nation’s legislatures. A good video to watch before reading this comment was just posted to PopModal Videos and can be seen here.

A majority of the Democrat Party is controlled by Left Wing Progressives that cannot win arguments on merit alone to stay in, or accumulate power, they must “bully, denigrate, and vilify all opposition to win votes. This is why they must use their hard fought for platforms, such as classrooms, news media and entertainment to focus the nation on hatred – hatred of the Republicans, vitriolic hatred of the Tea Party, hatred of Wall Street, deep hatred of capitalism, hatred of the rich, (even so there are more rich socialist than successful Free Market Americans) hatred of the Constitution, hatred of the United States itself, hatred of anyone who disagrees with them. They claim they are the only real Americans, yet since when is hatred an American Value? Since when does America stand for intolerance? Since when is Marxism, or even socialism the foundation of American Economics? These are all anti-American characteristics, yet they, and their policies, are voted into office time after time.”

My question to the rank and file registered Democrats (and Republicans that voted for Obama) is why be so oblivious to these obvious facts. If you are Gay, why support the Democrat Party that supports the largest religious group in the world where the public hanging of gays is public policy? If you are a woman, why support the Democrat Party that supports the largest religious group in the world that oppresses women far more than America ever has? If you are a Black American, why support the Democrat Party that has actively worked throughout history to keep your community in slavery? If you are a decent person why do you support the Democrat party that cannot win any economic argument and depends on hate, propaganda, dirty tricks, and manipulation to win your support? The answer lies in ignorance and fear.

The majority of this country’s population are undereducated cult followers. Included in this group are people that actually desire dependency. These are the conditions that led to the French Revolution which was the most brutal of all revolutions. Even the Marxist’s 180,000,000 murders cannot hold a candle to the brutality of Maximilian Robespierre’s slaughter of 100,000 fellow citizens of France who disagreed with them. All these despots, including Barrack Obama, have one thing in common: they are inspired by Jean-Jacques Rousseau the single person that can be attributed to more political murder than any other person in history and his principles of fear.

It is my opinion that America has been lost to the ideology of Rousseau and to the greed of the dependent, and the greed of those who hold a legislative gun to the head of fellow citizens to confiscate their hard earned treasure once protected by the Declaration, Constitution and Bill of Rights of the Untied States of America.

Goodbye America, may the Christian God that created you live on in the souls of those that yearn to be free.

January 4, 2013

Labor Attacks the Constitution

Written by Dick McDonald, founder of Founder of the Prosperity Commission

CalPers, California’s $240 billion dollar giant employee pension fund is asking the courts to give the State of California police powers to compel the City of San Bernardino to pay its pension bill for city employees.  As the city is in bankruptcy court Calpers will have to convince the judge to overturn the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution as Federal bankruptcy laws which includes the right to withhold creditor payments would have to be declared “unconstitutional.” The chances of this argument succeeding would normally be unheard of but look at what happened to GM bondholders. We are living in a new “progressive” world where America’s Constitution is largely ignored.

You might ask why San Bernardino went bankrupt. Well it is the same reason the Federal government is already technically bankrupt ($138 trillion of fund

ed and unfunded debt – see http://www.usdebtclock.org.) That is – too much spending. The only reason the federal government itself can avoid bankruptcy is because they can print money to pay their bills – “monetary easing” they call it.  San Bernardino can’t print money so they went into bankruptcy court just like Stockton and many other cities throughout the country are doing. In fact it is an endemic international problem as well. Greece can’t print money and that is why they are in the tank.

CalPers is suing on principle. They are massively unfunded themselves and are desperately looking for any help they can get from the possibility that every city in California will go bankrupt and stop paying all or part of their of their pension obligations. This is an economic threat of unimaginable proportions to CalPers – the most successful and employee-friendly pension plan in America. Its beneficiaries get thousands more per month than those on Social Security. A large number of bankruptcies could limit pension payments.

The CalPers pension model is to be envied.  The employer and employee contributions were funnelled not to Social Security but to CalPers.  CalPers invested those funds into the stock market.  In 2008 when the confluence of a real estate mortgage disaster met the realization that an anti-business administration was going to be elected the Dow 500 fell from 12,000 to 6,000.  Like many others who don’t understand long-term stock market investing CalPers made moves to reduce their risk of losing all of their capital. That meant it “went to cash”, “went to bonds” and other risk-reducing schemes.

Needless to say when the Dow retraced its 50% fall with a 117% jump to 13,000 Calpers didn’t have all its capital in stock to enjoy the climb and recoup their losses – and predictably became underfunded.

Unfortunately individuals, governments, their instrumentalities as well as funds and investment concerns followed suit.

Trillions were lost because the losers really didn’t understand that the stock market is a weather vane and looks only to short-term profits. All they would have had to do was look at the GDP.  It stayed constant.  It didn’t have a disastrous fall.

However, the losers are those pension funds looking down the throat of government instrumentalities going bankrupt and their pensioners losing some or all of their pensions. Something has to be done and relying on politicians to do something positive hasn’t worked since Lincoln.

Inasmuch as “we the people” have to solve this debt and pension crisis we can’t look to conventional solutions politicians advance.  They are the ones whose incompetence has put us into this crisis and they are incapable of getting us out.  We need to look for a plan, an idea, an out-of-the-box solution to reduce our unfunded debts without sacrificing people’s pensions.

I have advanced a solution to this and many other financial concerns facing America as the Founder of the Prosperity Commission and the author of the USA Plan. Among the Plan’s many features it saves cities, counties, states and the federal government from the current pension and entitlement debacle. It also immediately reduces the government’s funded and unfunded liabilities from $138 trillion to $30 trillion.

If, in addition to saving pensions, you are interested in eradicating endemic poverty, increasing benefits of safety nets like Social Security, Medicare and Disability, economically emancipating women and a whole host of other things please go to the website and learn more. We need all the people to support and advance our Plan. It will really help your kids and grandkids.  The kids can’t afford to pay the debt politicians and ideologues have run up.

via Labor Attacks the Constitution | New York Daily Sun – The Trusted New York Daily Broadsheet.

January 2, 2013

Will Aging Childless Voters Enslave My Future Grandchildren?

The problem with entitlement democracy is that you eventually run out of other people’s babies.

By Bill Frezza

Screen shot 2012-12-28 at 9.51.44 AMIf demography is destiny, democracy is toast-at least those democracies where citizens can vote themselves a living at someone else’s expense. It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to see that governments’ addiction to intergenerational income redistribution is not sustainable unless someone keeps supplying babies at an accelerating pace.

The root cause of the economic disaster that lies ahead is the kamikaze drive of democratic governments to displace the functions of the family, including the care of relatives in their old age. Since time immemorial, in every human society that ever was, and buttressed by social mores central to every religion ever practiced, children, grandchildren, and kin did what governments the world over now promise to do.

The burdens of providing for the aged used to begin when people could no longer care for themselves. The liabilities were dispersed, unenumerated, and owned by small groups of closely related individuals. These individuals owed their very existence to the elderly dependents who brought them into the world and nurtured them through childhood. The glue of duty, love, and reverence bound families together. Yes, families occasionally broke down, which threw unfortunates onto the mercy of charity. But isolated family failures never threatened to destabilize global economies.

Democracy changed all that. The burdens of providing for the aged are larger than ever thanks to the greater longevity that modernity accords. But the necessity and personal pride that drove the elderly to provide for themselves for as long as they could has been replaced by the invention of a universal “right of retirement” irrespective of an individual’s means.

This “right” to stop working for the last 10, 20, or even 30 years of our lives is secured and supported through an electoral system under which politicians promise old-age entitlements in return for votes. The system subsists on coercive taxation, money printing, and borrowing from the future. Ballooning centrally owned liabilities are perched atop a demographic pyramid with a base that must continue growing to avoid Ponzian collapse.

The aggregate U.S. federal and state unfunded liabilities required to pay for all the entitlements promised by politicians past-namely Social Security, Medicare, and defined-benefit pensions for public employees-now exceed $100 trillion. Tomorrow’s workers, including those yet unborn, have no particular kinship to the people who will be feasting on their paychecks.

The perpetual pin-the-blame-on-the-donkey circus in Washington proves that politicians will never take responsibility for curtailing entitlements, or even stop inventing new ones. The illusion created inside the Beltway and peddled by our public education system that we have somehow pre-paid for our benefits with money set aside from payroll deductions throughout our working lives makes it impossible to honestly fix the problem.

Now consider the fate of modern democracies as birth rates plummet. Educated, liberated 20- and 30-somethings are increasingly dodging the rigors of marriage and parenthood as they search for self-actualization, zipless hook ups, and ecological consciousness. Growing ranks of childless, single citizens are dealing themselves out of the cycle of life. This has never happened in all of human history. These people have no particular stake in the world they will one day leave behind. And yet they vote, in increasing numbers as they age.

This powerful shift in our cultural foundations is meticulously outlined in a recently released study titled “The Rise of Post Familialism: Humanity’s Future.” Its many chilling charts and graphs show how country after country across the developed world is hurtling toward population implosion.

It takes a live birth rate of 2.1 children per woman to maintain a stable population. Birth rates across Southern Europe have plunged below 1.5, and are expected to drop even further as Euro Zone economies continue to contract. Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and Japan are converging on birth rates closer to 1.0, literally halving their population each generation. Even the Black Plague didn’t do that.

As women increasingly gain financial independence through education and higher workplace participation-the study calls this the New Girl Order-they are increasingly shunning marriage and child rearing. Meanwhile, entire cohorts of emasculated young men have adopted the so-called “herbivore” lifestyle, living a partnerless existence filled with comic books, videogames, pornography, and masturbation.

The trend is slower in countries like the United States that attract large numbers of both legal and illegal immigrants, whose babies fill the gap. But don’t get too comfortable. The fertility rate associated with recent immigrants disappears with assimilation. Meanwhile, protracted economic downturns like the present Great Stagnation have stemmed and in some cases reversed the flow of baby makers.

One need only look at our biggest and most politically powerful cities to get a picture of our future. These dense urban centers have become entertainment megaplexes with economies that cater to single professionals. Meanwhile, sky-high rents and deplorable school systems drive families away. A majority of residences in Manhattan are now for “singletons,” with Hizzoner Michael Bloomberg pushing to build 300 square foot mini-condos to cram in even more. In Washington, D.C., an eye popping 70 percent of the female population is unmarried, with nearly half of all pregnancies ending in abortion. San Francisco has become a mecca for urban tribes of single, childless hipsters whose behavior and policy preferences further accelerate family flight.

The fatal flaw in this scheme is the skyrocketing dependency ratio. The number of young people entering the workforce (should they be lucky enough to find jobs) is not growing fast enough to support the exploding population of non-working 60, 70, 80, and 90-somethings. Meanwhile, the elderly’s over-consumption of health care services threatens to bankrupt an indebted economy to which they’ve stopped contributing.

Signs and portents of the new reality abound. The government of Singapore has begun begging women to have babies. There are now more adult diapers sold in Japan than baby diapers. In America dogs are the new kids, so much easier and less expensive to train and care for.

Those of us who have or hope to have grandchildren (alas, far fewer than the number enjoyed by our grandparents), have to wonder how many of their working hours will be devoted to paying for the “rights” the aged have voted for themselves. With take-home pay dwindling, will my grandchildren be able to afford families of their own, or will they decide that it’s cheaper and easier to join the crowd and resign from the gene pool? Will those that buck the trend be forced to emigrate to escape economic enslavement imposed by a childless, aging majority? And what will happen to Western civilization when the only people left having babies are those who plan to raise them on welfare and food stamps?

The problem with entitlement democracy is that you eventually run out of other people’s babies.

via RealClearMarkets – Will Aging Childless Voters Enslave My Future Grandchildren?.

December 28, 2012

Thoughts on Reactions to the Sandy Hook Tragedy

Larry Sand President California Teachers Empowerment Network

Larry Sand President California Teachers Empowerment Network

Teacher union leaders offer heat but no light after the mass murder in Newtown.

In the aftermath of the December 14th mass murder of 26 children and school staffers in Newtown, Connecticut, there has been the understandable finger pointing and a full range of suggestions for ensuring that such a horror doesn’t happen again.

On the lunatic end of the spectrum we have teacher union apologist Diane Ravitch, the formerly venerable education historian, who took up residence in the land of Bizarro several years ago.

Every one of the teachers was a career educator. Every one was doing exactly what she wanted to do. They’ve worked in a school that was not obsessed with testing but with the needs of children. This we know: the staff at Sandy Hook loved their students. They put their students first, even before their own lives.

Oh, and one other thing, all these dedicated teachers belonged to a union. The senior teachers had tenure, despite the fact that “reformers” (led by ConnCAN, StudentsFirst, and hedge fund managers) did their best last spring to diminish their tenure and to tie their evaluations to test scores….

Ravitch’s loopy rant is Rahm Emanuel’s “Never let a good crisis go to waste” philosophy taken to an obscene level. And when in response, Teach For America V.P. and self-described “lefty Dem” David Rosenberg took Ravitch to task, Chicago Teacher Union president Karen Lewis (perhaps shocked that someone could outdo her in the outrageous comment category) weighed in with,

There might have been a time where “politicizing” tragic events, especially mass shootings was thought to be in poor taste. That has changed with the 24/7 news cycle that continues to focus far too much time and energy on the perpetrator of the massacre than that of our precious victims. Rosenberg’s “false outrage” needs to be checked. That same false outrage should show itself when policies his [TEACH FOR AMERICA*] colleagues support kill and disenfranchise children from schools across this nation. (Emphasis added.) We in Chicago have been the victims of their experiments on our children since the current secretary of Education “ran” CPS.

Yes, you read that correctly. Lewis is saying that TFA, an organization that places exceptional, idealistic young teacher-leaders in the most challenging schools in the country is responsible for killing kids. After uttering those shameful words, Lewis should resign in disgrace.

Then we have a rare joint statement issued by the leaders of the two national teachers unions – the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers. NEA’s Dennis Van Roekel and AFT’s Randi Weingarten came out with a press release with a sub-head which reads: “Focus Needs to Be on Investments in Mental Health Services, Reasonable Gun Safety Legislation.”

In the body of the brief statement they say,

Long-term and sustainable school safety also requires a commitment to preventive measures. We must continue to do more to prevent bullying in our schools. And we must dramatically expand our investment in mental health services. Proper diagnosis can and often starts in our schools, yet we continue to cut funding for school counselors, school social workers, and school psychologists. States have cut at least $4.35 billion in public mental health spending from 2009 to 2012, according to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors. It is well past time to reverse this trend and ensure that these services are available and accessible to those who need our support.

While this may sound good, it has nothing to do with what happened in Connecticut. The shooter had been identified as having a type of autism, perhaps Asperger’s; he had been assigned to a high-school psychologist and there have been no reports that he was bullied. So this statement is really nothing more than a pitch to advance the teachers union agenda of spending ever more money on education.

The other part of the press release deals with guns:

Our duty to every child is to provide safe and secure public schools. That is the vow we take as educators. It is both astounding and disturbing that following this tragedy, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, Bill Bennett, and other politicians and pundits have taken to the airwaves to call for arming our teachers. As the rest of the country debates how to keep guns out of schools, some are actually proposing bringing more guns in, turning our educators into objects of fear and increasing the danger in our schools.

Guns have no place in our schools. Period. We must do everything we can to reduce the possibility of any gunfire in schools, and concentrate on ways to keep all guns off school property and ensure the safety of children and school employees.

Not surprisingly the union leaders are out of touch with reality, at least the current reality in California. When I was a classroom teacher in Los Angeles, my middle school had a gun carrying school cop on campus every day. And my school is hardly unique. In fact, the state education code allows for an armed presence on any campus on an “as needed” basis. Given the current mood, I’m guessing that more parents will start demanding that their kid’s campus have armed cops for security. In fact, in a recent Gallup poll, when asked if increasing the police presence at schools would be an effective way to stop mass shootings at schools, 87 percent said that it would be very or somewhat effective.

And I think we need to go one step further. I would like to see a few armed teachers at every school. These volunteers would go through a rigorous background check and proper police-type training and then should be allowed to anonymously carry a concealed weapon on campus.

Despite the union leaders’ comments, there is no way to effectively keep schools as “gun free zones.” As David Kopel writes, these are nothing more than “pretend gun free zones.”

Real gun-free zones are a wonderful idea, but they are only real if they are created by metal detectors backed up by armed guards. Pretend gun-free zones, where law-abiding adults (who pass a fingerprint-based background check and a safety training class) are still disarmed, are magnets for evildoers who know they will be able to murder at will with little threat of being fired upon.

Kopel’s point was demonstrated in the Aurora, CO movie theater shooting. As John Lott explains,

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.

Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. (Emphasis added.) In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

The perspective that has been lost in the aftermath of this tragedy is that guns are used to keep our most important things safe – our cities, banks, courthouses, etc. In fact, armed marshals are placed anonymously on many airplane flights to safeguard us and our children. So why do many insist that our most important and precious assets – our children – be completely defenseless?  President Obama’s kids have armed protection at school. Don’t all our kids deserve the same?

Larry Sand, a former classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues.

December 26, 2012

Jon Voight in Negotiations to Play Soviet Spy in Ronald Reagan’s Hollywood Biopic

EDITORS NOTE: The best political documentary of all time, in my opinion, is “In The Face of Evil, Reagan’s War in Words and Deeds” (see trailer) This film, written and directed by Stephen K. Bannon, is a treatment on Reagan’s rise to power and how he, along with Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul the II, won the cold war against the Soviet Union and forever banished Communist Russia to the ash heap of history.  Unfortunately, the Communist had their own parellel game plan that involved the control of the American Mainstream Media, our Public Education and Hollywood Movie making. So do not expect to see truth but do expect to see a rewite of history to support the abosolute hate of the tradional values that made this Nation the greatest on earth.

Jon Voight in Negotiations to Play KGB Agent in Ronald Reagan Biopic

by Paul Bond

Jon_VoightThe indie, “Reagan,” is one of at least three upcoming films about the 40th U.S. president.

Oscar-winning actor Jon Voight is negotiating to play a pivotal role in Reagan, an upcoming movie about President Ronald Reagan, people associated with the project said Tuesday.

Voight, perhaps the most prominent and outspoken conservative in Hollywood, would play a Soviet KGB agent whose job it was to track Reagan, the 40th U.S. president who is largely considered a hero of the Republican party.

The movie is based on The Crusader and God & Ronald Reagan, two books by Paul Kengor. The story unfolds as a young Russian leader visits a retired agent named Viktor – the character Voight is negotiating to play – so that he may learn of the demise of the Soviet Union.

“Viktor is actually a character based on a number of KGB agents and Soviet analysts who we now know were tasked with keeping tabs on Ronald Reagan for many years,” Kengor said. “This is a feature film and not a documentary and I thought it was a smart way for the producers to keep the integrity of the story and yet make it entertaining.”

The $35 million independent movie is being written by Jonas McCord (The Young Riders, The Body) and Howie Klausner (Space Cowboys). It is produced by Ralph Winter, who was behind the 2000-06 X-Men films, along with Mark Joseph, who produced the indie film Doonby in 2010 and was a marketing executive on such films as The Passion of the Christ, Holes and Ray.

The former U.S. president is a fairly hot commodity in Hollywood nowadays, with multiple projects in the works that will feature Reagan. The Butler, for example, has already generated controversy for casting liberal activist Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan while Alan Rickman plays Ronald Reagan. The Weinstein Co. film is expected to open in 2013.

Reykjavic from Participant Media will feature Michael Douglas, also a liberal activist, as Reagan. Participant has backed several politically-charged movies, including Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln and former Vice President Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.

Perhaps the best-known treatment of Reagan was in 2003 when James Brolin portrayed him in the Showtime miniseries, The Reagans, largely perceived to be a negative take on his presidency.

via Jon Voight in Negotiations to Join Reagan Biopic – The Hollywood Reporter.

December 20, 2012

Classic Christmas Videos from PopModal Videos

christmas-sq-banner-2012

December 20, 2012

Unraveling What Happened in Michigan

 

Larry Sand President California Teachers Empowerment Network

Larry Sand President California Teachers Empowerment Network

Unraveling What Happened in MichigaNow that the dust has settled, there are still some loose ends that need to be addressed in the Wolverine State’s right-to-work battle.

Last Tuesday, Michigan became the nation’s 24th right-to-work state. Much has been written about this and yet there still is much misinformation in circulation – mostly being spread by the unions, of course. And President Obama, an outspoken union supporter, has uttered some mistruths (if unintentional) or lies (if they are not.)

What does “right-to-work (RTW)” mean? It simply means that workers don’t have to pay dues to a union as a condition of employment. Many have publicly lamented that collective bargaining in Michigan is going to be imperiled. President Obama jumped on that bandwagon saying,

What we shouldn’t be doing is try to take away your rights to bargain for better wages and working conditions. We don’t want a race to the bottom. Right-to-work laws have nothing to do with economics and they have everything to do with politics. They mean you have the right to work for less money.

No, Mr. Obama, Michigan’s new law – for better or worse – will not affect any union’s right to collectively bargain.

Another erroneous assertion – a long time mantra for organized labor – is that workers who choose not to join unions in RTW states are “freeloaders” or “free riders.” As Heritage Foundation’s James Sherk points out,

Unions object that right-to-work is actually “right-to-freeload.” The AFL-CIO argues “unions are forced by law to protect all workers, even those who don’t contribute financially toward the expenses incurred by providing those protections.” They contend they should not have to represent workers who do not pay their “fair share.”

It is a compelling argument, but untrue. The National Labor Relations Act does not mandate unions exclusively represent all employees, but permits them to electively do so. (Emphasis added.) Under the Act, unions can also negotiate “members-only” contracts that only cover dues-paying members. They do not have to represent other employees.

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly on this point. As Justice William Brennan wrote in Retail Clerks v. Lion Dry Goods, the Act’s coverage “is not limited to labor organizations which are entitled to recognition as exclusive bargaining agents of employees … ‘Members only’ contracts have long been recognized.”

Even though, as Sherk says, unions don’t have to represent all employees, they do so voluntarily to eliminate any competition. So instead of “free rider,” a better term would be “forced rider.” Teacher union watchdog Mike Antonucci explains,

The very first thing any new union wants is exclusivity. No other unions are allowed to negotiate on behalf of people in the bargaining unit. Unit members cannot hire their own agent, nor can they represent themselves. Making people pay for services they neither asked for nor want is a “privilege” we reserve for government, not for private organizations. Unions are freeloading on those additional dues.

…The “freeload” crack is especially ironic coming from MEA (Michigan Education Association), which ran an $11 million budget deficit in 2010-11 and is a cumulative $113 million in the red. In other words, the union has spent millions of dollars in dues it hasn’t collected yet, some of which will be paid by people who might not even be members yet. Who is freeloading?

In any event, it is undeniable that unions are taking it on the chin these days. In 2011, Wisconsin banned collective bargaining for some employees, and earlier this year Indiana became the 23rd RTW state. Michigan union leaders, well aware of the zeitgeist, tried to enshrine collective bargaining into the state constitution in November via Prop. 2. The amendment, however, was solidly defeated – 57 to 43 percent – even though the unions outspent the opposition by a 22:1 factor. (H/T John Seiler.)

What’s next for the unions in Michigan? Undoubtedly more thuggery and distortions, and then there is 2014. Last Tuesday, at a rally outside the building which houses Governor Rick Snyder’s office,

The main battle cry of the anti-right-to-work protesters…had a common theme: wait for 2014. Many of the GOP seats, including Snyder’s, will be up for grabs during the midterm elections. Rather than attempt to recall Republicans, as Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to do to Gov. Scott Walker, the Michigan unions are set to mobilize behind Democrats and pro-union Republicans in two years.

But will the people of Michigan be taken in by the unions’ demagoguery? Organized labor is blaming their loss on everyone but themselves – the Koch Brothers, right wing legislators, the Tea Party et al. But as Kim Strassel in the Wall Street Journal points out,

The unions lost in Michigan—as they’ve lost elsewhere—because they and their White House compatriots have forced the issue, and in the process forced Americans to take a side. And what we’ve discovered is that when the choice is between more freedom for workers, more choice for parents and more tax dollars for vital services or, on the other side, more coercive powers for a special interest—well, that isn’t such a hard choice after all.

When all is said and done, it is instructive to examine why RTW is a good thing. First, despite Mr. Obama’s insistence to the contrary, RTW laws do indeed have a great deal to do with economics: they are beneficial.

According to the West Michigan Policy Forum, of the 10 states with the highest rate of personal income growth, eight have right-to-work laws. Those numbers are driving a net migration from forced union states: Between 2000 and 2010, five million people moved to right-to-work states from compulsory union states.

Other policies (such as no income tax) play a role in such migration, so economist Richard Vedder tried to sort out the variables. In the 2010 Cato Journal, he wrote that “without exception” he found “a statistically significant positive relationship” between right to work and net migration.

Mr. Vedder also found a 23% higher rate of per capita income growth in right-to-work states. An analysis by the Taxpayers Protection Alliance finds that Michigan is now the 35th state in overall prosperity measured by per capita income. Had Michigan adopted a right-to-work law in 1977, the group estimates, per capita income for a family of four would have been $13,556 higher by 2008. (Emphasis added.)

And secondly, RTW is a fairness issue for the worker.

… the best case for right to work is moral: the right of an individual to choose. Union chiefs want to coerce workers to join and pay dues that they then funnel to politicians who protect union power. Right to work breaks this cycle of government-aided monopoly union power for the larger economic good.

The question that unionistas can’t seem to come to grips with is this: if the unions are so beneficial, why must they force workers to sign on? The reality is that, given a choice, many workers will just say “no” and the unions will lose money and influence, their real raison d’être. And for the refuseniks, it is an uncoerced step on the road to freedom.

Larry Sand, a former classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues.

December 17, 2012

Airmodal is growing….

Airmodal is proud to announce it has posted its 334th post and has received over 15,000 views. What a great year.

December 17, 2012

Media blackout: Oregon mall shooter was stopped by an armed citizen.

While reports of Tuesday’s shooting at the Clackamas Town Center Mall in Oregon, dominated the national media, until Friday’s horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, one very important detail has been repeatedly (and intentionally) left out of the MSM’s coverage.

The shooter, Jacob Tyler Roberts, was confronted with an armed citizen, at which time he ran away and shot himself. By the time police arrived on the scene, Roberts was already dead.

That armed man was 22-year-old Nick Meli, who was at the mall shopping with a young woman who was babysitting her friend’s baby.

On Friday, KGW News Channel 8, the only media outlet to cover this part of the story, posted the following report on their website:

Clackamas Mall Shooter was confronted by armed citizen

“I heard three shots and turned and looked at Casey and said, ‘are you serious?,'” he said.

The friend and baby hit the floor. Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar.

“He was working on his rifle,” said Meli. “He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side.”

The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.

“As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them,” he said.

Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision.

“I’m not beating myself up cause I didn’t shoot him,” said Meli. “I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself.”

The gunman was dead, but not before taking two innocent lives with him and taking the innocence of everyone else.

We now know that the assailant’s gun had jammed, and when he cleared it, he quickly retreated and shot himself, as Meli continued to keep him in his sights.

Not only has the national media refused to acknowledge this aspect of the deadly event, but law enforcement has as well.

On Tuesday night, Clackamas County Sheriff Craig Roberts held a press conference in which he credited local police officers and deputies with ending the rampage, never mentioning Meli’s actions.

Sheriff Roberts said: “I’m really proud of all the different agencies that came together to really step up and put their lives on the line,” to “basically hunt down this guy in the mall.”

Now, remember, the shooter was already dead when police arrived on the scene.

Killed in the attack were Steven Mathew Forsyth, 45, and Cindy Ann Yuille, 54, A 15-year-old girl, identified as Kristina Shevchenko, was seriously wounded but was expected to survive.

Of course, the Obamamedia is in full support of even harsher gun control laws and it should come as no surprise that they would suppress any story which provides proof that lawfully armed citizens do prevent crimes and save lives.

Here are a few facts about armed Americans:

In 1982, the town of Kennesaw, Georgia, passed an ordinance which required all heads of household to have at least one gun in the house. The burglary rate immediately dropped an astounding 89 percent. Ten years after the law was passed, the burglary rate was still 72 percent less than it was in 1981.

Armed citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as the police do every year in this country (1,527 to 606).

A 1996 University of Chicago study concluded that states which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rates by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent, and robbery by 3 percent.

-According to the National Safety Council, with guns being used 2.5 million times a year in self defense against criminals, firearms are actually used more than 80 times more often to protect lives, rather than to take lives.

-A 1979 Justice Department study entitled Rape Victimization in American Cities, concluded that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32 percent were actually committed. But when a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3 percent of the attempted rapes were actually committed.

-Another Justice Department study found that 57 percent of felons agreed that “criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running the police.”

Read more on the subject of gun ownership:

12-year-old girl shoots intruder with mom’s gun

14-year-old boy shoots intruder while babysitting

Pizza Hut worker shoots, kills two armed robbers

Even Jesus opposed gun control

So-called ‘gun-free zones’ never protect the innocent

via Media blackout: Oregon mall shooter was stopped by an armed citizen – Virginia Beach Conservative | Examiner.com.

December 14, 2012

Yes We Can – Eliminate Poverty in our Lifetime

theUSAplan-LOGO

On December 1, 2010, the President’s Debt Commission issued a report recommending specific budget cuts and tax increases.   To date, these austerity measures have not been acted upon by the administration.

Written by Dick McDonald, founder of www.theusaplan.com

During the recent campaign, the Republicans promised draconian spending cuts to the national debt and tax cuts for the 2% of “job creators.” But these, it seems, were largely perceived as attacks on government welfare and entitlement programs; and the people re-elected President Obama and a majority Democrat Senate.

All that was heard from both parties was “no we can’t” – compromise our cradle-to-grave policy or sink-or-swim principles.  What the nation desperately needs is some meaningful “Yes we can,” and they need it in big doses because we are heading off the proverbial social as well as fiscal cliff.

This is why I started the Prosperity Commission to give Americans the “hope and change” no government in the history of man has ever given its poor and working class – wealth. That is a big idea; one the people will actively support.

Granted, America has the “wealthiest “poor in the world, but that “enrichment”  is supported by government entitlement and welfare programs that have run up debt  amounting to a $1.2 million liability for each and every household in America. See http://www.usdebtclock.org.

The Prosperity Commission is promoting its USA Plan.  The “USA” stands for the Universal Savings Account. At its core, the plan expands trickle-down economics to include (1) the poor, (2) the middle-class and (3) rich people who aren’t “job creators,” like movie stars and sport stars. We prefer to call it the Rise Up Theory of Economics.

Making all Americans job-creators will lead to a citizenry that can afford, out of their own pocket, to retire affluently and acquire the best healthcare on the planet.  Considering our current unfunded $121 trillion of debt attributable to the existing Social Security, Disability and Medicare programs, the government is clearly not up to the task.

It is time for the people to assert their sovereign right to change the way government works as specified in our Declaration of Independence. The USA Plan is step in that direction.

The USA Plan funds each taxpayer’s Universal Saving Account (USA) by diverting his or her Federal payroll taxes (the 15.3% of their gross income withheld or paid) into their personally owned account, which is unreachable by the government or the courts and administered by an independent trust not associated with Wall Street.

Over the 40-year working life of the average $50,000-per year taxpayer, that 15.3% withheld or paid amounts to an investment of $300,000 (40 x 15% x $50,000).  Invested weekly into the stock market (not bond or money market) will accumulate and compound into a nest egg of $ 4 million,  based on the average rate of return for 40-year investments in the S&P 500 since 1911 – the period of 1871 to 1911 being the first 40-year period. See the USA Plan website for the year-by-year calculation of the $4 million nest egg and the historical record of the S&P 500’s rate of return.

The logical response to the diversion of payroll taxes into USAs is, “Where are we going to get the money to pay existing Social Security, Disability and Medicare benefits?” The answer to that is much simpler than you think: The USA Plan upon enactment will immediately cut the $138 trillion of “funded” and “unfunded” US debt to $30 trillion. READ FULL ARTICLE  Yes We Can | New York Daily Sun – The Trusted New York Daily Broadsheet.

%d bloggers like this: