Liberals almost
always under fund all aspects of national defense. They also do
everything possible to argue that defense spending is wasted. The reason
for this is that liberals always need more money to fund their "investment"
in domestic spending. They don't want defense spending to crowd out
domestic spending. The efficacy of the domestic spending is not an issue
for them. Liberals need ever larger domestic spending simply
because that's how they buy their votes.
Translate
A Call for Healing
May 5, 2013
Apr 28, 2013
US Air Traffic Control:: Total Managerial Incompetence
I want to privatize US air traffic
control. That would be truly less government. The Canadians have
privatized air traffic control. You know how liberals love to talk about
how Canada
does things. The air traffic control fiasco is just another example of
total managerial incompetence in government. This incompetence is a
direct result of the incentives that face government employees who make
managerial decisions. The bigger the
government, the more secure your job is.
When faced with cuts, the government typically cuts the most visible
services in order to get their budget restored.
This strategy is so common it has its own Wikipedia entry. However, the FAA has a long history of such managerial
incompetence. In a recent example, the FAA did not managed to modernize US air traffic
control, while wasting billions of dollars trying. Government employees
want to maximize their budget, so cost overruns are good for them. This
administration's political reaction to budget cuts should make everyone think
twice about allowing big government to run anything economically important,
especially air traffic control.
Description of Canadian Air
Traffic Control
Article on FAA History of Waste
Cuts Politically Motivated
Wikipedia Entry for Washington Monument Syndrome
Arms Race: Missile Defenses v Rogue State Nukes
The Iranians are threatening Israel
with annihilation, not the other way around.
Iranian demonstrators have been encouraged by their government for years
to chant “Death to America ”
and “Death to Israe l” ever since 1979. The ayatollahs say they will wipe Israel off the
map. My guess, based on the Israeli view of the Spanish Inquisition and
the Holocaust, is that Israel
will use their nukes if they have to, especially when the Iranians explicitly
threaten them. The fact is that Israel
has nuclear capable ballistic missiles that can reach Iran . My
guess, based on their view of the Spanish Inquisition and the Holocaust, is
that Israel
will use their nukes if they have to. Israel also has a formidable air
force. However, it's likely that only the US ,
and not Israel , has the
capability to significantly damage Iran 's nuclear program with
conventional weapons. If the US
does not take care of the Iran
threat, then we may force the Israelis to use their missiles with nuclear warheads
to preclude an Iranian nuclear breakout. The only thing that could stop Israel from
attacking is a significant missile defense capability. So as it stands
now, it’s a race between Israeli missile defense and Iranian nuclear weapon
development. The president says that all options are on the table. However, he seems to be signaling, with all
of his diplomacy, that the US
will sit this one out militarily. Does that seem like a smart thing to
do?
The US needs robust missile defenses as well. Missile defenses make a small number of ICBM's
less valuable. They would tend to discourage North Korea from trying to build
enough ICBM's to be effective as a credible threat to the US, because the cost would be prohibitive for them.
The argument that US missile defenses might offend the Russians and Chinese is
appeasement pure and simple. The liberal line on these issues is always
in favor of spending less on defending ourselves, so we can spend more on
domestic "investment," like Solyndra and Fisker. It's how
liberals buy their votes, but it is not a rational approach to defending ourselves.
Article on need for missile defenses
Description of Israeli Ballistic Missile Capability
Apr 24, 2013
Immigration: 840 Pages of Unreviewable Discretion.
Marco Rubio was
quoted in National Review Online saying the Senate immigration bill is only 840
pages. There is no way I want the government to be able to hide its arbitrary
actions behind a screen of 840 pages of poorly and hastily drafted law, exceptions
and regulatory guidelines. The bill gives the Executive branch the
ability to waive many of the key provisions of the law, according to another
National Review article. Worse, the bill says that these waivers are “unreviewable discretion.” Remember
our current president already thinks he can pick which laws he enforces and
which laws he can ignore. The House should reject this mess and pass a
simple bill. It should greatly expand H1B Visas and create a guest worker
program. People should be able to qualify for either, whether they are in
the US
or outside. If they qualify, then their immediate family should get
residency permits. Shirt tail kin should not be allowed to piggy back on
this status. Extended stays on public assistance should be prohibited.
The bill should be 50 pages tops. The Democrats should have to
explain to Hispanics and Asians why the Senate won't vote on it because unions don't like it. Conservatives would be able to show that we are pro
immigration as long as it's legal. The "Comprehensive Solution"
on any issue is always a mirage. Liberals promise such a solution for two
reasons. If they get it passed, government gets bigger and more complex.
If they fail to get it passed, Liberals can blame conservative
obstruction for the failure to achieve the mirage.
Rubio quote:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346362/marco-rubio%E2%80%99s-radio-row
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346345/immigration-power-grab
Ability to Waive
provisions:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346345/immigration-power-grab
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)