I got a look at a batch of the new pennies today. You know, the ones with scenes from President Lincoln’s life on the backs instead of the Lincoln Memorial. For starters, they feel different from old pennies. They seem lighter (although it could just be my imagination), as well as have a brighter hue than old pennies (which is likely simply because they’re new). I am fully aware that these pennies are chemically identical to their predecessors. No, this post is not a tale about the things that cross my mind while standing at a cash register.

Looking at these new pennies, I started thinking about the debate surrounding the penny’s production. For example, it actually costs the US taxpayer 1.23¢ for the Government to mint one penny. This is an enormous waste of money, especially considering that most Americans consider the penny a disposable article.

I also thought about the political landscape of the late 1960s and 1970s, when President Nixon received criticism for suggesting a reduction in size of the penny as a cost-cutting measure, while still allowing for the price-accuracy of 1¢ increments. “Lunacy!” cried the left. So much so that the DNC partnered with novelty interests to create the “Nixon Penny”—a tiny penny bearing the likeness of the 37^th President, which came in cardboard and plastic packaging bearing the words, “NEW: Nixon Penny and getting smaller… smaller… smaller.” The novelty item is shown below (courtesy eBay).

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-05-18-auto-emissions_N.htm

http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSN1943363120090519

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/18/feehery.health/index.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/obama-calls-for-an-extrem_b_204903.html

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/19/cafferty.bush.administration/index.html

Looking at these stories IN ORDER:

• · The Government will now force car companies to build smaller, more “energy efficient” cars that Americans have proven time and again that they do not want, effectively forcing Obama’s preferred products onto the consumer.
• · The Government is on the verge of buying General Motors, thus socializing America’s largest car company. How long will it be before the Government begins imposing regulations on car companies that have the gall to oppose Government Motors?
• · The Obama Healthcare plan, which again pits the Government against the free market by “competing” with the existing private companies, will soon be underway. This will eventually kill those private companies because Government insurance will simply always cost less—unless you count the enormous bill that taxpayers will be funding until my great-grandchildren are eligible for public office (I am currently 18 years old).
• · The Government is calling for a “culture” that resists personal success in favor of “collective success” (my words, a paraphrase of the President). In other words: let’s destroy the free market in favor of a system that meets some bureaucrat’s arbitrary idea of “fairness.”
• · The Loony Left is honestly considering prosecuting Bush-era officials over simply having different policies than the current Administration. Let’s ignore the fact that Bush-era policies kept America safe for the 7 years following 9/11, and thwarted over 40 planned terrorist attacks, thereby saving thousands of lives or more.

Put it all together, and what do we get?

“Nobody panic! We have a new flu strain that we can’t figure out, and it could kill you. But do not panic!”

Such is the message of the media. Let’s ignore the obvious hypocrisy of the media’s hysteria-mongering, and look at where the “emergency” and “pandemic” directives are coming from: the CDC and Washington DC.

It is my belief that the CDC and the Obama Administration will quickly turn the Swine Flu panic into a political ploy; they will soon declare a “state of emergency” over the new flu and use this as an excuse to nationalize hospitals nationwide. Congratulations, Mr. President: you have found a way to do the abhorrent: steal liberty and curtail quality healthcare all in the name of security.

Why else would Washington be pushing this story so hard? The Democrats want a panic so that we can glide quietly from “pandemic” to “state of emergency”—for the record, the swine flu should be classified as neither—and the Government’s power-grab will appear to be the noble spirit of heroism in the form of working to control a bad situation. Leave it to the liberal media and an ultra-liberal White House to create pandemonium to move towards a power grab.

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn is already going public to tell Illinois citizens that “we’re all in this together.” Sure, Governor. With your record, I don’t have any reason at all to distrust you.

Listen readers, I’m not a big conspiracy theorist. I just know how to think like a miserable, mean-spirited opportunist. In other words, I get politicians. I know that fear like this is a huge, gaping opportunity for a big government power grab. Much like citizens are willing to cede rights and liberties during wartime, when fear is rampant and alarmism reigns, the liberals in power are hoping that this health “pandemic” will give them the excuse they need to federalize power over healthcare.

This is the sort of thing that we must always be on the lookout for, readers. Attacks on liberty will always come in the face of what appears to be a threat so large that citizens will be unable to defend themselves. People: we are talking about the flu. Panic will solve absolutely nothing. America can handle this, but only if we remember that we already have the best healthcare in the world. Any government action against the swine flu must be seen as a direct affront to our ability to care for ourselves and our right to choose our own healthcare systems.

UPDATE: President Obama demands emergency funding to the tune of $1.5 BILLION targeted at swine flu. It's coming people. Get ready.

Click here to see the official Mind & Morals take on the "Right-wing extremist" memo released on April 15. 

For full effect, see the liberal POV from my talented counterpart here.

“I told you so!”

“You did not!”

“Yes, I did!”

“It never happened.”

“Yes, it DIIIIIDDD!! It did, it did, it did!!”

Believe it or not, this exchange did not take place between two under-five-year-old siblings in front of my cash register. It is taking place between the staff of two of America’s best-known politicians.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/09/rove-calls-biden-liar-bush-aides-challenge-vps-boasts/

Vice President Joseph Biden claimed, on two occasions, to have privately (or semi-privately) spoken with former President George W. Bush during Bush’s tenure in the White House and was, shall we say, candid about his feelings on the Iraq War and general policy.

Meanwhile, former Bush aides are claiming that the two occasions never took place.

My big question: so friggin’ what?

I look at the exchanges, and I chuckle. I know that former President Bush is a good sport, and he has a good sense of humor (if not always the quickest tongue). I also know that Vice President Biden is blunt, clever, and (based on what I know of his career) more-than-less genuine. The two exchanges strike me as completely plausible. I would believe that the two men might, indeed, have met based on Biden’s experience in the Senate and Bush’s good nature.

If the exchanges didn’t happen, then the Vice President exaggerated a story or two to make a point. Big deal. Who among us hasn’t done that? Granted, it may seem a bit unprofessional for the Vice President of the United States to employ this particular storytelling technique, but, like any politician, statements given by him must be taken with a grain of salt.

Now, my regular readers may notice a disproportionate amount of slack cut towards Vice President Biden even going back to the VP debates during the campaign. That’s because, simply put: I like Joe Biden. I will readily admit that, although I may completely disagree with him on numerous issues, I am able to follow his logic and generally respect his opinion. The Vice President remains one of my favorite currently-serving Democrats. That’s my little disclaimer.

I can’t claim to speak for former President Bush, but I can’t help but think that he finds this whole thing absurd. In the grand scheme of things: who gives a damn who said what, when? This feud needs to end. It was stupid for it to ever begin. If the Vice President invented a story, then he was merely making a point and keeping audiences interested. If it actually happened, former Bush staffers are having a bad reaction to the idea that they didn’t know every little detail of what happened over the course of an eight-year period.

Guys, it’s time to move on and get to governing. Let’s let this media-exaggerated feud die while I still respect both of you.  

I’ve been in something of a funk lately. For a time, I had lost quite a bit of faith in both people and my own future. However, today changed that.

You’ll have to pardon me, as this will not be my usual, thoughtful political commentary. Rather, this will be a more personal story with a dash of political salt.

I was in a relatively dark place going into my early class today. I’m sure that I seemed fine to most, but I was a shell of myself. I was, in my mind, dismissive of most of the world, and fairly convinced that my work to try to impact just one person at a time was futile. It was one of those situations where it gets very hard to see the big picture.

During that first class, we discussed a writing of a gentleman who tried to convince us that animals deserved rights and that it is morally wrong to be “speciesist”—like racist, but prejudiced against species. During this time, I became very hungry (power of suggestion, I guess), in spite of the six mini-sausage sandwiches that I had consumed that morning, so I elected to go buy something with meat on it.

I wound up dining at a small place downtown called the Griller’s Café. They had an absolutely incredible Italian Beef sandwich. It’s rare to get an Italian Beef sandwich just right; so many places don’t give you enough beef, others don’t serve it with hot peppers, and others just plop an Italian Beef Sausage on there and call it a day. But these guys did it perfectly, which boosted my spirits almost as much as the beautiful irony of enjoying this sandwich right after a class that attempted to validate the boloney (sorry) claims of a rabid vegan. After all, meat is murder… tasty, tasty murder.

Meanwhile, I went across the street and checked my email, only to find an absolutely tremendous gesture of gratitude for a service that I had provided to my former high school. What that sandwich did for the body, this gesture did for the spirit about a hundredfold.

This evening, there was a lecture to be given at Loyola by Andrew Card, George W. Bush’s former Chief of Staff. Mr. Card also served under Presidents Reagan and Bush 41. I was on the fence about going, considering it was set to begin about 15 minutes after my class ended, and I was on the other side of town (for those who don’t know, Loyola University is divided into two campuses—one by the lake, and one on Michigan Avenue—I was at Michigan Avenue, while Mr. Card was at Lake Shore campus). My class wound up letting out half an hour early.

I managed to get there with plenty of time to spare. And I’m glad I did. Mr. Card gave an absolutely engrossing lecture, after which I managed to step up and introduce myself. I managed to tell Mr. Card that I was personally grateful for his service and for President George W. Bush. I also conveyed the fact that my regular readers know very well: that I actually became a Republican because of President Bush. Mr. Card was gracious and patient enough to sign my pocket Constitution and to take a picture with me. I managed to ride my political-geek-high all the way home. I can’t describe how grateful I am to Loyola’s College Republicans for organizing the event, and, of course, for the good that this did for my previously sunken heart.

So, today, an Italian Beef Sandwich, a gesture of generous gratitude, and President Bush’s Chief of Staff all conspired to rebuild the Michael Coyne that I really am. Tonight, I am whole again. God provides; let it never be said that He doesn’t.

Gotta love the media.

I absolutely love the coverage that all of the media outlets are giving to the AIG bonuses. To hear them tell it:

“Look at those horrible capitalists! They’re being bad with money! For shame…”

Yeah. OK. Now; let’s look at what really happened. Here’s the whole picture:

1)   AIG, like so many other groups, was irresponsible with money. So, they lost money and faced a financial meltdown. Such is the nature of free-market capitalism. In other words: they SHOULD have failed. That’s how people and companies learn.

2)   The Government decides to float those irresponsible individuals a crap load of our money.

3)   The irresponsible company fails to learn their lesson; assumes that there will always be a government safety net.

4)   The company continues the irresponsible behavior by giving outlandish bonuses to executives. Much like a child assumes that he can blow all his birthday money on candy and trading cards, and mommy and daddy will still provide for his other wants.

Can anybody say, “Duh?” What the hell did you think was going to happen? Rewarding bad behavior only yields more bad behavior. The Government essentially gave AIG a pat on the back for bad business practices, and now they are claiming to be surprised that the bad business practices didn’t change? Are we serious here?

I don’t blame AIG for blowing money on bonuses. That’s not the part that I find egregious.  I have issues with the government giving them money in the first place. Just like I don’t blame the child in the above example for wasting all his money. Just like I don’t blame that same child when he cries and whines and screams in the middle of the supermarket when his parents don’t buy him the new toy he wants. I blame the parents for letting him waste his money in the first place. I blame the parents for letting that child think that he was entitled to anything he wanted. By the same token, I blame the Government for allowing poor-performing corporations to believe that they were entitled to abuse taxpayer funds.

As usual, the problem is really the Government’s fault. I will say it one more time; this message is as true for Governments as it is for parents as it is for individuals:

            Rewarding bad behavior will only yield more bad behavior. You do not get to be surprised or outraged when it actually happens. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html

Shocked? Don’t be.

For those of you who didn’t bother to click the link above, I’ll synopsize: President Obama’s approval ratings have slipped from 65% on January 21 to 56% as of March 12, according to Rasmussen Reports. That’s a 10-point drop in two months. Ouch!

Now, I’ll ask again: Shocked? Don’t be.

There is a reason that Republicans warned America about Obama’s Carter-esque leanings during the campaign. We’ve seen this picture before: threats of nationalization, a stock market in free fall, taxes on the rise, and government promises that they can fix it all. Sure.

But, as I said, this is not new territory. In 1982—Carter just finished up his roll in the hay with Speaker O’Neil and Reagan was taking over—the unemployment rates were at approximately 10.2 percent. That’s roughly two points higher than it is now. And, prior to the 1980 election, Congress showed no signs of slowing down on the spending and accompanying tax hikes that marked Carter’s four years.

Plus, according to former Clinton advisor Dick Morris, the national deficit has reached approximately 15 percent of America’s GDP. For comparison, Japan’s national deficit never topped 10 percent during their downturn.

President Obama has proven himself good at only one thing thus far: spending our money. Most Americans are against spending projects in general, and therefore disapprove of all of the astronomical spending projects—such as the $3.6 trillion budget—that have come to symbolize the President’s agenda.

Now, realistically, 56 percent is not really something to worry about. If Obama were to change course now and to actually cut wasteful spending, as he promised to do during the campaign, he could realistically maintain solid approval ratings. But I do not see that happening.

My prediction: President Obama will continue to cater to Speaker Pelosi and her far-left cabal, and this slight dip in the polls is but mere foreshadowing of what’s to come. By the end of the year, the President’s approval ratings will be below the 45 percent mark. Possibly lower, depending on how the foreign policy situations pan out. But primarily based on economics and Democratic budgeting, the Obama administration will grind to a PR halt just as quickly as the Obamamania hype began. 

It is NOT the government's job to guarantee that you have a job, healthcare, food, money, or housing. Rather, the government exists solely to keep you safe while you provide all of those things for yourself. In other words: the government’s job is to ensure an environment where anyone—from any economic background, of any color, of either gender, adhering to any creed, and holding any set of values—can fight for themselves without fear of hindrance or molestation.

I take the time to say this because, according to a new Fox News / Opinion Dynamics Poll:

• ·      68% of Americans think that it is the government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have food.
• ·      66% think that it is the government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care.
• ·      52% think that government has a duty to provide housing to all Americans.
• ·      51 % think that government has a duty to provide jobs to all Americans who want one.

Those numbers scare the living daylights out of me. And they should scare any given capitalist, as well.

Look at history; look at facts. Every time that a government has decided to try to “provide” something to its people, it has failed. There’s a reason that, save for China and Cuba, the world has sworn off communism. It doesn’t work. Look at the Soviet healthcare system: you’ve all seen it because it’s two aspirin. That’s all that the great “medicine for all, paid for by all” could afford. News alert to President Obama: “Spreading the wealth around” does not work.

Yes, I will concede that, in capitalism, some people must, from time to time, fail. Capitalism involves risk and effort. But there are two sides of the coin: if you must own your failures in full, then you also get to own your successes in full. It is those successes that America was built upon.

To quote President Washington, “Like fire, government is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master.” If we start asking government to do things for us instead of us doing things for ourselves, then the government will ask something in return: funding.

To remind my readers: government is bankrupt. It’s true; the government has never spent a single dollar that it already had. Rather, that trillion-dollar spending bill that just plowed through congress will be funded by you through new, higher, and ever more ridiculous taxes. And, as much as it sounds like universal healthcare is a warm, compassionate thing for government to do; it is really a cold and foolhardy concept that calls for the government to play the role of Robin Hood, taking from everybody and redistributing money where government deems it more appropriate.

This also means that that “top 2%” that the President keeps saying will be getting a tax hike includes 85% of small business owners—anyone earning over $250,000. I hate to break this to you, Mr. President, but even if you raised their taxes from 35% to 100% (no, that’s not a typo), the government would still not have enough money to pay for your ludicrous spending projects.

Here’s the bottom line: government cannot give something to one person without stealing something from somebody else. Expecting government to provide for your family’s needs is not just illogical; it’s lazy and irrational. It is your job to provide for yourself and your family, nobody else’s. Government needs to step aside and get out of your way.

If Americans want to remain a free nation, then Americans need to shake this asinine sense of entitlement that has pervaded our collective psyche. Ours is a nation of the self-reliant. Let’s start acting like it.

With the election of a new chairman to the RNC, Republican leadership promised to pay attention and put forth effort into all opportunities to elect Republicans to congress. That means finding viable candidates in all 435 districts.

Job one should have been the Special election taking place this March to replace Rahm Emmanuel in the Illinois 5^th. And yet…nothing.

I’ve looked at the candidates and surveyed the area. The front-runner is Patrick O’Connor, or, as I prefer to call him, Rahm Lite. Just about every lawn and every small business’ window in the district has an “O’Connor for Congress” sign. I’ve also seen a handful of shows of support for Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley, a man who I actually met once. I had to shower for two hours straight and I still couldn’t get his slime off of me.

So I tried to look at how the supposedly revitalized RNC was responding.

There are three “serious”—and I use the term very loosely—candidates on the Republican side. First is our “front runner,” Tom Hanson. Hanson ran against Emmanuel in 2008, but of course, he lost. Can anybody say “Adlai Stevenson?” Looking at his campaign website, I cringed. It looks like it was designed by a high school sophomore and has just about as many grammatical errors on the front page as would be expected from a website designed by a high school student from the Chicago Public School System. He made me want to throw away the State Constitution and run myself. I’m sure I’d do better.

Our second-best is Rosanna Pulido, the State Director of the Minuteman Project. You’re likely thinking what I am: is the Illinois GOP serious? She’s a one-issue candidate with views on immigration that make Ann Coulter look rational and moderate, running in a district where white people are considered a “healthy minority.” If she gets over 4% of the vote, I think I’ll choke on something. But at least her website looks more professional than Hanson’s, so she gets to lose in style. By the way, on her front page, illegal immigration is mentioned in four out of eight of her “headlines,” including sections on “Defending Our Chicago Police Officers,” “Rosanna For Congress,” and two that are actually called “Illegal Immigration.”

There are other candidates on the ballot, but you get the point. The Illinois 5^th should be our first real fight; a symbol that Republicans are prepared to get back on the horse and that we really are more competent than the shamed Blagojevich Democrats. Instead, we are displaying ourselves as a party in ruin; why would Illinoisans vote for the party that can’t run one viable candidate in one special election? This state will vote for Democrats with the logic, “Well, they’re corrupt, but at least they’re smart enough to occasionally accomplish something. These Republicans are boobs, but, OK, honest boobs.” Wake up, Republicans! If this is a sign of things to come, then our party is, indeed, finished. 

With tomorrow’s historic events just about ready to jump the gate, and the end of the 43^rd presidency just as close, I feel an odd mix of reflective sadness and dare I say…hope.

I will miss President Bush. While this will not surprise any of my regular readers, much of America doesn’t quite understand that emotion. I believe, with all my heart, that President Bush is a patriot and a great American. And I believe that he did his absolute best to act in what he believed to be the best interests of America’s citizens and America’s posterity. While I may not have always agreed with the President, I have always given him moral support and the benefit of the doubt.

We have all seen outright hateful bumper stickers, buttons, t-shirts, etc. that attack the 43^rd President. And, I’ll admit, I came dangerously close to adopting a similar stance towards President-Elect Obama.

I was not alone. Many disenfranchised Republicans are reverting to a base sense of vitriol that has permeated too much of America for the past several years. We, as a Party, and as Americans, must rise above this sort of knee-jerk reaction.

I did not vote for the President-Elect. Nor do I plan on voting for his reelection in 2012. However, I will resist the temptation to harbor specific animosity towards President Obama straight out of the box. I know that I am above that.

America has nothing to fear but the politics of hate.

Hatred gets us nowhere. And, I suppose, until 2012, I am now a de-facto ‘Republican for Obama.” As should we all be, if we plan on surviving as a Party and as a Nation.

I am not afraid to pledge my moral support, if not my political support, to the incoming President. Remember, readers, Barack Obama is now the President of the United States, and that means the ENTIRE United States. Whether or not you voted for him. I may disagree with him vehemently on a massive cadre of issues, but I will grant him all of the following, and I expect all Republicans and Conservatives to do the same:

1)   I will give the 44^th President the benefit of the doubt. Even when I disagree—and that’s bound to happen frequently—I will trust that he believes that he is acting in America’s best interests.

2)   I will not engage in any active show of contempt or disloyalty to America’s new Commander-in-Chief. Republicans must take a cue from the British. We must now act as “Loyal Opposition,” never as enemies or antagonists.

3)   I will maintain respect for the Office of the President of the United States, and for the man charged by the electorate with executing that office.

4)   I will never allow loyalty to my new President or my new Republican-minority Government to dissuade me from what I believe is right. I am a conservative, and I will always act as such.

5)   I will, in my heart, wish only the best for President Obama. I will not wish him ill.

For now, friends, we should all temporarily take up the “Republicans for Obama” mantle. I wish the new President all the luck in the world… until the 2012 election, that is. 

Islamic fascism, a biased media, and a naïve public have all conspired to make a dangerous and downright horrific predicament for both Israel and the United States.

Admittedly, it looked bad when the media reported that Israel had launched missiles, and subsequently launched a ground deployment into Gaza. But we must ask ourselves why it looked so bad. The answer is that the media got lazy.

Most thinking Americans knew, in the back of their minds, that Palestine and other Islamic nations that surround Israel deny the fact that Israel has a right to exist. This, of course, is the most basic premise of any argument or debate. But, because the media failed to actively report on the active recruitment of “soldiers” and suicide bombers for use against Israel by the Palestinian government, Americans virtually forgot about the situation. So, when Israel finally stood up for itself, the media blitz began and suddenly there was a “Crisis in Gaza.” Or so the headlines would have you believe.

The truth that the media is failing to report is that Israel, not Palestine-controlled Gaza, has been under siege for decades. The media has tried to make the Israeli movement into Gaza look like an unprovoked attack. This is absurdity in the worst form. Palestine has constantly besieged Israel and tried to destroy her sovereign government. Israel’s response here was not only warranted, but actually far too restrained, given the history of the hostilities.

Why would the media be this dishonest? It’s simple: if Israel looks bad while the 44^th President takes office later this month, his refusal to come to the aid of our ally no longer reeks of cowardice, but it becomes an act of defiance, an act of stepping away from an ally who went off the deep end. Politically, the media is trying to insulate what they believe will be the President-Elect’s ultimate decision.

But because of the media’s negligence, the American public is becoming divided. People mistakenly believe that Israel is the aggressor, and are actually coming out vocally against one of America’s closest allies. I have seen American citizens calling Israeli troops “murderers.” Thus, the media’s preemptive defense is working, and, should the President-Elect snub Israel, his decision will be cushioned by the media’s slanted story. However, those ill-informed Americans who refuse to stand with Israel comprise but a loud minority of Americans. And their foolish rhetoric will hold no water with the majority of the people.

Today marked the swearing in of the 111^th Congress of the United States. Congratulations to them. But the challenge facing these new leaders is one of foreign policy that will lead us to a new plateau in the War on Terror: the threatened sovereignty of Israel. If the new Congress fails to back America’s friend and ally, perhaps the only sound democracy in the Middle East, then America will have lost its way beyond all hope.

Granted, military and foreign policy issues have tended to fall into the care of the Executive Branch through much of recent history. But our Constitution actually gives these powers to Congress. As such, we must rely on them to act responsibly. And the only responsible action is to back Israel. Congress must unite against the evil of Islamic fascism that currently governs the Middle East. We must stand firm with our staunch, democratic ally. And we must make known that any threat or attack on America’s truest partners will be treated as a threat to America herself.

The Democrats who have hounded me for years over Iraq have finally gotten their wish. I am finally saying that there are now more deserving battles for our American forces overseas than the all-but-completed mission in Iraq. It will not be long before al-Qaeda and their ilk unite and launch a new assault on Israel. We must be there to help defend her. Congratulations, President-Elect Obama, you have your wish: a valid reason to leave Iraq. Now, the only question that remains is will you do the responsible thing and use that manpower to bring peace to the embattled state of Israel, or will you withdraw into the cowardice of isolationism? Welcome into office, Mr. President.