Why Republicans Should Consider Punting on the Minimum Wage

It's simple. Low information voters are too ill-informed to understand the outstanding, rational and logical arguments against raising the minimum wage. You can't tell these people that when you increase the price of labor, people buy less of it. They look at you like you are crazy.  Their understanding of economics is abysmal. When you tell them businesses will increase prices, they think you are insane.  These people, who have obviously never had to make payroll, say things like "if a business can't afford to pay $9 per hour, it shouldn't be in business."  I guess the guy mowing lawns should just shut down and fire his 5 employees. 

Or they will say that increasing the minimum wage will make the person that earns the minimum wage more productive.  Really? How?  They are utterly clueless. When you ask them, "why not raise it to $25 or $50 or $100 per hour," they look confused.  I mean, if $9 is good, $50 must be better, right?  These people will never get it. They lack intelligence, which is why they are in the minimum wage zone to begin with.

Republicans should just punt on the issue and let these idiots reap the consequences of their actions. It's a losing issue. It allows the Democrats and their fellow travelers in the media to paint Republicans as non-caring, evil, etc. It allows them to do it on a periodic basis.  By increasing the minimum wage and indexing it to the low level of inflation that social security payments are increased, the issue is taken off the table for good. Let the Democrats own the higher unemployment that comes from it in the short term, and in the long term, the issue goes away. 

Alternatively, the Republicans might want to just go all-in and propose a $20 per hour minimum wage.  Then, let the Democrats explain why that would be a bad idea. Put them on the ropes and make them explain the logical limits of their proposal.  If it passes, blame Obama and the Democrats when unemployment goes through the roof.  It will be painful in the short term, but prices will ultimately increase across the board and equilibrium will be reached once again.  As Jesus said, you will always have the poor.

I'm no Republican strategist, but what they are doing isn't working. Republicans are, as usual, battling the media on this issue and it just isn't worth it. There are bigger fish to fry. 

Most Democrats Don't go to Church

So sayeth Gallup. Well, duh. It would be pretty tough to spend a lot of time in church and then vote for candidates who support this. (WARNING: Graphic video at link)

Media ignores Edwards affair but will smear Boehner

In case you need any more evidence of the liberal media bias (tut, tut), it appears that The New York Times plans an expose on a supposed affair by Minority Leader John Boehner. You read that right, The New York Times, not The National Enquirer. Of course, they basically ignored the John Edwards affair until they became so embarrassed by it from the few outlets and bloggers who held them accountable.

How many more examples do the sheep of this country need to realize that, by and large, the mainstream media is a puppet for the Democrat Party?

Worried about the Looney Left?

Blue Collar Republican is. It is good to see that someone is "striking a nerve." Meanwhile, Lamar Alexander is rightfully called out on the same site. First, he slapped us in the face with his vote on guns in national parks. Second, he slapped us in the face with his support of Sotomayor. And now, he continues to vote for unconstitutional spending. We need to get Lamar out of office. He does not represent the values of Tennesseans very well.

Marketwatch Contributor on Guns

In a typical anti-gun piece, Thomas Kostigen suggests that "It's time we analyzed the costs of gun ownership in this country." Liberals have been analyzing the "costs" for decades, but they continue to fail to recognize the benefits. I am all for analyzing the net costs of gun ownership, because the net cost will likely show a net benefit to society. The problem is that so many of the benefits are intangible. What is the benefit of having a large number of law-abiding citizens who could, in a pinch, provide homeland security? What is the benefit of knowing that if someone comes into your home in the middle of the night, you won't be defenseless? What is the benefit of oftentimes being able to simply show a weapon and end a crime? What is the benefit of having a force that equalizes the power of the thug and the physically weak?

Liberals want to look at costs of gun ownership but do not want to look at the benefits. It is just like any other freedom. What are the costs of having a free press? One is that we are inundated with utter B.S. What are the costs of having the protections of the Fourth and Fifth Amendment? Sometimes, guilty persons go free. When it comes to freedom, we cannot look at costs in a vacuum.

What is it with liberals and abortions?

King Barry's science czar has apparently written about the constitutionality of forced abortions. Of course, its not surprising that some on the left would prefer it if the state made reproductive decisions, along with every other decision of any importance. The left's love affair with eugenics has largely been buried, but they just can't seem to help themselves when it comes to doing what they believe is best for "society."

All of this brings me to a question. Black women have abortions at a much higher rate than white women. Further, a high percentage of abortions are performed on those with lower incomes. Both of these are target demographics for the Democrats. Why would Democrats want to terminate babies who would most likely end up supporting them politically?

The Stimulation of the State

Mark Steyn has it spot on - the only thing being stimulated is the state.

At some point, the dwindling band of citizens still foolish enough to earn a living by making things, selling things or providing services other than government-funded program coordination will have to vote against not just taxes but specific agencies and programs – hundreds and thousands of them.

Flawed Survey?

This survey says that "most Americans believe the media is in some part responsible for the current economic crisis by causing people to buy things they couldn't afford." The survey goes on to say that some blame news outlets, etc. Some commentators point out that this is another example of people trying to blame others and avoiding taking responsibility for their own actions. Based on the linked article, that well may be true. However, my question is, what did the survey actually say? I think there is ample reason to blame news outlets because they did everything they could to talk down the Bush economy prior to the election.

Buffalo News Columnist Favors Red-Light Cameras

I've never heard of Rod Watson until I read this article today. A couple of his points really set me off:

And to critics who call all of this a municipal money grab, so what?
Think of it as a stupidity tax—and a voluntary one, at that.

There is more than enough stupidity to go around here. Longer yellow lights will decrease accidents, but municipalities don't care about that. Why not? Let's not pretend this is about safety when this is really about money.

Of course reading the rest of Mr. Watson's article make me believe that he would prefer the nanny state to provide the magical illusion of protection for every aspect of his life. Then, you have the obligatory anti-gun reference:

Driving is one reason I don’t hunt. After watching what morons do with a lethal steering wheel in their hands, there’s no way I’m going to give them guns and then go out in the woods and walk around in the middle of them.

Page 31 of the liberal playbook is not too be missed. That is the page that commands that you must denigrate gun owners at every opportunity.

I'm glad I didn't pay for that newspaper. Talk about a "stupidity tax-and a voluntary one, at that."

Democrats finally right about something

They told me if I voted for McCain....

Swallow your beverage before reading this.

Insulting Democrats, Congress and the Florida Gators...all in one video. The video is priceless.

Don't tell Congress

That Wal-Mart is awarding $2 billion in bonuses to its employees. They might try to pass another ex post facto law to strip the bonuses away from them. Of course, the Democrats see a successful company like Wal-Mart and they do everything they can to destroy it while doing everything they can to raid taxpayer coffers to prop up failing businesses like General Motors. Follow the (union) money, people.

An Arsenal?

Give me a break. The anti-gun Associated Press headlines the article as follows: "Church shooting suspect had an arsenal in bedroom."

The arsenal in accused gunman Terry Sedlacek's room included two 12-gauge shotguns, a rifle and a box of 550 .22-caliber bullets, according to court documents filed Tuesday.

That's it? That's all? That's what AP calls an arsenal? Under that definition, nearly every hunter on planet earth would own several "arsenals." Where do they get these people? The alleged murderer is clearly a nutjob but AP wants to focus on his "arsenal." Perhaps that is part of Pravda's new talking points. Look for anti-arsenal legislation from the Obama camp in the coming days.

It's over. McCain has won the election.

Well, the liberals might as well get over it. Despite claims to the contrary by the desperate news media, McCain has won the election and it is for a very simple reason. Most of the Democrats will believe the press reports that Obama has already won. After all, their primary news source is the MSM and everything said in the MSM is true (except for Faux News - everything said there is a partisan lie and part of the vast right-wing conspiracy). Since these lemmings already believe the media hype, it stands to reason that they will believe that Obama has won and will not vote. Republicans, on the other hand, do not believe the MSM lies. They will rightly assume that the race is not, in fact, already won by Obama and will go vote for McCain.

In any event, this final nail in the coffin for Obama may have been unnecessary. We all know that most Democrats work in high-paying jobs and would rather stay at work than go waste their time voting. On the other hand, most of the Republicans are too poorly educated to get in out of the rain, work at minimum wage, are unemployed, are dead or just got out of prison so they have plenty of time to go vote, at least once or twice.

McCain selects Palin

No word yet on whether Chris Matthews has felt anything running up his leg.

Government on Food Waste

You better eat whatever is on your plate, othewise the government might have something to say about it in Great Britain. Of course, if you eat what's on your plate, you might become obese, another problem that the bureaucrats think they ought to regulate. I suppose the only way to reconcile these two problems is to increase taxes on food, which is what they really want anyway.

American Bar Association Statement on Civil Rights Case

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision on the true meaning of the first amendment in a landmark civil rights case. The American Bar Association agrees that the first amendment should be appropriately limited to protect us from ourselves. Their statement is reproduced below:

The American Bar Association is gratified that the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in District of Columbia v. The American People recognizes the public interests in regulating speech. However, the ruling also specifically confers a right to speak freely in one's home, provided that it is done in such a manner that the neighbors cannot hear it, be offended by it or otherwise be disturbed. That leaves for further analysis, and appears to support, much of the vast body of regulation that has developed over time based on the needs of those in power to protect themselves from the ill effects of offensive speech in the interest of the public welfare. It leaves the District of Columbia and other jurisdictions the ability to adopt regulations that respond to those legitimate public interests, and retain those already in place. The majority opinion allows limiting the speech that individuals can use in public without appropriate, governmentally approved press credentials, and permits restrictions on dangerous and unusual speech of any kind. It upholds press licensing laws, and restrictions on even permissible speech in sensitive places. This is not a signal to rescind regulation or ignore legitimate restrictions on free speech that are grounded in reason and practicality.

Yeah, that's a joke; the ABA would never say that. Why then, would it say this?

Democrats get one right despite themselves

While the Democrat-controlled Congress voted 276 to 146 in favor of adding gasoline price gouging regulation to the list of idiotic things it has done, Americans dodged a bullet because they did not have the votes to sustain a threatened veto. Sure, probably most people are in favor of this legislation, but most people do not have enough education in the area of economics to make an informed decision on the subject. They think price gouging laws actually help consumers when quite the opposite is true. Remember this the next time you hear that Bush is a lame duck.

Liberals less honest than conservatives

That is the gist of this story. It probably should not surprise anyone that those who want to take wealth away from the producers at the point of a gun and give to the non-producers would be dishonest. "Stealing" does not appear to be in their vocabulary.

Only a liberal

Only a liberal could complain about the government's response to Hurricane Katrina but then advocate for universal (i.e., socialist) healthcare.

Update: Here is a good list of similar thoughts: You might be a liberal if ...