The Real Republican

The Senate voted today on belching federal funds to bail out all the homeowners who couldn't understand the word "adjustable" when they got their mortgages. I went off on this nanny state "Dollars for Stupidity" program here and Michelle Malkin continues to cover it in detail.

As I said before, if the Kremlin Congress wants pay citizens for poor choices then it owes me more money than even a Charlie Rangel tax hike could raise.

Naturally, the Democrats think the bailout is necessary because the people were somehow tricked into getting the ARMs. I believe it was, oh, let me see, in the post immediately preceding this one where I said that being a liberal means never having to say "It's my fault." I love quoting myself.

For a party that fancies itself intellectually superior the Dems love to claim mass stupidity on the part of its constituency. You remember Florida in 2000, don't you? Al Gore's future hung on claiming that a significant number of his supporters were too stupid to read. Now it's another reading problem, this time an inability to translate the arcane phrase "Adjustable Rate" well enough to even ask what it means.

I'll grant that some voters are a few points shy of a workable IQ-how else can you explain Chuck Schumer's election?

While the rest of the Senate brought their copies of Das Kapital with them to the vote, Arizona's Jon Kyl decided to bring his balls. His was the lone voice of common sense crying out in the pandering wilderness.

For those of you who may not know Kyl, he is the GOP's dream candidate. There isn't a Democrat alive who Kyl couldn't quietly dissect in a debate. Sadly, he's waiting in the wings while the senior senator from Arizona takes his last shot at the White House.

If the congressional Republican elephant wants to keep growing donkey ears on fiscal matters the true GOP voters will have to endure a long, federally funded nuclear winter of ideological and fiscal bankruptcy.

We can only hope that Jon Kyl will still be around to open a can of whoop-ass to help lead us out.

Where Are The Republicans?

Correct me if I'm wrong, George W. Bush was the Republican nominee both times he won the presidency, right?

Michelle Malkin discusses the particulars of the president's quasi-nationalization of the mortgage industry and bailout of the homeowners whose eyes were bigger than their wallets here.

Since when is it the government's job to offer assistance for confusion and/or stupidity? OK, we pay retirement benefits to former members of the House and Senate but that's unavoidable.

Millions of Americans apparently signed contracts for Adjustable Rate Mortgages without quite understanding the nature of the beast. Perhaps it has to do with all that public education leaving them with no working knowledge of simple math ("Small number now, big number later..."). Maybe the word "adjustable" was only used in honors classes. I'd wager a good portion of the people in trouble right now believed they were purchasing actual appendages.

"Honey, this looks more like a house than an arm."

"Shh, let's keep it anyway. If we say something we'll look stupid!"

If the federal government is truly going into the business of bailing out people for stupid personal choices then it owes me a chunk for my mid-twenties. With interest. Heck, I've got a list of idiocy that runs right up to last Friday (onions, garlic and broccoli before heading out for the night-blast off!) that I could use some cash for. So far, so good this week though.

The American public isn't known for its financial acumen. We're the idiots who keep electing the idiots who spend our money on nothing.

"What's that, Senator, you've wasted another third of my income? Well, by all means, take some more of my money and get back to work then!"

So now we're asking the idiots who never spend our money well to help us because we didn't spend our money well.

"I'm having a hard time losing weight. If I eat nothing but ice cream, beer and potato chips for a month it should get better."

I feel for the few real Republicans left in Washington. It must be hard to get any substantive legislation passed when you spend most of your day recovering from injuries incurred while banging your heads against the wall.

"Hush little baby, don't say a word. The Nanny-State will help in ways quite absurd..."

Fighting The Wrong Pork

Watch out folks, the feds are trying to help again. Feeling the courts are adequately protecting everyone from Christmas, your federal legislators have decided to ramp up their ongoing war against parental involvement in their own children's lives. This time, it's a national ban on junk food.  The legislation is sponsored by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Nanny State), whose biggest recent accomplishment was defending Hugo Chavez's remarks about President Bush at the UN. 

My blood boils every time a Democrat attempts to throw a blanket of socialism over American society. This particular attempt, however, does help illustrate the fundamental flaw in the Democrats' approach to governing. 

The first thing one gives up when registering as a Democrat is a sense of personal responsibility (irony goes quickly after that). Once you're in, you can blame all ills on the ubiquitous lack of funding, the Republicans or, in the case of the Climate Commies, the fact that weather changes.  Sadly, some current Republicans get guilted into signing on to some of the nanny legislation whenever they're accused of being against the children. The first thing the GOP needs to do is send this group home and get some candidates who understand the differences between the parties' philosophies. 

Which brings us to the fat kids. What the United States lacks in domestic fuel production we make up for in the production of porky pre-teens. When teachers complain of classrooms that are too full they are often merely describing how much room these little Oompa-Loompas take up.  

I'm going to muddy this discussion up by introducing some casual empiricism. Go to a mall this holiday season, sit on a bench for a while and watch the people. See how many fat kids have fat parents in tow. One might come to the conclusion that all of this chubbiness is beginning at home. Naturally, the best place to remedy this is to go after the Ho-Ho's (can we still call them that?) and Ding-Dongs at school. 

It all seems so heart-warming and laden with altruism, doesn't it? Wait, what's this?

This same article mentions that leaders are more optimistic than ever about enacting the legislation because "...leaders in the food and beverage industry have had a hand in creating the new standards." Hmm, might these leaders of industry have some new products that just happen to fit those new standards? I'm no journalist (I'm a Republican so I'm not allowed in that club), but I bet a little digging might find some new, improved and perhaps even more expensive snacks waiting in the wings.

I can already hear my liberal friends saying, "So what's wrong with that? At least the kids will have healthier choices at school!"

What's wrong is that many of these kids will still have the parents at home who are feeding them fried ice cream and pork rinds for breakfast. Afternoons will still be spent munching on the unhealthy snacks that those same industry leaders will still have on the shelves and sitting down in front of the computer or TV. It's like trying to fix a broken leg by just giving the patient crutches without a cast. 

In the end, all this does is give some parents a scapegoat and the feds another chance to weasel their way into kids' lives. 

The kids don't need more carrot sticks at school, they need parents who provide good examples and teach them to make good choices. No government can do that. If the parents can't say "No" to junk food the kids have very little chance of learning, even if Tom Harkin wants to help.