Monthly Archives: December 2010

Sing “Dixie” tonight after “Auld Lang Syne”

Tonight, as you savor your Mint Juleps and join in with friends and family to welcome the New Year, don’t forget to sing the traditional New Year’s anthem, “Auld Lang Syne.” And be sure to sing “Dixie” as well, because the two songs complement each other.

Everyone knows that “Auld Lang Syne” is a song of remembrance of treasured days:

Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
and never brought to mind?
Should auld acquaintance be forgot
and days of auld lang syne?

For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We’ll take a cup o’ kindness yet
For auld lang syne

Loved ones we have lost still touch our hearts, and they will always remain a part of us because we will remember them. But present-day relationships make life worth living today, and the song includes this pledge to those who are close to us now:

And here’s a hand, my trusty friend,
And gie’s a hand o’ thine;
We’ll take a cup o’ kindness yet
For auld lang syne

“Dixie” also recognizes the bonding of past and present by celebrating the history that is a vital part of who we are:

Oh, I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times there are not forgotten,
Look away, look away, look away Dixie Land.

In Dixie Land, where I was born in,
early on one frosty mornin’,
Look away, look away, look away Dixie Land.

“Dixie” also includes this promise to go forward while remaining true to the past:

I wish I was in Dixie, Hooray! Hooray!
In Dixie Land I’ll take my stand
to live and die in Dixie.
Away, away, away down South in Dixie.
Away, away, away down South in Dixie.

These songs celebrate our connections with our loved ones of the past and present, connections that make us mindful of things beyond ourselves — connections that make us human. In an age when loyalty, patriotism, and love of one’s own are attacked as anachronisms, when our only concern is supposed to be maximizing the bottom line, and the only values that matter are those of the deracinated, isolated psychopath, it’s good to remind ourselves that stubborn human nature persists despite the pressure from our handlers. Let’s take a cup.

More Korea – US “Free Trade” Deal (KORUS a.k.a. KAFTA) Articles

My goal is to make CHT a repository of information and links regarding the Korea – US “Free Trade” Deal (KORUS a.k.a. KAFTA). I want CHT to be the go to website regarding KORUS/KAFTA. Here are a few.

Obama Trade Deal Would Hurt Workers” by David Newby at the Wisconsin State Journal.

Friend of this website, Mike Tuggle, has this in the Salisbury Post.

Mike Tuggle’s article being commented on at FreeRepublic.

Friend of this website, Peter Gemma, has this blog item at Campaign for Liberty.

Here is a similar entry from Peter at DailyPaul.

Elizabeth Shuler at USA Today.

Ed Dornlas at the Las Vegas Sun.

Economy in Crisis: “NAFTA Redux?”

Editor’s Note: I have added a new “Korea Trade Deal” category.

Chris Matthews Joins the “Just Release the Long Form” Bandwagon

Liberal Chris Matthews has now taken on air the common sense position that Obama should just release the long form. (Make sure you watch the video a few paragraphs down from the top.)

“I am not a birther. I am an enemy of the birthers,” Matthews said. But, he added, “Why doesn’t the president just say, ‘Send me a copy right now?’ Why doesn’t Gibbs and Axelrod say, ‘Let’s just get this crappy story dead?’ Why not do it? … If it exists, why not put it out?”

While commentators Clarence Page and David Corn are not really sympathetic to Matthews, they are somewhat coerced into agreeing with the general “just release the long form” sentiment at the end. So at least arguably Corn and Page can be added to the “just release the long form” chorus as well.

More later…

Want to help the poor?

And a whole lot of the middle class at the same time? The answer is so obvious, even liberal writer Mickey Kaus can see it:

If you’re worried about incomes at the bottom, though, one solution leaps out at you. It’s a solution that worked, at least in the late 1990s under Bill Clinton, when wages at the low end of the income ladder rose fairly dramatically. The solution is tight labor markets. Get employers bidding for scarce workers and you’ll see incomes rise across the board without the need for government aid programs or tax redistribution. A major enemy of tight labor markets at the bottom is also fairly clear: unchecked immigration by undocumented low-skilled workers. It’s hard for a day laborer to command $18 an hour in the market if there are illegals hanging out on the corner willing to work for $7. Even experts who claim illlegal immigration is good for Americans overall admit that it’s not good for Americans at the bottom.

The law of supply and demand applies to labor, too? Whoa! What’ll Kaus discover next? Gravity?

National Review interviews Ron Paul

National Review published an interview with Ron Paul yesterday. The interview itself might have seemed impartial if the introduction didn’t make it so obvious that the magazine is anti-Paul. National Review, the alleged “flagship publication” of the “conservative movement,” does not praise Paul for being anti-abortion – instead it notes that he opposes “abortion rights” (I am actually surprised they did not use the “right to choose” or “reproductive rights” euphemisms) as a way of questioning his libertarian bona fides. The introduction uses sarcasm-quotes around the word “neoconservatives”, in the same way one might describe a phony carnival psychic communicating with “spirits”. It strongly implies Paul has delusions of grandeur (“Paul maintains… that he is the voice crying out in the wilderness”). He notes that some consider Paul an “isolationist”, but that Paul “says non-interventionism is different” (emphasis mine), as though “isolationism” was ever anything more than a slur, as though anyone wishes to “isolate” the United States , or as though free and peaceful interaction and commerce with the world is any kind of “isolation”. The writer goes to great lengths to push his weird idea that no one has any idea what Ron Paul stands for, and that people project their ideals onto him (as people actually did with Obama), as though he hasn’t been absolutely straightforward and plain-spoken as far as his ideas are concerned.

Not surprisingly, NRO has disabled comments. Feel free to write a letter to the editor here.


Our friend Peter Gemma has graciously given us permission to post here an interview he recently conducted with Dr. Paul (for the excellent Quarterly Review), which touches on many of the same subjects as the NRO interview. The editors at National Review might be surprised to find Paul as lucid and consistent in expressing his positions as it is possible to be. The original can be found here. Any who wish to subscribe to Quarterly Review can do so here.

Commonsense and conscience in Congress
Peter B. Gemma interviews US Republican Congressman RON PAUL

Ron Paul, MD, is an American physician (obstetrics and gynæcology)
and a Republican Congressman representing the Galveston area of
Texas. He currently serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee,
the Joint Economic Committee, and the Committee on Financial
Services. Dr. Paul is well-known as an opponent of US interventionism and an
outspoken critic of American monetary policy – putting him often at odds with
both Republican and Democratic Party leaders. Congressman Paul is the author
of several books including the New York Times bestsellers End The Fed (2009),
and The Revolution: A Manifesto (2008).

Peter B. Gemma is an award-winning writer, whose articles have appeared in
many journals, including Military History, The Washington Examiner, The Journal
of Social, Political, and Economic Studies and USA Today. He is a columnist with
Middle American News and a contributing editor to The Social Contract.

Congressman Paul, thanks for spending some time with us. Let’s start off
with some background. You have been a member of Congress for a total
of 22 years – I’m taking the safe bet here that you’ll be re-elected come
November. When you initially ran for office you were a successful physician
with a young family. Why the jump into politics?

I jumped into politics in the early 1970s. It was clear to me from my reading of
Austrian economics that the Nixon administration’s economic policies would
be a major disaster for the country – not only because of the wage and price
controls, but also because of Nixon’s decision to break the dollar’s last ties to
gold. We now had a totally fiat currency and a fiscal policy guaranteed to produce
high unemployment and shortages of goods. Since I knew what was happening,
I thought I ought to try to do something. So I ran for Congress the first time in
1974 and didn’t win, but ran again in 1976 and won. By then Nixon was gone, and
so were his wage and price controls, but we still had fiat money and a lot of other
serious problems, and unfortunately we still do.

You have long been a proponent of a gold-backed currency. Why is that a
better system than what we have now, and how would it impact the current
international monetary crises?

Continue reading

Mr. President, Just Release the Long Form Birth Certificate

While I have never questioned that the President was born in Hawaii, I have long and repeatedly maintained that he should authorize the release of his long form birth certificate, that there is no go reason why he shouldn’t, and that people are rightly curious as to why he has not.

Well it seems the incoming Democrat Gov. of Hawaii agrees with me.

Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie wants to find a way to release more information about President Barack Obama’s Hawaii birth and dispel conspiracy theories that he was born elsewhere.

“Just release the long form” has always seemed like an unassailable position to me. I don’t get how anyone could be opposed to it. It is the intuitive, common sense, default position. Those who get their back up about it seem to me to fall primarily into two classes – either liberal Obama apologists who construe any opposition to the President as inherently malevolent and likely racist and moderate and conservative conspiracy phobics who want to shout down any kind of conspiracy talk lest it taint political discourse. (Conservative conspiracy phobics have an interest in protecting the brand. Moderate conspiracy phobics have an interest in maintaining the unquestioning acceptance of the conventional wisdom. There is much overlap as well.)

Korea – US “Free Trade” Agreement: What’s in a Name?

The Korea – US “Free Trade” Agreement is often referred to by this long hand. But the shortened forms that I have seen are KORUS FTA, combining Korea and US with FTA for “free trade” agreement. Or simply KORUS.

But it occurs to me that it could easily be referred to short hand as KAFTA (Korea America “Free Trade” Agreement) and be easily recognized for what it is because that would stay with  the convention of the previous trade deal, NAFTA.

Could it be that supporters of the deal don’t want it referred to as KAFTA because that would clearly evoke images of NAFTA which is viewed unfavorably by many? So instead we get the much more unwieldy KORUS FTA or KORUS which many if not most will have no idea what it is?

Well I say two can play at that game. If supporters of the deal believe they get to name the deal favorably, I don’t see why we have to oblige them by using it. I would like to suggest that opponents of the deal start referring to it as KAFTA. Let’s get this thing started, and we can then say you heard it here first. :-) (If someone is already doing this then I appologize, but I haven’t seen it elsewhere yet.)

Rise of the authoritarian Left – Self-government will not be allowed

With the sesquicentennial of the War Between the States upon us, don’t be surprised if you see more opinion pieces like this one from E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post or this one at by Western Kentucky professor Glen LaFantasie. They are obviously designed to try demonize the Confederacy, to equate the Confederacy with Nazi Germany, but there’s a deeper purpose to them as well.

A race-obsessed Left will obviously want to make the war entirely about slavery because no one would want to identify with such an odious notion as a nation based on chattel slavery.  Dionne wrote not to spin the cause of the war and yet manages to spin on his own anyway, conveniently forgetting a codicil in the U.S. Constitution about a slave being three-fifths of a person (which Northerners demanded in the Constitutional Convention and got), about a nation created on July 4, 1776 where slavery existed up and down the coastline (or as Samuel Johnson would  put it “this revolution of slave holders”) where the military leader of the revolution and best theoretician were also slaver owners and where the “liberator” himself, Abraham Lincoln, once said if he could save the Union without freeing a slave he would do so. In fact, such a hope was part of the platform of the Republican Party, which was did not call for abolition in the states where slavery already existed. Lincoln was not an abolitionist. He would  not have been the GOP nominee in 1860 if he was. While detesting slavery, Lincoln’s overall attitude was similar to many Negrophobes in the Midwest at the time who worried the expansion of slavery would settle blacks not only in the Western territories, but in their own states as well (which is why the Dred Scott decision swung sentiment towards the Republicans). The Union side included several slave states and the cause the U.S. fought for had nothing to do with slavery at the beginning of the war  but preserving the Union itself. No one denies slavery was a cause of the secession and eventual war. Certainly there were Southerners who defended slavery. But it was not the only cause of Southern grievance against the U.S. government which led henceforth to its secession from it.

This line of attack of course is typical and has been going on for at least 20 years. What will be noticeably different is the Left’s view of secession being treason in itself.  This is basically the thesis of the LaFantasie essay which includes this chilling line…

“There is no gray area, no wiggle room, that allows you to claim that because the Constitution does not mention secession, it therefore must be legal, and, oh, by the way, beginning on Tuesday Texas will henceforth be an independent republic. If Texas desires to leave the Union, then the president and Congress are duty-bound to prevent it from doing so. The aphorism “Don’t Mess with Texas” has no relevancy. Neither Texas nor any other state can secede from the Union without paying the consequences..”

So if little Vermont, which does have a secessionist movement which is far more along than the one in Texas (and without the opportunism of a career politician looking to save his political neck by co-opting Tea Party rhetoric), did manage to secede, the consequences of this would be fire, bloodshed, murder and destruction right? No doubt LaFantasie probably does fantasize this response when it comes to Texas itself but would he feel the same way if peaceable Vermont did so? Does he not forget Vermont essentially invoked nullification of Fugitive Slave Act and that Vermont and other New England states entertained ideas of secession during the War of 1812? No, he does not because to do so would mean secession was not just a Southern issue (which leads us back to slavery again) but has been thought about by other parts of the country (including Alaska which elected a member of a pro-secessionist political party as governor) for the very same reasons: separation from a larger body of government due to irreconcilable differences, the kind which were clearly spelled out in Declaration of Independence. This is why LaFantasie was vainly tries to equate the Founding Fathers on the same level as the Jacobins, the Communists and other revolutionary forces throughout history because otherwise the American Revolution looks exactly as it does, the secession of Great Britain’s American colonies from the British Empire, the rule of King George III and the British Parliament in favor of rule by colonial assemblies and their representatives in Philadelphia which signed the document.

Continue reading

Wayne Root to Guest Host G. Gordon Liddy Show – Ron Paul to be a Guest

Wayne Allyn Root, the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential candidate, best-selling author, Fox News Channel regular guest, and outspoken Libertarian-conservative media personality, guest hosts the nationally-syndicated “G. Gordon Liddy Show” on Monday December 27th.

Root’s guests will include former Republican Presidential candidate, Chairman of “Campaign for Liberty,” and Best-Selling author of “End the Fed,” U.S. Congressman Ron Paul; nationally known economists John Mauldin and Kip Herriage; CEO and anti-union activist Dave Bego; and Tea Party Express Founder Sal Russo, among others.

Root is a high-profile speaker at Tea Party events across the USA, and serves as elected member of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) and Chairman of the Libertarian National Congressional Committee (LNCC). His best-selling book, “The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gold & Tax Cuts” is now out in paperback. His web site is:

Cross posted at IPR.

Jimmy McMillan (The Rent is Too Damn High Party Guy) is Running for President

Internet sensation Jimmy McMillian is running for President, and he has Obama in his sights. He has registered as a Republican presumably to oppose Obama, but he seems like a better fit with the Green Party. As far as I can tell he is populist leftist.

He is entertaining at the least. I kind of like these candidates who are more theater than serious candidate. They poke a hole in the pretensions of the serious candidates who are visibly pained by their presence.

The globalist racket

Pundit Joe Klein left the cloistered world of the Beltway to travel American during the 2010 mid-term election. He found out and admitted what many already knew: free trade was not the panacea the economic and political elites promised it would be.

“when the middle class looks and sees how free trade has sold them down the river, exporting millions of jobs … they feel whipsawed, pissed off at both sides. I can’t tell my kids that they’ll be able to get a good job with a good company, work there for 30 years and retire with a good pension. I’d be lying. People know that doesn’t exist anymore, and they’re angry about it.”

And trade deals which help corporate bottom lines rather than workers is not fair trade. This isn’t like trading for bubble gum cards or stickers when you were young. These are vast, complex deals worth a lot of money to the powers that be. If your average joe benefits, great, if not well that’s creative distruction for you.

It isn’t just U.S. industrial unions opposing the deal, it’s also Korean farmers protesting trade deals with heavily subsidized U.S. farmers. Those who stand to lose, and stand to lose a lot, are the ones making the products or growing or mining the commodities that will be traded. Pitting worker against worker in a race to the bottom as means of economic growth for those well off already enjoying cheap good in the collusion between big business and big government.

Trade between nations yes but let’s cut out the middleman first.

War on Christmas – Israeli style

Looks like the War on Christmas has spread across the ocean, this time to Israel:

“NAZARETH ILLIT, Israel (AFP) – The mayor of a Jewish suburb of Nazareth sparked outrage on Wednesday after refusing to allow Christmas trees to be placed in town squares, calling them provocative.

Predominantly Jewish Nazareth Illit, or Upper Nazareth, is adjacent to Nazareth, where Jesus is said to have spent much of his life. It has a sizable Arab Christian minority, as does mostly Muslim Nazareth itself.

“The request of the Arabs to put Christmas trees in the squares in the Arab quarter of Nazareth Illit is provocative,” Mayor Shimon Gapso told AFP.

“Nazareth Illit is a Jewish city and it will not happen — not this year and not next year, so long as I am a mayor,” he said of the northern Israeli town.”

So all you so called Zionist Christians, you John Hagees and Michelle Bachmann’s, you Dispensationalists and others who traveled on Israeli junkets, met with Netanyahu and excused Israeli treatment of Christians in the past, what do you say now and treatment of your Christian brothers by banning a symbol of Christmas?

Oh I forgot, if they don’t worship like you they’re not considered “Christians” in your eyes.

Well, as the Bible says, you reap what you sow. So when Christians are driven from the Holy Land, we’re also going to blame you, because said or did nothing when it happened.

Some Commentary on the Specter Farewell Whinefest

Timothy Carney took notice at the Washington Examiner.

Paul Chesser comments on the Carney article at American Spectator.

Jay Homnick has this to say about it at AmSpec.

Once again for those who haven’t seen it, here is a video of Specter’s farewell speech.

If you find anymore articles on Specter’s tantrum, post links in the comments, and I will post them here.

Update: Jennifer Rubin at the The Washington Post chimes in.

John Nichols at The Cap Times: Your Progressive Voice (Ick!) gives us a liberal take.



The Mark of Cain

“All your daddies fought in vain, just to wear the Mark of Cain”

There are many reason not to vote for Haley Barbour for President, the whole silly brouhaha about his comments in a Weekley Standard article about his life growing up in Yazoo City, Mississippi is not one of them.

I’m curious as to why writer Andrew Ferguson felt he must ask these questions, because its not as though Haley Barbour had anything to do with what was going on in Mississippi during the 1960s as a young lad or could have changed anything. It’s not relevant in the course of his being President. My guess is Barbour was accurately describing what life was like for him in Yazoo City growing up and now he’s made to look like a racist because he wears the old Southern Mark of Cain (as line from song I know goes). If were going to start using that standard then Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton or John Edwards should have been disqualified from being President because members of their respective families more than likely fought for the Confederacy and Carter himself grew up on a big farm in southwest Georgia whose family, like Barbour’s, was part of the landed gentry who hired black tenant sharecroppers and probably didn’t pay them a whole hell of a lot. It’s as ridiculous as asking eight-year old Barak Obama to retroactively condemn Weatherman Bill Ayers for being a terrorist, so why should Barbour be forced to do the same thing? Condemn things he never did or said as a person because of his background growing up? Should we all be as suspicious of Barbour as those who are suspicious of Obama’s origins because of his foreign background and strange name?

If what one did during the 1960s is going to be the new litmus test for presidential candidates, it’s going to be a long time for another Southern white gets elected to the White House.  Talk about bigotry.

Former RINO Turned Democrat Arlen Specter is a Big Ol’ Whiny Baby

Political whore … er … I mean opportunist Arlen Specter delivers a whine fest on his way out of the Senate.

Tea Parties … whaa whaa … partisanship … whaa whaa … loss of civility … whaa whaa … compromise … whaa whaa whaaaaaaaaaaaa…

Specter bolted the Republican party because he knew he was going to get his a** handed to him in the primary. How dare the unwashed masses challenge His Highness. Then he jumps to the Dems and gets a challenger there. How dare the Dems not welcome the little rat with open arms.

Specter is probably the most smug and insufferable member of the Senate, and that is quite a distinction. (Lisa Murkowski is a close second.) Good riddance to him.

Here is a video of Specter’s farewell speech.

Here is a video of me celebrating his departure.

Did Clyburn Get His Limo?

With his fall from the number 2 spot, Clyburn lost his taxpayer-funded limousine service around D.C. He cried racist, so a new number 3 spot is being created especially for him:

Under an arrangement worked out in private, officials said late Friday that Clyburn would instead receive a new position, title unknown and duties undescribed, explicitly labeled the third-ranking post in leadership.

The maneuvering was described by Democratic officials after Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued a vaguely worded statement saying she intends to nominate Clyburn to a new No. 3 post. The statement made no mention of Hoyer, and officials who filled in the details did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not permitted to speak publicly about the matter.

The AP doesn’t even mention a limo. Did Clyburn get his limo, or is Washington racist?

Update: The new Democratic House post will be called “assistant leader”.

Ron Paul and Walter Jones Come Out Against KORUS FTA

If free trade purist Ron Paul and paleo-leaning Walter Jones are both against this monstrosity, then you know it is a mess.

Read this letter from the two congressmen. The sovereignty issues they point out are devastating.

Dear Colleague:

Free trade theorists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo must be rolling in their graves to see pacts like President Obama’s Korea Agreement called “free trade.” Like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the pact, written by unelected trade bureaucrats, spans 1,000 pages.

It includes endless pages of rules and regulations enforced by foreign tribunals. This act is a sneaky form of international preemption, undermining the critical checks and balances and freedoms established by the U.S. Constitution’s reservation of many rights to the people or state governments.

And, President Obama’s Korea Agreement sets up foreign tribunals to which the United States mst submit for judgment. Foreign investors are allowed to skirt the U.S. court system to directly ue the U.S. government for trade pact violations before UN and World Bank tribunals. Those provisions enable demands by such forms for compensation in U.S. taxpayer funds for violations of the special foreign investor privileges the pact provides. There are nearly 80 Korean firms with more than 200 establishments set up in this country now that would acquire these new rights to raid our Treasury using foreign tribunals.

We urge you to oppose President Obama’s Korea Agreement.


Ron Paul

Walter Jones

Garland Favorito: “The Key Event That Lead to Uncontrolled Federal Growth”

Garland Favorito of Voter GA, on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of South Carolina’s secession from the Union, offers us this take on the War Between the States.

The 150th anniversary of South Carolina’s attempted secession and America’s most devastating war gives us a new chance to understand the key to how our federal government can no longer be easily be controlled. But we must reevaluate what we have learned because the history of all war is written from the perspective of the victor.

Read more

Cross posted at IPR. Check out the comment thread there. An interesting debate.