Democrats the Lawyers' Party

My friend Contrairimairi sent me this missive:

>This is why we should NEVER allow lawyers to be legislators. They should be confined to the Judicial branch of government. Many thanks to dear friend and fellow Patriot, Kat:

>>The Lawyers' Party
 

This is very interesting! I never thought about it this way.
Perhaps this is why so many physicians are conservatives or Republicans.
The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers' Party.

       *         Barack Obama is a lawyer.
       *         Michelle Obama is a lawyer.        (Should be these two WERE lawyers! They still aren't telling what happened!)
       *         Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
       *         Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
       *         John Edwards is a lawyer.
       *         Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
       *         Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
       *         Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, Except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.

Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:

       *         Harry Reid is a lawyer
       *         Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

 

The Republican Party is different.

       *         President Bush is a businessman.
       *         Vice President Cheney is a businessman.
 

 The leaders of the Republican Revolution:

       *        Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
       *        Tom Delay was an exterminator.
       *         Dick Armey was an economist.
       *         House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic Manufacturer.
       *         The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a Heart surgeon.
 

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer?

       Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.
 

The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work,who are often the targets of lawyers.
 

The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers.

Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.
 

The Lawyers Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America .  And, so wehave seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail?

Pharmaceutical Companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers.

Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people.

Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives.

America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the Law  in  America  is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of  Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too Great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers Party to provide real change, real Reform or real hope in America Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected Judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our Defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our Economy.

The United States has 5% of the world's population and 66% of the world's lawyers!

Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in Ridiculous lawsuits such as spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you and also to limit punitive damages In huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party.

When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association go to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

       Please -- DO PASS THIS ON!

Judge Napolitano: Uconstitutionality of Patriot Act, America a Tyranny

Fortuitously, someone just posted asking why I haven't written on the Patriot Act and, almost the next e-mail was from Jim Crum, who sent this video of a prominent judge about the unconstitutionality of the Patriot Act. "Freedom must be defended from every assailant...from the government that wants to take it away from us."

America has become a tyranny. My blog yesterday morning speaks to similar themes in a slightly different way. I'm for Napolitano for president.

Jim Crum writes:

This is beyond terrific. Listen to the end AND THEN FORWARD IT ON.

>Andrew P. Napolitano is a 59 year old former New Jersey Superior Court Judge.
He is a graduate of Princeton University, and Notre Dame Law School. At Princeton he was a founding member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, along with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is the youngest life-tenured Superior Court Judge in the history of the State of New Jersey.

Government: The Oldest Confidence Scheme

For a number of years I worked at starting a business and investing in real estate. One of the chief challenges with which business men have to deal is the deception and manipulation of confidence men and women. Elderly people fall prey to confidence men who offer prizes for cash and Internet sweepstakes, but seasoned, high level executives fall for them as well. The Madoff scandal is but the most glaring of history's confidence schemes. In 2001, Sam Waksal convinced Peter Dolan, then recently appointed CEO of Bristol Myers Squibb and Waksal's friend (as was the also ill-fated Martha Stewart) to invest $2 billion in Imclone. According to the Wharton School of Business:

"But in December, the Food and Drug Administration rejected ImClone's application for Erbitux's market approval. ImClone's stock is now trading under $10 a share and its former chief executive, Samuel Waksal, was arrested in June on charges of conspiracy, perjury and insider trading. Authorities are investigating whether Waksal tipped off his friend, Martha Stewart, also an investor in the company, to sell shares just prior to the FDA's December ruling."

The annals of business are replete with stories of confidence schemes.

But government offers confidence schemes that are even bigger and of more malicious scope than does business. For example:

-Chinese, Soviet and Cuban governments came to power on the promise that communism would make their comrades' lives better. After decades, tens of millions of victims murdered by these governments, and one mismanaged enterprise after the other, the comrades were as poor as ever. The communist countries could not develop.

-In America, the Great Society programs of Lyndon B. Johnson claimed to be an important tool to help the poor and minorities. Today, 21% of inner city black teenagers are unemployed. Poverty has not been eradicated, rather income inequality has grown.

-Social security claimed to help the economic security of the elderly. Yet today, the economic value of social security contributions is far lower than the economic value that taxpayers contribute. Politicians transferred benefits to politically vocal constituencies in the 1970s and earlier. The result is that today's taxpayers pay for the retirement of previous generations, while seeing their own recede into the ever more distant horizon.

-Military strategy. Government claims expertise with respect to military strategy. Defense is the one area where no one denies that government ought to play a role, although the left believes it should be a smaller role than the right. But in Vietnam and Iraq, the military refused to heed the advice of William S. Lind and Thomas X. Hammes as to the importance of Fourth Generation Warfare. The result was botched strategy, thousands of Americans killed unnecessarily and at least hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese and Iraqis killed unnecessarily.

-Central banking. The biggest scam. I have blogged about this elsewhere. The idea that economists are better equipped to judge how much money the crooks at the Federal Reserve Bank ought to print is a funny idea. Add to it the laughable claim that the money ought to be given to bankers, and the bankers ought to have the power to expand the counterfeit money five fold in order to "help the poor" is unquestionably the biggest financial scam in the history of mankind.

-Government operations. In the 1970s I had the privilege to work as an office temp in New York City's Department of Social Services. I was still in college. My job was to type forms for medicaid claims. The office as a large, 20,000 square foot room with at least 100 employees, maybe more. I was typing the forms, but when I looked up, not a single other person was working. Everyone else in the office was standing around talking. Not a single employee at a typewriter. Then, a group of them came to my desk and stood around me. One started saying that it was ungodly to work because Jesus said to give unto God what is God's and Ceasar what is Ceasar's.

This occurred just before the mayoralty of Edward I. Koch, the Democrat who advocates lots of additional government programs. The DSS continued unaffected during Koch's 12-year mayoralty.

It is difficult to get to the bottom of all the thieving, stupidity and incompetence in government operations. One example was FEMA's handling of the New Orleans Hurricane Katrina a few years back. The Democrats, with their usual incompetent finger pointing and refusal to look for real causes, blamed the hurricane on Bush. But there is hardly a competently run agency in state and federal government. They are all mismanaged scams.

But, of course, the confidence men cum politicians do not discuss the mismanagement, waste, misallocation of resources and failed regulation. They do not tell you that they are helping the rich through their regulatory and monetary scams.

Rather, they tell the American people that they are helping the poor and the general population.

The American people are suckers. They are suckers to allow 50% of their income to go to federal and state taxes to be squandered on the garbage that politicians oversee.

Letter to Congressman Hinchey: The US Government Needs to Down Size

Dear Congressman Hinchey:

Why don't you and your fellow Congressmen deflate your puffed egos and reduce the federal budget by 50% or 60%? The recent bailouts are proof that you don't know what you're doing.

According to the Census Bureau, in 2007 the US government's direct expenditures or obligations were in excess of $2.5 trillion and other federal assistance, including direct loans, guaranteed loans and insurance, was almost $1.2 trillion. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Gross Domestic Product in 2008 was $14.3 trillion. Thus, US government spending is roughly (2.5 + 1.2) / 14.3 = 25.8% of GNP. This suggests that the federal government believes that 1/4 of the time it can make decisions that are better for society than private consumers can.

This past year has seen an escalation of federal government spending. It is hard to keep track of all the bailouts, subsidies, and handouts that the Bush-Obama administration and the US Congress have concocted, but it seems that these amounts substantially increase the percentage of Gross Domestic Product over which the federal government mistakenly imagines itself best fit to manage.

Rather, the 25% in 2007 was way too high. The federal government has proven that it is incompetent. The 25% should be slashed to the 10% it was in 1950.

If Congress has trouble deciding which government agencies to close, I have a suggestion. Since all government programs are useless, just cut randomly. After cutting the size of government to 10% of gdp, the next step would be to reduce taxation to 10% of gdp. Then people who are a lot smarter than you are, the American public, can begin to repair the damage that Congress has wrought. It will take many years because of your incredible stupidity and incompetence.

A 10% federal budget would still be 10% too high, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert