OU professor: Youths' attraction to Sanders shows education failure

This is a reprint of the article written by Professor David Deming of OU, January 30, 2016 in the NewsOK paper.


OU professor: Youths' attraction to Sanders shows education failure
By David Deming  | January 30, 2016

It's disheartening that an avowed socialist is a viable candidate for president of the United States. Socialism is a dead end. For hundreds of years, it has failed everywhere it's been adopted. The enthusiasm of our youth for the candidacy of Bernie Sanders is a symptom of our failure to educate them, not only in history, government and economics, but also basic morality.

You don't have to be a student of ancient history to know socialism doesn't work. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 was an unequivocal demonstration of the moral and economic superiority of capitalism. The misery caused by socialism is unfolding today in Venezuela. Since Venezuela embraced socialism in 1999, poverty, crime and corruption have all increased. Grocery shelves are empty and the annual inflation rate is estimated to be as high as 200 percent.

The United States is a constitutional republic founded on political equality, not equality of income or circumstances. Our system of government was designed to secure the natural rights of its citizens. These rights include not only “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” but the right to acquire and maintain private property. The Founding Fathers considered property rights to be sacred and
paramount.

Under capitalism, goods and services are distributed through private, voluntary exchanges. When people engage in volitional transactions, everyone benefits. If we believe a transaction is in our best interest, we have an incentive to maintain good relations with those with whom we're trading. Thus a society based on freedom and trading promotes good will and civility. Our free-market system has produced the greatest prosperity in human history.

There are no property rights under socialism. Goods and services are distributed by force through political means. Everything you possess is subject to confiscation and redistribution. Industrious and productive people are punished; parasites are rewarded. When people come to believe they have a right to goods and services produced by other people, society disintegrates into squabbling factions. If socialism is allowed to progress to its logical extreme, it culminates in a military dictatorship like North Korea.

What about so-called “crony capitalism”? This is nothing more than socialism that benefits the wealthy and influential. It's just as wrong as any other form of socialism. The cure is to limit government power. Human nature is corruptible. If government has the power to redistribute wealth, it will always act in the interests of the powerful segments of society. What made America great is not progressive government, but the genius and industry of a people freed from arbitrary power by the chains placed upon government by our Constitution.

Socialism isn't so much a legitimate economic system as it is a moral failing. It will always exist because ignorant people will always want something for nothing. If we want to retain our freedom and prosperity, then we must educate our children that the purpose of government is to secure liberty, not provide free lunches.

Deming (ddeming@ou.edu) is a professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

Matt Walsh Blog - Provocative, Rational Insight

Matt Walsh Blog
Matt Walsh on Facebook

I recently added a link to Matt Walsh's blog site on my own blog.  Matt is a very good writer, and even better thinker.  Reading his blog will make you smarter, because Matt is a smart guy.  Whether you agree with him or not, you cannot argue his positions are not logical and rational, and his ability to put them into words is lacking in much of what is passes for op/ed writing these days. 

How Joe Biden Gets Democrat Nomination

I'm going on record with a prediction concerning Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party.

Given the nature of the FBI investigation on Hillary's email server and classified data in those email messages, I predict the Democrat Party will plan accordingly to ensure they have a viable candidate for the general election for President. 

The concerns are that Mrs. Clinton will be indicted, opening the way for Bernie Sanders to win the nomination, followed by the socialist losing the general election.  Here is what the Democrats would likely do in my opinion.

The Obama controlled Department of Justice will not proceed with an indictment as long as Hillary appears to be the eventual nominee throughout the primary season.  Once Hillary locks up enough delegates to win the nomination, the party will wait until after she is nominated.  At that time the indictment will come down, she will be forced to step aside, and the party big shots will place whomever they like in the nominee seat.  That person will be Joe Biden.

They cannot interfere with the primary elections according to their own rules.  But once the nominee is known, they have the means to replace the nominee with anyone of their choosing.  If there is no first ballot nominee, they can also use the delegates they control to choose anyone besides either primary candidate.  President Obama would like nothing more than a democrat president succeed him in order to maintain the legacy, and Biden is most likely to protect Obamacare and Obama's executive orders. 

They cannot indict Hillary too soon, or she loses the nomination to Sanders, and the party doesn't want that, because they mostly feel he cannot win in November.

White Privilege is not so simple, really.

Simplest Explanation of Privilege


This comic has picked one scenario which may or may not be the rule.  I do not think it is quite so simple as this scenario demonstrates.


This scenario does not account for the millions of immgrants coming to America with only their clothes on their backs and desire in their hearts.  They worked hard, made life better for them and their children, and passed along the secret to making life better.


That secret is no real secret at all.  Get educated.  Get employed, anywhere.  Get married.  Have children.  Do not commit crime.  Do those things in that order and your likelihood of living in poverty is about 3%.  Do those things out of order, skip one, or commit crimes, and live in poverty about 80% of the time.


Even if you're born into a family in poverty, you can learn this lesson, if only by observing your community, but certainly by going to school every day and paying attention.  Its not about privilege, its about setting expectations.

Feeling the Burn!

Feel the 'Bern'

Bernie Sanders is proposing many things if gets elected President.  Many things which will not be free.  Many things that will necessitate tax hikes.  Significant tax hikes.

Business healthcare premium tax — $6.3 trillion
Bernie thinks taxing businesses will raise enough money to pay for socialized medicine, er, free health care. Actually raising taxes will cause employers to lay off workers in an effort to reduce the tax burden.  So employees' savings on health care will not be enough to offset lost jobs.
Ending tax free status of employer health insurance — $3.1 trillion
Same logic as above.  I would propose removing the exempt employer status, and give raises to all employees to buy their own insurance.
Wall Street speculation tax — $3 trillion
What the heck is Wall Street speculation anyway?  If that means investments, then you can kiss Wall Street goodbye, in which case there will be no more speculation.  If people cannot expect a return, there will be no investment.
Individual healthcare premium tax — $2.1 trillion
More taxes on individuals following a decade of shrinking income.  Make sense to anyone?
Social Security tax hike — $1.2 trillion
This might make sense if Social Security was solvent, which it is not.  Raising teh eligibility age makes more sense, though this one may be negotiable for me.
Raising marginal income tax rates — $1.1 trillion
Raising tax rates on smaller income is a lose:lose proposition every time.
Corporate offshore income tax — $ 1 trillion
A better idea is a tax holiday which would repatriate the money being held overseas.
Capital gains tax hike — $920 billion
How is this different than the speculation tax above?  Oh, it piles on to that one.
Payroll tax hike — $319 billion
More taxes for working people?  Seriously?  See raising marginal income tax above.
Death tax hike — $243 billion
Nothing like double taxation to make a socialist feel good.  Tax me when I earn it, and tax my family when I die.
Scrapping tax deductions — $150 billion
Limit deductions.  Sounds like raise tax rates to me.
Energy tax — $135 billion
Al Gore would be proud, but until any form of energy is cheap enough to make people switch, they won't.  Green energy is not cost effective and therefore is not a good option.  Maybe one day it will be.
Carried interest tax — $15.6 billion
This earned interest is already taxable income.  So just say increased taxes again.

Liberals and socialists never learn that to get more of something you subsidize, and for less you tax it.  When you increase the tax rate you generally get less tax income due to the shrinking base being taxed.  Politicians never believe that a change in taxation results in changed behavior, yet it happens every time they change the tax rates.  But of course they know this is true because they are using the tax code to reward and/or punish various behaviors already.  They want their cake and to eat it too.

Liars lie, its what they do!

Hillary surprised by use of personal email account by staffer
For the good of country, this woman cannot be elected.  She cannot be trusted, and she lies, consistently lies, and then she lies to cover up her lies.  Oh yeah, and she's a liar too.

How can any reasonable person, using a personal email account for state business when it is expressly forbidden, be surprised that a staffer would be doing the same thing?

She has lied about the women her husband has been accused of sexually abusing, harassing and assaulting.  Link
She has lied about FBI files in her closet in the White House. Video
She has lied about Whitewater.Link
She has lied about cattle futures. Link
She has lied about travelgate. Link
She has lied about the Benghazi attack. Link
She has lied about her email server. Link
She has lied about the messages on the email server.
She has lied about what she said to families of the Benghazi victims, and she has accused them of lying about that.

If you search the web for "Hillary lies" you will get approximately 6.8 million hits.

Need more information about her lies?

This commentary was submitted by US Representative Tammy Duckworth in the Chicago Tribune. 

Reject fearmongers, welcome Syrian refugees

Note: Ms. Duckworth, I am copying your commentary with my own response included after each paragraph.  My responses begin with RS:. I encourage you to respond.  I encourage all who read it to respond.

This is a time for the United States to lead with strength, not fear.

  RS: One could argue our president is not leading at all, much less with strength.

In combat one should never let the enemy determine the battlefield or dictate the terms of war. I've experienced the mission challenges that emerge when our nation engages in armed conflict with an enemy it does not truly understand. Unfortunately, I am concerned we may be repeating past mistakes as we confront a barbaric new enemy — the Islamic State.

  RS: So you admit the enemy is not truly understood by us.  This is a problem since we should not ignore what we don;t understand.  Are you suggesting we vote to let them in without understanding who we are letting in.  Sounds like the process that gave us Obamacare.

As last week's terrorist attacks made clear, Islamic State is a deadly and determined adversary. However, despite its brutality, Islamic State is no match for the American military and would be destroyed in a conventional war.

  RS: But we're not fighting them in a conventional war.  Maybe we shoud be fighting them more conventionally instead of udner the rules of engagement, or lack thereof, we currently impose on our military.

They realize this too, which is why they are seeking to force the United States and our allies to fight on their terms by waging a bloody but sophisticated propaganda campaign that attempts to radicalize Sunni Muslims — wherever they live — against the West. This campaign relies in part on provoking an understandable but ultimately self-defeating reaction among horrified Westerners against all Muslims, which perpetuates a cycle of distrust and conflict.

 RS: There are not many people claiming all Muslims are terrorists.  There is a good argument for ISIS members being Muslim though.  It is not a valid argument to say I think all Muslims are evil or terrorists.

It would be a mistake to react as Islamic State wants us to, which is why the callous actions of many governors, including here in Illinois, are so disappointing. They are sending a signal that innocent victims fleeing the brutality of the Syrian civil war are not welcome in the United States, which plays right into our enemy's hands. It empowers and emboldens radicals who want nothing more than for us to conflate their twisted barbarism with the entire Muslim world, and to appear indifferent to human suffering as we turn inward. Ultimately, this poses a threat to our national security.

 RS: The governors are sending a signal to proceed with caution, and not simply open the doors to any and all who claim to be a refugee.  Can you not see how prudent it is to proceed with caution?  Your own words indicate as much.

It is not difficult to imagine a child we reject today fighting alongside Islamic State years from now. Abandoned in a dangerous and hopeless place, that child could turn into a fighter firing rocket-propelled grenades at American helicopters, just like the one who brought down my Black Hawk 11 years ago this month.

 RS: You do understand ISIS is training children to kill infidels?  The child we let in may be a trained would be killer.  And so could his mother.  Women have been using suicide bombs just in the last several days.

We are not powerless in that child's fate.

 RS: Correct, and we should not relinquish that power either.

When I was a child, I witnessed the refugee crisis borne out of people fleeing the Khmer Rouge and Pathet Lao in Southeast Asia. I remember families loading all they had into boats and risking everything on the South China Sea. I am proud the U.S. took in refugees during those years, and ever motivated by the knowledge that we could have done more.

 RS:  I agree,  but these are not those.  They were not people intent on killing infidels. 

I can only imagine choosing to carry my precious 1-year-old daughter, Abigail, as we flee halfway across a continent, and placing her in a rickety boat or rubber dinghy that may not survive the dangerous trip across the Mediterranean Sea, because that ordeal is still safer than staying home. That is exactly the choice parents are making in Syria today. These families are leaving everything behind in a desperate attempt to escape the horrific violence being perpetrated both by Islamic State and the brutal regime of Bashar Assad.

 RS:  Then let's make sure the USA remains the strongest and most secure country on Earth.

I certainly understand the concerns many have expressed after last week's brutal terrorist attacks, and the temptation to turn inward as a result. I also have no difficulty imagining a would-be terrorist seeking to enter our country by exploiting our humanitarian good intentions. But this is where a dose of reality is required: The current security screening process takes almost two years to complete and is particularly stringent for people from unstable regions like Syria. It involves biographic and biometric screenings, as well as vetting for connections to terrorist organizations by the FBI, the National Counterterrorism Center, and other agencies. I welcome efforts to improve security even further, which is why I am working in Congress and the Obama administration to develop a range of additional measures to strengthen the screening process.

 RS:  Our own FBI director claims we are unable to adequately screen these refugees under current circumstances.  Why should I beleive you or President Obama over the man who is to screen these people?  And the director is not alone in his thinking.

So let us reject the cynics and fearmongers who question our country's ability to conduct effective security screenings that balance safety and freedom. America must be resolute in the face of terror and never allow our enemies to scare us into retreating behind walls and abandoning our values. Even as we work to destroy Islamic State, we must feel compassion for its victims, because they include both those whose lives were shattered Friday night in Paris, as well as the millions of Syrians who have been displaced and are seeking refuge.

 RS:  Cynics and fearmongers exist on both sides of this debate.  Let's not give in to those.  Instead, let's use logic and reasoning to come to a proper process that leads to both security and compassion for refugees.  Let's understand that refugees are one thing, but terrorists are completedly different.  When you can tell the difference you are almost there.

By remaining steadfast and true to our values, the United States can lead the fight to crush Islamic State. This requires engagement, however, not retreat. In this fight, our compassion and values are required in addition to our military might. We must not yield the field of battle to our enemy. This is a time for the United States to lead with strength, not fear.

 RS:  Crushing ISIS requires we make some changes in strategy and policy, namely in terms of rules of engagement.  It is indeed a complex problem, which is why prudence is needed.

U.S. Rep. Tammy Duckworth represents Illinois' 8th Congressional District.

 RS:  Ms. Duckworth, please answer the following questions and share your answers publicly.  I think these questions should properly explain why openign the door to Syrian refugees should be done by first checking the peep hole.

1. Do you want to allow members of ISIS, who may be Syrian, into the USA?
2. Do you know these refugees are not traveling with documentation that can be trusted or verified since there is no source of truth for those documents?
3. If a Syrian member of ISIS wanted to come into the USA as a refugee, do you think he or she would self-identify as a terrorist?
4. Do you know that ISIS is training Muslim children to be terrorists and to kill?
5. Do you know that in the last couple of weeks Muslim women have killed using suicide bombs?
6. Do you think it wise to at least try to ensure terrorists do not try to pass as refugees?
7. Do you understand the FBI says they cannot screen these people to learn if they may be terrorists?
8. What would you do next? 
Remember, it only takes one!