Category Archives: Ron Paul

UPDATE II: Republican Thrust And ‘Perry’ (Perry Feels Your Pain, NOT)

IMMIGRATION, Outsourcing, Politics, Regulation, Republicans, Ron Paul, Taxation, The State

I thought the CNN/Tea Party Debate in Tampa, Florida, was far and away better than the Republican spat in Des Moines, Iowa, last month. Perhaps the network is desperate for the ratings Tea Party sponsorship affords because Wolf Blitzer worked it—even if the focus was placed on the Big Two, Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Michelle Bachmann showed that, like her or not, she’s a force of nature. Would that the woman’s eloquence, attractiveness, and the fact that she is seldom fazed could be harnessed in the service of liberty. Like a bulldog, Bachmann latched onto Perry and refused to let go over the governor’s Body Snatcher Program—the forcible invasion of the bodies of little Texan girls. Perry was man enough to apologize for requiring the vaccination of girls as young as 12 against cervical cancer. But a man who would mandate such a thing should never be trusted. Perry is almost as shifty as Bush, although more intelligent than The Shrub.

Jon Huntsman generally came over as the most statist among the Republican contenders. A young man asked him poignantly, “How much of what I earn do you believe I should be able to keep?” Rep. Paul would have replied, “All of it.” Huntsman belabored an incoherent tax plot.

Huntsman managed, however, to brilliantly commandeer Ron Paul’s argument for divesting from Afghanistan. This in response to a question about what he intended to do, as president, for the women and girls of Afghanistan. Nothing, basically, was Huntsman’s retort. Unlike Fox News on whose website there are more images than words, CNN is sure to post debate transcripts by tomorrow, at which time I’ll excerpt Huntsman’s excellent thrust and parry over the need to bring the troops home, look after the homeland, and act as an example to the world by, once again, shining.

However, Huntsman, like most Americans (except for us immigrants), proved that he knows close to nothing about America’s labyrinthine visa programs. He advocated for fixing the immigration system so that the US could import many more brilliant, highly skilled individuals, as if there was a limit on, or an impediment to, such immigration.

THERE are no limits on the number of geniuses American companies can import.

America already has an “Extraordinary Ability” Visa. In exchange for my spouse’s exceptional abilities and qualifications, he was awarded the O-1 visa. And we, in short order, gained green cards.

The primary H-1B hogs—Infosys (and another eight, sister Indian firms), Microsoft, and Intel—are forever claiming that they are desperate for talent. But, in reality, they have unlimited access to individuals with unique abilities through the open-ended O-1 visa program.

I believe that before “Why Aren’t The H-1B Hogs Satisfied With The O-1 ‘Extraordinary Ability’ Visa?” was written, no immigration expert had made the simple point above.

That’s right: The O-1 visa program enables the importation of as many geniuses as a company can find, from every corner of the world. Yet, not even Ron Hira (Ph.D., P.E. Chair, Research & Development Policy Committee The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers – United States of America), advocate for local talent, bothers to point this out in the course of his many media appearances.

UPDATE I (Sept. 13): Tom, the criteria for Sean were quite rigorous. As I mentioned in the article, the authorities do make it even easier for guys who’re more gifted than my guy; they are given green cards on the spot. “A one-of-a-kind Afrikaner RF engineer we know, who possesses a PhD, publications galore, patented software programs and products, and a company, was told to hop on a plane, family in tow.” He came and left; he and the family didn’t like the USA.

Super models can also get the O-1 ‘Extraordinary Ability’ Visa, I believe. And if they are wealthy and beautiful, why not? Heidi Klum has a unique talent or two—and has generated an industry for the locals.

UPDATE II: PERRY FEELS YOUR PAIN, NOT. JACK CAFFERTY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: “Rick Perry, the anointed front-runner at least at this hour, would have us believe he is a country boy at heart, a down home country cornpone that can relate to the plight of the ordinary American. There’s another side to the Texas governor. ‘Politico’ reports that for years, Perry, who makes $150,000 a year as governor, has enjoyed additional lavish perks and travel mostly funded by wealthy supporters. Imagine that.”

“Texas donors have paid for the governor and his family to travel around the world sometimes on private jets, paid for them to stay at luxury hotels, resorts, vacation in Colorado ski towns, and attend tons of sporting events and concerts. Rick Perry has also accepted a wide range of very expensive gifts, including 22 pairs of cowboy boots, some of them costing $500 a pair. Somebody else even pays his cable TV Bill. Taxpayers pay his rent, $8,500 a month for Perry’s 4,600 square foot mansion in Austin. The governor and his family have been living in the five bedroom seven bath mansion since 2007 while the governor’s mansion undergoes repair. Four years? What sort of repairs are those, do you imagine?”

“It’s all copacetic down there in the lone star state which has some of the loosest ethics and campaign rules in the country. Nonetheless, it is tough to imagine supporters aren’t buying influence when they lavish those perks on the governor. Of course they are. Some donors have wound up with appointments to state commissions, million dollar state grants to businesses they are involved in.”

Perry’s camp insists it is all on the up and up. A spokeswoman told ‘Politico’ the governor fully discloses all gifts and travel in his financial disclosure statements. But that don’t make it cricket.”

Here’s the question — does Rick Perry’s lavish lifestyle, mostly paid for mostly by taxpayers and wealthy friends and donors, match his downhome, awe shucks country boy image?

The Republican Reagan Epiphany

Ann Coulter, Democrats, Political Philosophy, Pseudoscience, Republicans, Ron Paul, States' Rights

“Southerners are extremely patriotic,” said Ann Coulter on Fox News Business, while explaining the phenomenon of a Southern Democrat (like Rick Perry), who has always been far more conservative than the northern Republican. “[Southern Democrats] were not going to remain with the party of George McGovern,” observed Coulter, who is, arguably, the Republican Party’s most powerful and most devoted pundit.

That’s a little deceptive. Is it at all possible that the much-maligned Southern Democrat has found it hard to join the party of Abraham Lincoln? Perish the thought!

Ann Coulter says, correctly—and at last—that Ronald Reagan should not be held up as “the touchstone for every [other Republican] candidate.” If only Ms. Coulter was capable of arriving at a similar epiphany about Lincoln, but that would demand too much by way of philosophical integrity.

Perry’s Political Pedigree

Democrats, Elections, Republicans, Ron Paul

Ron Paul was one of only 4 congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan’s campaign for president. After Reagan, Al Gore found an enthusiastic cheerleader in Texas, who looked nothing like a Dallas Cowboys cheerleader. According to the latest Campaign For Liberty ad, Rick Perry helped lead the Al Gore campaign to undo the Reagan Revolution. The Paul Campaign’s pitch about an untrustworthy Perry is persuasive. Rudderless is also a good description for the core of Perry.

Wrong About Ron

Democrats, Elections, Foreign Policy, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Republicans, Ron Paul

The DC Establishment, left and right—the engorged organism I call the media-military-congressional complex—thinks of Ron Paul as “charming”; his “heresies—his denunciations of ‘militarism,’ even his suggestion that Iran might have understandable reasons for wanting nukes and it might not be so terrible if they got one—[as the] tolerated [and] lovable eccentricities of a cranky but harmless uncle.” Or so writes Hendrik Hertzberg of The New Yorker.

Hertzberg has a point.

But his kind is as detached from mainstream America as the Republicans he lambastes (Let us hope that this will be their undoing.) Ron Paul’s stance against American militarism around the world makes him appealing to voters on the left, the (real) right, and the center. All are well represented among the millions who are jobless and without an income. All would prefer to see “charity” (I use the word in the loosest possible way for the evil the US perpetrates around the world) begin at home, not abroad. Like or dislike him, Ron Paul is the only Republican presidential contender whose foreign policy position can unite left, right and independent Americans.

Provided all factions begin to … THINK.