Why is Jerry Brown called “Governor Moonbeam?”
When one asks the question of why California Governor Jerry Brown is often referred to as Governor Moonbeam it is not just because his first term was at the end of the “hippie” era. It is also because of the many stupid ideas he promotes, such as building a high speed rail passenger line. This thing could bankrupt California if it is ever built.
But Arizona is also joining this stupidity, as evidenced by the headline in the recent Phoenix Business Journal “ADOT PRPOPOSING PASSENGER RAIL ROUTE OPTIONS.” The idea is to build a passenger rail line between Phoenix and Tucson. This ridiculous proposal would be extremely wasteful and inefficient and, in a word, really stupid.
The whole idea of passenger rail in an era of self driving cars makes no sense but, in a state like Arizona, with a low population density, it makes even less sense.
ADOT is still an executive agency so I encourage anyone with an ounce of fiscal sanity to contact Governor Ducey and urge him to put a stake through the heart of this monster…..before it comes to life and devours our state finances.
The best advice anyone could give Donald Trump: USE THE TELEPROMPTER
NPR Just Can’t Be Totally Honest
The NPR newscast today (July 6) stated that Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe had signed legislation that reinstated ex-felons right to vote. The NPR reporter stated that a disproportionate number of ex-felons are Black. He concluded the news piece by opining that this move would likely benefit the Clinton campaign because more Blacks vote Democrat. Remember that the McAuliffe legislation had nothing to do with race. Apparently, the NPR newscaster simply could not bring himself to state the truth, that the Clinton campaign would benefit because most ex-felons are likely to vote Democrat.
NPR Can’t Help Twisting the News to Defend Hillary
The left wing bias on National Public Radio came out again today. Commenting on Hillary’s three-hour interview with the FBI, the NPR announcer stated that the FBI was trying to determine whether Hillary broke any laws. First of all, how does NPR claim know what the motive was behind the FBI questions? Second, isn’t NPR really editorializing that there is a possibility that Hillary did not break any laws? I submit that no one except the leftist media believes this. More likely, the FBI was trying to determine whether there was enough evidence to indict Hillary and get a conviction.
Horizon Can’t Shake the Liberal Bias
Why do people say that PBS has a liberal bias? A recent example is our own local Horizon program. Ted Simons recently hosted liberal columnist EJ Dionne to discuss his new book “How the Right Went Wrong.” There was no conservative commentary to balance EJ’s leftist views and there will not likely be a subsequent Horizon show featuring a conservative commentary on Dionne’s book. There will also not likely be a Horizon program featuring a clearly conservative book such as “How the Left Went Wrong.” But, worse than that, hosts like Ted Simons and Diane Rehm always seem to phrase their questions in a way that is critical of conservative views. In the case of Simons interview with Dionne, Simons had the audacity to invite Dionne to compare the Tea Party, a conservative group, to the John Birch Society. What is the likelihood that Simons will invite some liberal on his show to compare a leftist group with Marxism or Communism? So much for the unbiased press.
Richard Cohen is absurd, not assault weapons
Richard Cohen recently (June 15 in the Arizona Republic) wrote an article entitled “The absurdity of assault-weapon availability in public markets” in which railed against weapons which he should know (and probably does) are NOT available in public markets. The weapons he refers to as assault weapons (a term manufactured by the left to incite opposition) are fully automatic. Such weapons have been outlawed in the United States since the 1930s. Similar looking weapons that are only SEMI-automatic are available but these are not the weapons of war that Cohen disingenuously rails against.
On June 18 a bold headline in the Arizona Republic claims “Light rail is an Arizona success story, and (unfortunately in my opinion), there’s more to come.” I will confess that, anytime government takes billions of dollars (yes, billions) from the taxpayers and spends it on any project, there will certainly be “successes,” that is, a few who will benefit. This is a classic example of the idea of concentrated benefits and distributed costs.
However, by any rational analysis, from the taxpayer’s point of view, the allegation is nonsense. Light rail is a 19th Century “solution” to a 21st Century problem that will yield red ink forever. Even the leftists and central planners who brought you light rail never predicted that it would make money, or, that more than a very small percentage of Valley residents would ever ride it. More than 95% of transportation is by automobile and that will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. (Probably self-driving automobiles.)
So, how is this turkey rated as a “success?” This can only be claimed by looking at the winners and not the losers. The great philosopher Fredrick Bastiat showed us this faulty analysis in his famous book “The Law” where he spoke of the “seen” and the “unseen” effects. The shiny trains running along the track and few people who ride them are the “seen” and the great things that could have been accomplished with the billions wasted on the trains are the “unseen.”
Because the densest areas of the Valley have already been covered, the situation will only worsen, that is, the more we build the more money we will lose. It is hard for the average taxpayer to accept this fact but the reality is that taxpayers would benefit if we stopped the trains now and abandoned this wasteful experiment.
AZCENTRAL headline writers fail at their job
Today (June 23) an AZCENTRAL.COM headline claims “Arizona joins U.S. House sit-in on gun vote.” This is false. The truth is that a couple of the most left wing congressmen joined (the majority did NOT) in this sophomoric move which was clearly done as grandstanding. (Look to Senator Flake for a serious solution on this difficult issue.)
Does anyone wonder why many of us have no faith in the liberal media?
My friend Evan Scharf died in February 2016 and he left instructions that he wanted me to officiate at his funeral. The remarks below were given by me on February 13 in Flagstaff AZ:
It is quite an honor to be asked to officiate at this service and quite humbling. Ever since Sue called me I have been thinking about why Evan might have suggested me as the minister. One of the first things that came to mind, of course, was that, technically, I am a minister and have been for over 40 years. But I should be quick to add that my credentials are from the Universal Life church and, if you don’t immediately recognize that name, I will confess that it was actually formed back in the 60s as a way to avoid income taxes. There was a theory that you could form a church and write off many of your personal expenses, including your home as a parsonage. Well, that theory did not stand up over the years but, as far as I know, my credentials are still good.
A much more substantive reason for Evan to ask me to perform this role is that we both seriously considered going to a seminary to become real ministers. Evan and I shared very similar views on theology and philosophy. I first considered the ministry when I was at the Air Force Academy and developed a very close relationship with the protestant chaplain. However, as a way to follow through on my plan, I began a more academic study of religion and, unfortunately, I discovered that I simply did not believe some of the Lutheran doctrine that I had learned in my youth. That caused me to begin a multiyear search for another religious home and I finally settled upon the Unitarian Church about 40 years ago and I have been a fairly regular member ever since.
Because Unitarians tend to be very liberal in their political views, none of my friends ever showed up at my Unitarian Church……except for Evan. His joining me there was one of many “connections” that endeared me to him over the years.
More broadly, I think Evan and I shared philosophical views. Certainly this was true of our political views. We were both strong defenders of liberty and frequently found ourselves aligned with the same candidates and attending the same political meetings. As just one example, when Sue called me to let me know that Evan was in hospice I was attending a conference sponsored by Hillsdale College, a very conservative college and the only college in the United States that refuses all forms of government aide. This would, of course, endear the school to both Evan and to me. We were both longtime supporters of the Goldwater Institute and Evan founded the Scharf Norton center for litigation, a center that I might point out, has produced the most recent appointee to the Arizona Supreme Court, Clint Bolick. Evan’s center has also won many court suits which protected the liberties of a variety of people and also achieved significant national recognition.
And, I would be remiss if I did not point out that Evan met Sue at one of these political events right here in Flagstaff. Arizona State Treasurer Clark Dierks and I and several freedom lovers had formed the Arizona Economic Forum back in the early eighties and our signature event was always a weekend meeting in June here in Flagstaff at Little America.
Evan was a loving and kind man and it is certainly fitting that we are celebrating his life on the day before Valentine’s Day.
Just a little more on our philosophical connection. Even though Evan had a very prestigious academic pedigree, including Harvard Business School, like me, he had considered studying philosophy instead. In my case I applied to Arizona State University to pursue a master’s degree in philosophy when I left active duty at Williams Air Force Base. However, ASU thought my undergraduate GPA was too low so I wound up pursuing a master’s degree in business, the same as Evan, a few years later. In the meantime, I was reading the same philosophers that Evan was reading; Ayn Rand, John Locke, Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Friedrick Hayek, Frederick Bastiat, and many others. These authors were our heroes and provided the grist for many excellent conversations.
The wonderful thing about our friendship is that we learned from each other. One of the most significant concepts that I learned from Evan was the concept of self-ownership. The concept is too detailed for our discussion today but, suffice it to say, that it is a very fundamental concept to those who love liberty and I am thankful to Evan for introducing me to it. For my part, one of my earliest conversations with Evan had to do with the Goldwater Institute. Our director, Mike Sanera, had recently resigned and started a new organization that Evan was considering joining. As one of the founders of the Goldwater Institute, I had wrestled with the same decision and I believe I convinced Evan that he could be more effective working with the Goldwater Institute.…I am proud to say, that turned out to very true. Evan’s legacy will carry on there for many years.
But, enough of philosophy and politics and religion. Evan and I shared some less “heavy” interests too; such as a love of cowboy boots, especially those manufactured by Lucese. We, of course, shared an interest in guns (don’t all conservatives) and one of my most cherished possessions is a Smith & Wesson 38 caliber pistol that I purchased from Evan. The gun had some particular personal significance to Evan but I am embarrassed to confess that I cannot remember what it is. Maybe I will find it later in some notes.
In my planning for this event I must confess that I worried too much about little things. Sue seemed to be very confident in my abilities to officiate at this event because she had seen me in leadership roles at the Arizona Economic Forum and also at a libertarian dinner group that Evan regularly attended and that Chet Anderson and I founded. However, I told Sue that I was much more confident in those roles because I was determining the agenda. In trying to come up a meaningful service for Evan I was much less confident. What to wear……I decided that I should wear my Adam Smith tie and my Goldwater Institute lapel pin since these represent organizations and ideas that were meaningful to both of us. Also, as I stood in the bathroom yesterday looking in the mirror and trying to decide whether I should shave the beard that I usually have, the conventional conclusion came to mind, that is, it seemed more respectful to shave. However, as soon as I started shaving off the beard, I realized that I would no longer resemble “The Most Interesting Man in the World” You know….the one who rarely drinks beer but when he does he prefers Dos Eques. Evan and Sue and I had made a joke of this because there was a life size cardboard cutout of this most interesting man at their country club and we had taken a picture of me next to this life size figure one night when we were having dinner there together. However, as you can see, I realized the mistake too late.
Also, as I was preparing to come up to Flag I was wondering what hat I should wear….the National Rifle Association hat or the Ron Paul 2012. I decided that the freedom philosophy was more important than gun ownership (although both Evan and I would agree that the second amendment is in the constitution to defend the first amendment) so I decided on the Ron Paul 2012 hat. Both Evan and I would have loved to see Ron win in any of his presidential races (1988 as a Libertarian or 2008 or 2012 as a Republican). It would have also been wonderful if Ron’s son Rand Paul could have done better this year. But,….Evan and I both believed that, as Thomas Jefferson said, “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” and I will be thinking of Evan as I fight on for those causes that we shared.
One of the few interests that Evan and I did not share was dogs. Mary and I are cat people. (Ironically, the name of our favorite cat was CATO, the same name as Evan’s favorite dog.) However, I am counting on some of you to cover these areas of Evan’s life that you shared. I should have mentioned earlier that, when Sue asked me to officiate at this gathering, I was pleased to hear that she preferred a very informal service. This is similar to the kind of service that I would prefer for myself. I hope that some of you will share stories about Evan because I realized many years ago that no one has the complete picture of another person, even if that someone is a spouse or a lifelong friend or a member of the family. We all have a slightly different relationship with Evan and it is wonderful to be able to share these experiences. It is only sad that such sharing is only done at the time of a death. It makes me realize that we should always take time to say things to people that are on our mind. A quote that comes to mind is that “things that go without saying so even better when they are said.”
That great philosopher Wil Rogers gave the following advice to a speaker “never pass up an opportunity to sit down and shut up” so I will do that and ask that some of you share your thoughts about Evan.
A long time friend of mine recently asked me and some other adults to write a one page letter of recommendations for his daughter who is graduating. He will put these letters in a book for her. He asked me to write about integrity and to include a personal example. Here is what I wrote.
Dear Erin
I have been honored to know your father for over 30 years and, consequently, I have watched you and your family grow for much of that time. I have been very impressed with you and your family and I wish to congratulate you on the big step you are taking. Bob has asked me to comment on a subject that is very important to me……integrity. As a matter of fact, I believe it is the MOST important concept that you should seek to embody in your life.
First, I should say that integrity is a very broad concept and it is easy to get confused when studying it. Therefore, I think that it is more productive to focus on the main ingredient of integrity, which is simply telling the truth. It has been my experience that all other infractions such as cheating and stealing and adultery, etc, etc, always require lying.
Another point: It is possible to discover the importance of truth telling by simply studying the great philosophers such as Aristotle, St Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and others. However…….it is religion that provides the motivation to DO the right thing and avoid lying. Therefore, religion is a very important ingredient in developing your own personal standards. I was born and raised Lutheran but I have studied many religions and it is my opinion that sincerely studying religion is more important than picking a certain one, such as traditional Christianity. I consider myself a Christian because I am a follower of Christ but I am a Unitarian rather than a Trinitarian. (I would be happy to discuss that with you in detail sometime.)
Next, I wish to say that I believe we have a crisis in our country involving integrity. We are in need of leaders and I hope you will be one. There are many ways to be such a leader but simply being a good example is the best. For myself, I have chosen to be active in my Air Force Academy Association of Graduates and to focus on my alma mater’s Honor Code which states that “We will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.” I am concerned that these very rigid standards have not been enforced sufficiently in recent year and I am trying to change that.
The reason I have chosen this approach is that I believe integrity is important for everyone but it is even more important in the military because a lack of integrity can cause soldiers to die. Therefore, we should expect our military leaders, especially our officers, and especially our Academy graduates to be exemplary performers in the field of integrity.
Finally, it is important for all of us to be “our brother’s keeper” and to help our friends maintain high standards of integrity. I would admonish you, in addition to maintaining these high standards yourself; you should not ever hesitate to remind your associates (nicely of course) to also embody these high standards.
I hope this is the kind of advice that Bob was looking for in my comments. To use a military analogy; integrity is part of your duty and “You should do your duty in all things; you can never do more; you should never wish to do less.” (General Robert E. Lee)
roymilleraz 