Carter Family Redux on 3rd Generation CD

Growing up on farms in Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri, I listened to the music of the house, namely my grandparents' houses on the various farms. That music was old-time country, specifically the Carter Family, Jimmie Rodgers, Roy Acuff, and others who often appeared at the Grand Ole Opry in Nashville.

While some kids grew up listening to classical, swing and other favorites of the late 1940s and early- to mid-1950s, I took in and learned to love Appalachian folk combined with bluegrass and hill songs, Carter Family country.

A.P. Carter was the songcatcher, roaming the hills of Virginia to find songs that he then adapted to fit what he, his wife Sara, and sister-in-law Maybelle could play and sing, which became the Carter sound. Sara played guitar, Maybelle an autoharp and guitar.

Anyway, the original Carters are long gone as are most of their kids. Now we have the Carter Family III, third generation cousins John Carter Cash (son of June and Johnny Cash) and Dale Jett (son of A.P. and Sara's daughter Janette). Carter Family III has come out with a great album (includes John's wife, Laura Cash), called Past & Present.

I love the CD, which is filled with good, old-fashioned music that would make the Carters proud. I'm a nonbeliever, but I absolutely love their country gospel songs that make up about a quarter of the album. It's available from Amazon for less than $14. Unlike a lot of CDs, there's not a bad song on it.

Hail the Egyptian Protestors

They did it, those brave Egyptians who started and continued a revolution to remove the corrupt Egyptian president Mubarak.

No one knows what the future will bring for that country where most of its people live in poverty. But anything that pushed out the thief Mubarak (he and his family have taken at least $25 billion to their London house) is good for Egypt.

Now we await other citizens of countries where the leaders are corrupt and are stealing all of its resources to do the same. Think about it, United States. Doesn't that describe this country too?

Porking Out on Energy Subsidies

It's long past time to strip away all energy subsidies and preferences from the budget and the federal tax code. Let renewable energy and energy-efficient technology compete on a level playing field with the fossil fuels industry. The only way to ensure that level playing field is to completely halt the corporate subsidies.

Republicans are no better than Democrats. Bills passed by a Republican-controlled House and a Democrat-controlled Senate are awash in corporate subsidies, tax breaks, and regulatory preferences.

If a technology is economically competitive, no public subsidies are necessary. Conversely, if there's no demand for a technology, no amount of subsidies will make it so. Let's free energy markets instead of rigging them like a crooked boxing match.

The Real Heroes

When Americans are asked to name people they most respect and admire, they typically choose from the political, entertainment and sports worlds. Contemporary favorites might include Hillary, Barack or Sarah -- Oprah, Angelina or Justin -- Lebron, Tiger or Peyton. You won't find a single altruistic thought from one of those familiar names.

A list of people I currently admire includes a few who, unlike those named above, perform courageous deeds for others, sometimes at great risk to themselves: Greenpeace and animal-rights activists; Tunisian and Egyptian demonstrators revolting against oppressive dictatorships; Julian Assange of WikiLeaks and his sources like Pvt. Bradley Manning; and members of groups like Code Pink and Veterans for Peace who fight hard to bring an end to what has become endless foreign wars.

As time passes, there will be other names to add to my list, ordinary people doing ordinary and extraordinary things for others.

Simon Says

One of the greatest film and theater critics of the 20th century, John Simon, is actually blogging.

That such a literate and urbane (and famous) man of letters now resides in the blogosphere is surprising enough. That John Simon is doing so is doubly surprising; up until recently, I suppose, he wrote all his reviews and essays by hand initially, typing them clumsily, with two fingers, on an electric typewriter only after the pieces were finalized.

At any rate, enjoy a remarkable critic with a near-Menckenesque stature.

http://uncensoredsimon.blogspot.com/

It's Taken 20 Years But You Did It

About time, Clive. You finally admitted that I'm clever.

What a great way to start the new year!

Why Won't Wealthy Liberals Give More?

Very clever of you, Cassandra, not to explicitly admit that the greedy, selfish people you scorn in your post are many of them Liberals, as studies have shown.

Liberals proclaim their generosity and their humanity, and the rest of the country probably believes them. It's become a cultural meme: an unexamined assumption that spreads like a virus and never gets questioned or validated with actual data.

As it turns out, however, Liberals aren't quite so generous with their wealth as they want us to believe.

Arthur Brooks, the author of Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." Brooks adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money [approximately 6 percent less than Liberals]." The differences between conservative generosity and Liberal generosity stretch beyond money: for example, conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood.

Brooks: "You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away." In fact, he writes, people who disagree that the government should redistribute income are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

So stick that in your stockings, Libs.

Coal In Your Stockings, Blackhearts

At some point, you have to say there are many millions of people in this country who care only about themselves. How else can you explain the black hearts of the following:

1) Those who supported tax cuts for the rich. We were talking about a measly four percent higher tax rate, actually exactly the same as the Clinton years when the super rich got richer and richer without the tax cut. How could four percent be so horrible? That bunch doesn't know how to spend the money they have now. And don't tell me they're the "job creators" and they will hire now that they know how high their taxes will be. Not true during the past 10 years when they had their oh-so-important tax cuts. Does anyone remember the term "robber barons."

2) President Obama. There are many reasons for wanting coal in the stocking of our country's CEO, but I will stick with the wars that he continues to fight with the help of volunteer soldiers who can't get jobs anywhere else. (The wars would have ended long ago if there had been a draft.) Not only do we have wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there are military actions (wars) also in Yemen, Africa, Pakistan, and Colombia. Where else we have only to guess.

3) Anyone who didn't want Don't Ask, Don't Tell repealed. What are they afraid of? If you were in the military, how would you like it if your loved one could not see you off to fight in a far-off war or visit you openly in the hospital if you were injured? This issue was much like back when blacks could fight but couldn't be included in white squadrons and the like. I'm straight and I'm married and I'm not afraid of gays threatening either in any way. To think otherwise would be part of a mental illness.

4) Anyone who doesn't think about how others might be living. If you have a nice home, eat well, wear good clothes, drive a good car, etc., why would you think everyone else does or could have the same? Only someone with a black heart would not think about the poor children, disabled (including those with mental illness), the homeless, the homeless animals.

5) Anyone who continues to fight the Civil War, hoping over and over that blacks will once again be pushed to the back of the bus.

6) Politicians taking credit for passing the 9/11 health bill, all $4.3 billion of it over 10 years, making 430 million per year available to help. How far do you think that will go when it's to cover health issues for thousands of first responders to the New York City attacks in 2001? Only ones to benefit will be early claimants. The rest are screwed.

My list could continue, including aforementioned politicians and the rest who I believe to be experienced liars and nothing more. But I'll stop here and instead give you a short list of those who should receive sweets from Santa because they don't follow the sheep, don't think only about themselves. In other words, they have kind hearts.

1) Anyone who donates to an individual or family in their community who won't have enough to eat this weekend or who can't ever participate in holiday gift-giving.

2) Anyone who adopts an animal that won't make it through the holidays otherwise.

3) Anyone who hopes 2011 will see an end to the wars, to the maiming and killing of American soldiers along with civilians who live in the countries in the middle of "nation building."

4) Anyone who doesn't harbor petty jealousies. We wouldn't have many of the money problems we have now but for those who spend what they don't have to try to look like the rich. Who wants to look like the rich or have what they have? They're blackhearts, not to be admired.

Happy, happy to everyone for the new year.

Straw Tax Men vs. the FairTax Plan

Your sarcastic hyperbole is duly noted, Cassandra.

Cutting taxes (like next year's delightful move to cut the Social Security payroll tax from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent) is only half the picture. The other half is, of course, cutting spending. A government that doesn't spend as much is a government that doesn't need to tax as much.

In any responsible and sane conception of government, taxes must be collected to pay for certain services. The question that divides the country is which services are legitimate purposes of government. Maintaining an armed force for national defense is a legitimate purpose, as is providing social safety nets for the downtrodden and the hapless. Subsidizing corporations and markets in the private sector (like farms, auto factories, and banks) is not a legitimate purpose of government. There are hundreds of other illegitimate, unjust, and harmful acts in which the government is continually engaged--but statists and Left-wingers practically never discuss those acts in any serious way.

Maybe one day, this country will do away with all taxes on income and earnings, and instead tax consumption in a well-managed, sensible way. I'm a new proponent of the FairTax (www.FairTax.org). Let's hope that HR 25 and S 296 are passed, and that a new era of prosperity, legitimacy, fairness, and responsible spending is ushered in.

Tax Cuts, The Final Solution

Ask any Republican, and now any Democrat, what should be done to boost our economy and create jobs, and the answer is always tax cuts, in particular extending the Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003. After all, they've done a heckuva job, haven't they? We should keep what's working, shouldn't we?

Let's say tax cuts really are the end all, be all. Then why not eliminate all taxes. Think how great the economy would be then. Everyone who wants to work would work again. Everyone who wants to buy a house will have the money to buy one. All workers could keep all of their money, not pay those pesky Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, income taxes. They wouldn't have to pay property taxes, gasoline taxes, on and on.

Lots of pluses to this no-tax solution: No politicians, no wars, no subsidies, no unemployment compensation, no schools, on and on. Why, I ask, is anyone fighting these tax cuts? So simple, so easy.