Maggie's Farm

If Elvis Presley were still alive, he’d be 75. If you weren’t there, it may be hard to believe what a shocking and refreshing tonic Elvis was to the 1950’s, not only his melodic voice that reached into our hearts but his sexuality. The nation tuned in to the Ed Sullivan Show every Sunday night for the best variety of entertainers in the world. It was a compromise of the times, that didn’t last long, that Elvis’ wiggles were not seen on Ed’s show. Here’s a medley of Elvis classics from 1957 on Ed Sullivan.

Here’s Elvis in one of his hit movies, 1957's Jailhouse Rock. (Notice the early pole dancing.)

A decade later, the Beatles ruled. But, Elvis Presley is always the King. In 1968 Elvis was on the comeback trail, performing his Love Me Tender, one of his best to express our longings. The Beetles came close but never matched the King.

Elvis became, was Las Vegas, as in this medley from his show in 1970.

By 1977 his excesses and addictions can be seen catching up to Elvis, as the King performed before the King of Greece. He loses the words to Are You Lonesome Tonight, which he prefaces with “I am and I was”, probably reflecting on his divorce from Pricilla after 5-years of marriage – whom he never stopped loving, and just hear Elvis’ voice singing “shall I come back again.” Elvis has never left us.

Elvis died on August 16, 1977. His fans haven’t forgotten him. He recorded 711 songs.  Others have “covered” his songs, but none have ever captured the soul of the King and how he connected with each person individually in his audiences.

Jack Nicklaus, 70, sank a 100-foot putt in an August 10 champions game for charity (with Arnold Palmer, Tom Watson and Jonny Miller) at the opening of the new golf course he designed in Benton Harbor, Mich. Nicklaus called the putt "Pure Frickin Luck." Yeah, sure. Luck is when preparation meets opportunity. I need to practice more.

Sorry, the ESPN clip isn't working at youtube.com, but here it is from the AP.

Bird Dog and entourage take off tomorrow for vacation in Vienna, the Danube and Prague.  To help him keep in touch, here's a couple of Austrian postage stamps to use.

The financial burden on the states of illegal immigration is among the arguments for the Arizona law that increases local enforcement of federal immigration laws. Little commented upon is that the $26-billion the Democrats in Congress just voted in additional aid to the states, primarily to reduce or avoid layoffs of teachers and indirectly, it is said, of police, is the federal taxpayers helping the states meet this fiscal burden from illegal immigration.

According to the July 2010 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, (102-page pdf ; Executive Summary), the overall annual cost at the state and local level of illegal immigration is estimated at $84.2-billion and at the federal level another $29-billion. Particularly impacting education expenditures are the estimated over 3-million “birthright citizen” children of illegal immigrants and those here temporarily on entry visas, $49.2-billion from state and local government coffers for the education of children of illegal immigrants and temporary residents.

The FAIR study repeatedly states its numbers are based on estimates and extrapolations, but it uses the available wide-range of piecemeal studies from legitimate sources to base them upon. FAIR itself has been justly and unjustly criticized for harboring extremists. On the other hand, FAIR has not been critiqued for existing for the self-enrichment of its officers or fundraisers. It is recognized by Charity Navigator as a 4-star 501(c)4 which “Exceeds industry standards and outperforms most charities in its Cause,” on a par with the ACLU and ADL for its score on use of donations and assets for its goals. Other immigration focused organizations also receive 4-stars, like the National Immigration Law Center and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, while others receive 2-stars, like the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund or the Appleseed network of public interest law centers in the US and Mexico.

Charity Navigator does not rate unions. Unions have spent more than any other lobbying group in many current and previous federal, state and local issue and election campaigns, overwhelmingly to Democrats and for causes that will protect or increase the jobs and pay of its members. The $26-billion federal bailout for the benefit of unionized state and local government employees is one of its victories. Many unions have been exposed as inordinately feathering the nests of their officers.

There is an urgent need for more comprehensive and well-sourced studies of the fiscal impact, to taxpayers and to citizens generally, of illegal immigration, including from “birthright citizenship.” Some studies do indicate that the FAIR study may be overblown or that there are other benefits to the US not as easily counted. However, until there is such a new study that will do a far better job of taking into account all the impacts and benefits, the FAIR study deserves to stand as an indicator, at least, of the hole we’ve dug ourselves into by the holes in our borders and laws, including the unintended one in the 14th Amendment.

PEW Too: According to the widely-respected  PEW Research Center's Hispanic Center, there are over 4-million children of illegal immigrants in the US, 8% of the US birthrate.

Do you like him any better now?

No?

Then you're not a racist.

The twenty states and the National Federation of Independent Business reply to the Obama administration's brief to the US District Court in Florida. The Obama administration argues that the suit should be dismissed as the individual mandate is within the federal government's power.  The plaintiff states and NFIB disagree.

Below, the plaintiffs' intoduction summary pretty well sums it up (footnotes omitted). There's 81 pages in the pdf at the link above.

Without my normal, being long-winded, I say ditto to this on "gay marriage."

(HT: HotAir)

Related at Legal Ins: Deconstructing marriage

Several Republican US Senators are now supporting hearings into whether there should be a Constitutional amendment restricting birthright citizenship, anyone born on US soil is a US citizen.

There’s some electoral opportunism there as well as recognition that most Americans want more restrictions on illegal immigration.

About a fourth to a third of illegal immigrants in the US are parents of children born here. In some localities, the majority of births are to illegal immigrants, many of them coming into the US specifically for that purpose. Although by laws these parents are denied most governmental benefits, they are permitted to stay to care for their children, and many do work illegally. The children may petition for legal entry of other family members.

There is no legal doubt that the US has the complete right to govern entry and citizenship. There is doubt as to whether the post-Civil War 14^th Amendment, aimed at the citizenship of former slaves, intended to allow the birthright citizenship that we see today.  Advocates of restriction cite the statement of a co-sponsor of the 14^th.  However, the language of the 14^th has been interpreted in various ways by scholars and politicians over the next years and century-and-a-half. There are some peripheral court cases but the US Supreme Court has not specifically weighed in.

At this point, it seems that only a well-drafted Constitutional amendment would be able to restrict birthright citizenship. Surely there would be majority consensus to do so, requiring at least one parent to already be a citizen.

However, there are implications that must be considered. Should such children already here be allowed to retain citizenship? I’d guess yes. Should their parents be allowed to stay? I’d guess yes, with a path to citizenship. Should the children of legal entrants who have not yet become citizens be automatically granted citizenship? I’d guess not, at least until the parents have qualified and the children too. Some may consider that rewarding past behavior, and it is, but in a grand bargain and out of compassion, I’d guess there’d be the overwhelming support required for a Constitutional amendment.

I’d suggest the language can be as simple as “Only a child born of at least one US citizen will be a US citizen. All others are subject to US laws of entry, residence and citizenship.”

Yes, there will be resistance from those who want virtually open borders and those who benefit from hiring illegals, and from politicians whose constituency is such, but they are a minority and have little or no legal basis. There are valid emotional appeals to our past and to compassionate values but they, if not a purposeful distraction, are a recipe for enlarging the problems. Our past did not have the current practical burdens upon citizens or entrants.

As strong border controls are essential to reducing illegal entry, so are removing incentives to illegal entry or staying. Uneducated illegal entrants are the main problem in net costs to our economy and government budgets. The US has need of some, and some are or will become or their offspring become net contributors. But, not as many as once or now or in the future.  A Constitutional amendment to restrict birthright citizenship directly deals with a substantial part of the problem in a reasonable, cost-effective and widely-supported way.

UPDATE: According to the respected PEW Research Center's Hispanic Center, there are over 4-million children in the US of illegal immigrants, and they make up 8% of the US birthrate. 

At 99, Mitch Miller has died but isn't forgotten, nor his singalongs in our living rooms.

The brief from Wikipedia:

Mitchell William "Mitch" Miller (July 4, 1911 – July 31, 2010)^[1] was an American musician, singer, conductor, record producer, A&R man and record company executive. One of the most influential figures in American popular music during the 1950s and early 1960s, both as the head of Artists & Repertoire at Columbia Records and as a best-selling recording artist, he is sometimes thought of as the creator of what would become karaoke with his NBC-TV series, Sing Along with Mitch. A graduate of the Eastman School of Music of the University of Rochester in the early 1930s, Miller began his musical career as an accomplished player of the oboe and English horn, and recorded several highly regarded classical albums featuring his instrumental work. But he is best remembered as a conductor, choral director, television performer and recording executive.

Let's let Mitch Miller take us for a stroll.

If this is too schmaltzy for you, more the pity. Second part is vaudeville. (When Gavin was born, he wouldn't stop howling. I walked the hospital corridor singing "Toot, Toot, Tootsie, Goodbye" which quieted him. Not a single nurse nor visitor had ever heard of vaudeville!)

We need Mitch Miller in our living rooms today. His lasting impacts.

If you blinked this morning you missed the link I posted to a gallery of the Playboy centerfolds, semi- and unclad, "Maggie's Farmcritters", from 1953-2008. It was taken down by order from she-who-must-be-obeyed, our in-farm censor.  Banned from the Farm even as a link, not to mention in full display "below the fold" as a hidden page.

As a site posting great art, I wonder if painted nudes will be banned, or statues figleafed.  Bird Dog, better skip the Belvedere Museum outside Vienna.

But, my wife is from Europe, and enjoys the female form. She posed nude and in lingerie when younger. Her mother has a nude drawing of my wife on her living room wall. We have several Klimpts hanging in our house, and it hasn't corrupted our sons, both former champion breast-feeders. My wife enjoyed and emailed around my review of the Hooters International Swimsuit Pageant.

The other day I replied to a Commenter that "As I age, I would find more delight in finding the perfect Italian Cheesecake, far rarer than the perfect 'cheesecake.' " Personally, I would never allow cream cheese cake to pass my lips, but I wouldn't ban others from enjoying it when tastefully done.

What are your tastes and limits in either cheesecake? 

(Photo is an Italian Cheesecake. Ricotta cheese. Not too sweet.)

Where's Kerry's Berth Certificate?

It’s not for me to argue Catholic teachings, but my friend The Anchoress Elizabeth Scalia’s reply to Anne Rice's problem with whether Christians are living her political liberalism probably comes as close as to the Catholicism I learned being raised a Jew in a Catholic and Jewish neighborhood. Rice, like many or most of various religions, confuses politics with faith or, worse, substitutes politics for faith.

There’s a universal message, whether from scripture or Pope, that works: Open your heart and G-d will walk in. Close your mind and G-d’s presence is clouded, at least until your heart is set free.

Struggle with that as you wish or need to find meaning and salvation. Struggle is important in building strengths and to advance.  That allows the confidence and trust that ultimately works, to accept the faith in man and in our actions being truer to G-d’s missions for us.

There’s a practical measure each can easily know, if not denied: Are you living life’s struggles with contentment instead of anguish or anger.

There are varying interpretations of whom Jacob wrestles, the result of which is his renaming as Israel. There’s agreement, however, that wrestling spirits with spirit is transforming.

A poem I just dashed off (revised in keeping with the form):

I

Am Nothing

Struggle Makes Us

Strong Enough To Accept

The Guiding Light To Make

Something Better Of I

G-d’s Better I

Is All

Us

Rembrandt's depiction of Jacob's wrestling is one of engagement, not separation.

Last month, the Congressional Budget Office issued its own set of updated projections, but the frame of reference was the long-term, and not just the next 10 years.  Unfortunately, the farther out one looks, the worse the picture gets.  CBO’s latest projections again make it clear that the nation is rushing headlong toward a fiscal crisis, and the health law does nothing to head it off.

Read it all.

Since News Junkie is taking off for August, and only the names and the dates change, here’s a guide to the daily news for our readers.  Fill in the blanks.

CONGRESS:

Congressional Democrats Deny Scheme To _________________.
Congressional Democrats Propose Scheme To _________________.
Congressional Democrats Expect To Survive 2010 Elections Because _________________.
Congressional Democrats Poll Numbers Continue To Decline Because _________________.
Congressional Democrats Refuse To Investigate ___________________.
Congressional Republicans Have A Secret Plan to ______________________.
Congressional Republican’s Secret Plan Is Not To _______________________.
Congressional Republicans’ Chances Hindered By Extreme Statements About _____________.
Congressional Republicans’ Extreme Statements Are Only So To Leftist Journalists Who Say ________.

PRESIDENT:

President Obama declares urgency of ____________________.
President Obama puts off decision on __________________.
President Obama vacations in _____________________.
President Obama nominates ____________________.
President Obama’s nominee’s past reveals _______________.
President Obama recess appoints _________________.
President Obama’s longtime friend under the bus ______________.
President Obama says Bush at fault for _________________.
President Obama breaks another campaign pledge to _________________.
President Obama praises despot ___________________.
President Obama criticizes ally ________________.

JOURNALISM AND COMMENTARY:

Major media journalists ignore above news about ____________________.
Bloggers investigate and reveal facts about ___________________.
Major media find excuses for _________________________.
Bloggers persist about ___________________.
Major media run stories about bloggers not being journalists ____________________.
Polls indicate more people believe bloggers about _________________.
Major media continues to ignore facts about ________________.
Major media continues to shrink ___________________.
Major media appoints new liberal to masthead ___________________.
Major media reports scientist saying science says to ____________________.
Scientist’s science is based on faulty methodology ________________________.
Major media repeats scientist’s assertion about ___________________.
Smart person eloquently points out the obvious about ________________.
Smarty pants commentator points out purported minor exceptions to the obvious to disprove the obvious about _________________.

MAGGIE’S FARM:

Old server crashes again and excused as ________________________.
Bird Dog vacations in ____________________.
Photos of Bird Dog’s vacation in _________________________.
Debate continues on how much cheesecake is appropriate ________________________.
Big links to Maggie’s cheesecake from major blogger _________________________.
Serious subjects essayed at Maggie’s Farm arouse commenters about other subjects ____________.
Fun subjects at Maggie’s Farm arouse commenters to add to fun about ___________________.
Maggie’s Farm recipes and computer advice only work for blogger _________________.
Bruce interrupts permanent vacation to say (sometimes boring) _________________.
Joy Bliss pithily starts a subject and doesn’t finish about ______________________.
Great art and literature you never heard of about _____________________.

Bob Dylan's use of the phrase, "You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows" in Subterranean Homesick Blues encouraged the young to make their own decisions, including about drugs, to know what's happening based on changing conditions in order to know about what's coming. It's based on the nautical phrase to know the windward side.

This latest chart of ObamaCare only shows about a third of the complexity of the hurricane and where it is blowing us.

In the garage I still have a copy of the chart for HillaryCare. It was simple, Alice's Wonderland was easier to wend through, compared to this maze, a maze we're doomed to wander in search of care.

Only repeal is real.

To enhance Bird Dog's experience with Customs when he visits Europe in a few weeks, we've ordered some stickers for his luggage. Yeah, full body search.  If you visit the site, there's one for his female companions.

Encinitas, where I live, is the last refuge of traditional laid back Southern California beach towns. We have the usual run of art shops selling third rate paintings to tourists, any town's laughing-up-our-sleeves joke on the gullible.

But, the beachside bronze paid for by the local Cardiff Botanical Society (WTF does surfing have to do with botany?) has run into disdain for its insufficiently iconic image. Locals don't consider it realistic enough, and aren't to be treated as gullible by purveyers of public art who foist their artistic sense (or not) upon the populace.

The statue, disdainfully titled "Cardiff Kook" by surfers, has been dressed in tutu and bikini, but the latest Encinitans-gone-wild prank is the best yet.

Overnight, a huge papier-mache replica of a great white shark was erected devouring the statue.

The Sheriff Lt. at the scene said, “It wasn’t considered vandalism because there wasn’t any permanent defacing.” The sculptural addition will be removed, to the sorrow of locals and the crowds who consider it an improvement and stop to admire and shoot photos.

Encinitans will strike again.

What public sculpture in your town would benefit from a puckish aesthetic addition? 

Advocates of a “public option”, meaning a government medical plan, haven’t given up. There’s a highly debatable $27 billion assumption in the CBO estimate, relating to increased federal revenues from reduced employer spending on medical premiums. I phoned the CBO to clarify.

Congressman Stark requested an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. (Full pdf here.)

The CBO estimate says,

that the proposal would reduce federal budget deficits through 2019 by about $53 billion. That estimate includes a $37 billion reduction in exchange subsidies and a $27 billion increase in tax revenues that would result because a greater share of employees’ compensation would take the form of taxable wages and salaries (rather than nontaxable health benefits) partly offset by an $11 billion increase in costs for providing tax credits to small employers.

 

An expert’s review of “The Internet And The Organization Of Innovation” from the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) casts light on the Rasmussen poll that “75% Say Free Markets Better Than Government Management of Economy, Political Class Disagrees.”

The Rasmussen survey, by contrast to the 75% of Likely Voters who say  “more competition and less regulation is better for the economy“ finds “America’s Political Class is far less enamored with the virtues of a free market. In fact, Political Class voters [“the clique that revolves around Washington, DC, and Wall Street”] narrowly prefer a government managed economy over free markets by a 44% to 37% margin.”

Professor Shane Greenstein, Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management examines the origins and development of the Internet.

From a synopsis provided by NBER, he “uses the example of the creation of the internet to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of two distinct ways of organizing a long-term program for accumulating innovation.”

One approach, which characterized the early development of the internet, relies on autonomous research institutions ("skunk works") to organize and nurture innovators. The other, which has applied more recently, relies on commercial markets to aggregate dispersed initiatives from a wide array of entrepreneurial participants.

The "skunk works" approach runs the risk that innovation will veer into areas where there is no demand, and thus no economic value. The pre-commercial Internet avoided some of those dangers because the participants in that phase of the internet assessed value from their own experiences. Their managers, in turn, nurtured them and permitted experimentation to blossom -- leading to useful and innovative applications, such as e-mail and packet switching. In addition, the Department of Defense and the National Science Foundation (NSF) played a pivotal role as "demanders" for innovation. Their substantial funding of research institutions, and their distributed investments to universities, supported the innovative activity that led to the breakthrough technologies that underlie today's Internet. This "skunk works" approach, however, restricted participation and truncated experimentation by excluding innovation along lines that did not support the "acceptable use" requirements of the government agencies. Such restrictions limited learning to an artificially narrow range of issues, and left a wide array of other applications untouched.

In contrast to the early "skunk works" days, the more recent commercial era of the Internet has played to the strength of market-based innovation. It has permitted decentralized exploration from commercial firms facing a wide array of incentives and a wide variety of circumstances. Once released to commercial interests, the Internet became the springboard for a dizzying array of applications that were not envisioned by the sponsoring government agencies. These applications include the World Wide Web and its associated browsing technology.

In other words, government funding or direction of basic research or new programs may be useful and in some cases critical but further development of useful applications, adaptation, and wider spread acceptance and utility are best the province of free enterprise, or as Greenstein calls it "market-oriented and widely distributed investment and adoption."

Instead, in most government programs, the initial laws enacted that seek to foster or enlarge reform or innovation are too often crafted with further government controls in mind or as ignored unintended consequences due to hidden agendas. Not unintended but usually hidden is the self-serving enrichment and enlarged sway of the political class. If initiatives have any validity, they are still often more dangerous than presented just by not being geared to a hand-off to the private sector to adjust and improve but to enlarge the power of the political class while – by the nature of government programs – hindering transparent review and adaptive innovation.

Even in the case of the Internet, as complex and involved in most aspects of business and individual lives as healthcare, if left in the hands of the centralized “skunk works” we wouldn’t have seen the developments we enjoy today. In the case of other government programs, like ObamaCare as one of the worst instances, the clear objectives and consequences are nationalization of close to 20% of the economy and 100% of our lives, and even more stultifying – indeed deadly - to free market development of improved access, delivery and economics.

Character is what we do in the dark when no one is looking. It is defining.

Today, there's less darkness and more lights.

That may be a hindrance to some, sometimes justifiably and sometimes not, but that's the way it is, and it is preferable to have more character than less, even if forced by fear of exposure. Character is innate as well as a developed habit.

This is particularly so if one ventures into the public arena, as recognized in both our libel laws and common sense. (See here.)

Many of the NAACP meeting attendees openly expressed racism. Many of the Journolist members openly expressed collusion to suppress news via their positions.

That's free speech, and it carries accountability. Furthermore, those among both conclaves, and others, who don't speak up and out are complicit by their silence or non-exit, red-herrings thrown on the path aside and further condemning. And, Journolist founder Ezra Klein similarly misses the point when he says, "If I had thought there was some deep and dark conspiracy to protect, I can guarantee you I would've been a bit more selective." The point is that he founded and ran a selected "progressive" group of many influentials, and their views - although at times differing - were secretly shared to advance their causes. Klein says they should "assume privacy." Nonsense and sophistry, as usual, from Klein's immaturity of age and character.

Conspiracies of silence are as damning as conspiracies of silencing or nefarious abuses.

Congressional intent and judicial interpretation of the first amendment may conflict. Two recent examples:

The US Senate just passed by unanimous consent the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, HR 2765 (SPEECH Act). It is expected to pass the House. There’s little reason that the president shouldn’t sign off.

My good friend Rachel Ehrenfeld, doughty immigrant that she is, took our Constitution to heart and waged an at first solitary campaign to restrict “libel tourism” when she was its victim for a book she’d written exposing the enemy-funding financial dealings of a wealthy Arab.  She acquired powerful allies, across the political spectrum, until New York State passed a law that required judgments in foreign courts where our level of free speech protections do not rule to meet US standards in order to be enforced in the US.

Below the fold is Rachel’s press release.  Here are the AP and here the AFP news reports.

In past conversations with Rachel I’ve had some concerns about how US standards of free speech may be interpreted by the courts. Those in positions to know, she says, feel US standards of libel are well-enough defined so there’s confidence in prevailing without undue blockage of the Congressional intent. So be it to see.

According to this, the problem with Israel’s PR is that it focuses on explaining and, when supported by facts, apologizing. For some, it may come off as whining. And, it is less effective than should be.

It fails to impress, convince or, even, penetrate many educated people, whose antagonism or skepticism toward Israel is entrenched.

The problem: Most believe they are well-informed about Israel, even when not, and are poorly informed about Israel’s enemies.  When exposed, however, not to Israel’s side of the story but to the foes’ own words and actions, Eureka!  Most of these Western antagonists or skeptics are shocked, enlightened and wonder how Israel can deal with such rigidly violent anti-Western forces so far from our norms of thinking and conduct except by Israel itself being resolute and willing to take the measures necessary in defense, including preemptively.

There’s much truth in this analysis.

For those (most Americans) who don’t follow the annual Eurovision song contest, won by Israel in 1979 for Hallelujah, it is closely watched in our house (on Internet). We enjoy “world music.” It is becoming a smaller world, sometimes not for the better, as this year’s winner, from Germany, sang a number in English! My Germany-born wife was aghast at this loss of diversity.

The music world is also losing other diverse sense.

Some Western musicians are canceling their scheduled performances in Israel, caving to leftist memes and pro-Palestinian veiled threats.

Then there are the attempts to boycott Israeli performers as well. The Eurovision song contest was held in Norway this year. The Norwegian pro-Palestine Committee demonstrated outside the arena holding the event since Israel had reached the finals. A statement from the organisation said: “We want to close Euro Song for Israel. They are not welcome. We will request the European Euro Song TV-consortium to boycott nations that indulge in occupation and apartheid.”

Oppression, despotism, suicidal hatred, terrorism, that’s OK with them? Far from the Summer of Love, huh!

Here’s the Israeli performance at this year’s Eurovision, a lovely love song.

Yeah, we can’t have love where hate triumphs.

Here's Israel's 1979 winner. (This taping has helpful lyrics.)

Some's idea of Praise God (Hallelujah) doesn't include to "hold each other's hands, and sing from one heart."

That includes some Western musicians.

The US Chamber of Commerce says (more here) that the term capitalism is misunderstood, as just 57% in its poll support capitalism.

“We need to do a better job of explaining the economic system in the United States and how it is working,” Anderson said in an interview. “We have been looking at anecdotal information that there was a misunderstanding of capitalism.”

Au contraire says the survey’s results of the peasants. Seventy percent support free enterprise and free markets.

Americans know the difference between the two as capitalism has increasingly come to be practiced.

Charles Derber, a sociologist at Boston College, says the results show the public’s unhappiness with the ties between “big business and big government,” exemplified by the multi- billion dollar bailout of banks in 2008.

“When people say they are down on capitalism, they mean they are down on corporate capitalism,” Derber, author of books including, “People Before Profit,” said in an interview. “They see capitalism as it exists here as anything but a free market.”

With bigger and bigger Big Government comes those, pardon the expression, capitalizing on getting their way or piece of the pelf, whether business, union, tax-exempts, state and local governments, etc.

Free enterprise and free markets, in contrast, indeed may we remind freedom itself, work best with a more limited government.

Now, that isn’t to say complete laissez faire, as there is sometimes some need for enforcement of rules of play to encourage competition, not stifle it.

In addition to the findings on capitalism, the Chamber’s poll found that 43 percent of those surveyed said the Obama administration’s policies are making the economy worse compared with 23 percent believing it is making it better.

“There is a major trust deficit,” Lombardo [the pollster] said.

The US Chamber knows the difference between free enterprise and capitalism as it has too often come to be practiced. Increasingly, Americans do. It’s the difference between freedom and fascism.

Perhaps some corporate, union, tax-exempts, state and local governments, etc. HQs need visits from a Tea Party, not just the federal government and its minions of bigger. It takes two to tango.

Homework: Michael Barone, Goldberg.