Let’s face it. In the most optimistic scenario conservatives can imagine for November 6, Mitt Romney defeats Barack Obama by a whopping five points, carrying Ohio, Virginia and Florida by narrow margins. Wow. What a resounding victory for conservatism!
That this is the most optimistic scenario we can imagine should be a wake-up call to conservatives: If only half of the voters are willing to repudiate Obama’s economic failures, unconstitutional acts and radical redistributionist agenda, then our nation is so far down the road to serfdom that restoring constitutional liberty may well be a lost cause.
The pessimists among us believe it is too late and all we can do is hold ground and hope for a miracle. The optimists think we can still reverse course and restore constitutional principles if about a dozen very difficult tasks are accomplished during Romney’s first term.
The root of the political problem for constitutional liberty is, of course, the cultural meltdown we have experienced since the 1960s. Our nation is now divided between people who celebrate the traditional values of American individualism, personal responsibility, free enterprise and limited government, and those who champion the values of collective action and “social justice.” This November’s election will tell us how far this culture of entitlement has spread.
The political dilemma for those of us who cherish America’s heritage of ordered liberty is that our party, the GOP, seems wedded to a mindset that must be called a strategic myopia. The Republican establishment is content to slow the growth of government, but has no plan to reverse it — because it has swallowed the leftist, historicist propaganda that the trend cannot be reversed. Thus, it not only has no strategy for downsizing government, it has no desire to develop a strategy.
Conservatives see this Republican game plan as fatally flawed — all defense and no offense. This has been painfully illustrated over the past two years by the GOP House’s struggle to significantly cut federal spending.
What’s more, conservative Republicans and tea party patriots have reason to worry about the resolve and adequacy of the Romney team. If Romney wins, conservatives must make sure that his administration doesn’t ignore the issues that are essential to reversing our nation’s downward spiral of decline. The policy goals of a serious conservative agenda would look beyond tax policy and spending control to institutional reforms designed to change the political dynamics of the next decade. Some of those reforms will sound radical, but no more radical than what Obama has in mind for his second term. The difference is this: While Obama’s team is serious about transforming America, the GOP is not yet serious about returning our institutions to their constitutional moorings.
Too many Republican leaders and pundit-strategists want to forget that the tea party came into existence and prospered because of a vacuum in Republican strategic ambitions. Halting the growth of the national debt and setting a definite deadline for balancing the budget are policy goals that were forced on the House Republican leadership by organized grassroots pressure. Even today, those goals are disparaged and undermined by the Republican Party’s Beltway consultants and professional pundits, just as they continue to downplay border security and immigration enforcement despite those issues’ persistent popularity.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/20/is-it-too-late-to-restore-constitutional-liberty/#ixzz24JBnCKoM
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
CBO: Tax Hikes in 2013 Will Cause a Recession | CNSNews.com
CBO: Tax Hikes in 2013 Will Cause a Recession | CNSNews.com
CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf (AP photo)
(CNSNews.com) - The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that if tax rates rise in 2013 as scheduled, the economy will fall back into recession, shrinking by 0.5 percent in 2013.
CBO made the prediction in its annual summer budget update Wednesday.
“But the sharp increases in federal taxes and reductions in federal spending that are scheduled under current law to begin in calendar year 2013 are likely to interrupt the recent economic progress,” CBO said.
“By CBO’s estimate, that fiscal tightening will probably lead to a recession in 2013 and to an unemployment rate that remains above 8 percent through 2014.”
While CBO included mandatory spending cuts from the federal budget sequester (the “fiscal cliff”) in its analysis, the vast majority of the impact to the economy will come from the tax increases – the expiration of the Bush tax cuts -- due to their sheer size.
CBO estimated that the combination of spending cuts and tax increases would reduce the federal deficit by $487 billion in fiscal 2013, with the vast majority of that figure coming from tax increases.
CBO projects that if current tax policies are kept in place and do not expire in 2013 as scheduled, revenues would be $5 trillion less between 2012 and 2022.
CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf (AP photo)
(CNSNews.com) - The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that if tax rates rise in 2013 as scheduled, the economy will fall back into recession, shrinking by 0.5 percent in 2013.
CBO made the prediction in its annual summer budget update Wednesday.
“But the sharp increases in federal taxes and reductions in federal spending that are scheduled under current law to begin in calendar year 2013 are likely to interrupt the recent economic progress,” CBO said.
“By CBO’s estimate, that fiscal tightening will probably lead to a recession in 2013 and to an unemployment rate that remains above 8 percent through 2014.”
While CBO included mandatory spending cuts from the federal budget sequester (the “fiscal cliff”) in its analysis, the vast majority of the impact to the economy will come from the tax increases – the expiration of the Bush tax cuts -- due to their sheer size.
CBO estimated that the combination of spending cuts and tax increases would reduce the federal deficit by $487 billion in fiscal 2013, with the vast majority of that figure coming from tax increases.
CBO projects that if current tax policies are kept in place and do not expire in 2013 as scheduled, revenues would be $5 trillion less between 2012 and 2022.
Romney Rises in Swing States
Romney Rises in Swing States:
Well, whatever caused that -- Obama's spending advantage, poorly weighted polls or both -- the tide is turning and also doing so in two states Obama and his media mini...
The Fence Test
THE FENCE TEST: THINK ABOUT THIS, IT IS TRUE.
You can't get any more accurate than this!
This is straight forward country thinking...
Jeff Foxworthy on the fence.
Which side of the fence?
If you ever wondered which side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.
You can't get any more accurate than this!
This is straight forward country thinking...
Jeff Foxworthy on the fence.
Which side of the fence?
If you ever wondered which side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.
The Virtues of Ryanism
The Virtues of ‘Ryanism’
Since the 2008 election, American conservatism has been in a struggle to define itself. Now the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's vice presidential candidate is helping to resolve that struggle.
For years, the political left has tagged conservatives as out-of-touch anarcho-capitalists, all while enjoying a Republican party that, in reality, has demanded little more than a marginally more efficient administration of the welfare state than what the Democrats want. Conservatives have tried in vain to find a voice that refutes both caricature and reality.
Now, Paul Ryan has found what may be the right approach, and Mitt Romney has installed it at the center of the Republican party before it is too late to save the country from a European-style debt crisis.
“Ryanism” celebrates private entrepreneurship, demands lower taxation, and is willing to take on the hard issues of structural reform to programs, including out of control entitlement spending. It seeks to protect the social safety net by limiting it to the truly indigent and not to allow it to become a source of middle class entitlement (as it has over the last few decades). It does not "end Medicare," but rather makes changes to the system for those under age 55 so the program is solvent and does not rob our children. It is unashamed of America's powerful position in the world and recognizes that military spending is—when pursued prudently and not wastefully—a public good and not just another government boondoggle.
In other words, the Ryan approach is conservative and, very likely, workable. That is why it is so feared and loathed by the left.
Since the 2008 election, American conservatism has been in a struggle to define itself. Now the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's vice presidential candidate is helping to resolve that struggle.
For years, the political left has tagged conservatives as out-of-touch anarcho-capitalists, all while enjoying a Republican party that, in reality, has demanded little more than a marginally more efficient administration of the welfare state than what the Democrats want. Conservatives have tried in vain to find a voice that refutes both caricature and reality.
Now, Paul Ryan has found what may be the right approach, and Mitt Romney has installed it at the center of the Republican party before it is too late to save the country from a European-style debt crisis.
“Ryanism” celebrates private entrepreneurship, demands lower taxation, and is willing to take on the hard issues of structural reform to programs, including out of control entitlement spending. It seeks to protect the social safety net by limiting it to the truly indigent and not to allow it to become a source of middle class entitlement (as it has over the last few decades). It does not "end Medicare," but rather makes changes to the system for those under age 55 so the program is solvent and does not rob our children. It is unashamed of America's powerful position in the world and recognizes that military spending is—when pursued prudently and not wastefully—a public good and not just another government boondoggle.
In other words, the Ryan approach is conservative and, very likely, workable. That is why it is so feared and loathed by the left.
Disillusioned Obama voters reconsider | New Hampshire OPINION01
Disillusioned Obama voters reconsider | New Hampshire OPINION01
In the 2008 general election, Sen. Barack Obama was an inspiration to many Granite Staters who had grown disillusioned with the Republican Party politics of the George W. Bush era. Four years later, many of the voters who turned to Obama with hope in their hearts have felt that hope turn once again into disillusionment.
The poll data bear this out. As the University of New Hampshire’s Granite State Poll shows, President Obama’s lead in New Hampshire has fallen from 10 points in January to three points this month. That trend was noted in a Monday New York Times story that contained an interview with a New Hampshire woman named Dawn who expressed very well the disappointment of so many Obama voters, like herself, in this state.
“Obama is not on my real popular list,” she said. “I think Obamacare is ridiculous. A lot of things that were based on good intentions get messed up.”
She added, “Obama is not off the hook with me. Do I think it’s wise to spend tons of money on stimuluses and stimuluses? No.”
Dawn is no Republican stalwart. She voted for Obama because she believed he would fix the things he said he would fix. He promised pragmatism, not politics as usual. Now she sees, as do so many others, that the promises were empty.
A Gallup poll released on Monday showed that 56 percent of swing-state voters in this year’s presidential election say they are not better off than they were four years ago. A majority, 52 percent, said President Obama has not “done as well as could be expected when dealing with the economy.” The poll covered 12 swing states, including New Hampshire.
In the 2008 general election, Sen. Barack Obama was an inspiration to many Granite Staters who had grown disillusioned with the Republican Party politics of the George W. Bush era. Four years later, many of the voters who turned to Obama with hope in their hearts have felt that hope turn once again into disillusionment.
The poll data bear this out. As the University of New Hampshire’s Granite State Poll shows, President Obama’s lead in New Hampshire has fallen from 10 points in January to three points this month. That trend was noted in a Monday New York Times story that contained an interview with a New Hampshire woman named Dawn who expressed very well the disappointment of so many Obama voters, like herself, in this state.
“Obama is not on my real popular list,” she said. “I think Obamacare is ridiculous. A lot of things that were based on good intentions get messed up.”
She added, “Obama is not off the hook with me. Do I think it’s wise to spend tons of money on stimuluses and stimuluses? No.”
Dawn is no Republican stalwart. She voted for Obama because she believed he would fix the things he said he would fix. He promised pragmatism, not politics as usual. Now she sees, as do so many others, that the promises were empty.
A Gallup poll released on Monday showed that 56 percent of swing-state voters in this year’s presidential election say they are not better off than they were four years ago. A majority, 52 percent, said President Obama has not “done as well as could be expected when dealing with the economy.” The poll covered 12 swing states, including New Hampshire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)