Thomas Jefferson
Friday, November 30, 2012
Founding Father Quote
“To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.’”
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson
Conservative Quote
"It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master."
Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand
Why They Vote Democrat
12 Reasons I Voted Democrat:
1. I voted for a Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.
2. I voted for a Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
3. I voted for a Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
4. I voted for a Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers, rapists, thugs, and thieves.
5. I voted for a Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will disappear in ten years because of Global Warming if I don’t start driving a Prius or a Chevy Volt.
6. I voted for a Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
7. I voted for a Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.
8. I voted for a Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.
9. I voted for a Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution regularly to suit some fringe folks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
10. I voted for a Democrat because I think that it’s better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill for our own because it might upset some useless endangered beetle, gopher, or fish.
11. I voted for a Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world, I was promised “HOPE AND CHANGE.”
12. I voted for a Democrat because my head is so firmly buried in the sand that it’s unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.
__._,_.___
1. I voted for a Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.
2. I voted for a Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
3. I voted for a Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
4. I voted for a Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers, rapists, thugs, and thieves.
5. I voted for a Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will disappear in ten years because of Global Warming if I don’t start driving a Prius or a Chevy Volt.
6. I voted for a Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
7. I voted for a Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.
8. I voted for a Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.
9. I voted for a Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution regularly to suit some fringe folks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
10. I voted for a Democrat because I think that it’s better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill for our own because it might upset some useless endangered beetle, gopher, or fish.
11. I voted for a Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world, I was promised “HOPE AND CHANGE.”
12. I voted for a Democrat because my head is so firmly buried in the sand that it’s unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.
__._,_.___
Real Tolerance
This is REAL Tolerance
Higgs McDonald, NHL Hall of Fame broadcaster speaking in Orillia , Ontario , says,
"I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against another mosque being built in Toronto . I think it should be the goal of every Canadian to be tolerant regardless of their religious beliefs. Thus the mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.
That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs, which would be gay, "The Turban Cowboy ", and the other a topless bar called "You Mecca Me Hot."
Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that an open-pit barbecue pork restaurant, called " Iraq o' Ribs."
Across the street there could be a lingerie store called "Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret ", with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods.
Next door to the lingerie shop there would be room for an adult sex toy shop,
"Koranal Knowledge ", its name in flashing neon lights, and on the other side a liquor store called "Morehammered."
All of this would encourage Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so their mosque issue would not be a problem for others."
Yes we should promote tolerance, and you can do your part by passing this on.
Higgs McDonald, NHL Hall of Fame broadcaster speaking in Orillia , Ontario , says,
"I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against another mosque being built in Toronto . I think it should be the goal of every Canadian to be tolerant regardless of their religious beliefs. Thus the mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.
That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs, which would be gay, "The Turban Cowboy ", and the other a topless bar called "You Mecca Me Hot."
Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that an open-pit barbecue pork restaurant, called " Iraq o' Ribs."
Across the street there could be a lingerie store called "Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret ", with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods.
Next door to the lingerie shop there would be room for an adult sex toy shop,
"Koranal Knowledge ", its name in flashing neon lights, and on the other side a liquor store called "Morehammered."
All of this would encourage Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so their mosque issue would not be a problem for others."
Yes we should promote tolerance, and you can do your part by passing this on.
The President Wants To Go Over the Fiscal Cliff
President Obama wants to go off the fiscal cliff, his Republican interlocutors are beginning to believe, in light of the ‘ridiculous’ offer proposed by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to raise taxes, increase spending, and give Obama permanent unilateral power over the debt ceiling.
“After what’s happened this week, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the President of the United States wants to go off the cliff,” a Senate Republican source told The Washington Examiner. The source suggested that, over the last couple weeks, Obama decided that the election gives him a mandate to go off the cliff rather than compromise with the Republicans on taxes and budget cuts.
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner reportedly knew that his offer was unacceptable. ” I didn’t expect you would like this,” Geithner told McConnell, per Breitbart News.
Obama made no indication that he would move from his positions, rather than Congress. “If Congress does nothing, every family in America will automatically see their income taxes go up on Jan. 1,” he said today in Pennsylvania. “I’m assuming that doesn’t sound good to you. That’s like the lump of coal you get for Christmas — a Scrooge Christmas.”
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that the Geithner pitch was not a “serious proposal” for him to entertain. “There is a stalemate,” Boehner said during a press conference on the Hill. “We’re almost nowhere.”
“After what’s happened this week, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the President of the United States wants to go off the cliff,” a Senate Republican source told The Washington Examiner. The source suggested that, over the last couple weeks, Obama decided that the election gives him a mandate to go off the cliff rather than compromise with the Republicans on taxes and budget cuts.
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner reportedly knew that his offer was unacceptable. ” I didn’t expect you would like this,” Geithner told McConnell, per Breitbart News.
Obama made no indication that he would move from his positions, rather than Congress. “If Congress does nothing, every family in America will automatically see their income taxes go up on Jan. 1,” he said today in Pennsylvania. “I’m assuming that doesn’t sound good to you. That’s like the lump of coal you get for Christmas — a Scrooge Christmas.”
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said that the Geithner pitch was not a “serious proposal” for him to entertain. “There is a stalemate,” Boehner said during a press conference on the Hill. “We’re almost nowhere.”
Dem Rep. Hank Johnson: Amend Constitution to Restrict Freedom of Speech | CNS News
Dem Rep. Hank Johnson: Amend Constitution to Restrict Freedom of Speech | CNS News
(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) says, “corporations control the patterns of thinking” in the United States and that the Bill of Rights to the Constitution should be amended so that the government is given the power to restrict freedom of speech.
"We need a constitutional amendment to allow the legislature to control the so-called free speech rights of corporations," said Johnson.
Pat Buchanan :Stirrings of Secession | CNS News
Stirrings of Secession | CNS News
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ..."
So begins the Declaration of Independence of the 13 colonies from the king and country to which they had given allegiance since the settlers first came to Jamestown and Plymouth Rock.
The declaration was signed by 56 angry old white guys who had had enough of what the Cousins were doing to them. In seceding from the mother country, these patriots put their lives, fortunes and honor on the line.
Four score and five years later, 11 states invoked the same right "to dissolve the political bands" of the Union and form a new nation. After 620,000 had perished, the issue of a state's right to secede was settled at Appomattox. If that right had existed, it no longer did.
What are we to make, then, of petitions from 25,000 citizens of each of seven Southern states — 116,000 from Texas alone — to secede?
While no one takes this movement as seriously as men took secession in 1861, the sentiments behind it ought not to be minimized. For they bespeak a bristling hostility to the federal government and a dislike bordering on detestation of some Americans for other Americans, as deep as it was on the day Beauregard's guns fired on Fort Sumter.
Our Pledge of Allegiance still speaks of "one nation under God, indivisible," but that is far from the reality in the America of 2012.
The social, cultural, moral and political revolutions of the 1960s, against which Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan inveighed to win their 49-state triumphs, have now captured half of the country.
One America believes our history is a catalog of crimes against people of color, that women have an inviolable right to abortions, that condoms should be handed out to sexually active teens in schools where Darwinism should be taught as revealed truth, while Bibles, prayers and religious symbols should be permanently expelled.
The other America sees all this as unpatriotic, godless and decadent.
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ..."
So begins the Declaration of Independence of the 13 colonies from the king and country to which they had given allegiance since the settlers first came to Jamestown and Plymouth Rock.
The declaration was signed by 56 angry old white guys who had had enough of what the Cousins were doing to them. In seceding from the mother country, these patriots put their lives, fortunes and honor on the line.
Four score and five years later, 11 states invoked the same right "to dissolve the political bands" of the Union and form a new nation. After 620,000 had perished, the issue of a state's right to secede was settled at Appomattox. If that right had existed, it no longer did.
What are we to make, then, of petitions from 25,000 citizens of each of seven Southern states — 116,000 from Texas alone — to secede?
While no one takes this movement as seriously as men took secession in 1861, the sentiments behind it ought not to be minimized. For they bespeak a bristling hostility to the federal government and a dislike bordering on detestation of some Americans for other Americans, as deep as it was on the day Beauregard's guns fired on Fort Sumter.
Our Pledge of Allegiance still speaks of "one nation under God, indivisible," but that is far from the reality in the America of 2012.
The social, cultural, moral and political revolutions of the 1960s, against which Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan inveighed to win their 49-state triumphs, have now captured half of the country.
One America believes our history is a catalog of crimes against people of color, that women have an inviolable right to abortions, that condoms should be handed out to sexually active teens in schools where Darwinism should be taught as revealed truth, while Bibles, prayers and religious symbols should be permanently expelled.
The other America sees all this as unpatriotic, godless and decadent.
The Disastrous Reality of ObamaCare
The Disastrous Reality of ObamaCare:
Seven years in the Army provided me with a rather useful education. On one occasion, at age 19, a few minutes after being admitted to an Army hospital with strep throat and a fever of 104 degrees, I was told by a hospital orderly to get out of bed and sweep the floors. I came to learn that government medicine always serves another government agenda.
I also learned some unique turns of phrase from my sergeants that are apropos of such situations. I cannot repeat most of them here, but one term has immediate relevance: "Embrace the suck." An approximate translation would be: "At times you will find yourself in a miserable and dangerous situation with no way out. Deal with it."
The Drawn-Out Crisis: It's the Obama Way
The Drawn-Out Crisis: It's the Obama Way:
The president's inviting Mitt Romney for lunch is a small thing but a brilliant move. It makes Mr. Obama look big, gracious. It implies the weakened, battered former GOP nominee is the leader of th...
The president's inviting Mitt Romney for lunch is a small thing but a brilliant move. It makes Mr. Obama look big, gracious. It implies the weakened, battered former GOP nominee is the leader of th...
Thursday, November 29, 2012
WH's Benghazi Bungling Is Proving a Disaster
WH's Benghazi Bungling Is Proving a Disaster:
President Obama hasn't even begun his second term yet, but his administration is already struggling with a huge credibility problem on the Benghazi front. Watch this video posted today at The Weekl...
President Obama hasn't even begun his second term yet, but his administration is already struggling with a huge credibility problem on the Benghazi front. Watch this video posted today at The Weekl...
The Big Spenders in Washington Will Never Learn
The Big Spenders in Washington Will Never Learn:
No one seriously believes that federal spending is going to be brought under control any time soon. Regardless of what deals are cut during the lame duck session of Congress, Uncle Sam is expected ...
No one seriously believes that federal spending is going to be brought under control any time soon. Regardless of what deals are cut during the lame duck session of Congress, Uncle Sam is expected ...
Conservative Humor
Keeping You Up To Date
Playboy magazine reportedly offered Sarah Palin $4,000,000 to pose nude in an upcoming issue.
Michelle Obama was offered $50 by National Geographic.
In other news... we all remember when KFC offered a "Hillary" meal, consisting of two small breasts and two large thighs.
Now KFC is offering the "Obama Cabinet Bucket." It consists of nothing but left wings and chicken shit.
Just keeping you up to date...
I heard the President's visit to the troops didn't go so well..
Oh yes, you are going to forward this, aren't you!
The Racializing of American Politics
Henninger: The Racializing of American Politics
By Daniel Henninger
This is the most violated saying in American public life:
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Martin Luther King Jr.'s acclaimed call in 1963 for a colorblind society has been displaced, at least in our politics, by an obsession with racial categories. That is the meaning of racialization.
It may be over four decades since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, but whenever America votes today, the exit polls can't move fast enough to divide voters by the color of their skin. Mere moments after the 2012 exit polls were released, a conventional wisdom congealed across the media that the Republican Party was "too white."
Let us posit that this subject wouldn't have been raised if the bottom hadn't fallen out of the GOP's share of the Hispanic vote. When George W. Bush attracted 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, there was no cry that the Republican Party was "too white." The GOP's problem with Hispanics today is a tangle of issues involving the law, labor and assimilation that is hardly reducible to the accusation that the party is too white.
In virtually every instance, the idea that the Republican Party is "too white" is dropped with almost no discussion of what exactly that means. The phrase is being pinned like a scarlet "W" on anyone who didn't vote for the Democrats' nominee. It's a you-know-what-we-mean denunciation. Its only meaning is racial.
The exit polls—asking voters to self-identify as white, black, Hispanic, Asian—inevitably drive any postelection analysis into this racial swamp. High-school seniors applying to colleges have been told for at least 20 years to define themselves inside a racial or ethnic box. Elizabeth Warren spent a lot of energy in Massachusetts attempting a Houdini-like escape from one such ancient box.
Getty Images
During the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wrestled over race, first in January when Bill Clinton was accused of racial signaling during the South Carolina primary, and in March when Mrs. Clinton repudiated the late Geraldine Ferraro for referencing Mr. Obama's color. A New York Times report then said Mr. Obama was "puzzled" at this preoccupation with race and sex. It quoted Mr. Obama as saying: "I don't want to deny the role of race and gender in our society. They're there, and they're powerful. But I don't think it's productive."
A welcome thought. The truth is that no prominent Democrat since Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan has been willing to sustain opposition to this constant racializing of American politics and culture.
In the famous 2003 Supreme Court decision upholding the University of Michigan's race-based admission policies, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in support: "The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its use of racial preferences as soon as practicable. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary."
In 2008's election, many Republicans and independents voted for Mr. Obama to put a final nail in the coffin of Justice O'Connor's racial anxieties. The millions of them who then cast votes against Mr. Obama in 2012 did so almost wholly because of the status of the economy after four years of his presidency. No matter. They lost in 2012 because they're "too white."
This country's historic antidote to racial and ethnic obsessing is assimilation into the middle class, no matter what foreign country or continent sits in front of your hyphen. To this end the Republican candidate offered a solution led by private enterprise, and the Democrat said government should create the path forward. Mr. Obama won and has the four years he asked for to finally make good on his economics. But even this common goal degrades into a cudgel in the president's politics by category: tax cuts for the middle class but not for "the well-off."
The Democrats' insistence on pandering to political categories is a dead end for the country. Rather than spinning their own Rubik's Cube of race, gender and ethnicity, Republicans should start growing their share of the electorate by doing a better job of telling people how to succeed in the American melting pot, a wonderful organizing idea now mocked as a "myth" by progressive Democrats.
No one can beat the Democrats at the politics of social division. Instead, the GOP should tell prospective voters that no matter what their country of origin or happenstance of birth, their success in the U.S. will depend less on celebrating their assigned category than on supporting political policies that expand economic opportunity. A Republican Party that fails to tell that story in a way anyone can grasp is a party that will never escape the box the other side dropped it into on Nov. 7.
By Daniel Henninger
This is the most violated saying in American public life:
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Martin Luther King Jr.'s acclaimed call in 1963 for a colorblind society has been displaced, at least in our politics, by an obsession with racial categories. That is the meaning of racialization.
It may be over four decades since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, but whenever America votes today, the exit polls can't move fast enough to divide voters by the color of their skin. Mere moments after the 2012 exit polls were released, a conventional wisdom congealed across the media that the Republican Party was "too white."
Let us posit that this subject wouldn't have been raised if the bottom hadn't fallen out of the GOP's share of the Hispanic vote. When George W. Bush attracted 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, there was no cry that the Republican Party was "too white." The GOP's problem with Hispanics today is a tangle of issues involving the law, labor and assimilation that is hardly reducible to the accusation that the party is too white.
In virtually every instance, the idea that the Republican Party is "too white" is dropped with almost no discussion of what exactly that means. The phrase is being pinned like a scarlet "W" on anyone who didn't vote for the Democrats' nominee. It's a you-know-what-we-mean denunciation. Its only meaning is racial.
The exit polls—asking voters to self-identify as white, black, Hispanic, Asian—inevitably drive any postelection analysis into this racial swamp. High-school seniors applying to colleges have been told for at least 20 years to define themselves inside a racial or ethnic box. Elizabeth Warren spent a lot of energy in Massachusetts attempting a Houdini-like escape from one such ancient box.
Getty Images
During the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wrestled over race, first in January when Bill Clinton was accused of racial signaling during the South Carolina primary, and in March when Mrs. Clinton repudiated the late Geraldine Ferraro for referencing Mr. Obama's color. A New York Times report then said Mr. Obama was "puzzled" at this preoccupation with race and sex. It quoted Mr. Obama as saying: "I don't want to deny the role of race and gender in our society. They're there, and they're powerful. But I don't think it's productive."
A welcome thought. The truth is that no prominent Democrat since Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan has been willing to sustain opposition to this constant racializing of American politics and culture.
In the famous 2003 Supreme Court decision upholding the University of Michigan's race-based admission policies, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in support: "The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its use of racial preferences as soon as practicable. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary."
In 2008's election, many Republicans and independents voted for Mr. Obama to put a final nail in the coffin of Justice O'Connor's racial anxieties. The millions of them who then cast votes against Mr. Obama in 2012 did so almost wholly because of the status of the economy after four years of his presidency. No matter. They lost in 2012 because they're "too white."
This country's historic antidote to racial and ethnic obsessing is assimilation into the middle class, no matter what foreign country or continent sits in front of your hyphen. To this end the Republican candidate offered a solution led by private enterprise, and the Democrat said government should create the path forward. Mr. Obama won and has the four years he asked for to finally make good on his economics. But even this common goal degrades into a cudgel in the president's politics by category: tax cuts for the middle class but not for "the well-off."
The Democrats' insistence on pandering to political categories is a dead end for the country. Rather than spinning their own Rubik's Cube of race, gender and ethnicity, Republicans should start growing their share of the electorate by doing a better job of telling people how to succeed in the American melting pot, a wonderful organizing idea now mocked as a "myth" by progressive Democrats.
No one can beat the Democrats at the politics of social division. Instead, the GOP should tell prospective voters that no matter what their country of origin or happenstance of birth, their success in the U.S. will depend less on celebrating their assigned category than on supporting political policies that expand economic opportunity. A Republican Party that fails to tell that story in a way anyone can grasp is a party that will never escape the box the other side dropped it into on Nov. 7.
Today's Quotes
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
“When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not Guilty'.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
― Theodore Roosevelt
“When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not Guilty'.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Obama Too Busy Destroying Republicans To Address Fiscal Problems
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Why are Republicans allowing the entire debate to be about taxes and about the war among Republicans over holding the line on the Norquist pledge or not, when what Obama is proposing on raising the rates on the 2% is a triviality? It will reduce the deficit from 1.10 trillion to 1.02 trillion, 8 cents on the dollar. It is nothing. It’s lunch money, it’s a rounding error.
And yet that’s all the debate that we are hearing. Obama understands this. He’s not trying to fix our fiscal issues and problems. He’s trying to destroy the Republicans by insisting that there is a split among the Republicans on this issue which has held them together, the same way it destroyed President Bush Senior when he went back on the pledge he made. This is a political attack on the Republicans. There is no evidence right now that he has any interest in the real fiscal issue because he would have to talk about spending and entitlements and he isn’t.
And yet that’s all the debate that we are hearing. Obama understands this. He’s not trying to fix our fiscal issues and problems. He’s trying to destroy the Republicans by insisting that there is a split among the Republicans on this issue which has held them together, the same way it destroyed President Bush Senior when he went back on the pledge he made. This is a political attack on the Republicans. There is no evidence right now that he has any interest in the real fiscal issue because he would have to talk about spending and entitlements and he isn’t.
Congressman: Obama's Tax Increase Will Fund Government For Eight Days
President Barack Obama has proposed raising taxes on the rich to put America's fiscal house in order, but critics say federal spending is so massive that the wealthy don't have enough money to cover the nation's unprecedented debt.
In an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) said President Barack Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy would only generate enough revenue to fund the federal government for eight days.
"The president’s plan to increase taxes on the upper two percent covers the spending by this federal government not for eight years, not for eight months, not for eight weeks but for eight days. Eight days only," said Mr. Price. "It’s not a real solution. So, again, I’m puzzled by an administration that seems to be more interested in raising tax rates than in gaining economic vitality."
The problem is that the rich don't have enough money to put so much as a dent in America's $16 trillion national debt. "If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion," writes John Stossel. "That’s only a third of this year’s deficit. Our national debt would continue to explode."
Still, Mr. Obama's supporters persist in proposing tax hikes on the wealthy. On Sunday, billionaire Warren Buffett proposed a minimum tax for America's top earners. "We need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that."
There's just one problem with such an approach, says author Mark Steyn:
If you took every single penny that Warren Buffett has, it'd pay for 4-1/2 days of the US government. This tax-the-rich won't work. The problem here is the government is way bigger than even the capacity of the rich to sustain it. The Buffett Rule would raise $3.2 billion a year, and take 514 years just to pay off Obama's 2011 budget deficit.
Indeed, even Mr. Buffett seems to concede that he and the president's "soak the rich" proposals are more an act of political theater designed to generate an emotional response than serious solutions: Mr. Buffett told Matt Lauer he believes his proposal would boost the "morale of the middle class."
In an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) said President Barack Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy would only generate enough revenue to fund the federal government for eight days.
"The president’s plan to increase taxes on the upper two percent covers the spending by this federal government not for eight years, not for eight months, not for eight weeks but for eight days. Eight days only," said Mr. Price. "It’s not a real solution. So, again, I’m puzzled by an administration that seems to be more interested in raising tax rates than in gaining economic vitality."
The problem is that the rich don't have enough money to put so much as a dent in America's $16 trillion national debt. "If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion," writes John Stossel. "That’s only a third of this year’s deficit. Our national debt would continue to explode."
Still, Mr. Obama's supporters persist in proposing tax hikes on the wealthy. On Sunday, billionaire Warren Buffett proposed a minimum tax for America's top earners. "We need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that."
There's just one problem with such an approach, says author Mark Steyn:
If you took every single penny that Warren Buffett has, it'd pay for 4-1/2 days of the US government. This tax-the-rich won't work. The problem here is the government is way bigger than even the capacity of the rich to sustain it. The Buffett Rule would raise $3.2 billion a year, and take 514 years just to pay off Obama's 2011 budget deficit.
Indeed, even Mr. Buffett seems to concede that he and the president's "soak the rich" proposals are more an act of political theater designed to generate an emotional response than serious solutions: Mr. Buffett told Matt Lauer he believes his proposal would boost the "morale of the middle class."
Pushing Conservatives Off the Fiscal Cliff | CNS News
Pushing Conservatives Off the Fiscal Cliff | CNS News
The conventional wisdom has emerged that in order to avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff," politicians in Washington must agree to some method of tax increases ("revenue") — which will be real, even if low taxes are not the cause of our ills — alongside some kind of promise of spending restraint on entitlement programs, which is our problem, and which no one believes Washington will restrain.
The American left and our "objective" journalists — same thing, I know — are not helping the nation balance its budget. As usual, these partisan hacks are obsessed with tearing the Republican coalition apart, limb from limb. By empowering the GOP moderates, they drive the conservatives into exile. These liberals are dishonest but not dumb. They have no intention of honoring a pledge to curtail wasteful spending. What they want is GOP civil war.
On Nov. 27, the front page of The Washington Post exemplified the media's peculiar method of portraying the two sides. "Republicans begin to challenge the reign of an anti-tax enforcer," they triumphantly proclaimed for the GOP moderates. The Democrats drew this headline: "White House builds case for middle-class tax cuts."
The conventional wisdom has emerged that in order to avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff," politicians in Washington must agree to some method of tax increases ("revenue") — which will be real, even if low taxes are not the cause of our ills — alongside some kind of promise of spending restraint on entitlement programs, which is our problem, and which no one believes Washington will restrain.
The American left and our "objective" journalists — same thing, I know — are not helping the nation balance its budget. As usual, these partisan hacks are obsessed with tearing the Republican coalition apart, limb from limb. By empowering the GOP moderates, they drive the conservatives into exile. These liberals are dishonest but not dumb. They have no intention of honoring a pledge to curtail wasteful spending. What they want is GOP civil war.
On Nov. 27, the front page of The Washington Post exemplified the media's peculiar method of portraying the two sides. "Republicans begin to challenge the reign of an anti-tax enforcer," they triumphantly proclaimed for the GOP moderates. The Democrats drew this headline: "White House builds case for middle-class tax cuts."
ObamaCare's Rationers Argue "It's Good for You"
ObamaCare's Rationers Argue "It's Good for You":
Obamacare's backers have a plan to justify their attempts to ration medicine - by saying that it's good for you.
Through 2019, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - otherwise ...
Obamacare's backers have a plan to justify their attempts to ration medicine - by saying that it's good for you.
Through 2019, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - otherwise ...
Obama Taking U.S. Down Path of Greece
Obama Taking U.S. Down Path of Greece:
Unless you've played ostrich, you know the lessons of the presidential election. Republicans must give up their principles and be more like Democrats, or they'll go extinct.
Media sages ...
Unless you've played ostrich, you know the lessons of the presidential election. Republicans must give up their principles and be more like Democrats, or they'll go extinct.
Media sages ...
After the Tumult and the Shouting
After the Tumult and the Shouting
If I had to choose one word to describe the 2012 presidential election, it would be decline. The results showed a decline in overall turnout, a decline in the GOP coalition relative to its 2004 high, a decline in the Democratic coalition relative to its 2008 high, and in general a stark decline in public confidence that the nation’s leaders can fix its pressing problems.
NEWSCOM
Just look at the results. In 2008, some 131.5 million Americans went to the polls; while the votes are still being tallied, this time around there probably were between 127 and 130 million votes cast. Most of the decline came from white voters; in fact, between 6 and 9 million white voters went missing this year, relative to 2008. It is a reasonable guess that the number of white votes in 2004 roughly equaled the number in 2012, despite the fact that millions of new whites have become eligible to vote and the aging white population has entered peak voting years.
Much has been made of the increasing whiteness of the GOP coalition, with the implication being that Mitt Romney lost because he failed to attract enough support from ethnic or racial minorities. Without doubt, this was a problem for the GOP nominee and certainly made a difference in key swing states. In Colorado and Florida, Romney’s support among Hispanics was lower than that of George W. Bush and even John McCain.
Is this America's Fate?
"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations
has been two hundred years.
These nations have progressed through this sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage;
from courage to liberty;
from liberty to abundance;
from abundance to selfishness;
from selfishness to complacency;
from complaceny to apathy;
from apathy to dependence;
from dependency back again into bondage."
-- Sir Alex Fraser Tytler
(1742-1813) Lord Woodhouselee, Scottish jurist, professor and historian
has been two hundred years.
These nations have progressed through this sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage;
from courage to liberty;
from liberty to abundance;
from abundance to selfishness;
from selfishness to complacency;
from complaceny to apathy;
from apathy to dependence;
from dependency back again into bondage."
-- Sir Alex Fraser Tytler
(1742-1813) Lord Woodhouselee, Scottish jurist, professor and historian
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Founding Father Quote
The multiplication of public offices, increase of expense beyond income, growth and entailment of a public debt, are indications soliciting the employment of the pruning knife.
Thomas Jefferson, 1821
Thomas Jefferson, 1821
Conservative Quote of the Day
"The reason we have a lack of revenue in Washington is too much spending and no economic growth. So we don't have economic growth. If the economy were growing at 4 percent right now, we'd have plenty of revenue. But you don't get the economy to grow by raising taxes. That's what they want to do now, and I think it's absolutely the wrong thing to do."
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
Rand Paul: I Won't Break the No-Tax-Increase Pledge I Made to the People | CNS News
Rand Paul: I Won't Break the No-Tax-Increase Pledge I Made to the People | CNS News
(CNSNews.com) - While some Republicans have indicated they may break their no-tax-hike pledge, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is not among them:
"I made a pledge to the people of Kentucky that I'm not raising taxes. I took a pledge. I signed a statement, an oath that I wouldn't raise taxes, and I'm going to adhere to it," Sen. Paul told Fox New's Greta Van Susteren Monday night.
In fact, if Paul had his way, he says he'd lower taxes:
"I think you should balance budgets, not spend more than comes in, and I think you should lower taxes, not raise taxes. In fact, if you want to stimulate the economy, I'm for cutting tax revenues. All these Republicans who want to give up their taxpayer pledge and raise taxes, I'm the opposite. I want to lower taxes because that's how we'd get actually more economic growth and maybe more revenue, if you cut tax rates.
SMITH: House Republicans must check Obama - Washington Times
SMITH: House Republicans must check Obama - Washington Times
Read more: SMITH: House Republicans must check Obama - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/26/house-republicans-must-check-obama/#ixzz2DRc32tOk
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
The votes are counted, the president will serve another term, and the Senate continues in Democratic control. With confidence in the separation of powers and bicameralism, Americans have, however, once again entrusted control of the House of Representatives to Republicans.
The intensity of the White House focus on the election campaign crowded out many important national decisions, and not only on the marquee issues of jobs and taxes. The Obama administration punted on foreign policy and human rights, leaving too many issues for after Election Day. Combined with President Obama’s diffident view of America’s role in the world, this was not good news for America or the world.
Kicking the can down the road is not a responsible foreign policy in these challenging, even perilous, times. There are many examples of lapses, but perhaps one jumps out ahead of the others. Delaying investigation and accountability for the attack on our consulate in Benghazi may have served the president’s electoral purposes, but the American people cannot support a way forward without knowing the plain facts.
It is the responsibility of the Republican conference of the House to bring the administration to the action and leadership on foreign policy that the moment requires.
Read more: SMITH: House Republicans must check Obama - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/26/house-republicans-must-check-obama/#ixzz2DRc32tOk
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Problem Is Spending Too Much, Not Taxing Too Little
Problem Is Spending Too Much, Not Taxing Too Little:
Were the average Republican asked for a succinct statement of his views on taxation, he or she might respond thus:
"U.S. tax rates are too high for the world we must compete in. The tax burde...
Were the average Republican asked for a succinct statement of his views on taxation, he or she might respond thus:
"U.S. tax rates are too high for the world we must compete in. The tax burde...
For Starters, Put ObamaCare on Table
For Starters, Put ObamaCare on Table:
Negotiations between congressional Republicans and the White House will intensify this week as the deadline for steering clear of the year-end "fiscal cliff" approaches. Like the 2011 showdown over...
Negotiations between congressional Republicans and the White House will intensify this week as the deadline for steering clear of the year-end "fiscal cliff" approaches. Like the 2011 showdown over...
GOP senators ‘more disturbed’ after meeting with Rice on Benghazi
News from The Hill:
GOP senators ‘more disturbed’ after meeting with Rice on Benghazi
By Julian Pecquet
United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice failed Tuesday to convince Republican senators that she's not to blame for proving misleading information about the attack in Benghazi — raising new doubts about her potential nomination to be secretary of State.
“Bottom line, I'm more disturbed now than I was before (by) the 16 September explanation about how four Americans died in Benghazi, Libya by Ambassador Rice,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
Graham met with Rice for more than an hour Tuesday morning along with Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.). Acting CIA Director Michael Morell also attended the closed-door briefing.
“We are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get concerning some of the evidence that was overwhelming leading up to the attack on our consulate," McCain said.
GOP senators ‘more disturbed’ after meeting with Rice on Benghazi
By Julian Pecquet
United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice failed Tuesday to convince Republican senators that she's not to blame for proving misleading information about the attack in Benghazi — raising new doubts about her potential nomination to be secretary of State.
“Bottom line, I'm more disturbed now than I was before (by) the 16 September explanation about how four Americans died in Benghazi, Libya by Ambassador Rice,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
Graham met with Rice for more than an hour Tuesday morning along with Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.). Acting CIA Director Michael Morell also attended the closed-door briefing.
“We are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get concerning some of the evidence that was overwhelming leading up to the attack on our consulate," McCain said.
Founding Father Quote
"An elective despotism was not the government we fought for, but one which should not only be founded on true free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among general bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others."
-- Thomas Jefferson
-- Thomas Jefferson
Monday, November 26, 2012
Justice Ginsburg: We Need An All-Female Supreme Court | CNS News
Justice Ginsburg: We Need An All-Female Supreme Court | CNS News
Just not 9 liberal women justices!
Just not 9 liberal women justices!
(CNSNews.com) – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says there will be enough women on the Supreme Court when all nine justices are female.
“So now the perception is, yes, women are here to stay. And when I’m sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court]? And I say when there are nine, people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that,” she said.
Capito to Challenge Rockefeller for SenateA
Capito to Challenge Rockefeller for Senate
Republican House member Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia will challenge Democrat Jay Rockefeller for the U.S. Senate. At 59, Capito, who has served in the House of Representatives since 2001 and is the daughter of former West Virginia governor Arch Moore, will be facing a 75-year-old Rockefeller, who was first elected to the Senate in 1984.
Here's more from Hoppy Kercheval:
Rockefeller has indicated that he plans to run for re-election in 2014, but there continues to be speculation that he may retire at the end of this term.Rockefeller says Capito gave him a heads-up about her plans."Congresswoman Capito called last week to let me know of her plans, and I appreciate that," Rockefeller said in a prepared statement. "But my total focus right now is on the national budget situation and the fight for West Virginia families--making sure the very wealthy finally start paying their fair share again, for the first time in decades, rebuilding a strong middle class, and creating real opportunity for those who are still struggling."
Why Is Raising Taxes Obama's Top Priority?
Why Is Raising Taxes Obama's Top Priority?:
Here's President Obama in August 2009 discussing the link between tax increases, recessions and business growth: "The last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession because t...
Why the Recovery Is Feeble
Why the Recovery Is Feeble:
WASHINGTON -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke last week became the latest economist to ask why the current economic recovery has been so weak. The question has inspired a cottage industry of ...
WASHINGTON -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke last week became the latest economist to ask why the current economic recovery has been so weak. The question has inspired a cottage industry of ...
The Right Will Rebound
The Right Will Rebound:
Before Nov. 6, I thought only governments could spend so much money to such little effect. Republicans spent about $1 billion on the Election 2012 presidential campaign. For bupkes.
If fewer ...
Before Nov. 6, I thought only governments could spend so much money to such little effect. Republicans spent about $1 billion on the Election 2012 presidential campaign. For bupkes.
If fewer ...
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Today's Quote
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Oath Keepers
1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against
the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
Oathkeepers.org
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against
the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
Oathkeepers.org
Kill the Dept. of Homeland SecurityQQ
Kill the Dept. of Homeland Security:
Sunday, November 25, 2012 marks the 10th anniversary of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which pulled together nearly two dozen federal agencies and departments under the ...
Sunday, November 25, 2012 marks the 10th anniversary of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which pulled together nearly two dozen federal agencies and departments under the ...
None Dare Call It Default
None Dare Call It Default:
To call Greece First World may be a stretch, but Greece has defaulted once already, and it is only a matter of time until Greece defaults again. Welcome to default-o-rama, the next chapter in the F...
Tea party vows to stay for long haul, takes no blame for GOP losses - Washington Times
Tea party vows to stay for long haul, takes no blame for GOP losses - Washington Times
Read more: Tea party vows to stay for long haul, takes no blame for GOP losses - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/22/tea-party-vows-to-stay-for-long-haul-takes-no-blam/#ixzz2DGGn28aF
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Tea party leaders say they refuse to be the scapegoats for the drubbing Republicans took on Election Day, claiming it was the party establishment — not their insurgent movement — that cost the party seats in the House and Senate and returned President Obama to the White House.
In fact, various branches of the grass-roots movement vow to reassert themselves on the local and nation levels as Congress begins talks aimed at averting the “fiscal cliff.” They say their call for limited government is more relevant than ever before.
“As far as the tea party is concerned, we are still here,” said Amy Kremer, leader of the Tea Party Express. “We may not be out on the streets with the colorful signs like 2010, but we are here, we are engaged and we are going to continue to fight. We never thought this was a short-term process. It is going to take a long time to turn it around.”
Judson Phillips, head of Tea Party Nation, said the tea party’s first order of business is to rebut Republicans who want to blame the movement for their poor performance at the ballot box.
“They went well out of their way to ignore us, marginalize us and pretend we did not exist, and they gave us the most liberal nominee in the history of the Republican Party,” Mr. Phillips said, taking particular aim at Karl Rove, the mastermind behind former President George W. Bush’s career and founder of American Crossroads, a super PAC that spent more than $100 million in the campaign but had few successes to show for it.
Keli Carender, national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, also said she felt Republicans were trying to blame the tea party and that her group will put a renewed focus on local elections.
“We tried the last four years to go from the top and working with Congress,” she said. “I think we have not been as successful as we like. It is an impermeable steel bubble. We are really, really realizing that in order to have an impact it is going to have to come from the ground up — from the cities, the counties and the states.”
The tea party flexed its muscle in the 2010 midterm elections by knocking off veteran Republican lawmakers in primaries, including Sen. Robert F. Bennett of Utah, and sending a new class of fiscal conservatives to Capitol Hill — a group that included Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania.
Read more: Tea party vows to stay for long haul, takes no blame for GOP losses - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/22/tea-party-vows-to-stay-for-long-haul-takes-no-blam/#ixzz2DGGn28aF
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Founding Father Quote
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
James Madison
James Madison
Let Obama Be Obama
After his party’s devastating setback in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. They were portrayed as nativists for opposing the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal immigrants, and as callous in battling the federal takeover of health care.
Republicans countered with arguments that higher taxes on the employer class hurt the economy in general. They assumed most voters knew that amnesties are euphemisms for undermining federal law and in the past have had the effect of promoting more illegal immigration. They tried to point out that there is no such thing as free universal health care, since Obamacare will only shift responsibility from health-care practitioners and patients to inefficient government bureaucracies and hide the true costs with higher taxes.The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.
Instead, why not agree to hike federal-income-tax rates only on the true “millionaires and billionaires,” “fat cats,” and “corporate jet owners” whom Obama has so constantly demonized? In other words, skip over the tire-store owner or dentist, and tax those, for example, who make $1 million or more in annual income. Eight out of the ten wealthiest counties in the United States voted for Obama. Corporate lawyers and the affluent in Hollywood and on Wall Street should all not mind “paying their fair share.”
Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe, and then putting responsibility on the president to keep his part of the bargain in making needed cuts in spending.
Likewise, instead of hiking death taxes on small businesspeople, why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?
The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.
But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.
Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?
Finally, Obamacare will be imposed on all Americans by 2014. But so far the Obama administration has granted more than 1,200 exemptions to favored corporations and unions, covering about 4 million Americans. Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”
One of the brilliant themes of the 2012 Obama campaign was forcing Republicans, on principle, to systematically oppose most of the things that the administration wanted them to oppose — thereby shielding itself from the unwelcome consequences of its own ideology while winning political points. Now, in defeat, Republicans should agree to let the chips lie where they fall: Tax only the truly rich; reward only the truly deserving illegal immigrants; and exempt no one from Obamacare.
Nothing could be fairer or more equal than that.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The End of Sparta. You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com. © 2012 Tribune Media Services
And they utterly failed to convince the American people of any of that.
Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?
Republicans countered with arguments that higher taxes on the employer class hurt the economy in general. They assumed most voters knew that amnesties are euphemisms for undermining federal law and in the past have had the effect of promoting more illegal immigration. They tried to point out that there is no such thing as free universal health care, since Obamacare will only shift responsibility from health-care practitioners and patients to inefficient government bureaucracies and hide the true costs with higher taxes.The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.
Advertisement
Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe, and then putting responsibility on the president to keep his part of the bargain in making needed cuts in spending.
Likewise, instead of hiking death taxes on small businesspeople, why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?
The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.
But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.
Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?
Finally, Obamacare will be imposed on all Americans by 2014. But so far the Obama administration has granted more than 1,200 exemptions to favored corporations and unions, covering about 4 million Americans. Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”
One of the brilliant themes of the 2012 Obama campaign was forcing Republicans, on principle, to systematically oppose most of the things that the administration wanted them to oppose — thereby shielding itself from the unwelcome consequences of its own ideology while winning political points. Now, in defeat, Republicans should agree to let the chips lie where they fall: Tax only the truly rich; reward only the truly deserving illegal immigrants; and exempt no one from Obamacare.
Nothing could be fairer or more equal than that.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The End of Sparta. You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com. © 2012 Tribune Media Services
And they utterly failed to convince the American people of any of that.
Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?
LEE: After fiscal cliff comes fiscal avalanche - Washington Times
LEE: After fiscal cliff comes fiscal avalanche - Washington Times
Read more: LEE: After fiscal cliff comes fiscal avalanche - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/23/after-fiscal-cliff-comes-fiscal-avalanche/#ixzz2D9d8smZi
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
While Washington is preoccupied with the so-called fiscal cliff, little attention has been given to the fiscal avalanche that will occur if we continue down an unsustainable, long-term path, causing markets to turn sour on U.S. debt and leading to a spike in interest rates.
Such a eurolike crisis would make the fiscal cliff look like a dip in the road. Unlike driving off a cliff, which you can see coming and make last-minute adjustments to avert, we cannot predict with any reasonable certainty when the avalanche will break. If it does, there will be little anyone can do to prevent its devastating effects.
No one knows just how long the United States can continue to accrue massive debts before lenders lose confidence. Delaying significant fiscal restraint for yet another year will send the wrong signal to financial markets and may serve as a tipping point that could lead to disastrous consequences for our economy.
If U.S. creditors decide that our debt is no longer the safest form of investment available, demand for Treasurys will drop, interest rates will rise and the cost of servicing our debt will begin to explode. Paying interest on our national debt will quickly crowd out spending on almost all other federal priorities. At that point, any deficit reduction undertaken by Washington — including the sorts of spending cuts or tax increases being discussed today — will be too little, too late.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that under the most likely policy scenario, in 30 years, net interest payments on the debt could total $3.8 trillion in today’s dollars. That is more than total government spending for 2011.
Read more: LEE: After fiscal cliff comes fiscal avalanche - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/23/after-fiscal-cliff-comes-fiscal-avalanche/#ixzz2D9d8smZi
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
The GOP and Racism!
|
Lenders and Spenders: Confronting the Political Reality of Debt — The American Magazine
Lenders and Spenders: Confronting the Political Reality of Debt — The American Magazine
Is federal debt really nothing more than money ‘we owe to ourselves’? No. It frays the political fabric, and we are feeling its effects already.
“The debt we create is basically money we owe to ourselves, and the burden it imposes does not involve a real transfer of resources,” Paul Krugman wrote recently in “Debt Is (Mostly) Money We Owe to Ourselves.”
“That’s not to say that high debt can’t cause problems — it certainly can. But these are problems of distribution and incentives, not the burden of debt as is commonly understood.... talking about leaving a burden to our children is especially nonsensical; what we are leaving behind is promises that some of our children will pay money to other children, which is a very different kettle of fish,” he added.
If this little lullaby (“the debt is something we owe to ourselves”) helps you sleep, then you may be in for a rude awakening. Government debt frays the political fabric, and we are feeling its effects already.
Think of a simple economy, where the only product is corn. There is no foreign sector, and there are no financial claims more complicated than IOUs.
Friday, November 23, 2012
EDITORIAL: They built this - Washington Times
EDITORIAL: They built this - Washington Times
Read more: EDITORIAL: They built this - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/22/they-built-this/#ixzz2D5fY0ZFe
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
The History Channel recently concluded “The Men Who Built America,” a mini-series about the former titans of industry — Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Morgan and Ford. These men built America from the ground up in the 50 years following the Civil War. They embodied the values of innovation, competition and, most of all, hard work.
Often derided in today’s textbooks as “robber barons,” their lives demonstrated how great things were possible from humble beginnings. Most of these giants were born to poor or working-class families. They fought tooth and nail to make the American dream a reality, but they didn’t have to face many of the obstacles American businessmen see today.
Read more: EDITORIAL: They built this - Washington Times http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/22/they-built-this/#ixzz2D5fY0ZFe
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Today's Reaganism
"The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the Constitution."
Jill Kelley was awarded Joint Chiefs' No. 2 civilian medal | The Daily Caller
Jill Kelley was awarded Joint Chiefs' No. 2 civilian medal | The Daily Caller
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/tampa-socialite-jill-kelley-was-awarded-joint-chiefs-no-2-medal-for-civilians-prior-to-petraeus-scandal/#ixzz2D4wi3IsY
Tampa socialite Jill Kelley, the unpaid social liaison to MacDill Air Force Base whose harassment complaint eventually led to the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus, last year received the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s second-highest civilian honor.
Petraeus himself presented the Joint Chiefs of Staff Award for Outstanding Public Service to Kelley in March 2011, after personally recommending her for the honor, and it was approved by then-Adm. Mike Mullen, according to The Tampa Tribune.
The award citation praised Kelley for her “outstanding public service to the United States Central Command, the MacDill Air Force Base community and the Department of Defense from October 31, 2008 to May 31, 2010.”
“Mrs. Kelley distinguished herself by exceptional service while supporting the mission of the United Central Command, building positive relationships between the military and the Tampa community, supporting community outreach, and advancing various military endeavors,” the award citation continued. “[Her] willingness to host engagements with Senior National Representatives from more than 60 countries was indicative of her support for both the Coalition’s effort and the mission of United States Central Command.”
But the “positive relationships” Kelley helped build turned out to be less than helpful for several top U.S. military commanders.
(Well she did service two 4 star Generals!)
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/22/tampa-socialite-jill-kelley-was-awarded-joint-chiefs-no-2-medal-for-civilians-prior-to-petraeus-scandal/#ixzz2D4wi3IsY
Israeli Defense Vs. Gaza's Hamas Is Civilization Against Savagery - Investors.com
Israeli Defense Vs. Gaza's Hamas Is Civilization Against Savagery - Investors.com
Mideast: Celebration within Gaza after the bombing of a bus filled with innocent Israeli civilians is an object lesson on the so-called Palestine question. Those who would celebrate such a cowardly act are savages.
No one can imagine Washington's troops firing shots to celebrate a supporter of American independence trying to kill a group of Royalist civilians. During the Cold War, U.S. support for Lech Walesa's Solidarity would have dried up if he handed out candy after a Polish nationalist targeted, say, innocent Muscovites going to work.
We may live in a complex world, but evil is identifiable even when its practitioners claim their cause is good.
The gunfire across Gaza celebrating an explosion on a bus in central Tel Aviv on Wednesday is evil. And the Iranian-backed Hamas' rulers praising the bombing, which injured 15 passengers, is evil.
"Hamas blesses the attack in Tel Aviv and sees it as a natural response to the Israeli massacres ... in Gaza," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters.
The "Israeli massacres," i.e. self-defensive airstrikes, are exactly how the U.S. would react if, let's say, Mexico were doing to us what Hamas has been doing to Israel: firing hundreds of rockets into populated areas.
It is, in fact, what any civilized nation would be doing.
But only barbarians would hand out cakes in celebration of the bombing of a vehicle with innocent men, women and children, which was happening at Gaza's main hospital on Wednesday. "Go back to Germany, Poland, Russia, America and anywhere else," Hamas' al-Qassam brigades warned Jews on Twitter.
Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/112112-634360-celebrating-bus-bombing-is-reminder-of-hamas-evil.htm#ixzz2D4d68rrH
Mideast: Celebration within Gaza after the bombing of a bus filled with innocent Israeli civilians is an object lesson on the so-called Palestine question. Those who would celebrate such a cowardly act are savages.
No one can imagine Washington's troops firing shots to celebrate a supporter of American independence trying to kill a group of Royalist civilians. During the Cold War, U.S. support for Lech Walesa's Solidarity would have dried up if he handed out candy after a Polish nationalist targeted, say, innocent Muscovites going to work.
We may live in a complex world, but evil is identifiable even when its practitioners claim their cause is good.
The gunfire across Gaza celebrating an explosion on a bus in central Tel Aviv on Wednesday is evil. And the Iranian-backed Hamas' rulers praising the bombing, which injured 15 passengers, is evil.
"Hamas blesses the attack in Tel Aviv and sees it as a natural response to the Israeli massacres ... in Gaza," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters.
The "Israeli massacres," i.e. self-defensive airstrikes, are exactly how the U.S. would react if, let's say, Mexico were doing to us what Hamas has been doing to Israel: firing hundreds of rockets into populated areas.
It is, in fact, what any civilized nation would be doing.
But only barbarians would hand out cakes in celebration of the bombing of a vehicle with innocent men, women and children, which was happening at Gaza's main hospital on Wednesday. "Go back to Germany, Poland, Russia, America and anywhere else," Hamas' al-Qassam brigades warned Jews on Twitter.
Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/112112-634360-celebrating-bus-bombing-is-reminder-of-hamas-evil.htm#ixzz2D4d68rrH
The Problem With Susan Rice | RealClearPolitics
The Problem With Susan Rice | RealClearPolitics
This time it was President Obama who blew the dog whistle.
It happened during his Nov. 14 post-reelection press conference at the White House. Instead of merely reveling in his victory and extending a gracious hand to the vanquished Republicans, the president chose to escalate his growing rift with John McCain and Lindsey Graham over the future of Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
This time it was President Obama who blew the dog whistle.
It happened during his Nov. 14 post-reelection press conference at the White House. Instead of merely reveling in his victory and extending a gracious hand to the vanquished Republicans, the president chose to escalate his growing rift with John McCain and Lindsey Graham over the future of Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Muslim Brotherhood offices torched, Morsi on defensive - EGYPT - FRANCE 24
Muslim Brotherhood offices torched, Morsi on defensive - EGYPT - FRANCE 24
Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi defended his latest decree granting himself sweeping powers before supporters in Cairo as anti-Morsi demonstrators set fire to Muslim Brotherhood offices in cities across Egypt on Friday!
Arab winter?
Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi defended his latest decree granting himself sweeping powers before supporters in Cairo as anti-Morsi demonstrators set fire to Muslim Brotherhood offices in cities across Egypt on Friday!
Arab winter?
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Founder's Quote
Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.
- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
Thanksgiving 2012
For each new morning with its light, For rest and shelter of the night, For health and food, For love and friends, For everything Thy goodness sends.
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
NOVAK: Giving thanks for American Exceptionalism - Washington Times
NOVAK: Giving thanks for American Exceptionalism - Washington Times
Jay Leno agrees with Treasury Sec. Timothy Geithner that Congress shouldn’t be the one to decide how much money the U.S. can borrow.
Sort of.
In Tuesday’s “Tonight Show” monologue, host Leno weighed in on Geithner’s desire to eliminate Congressional limits on borrowing:
“Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says that Congress should lift the debt ceiling to infinity. Geithner argued that it shouldn’t be Congress’ job to place limits on how much we can borrow.
"And, you know something, he’s right: that’s China’s job.”
On Monday, CNSNews.com published an article, “Treasury Secretary Geithner: Lift Debt Limit to Infinity,” reporting Geithner’s call to eliminate the debt ceiling.