Monday, October 28, 2013

The president who has done the most damage

The president who has done the most damage:
I have been broadcasting for 31 years and writing for longer than that. I do not recall ever saying on radio or in print that a president is doing lasting damage to our country. I did not like the presidencies of Jimmy Carter (the last Democrat I voted for) or Bill Clinton. Nor did I care for the “compassionate conservatism” of George W. Bush. In modern political parlance “compassionate” is a euphemism for ever-expanding government.
But I have never written or broadcast that our country was being seriously damaged by a president. So it is with great sadness that I write that President Barack Obama has done and continues to do major damage to America. The only question is whether this can ever be undone.
This is equally true domestically and internationally.
Domestically, his policies have gravely impacted the American economy.
He has overseen the weakest recovery from a recession in modern American history.
He has mired the country in unprecedented levels of debt: about $6.5 trillion dollars in five years (this after calling his predecessor “unpatriotic” for adding nearly $5 trillion in eight years).
He has fashioned a country in which more Americans now receive government aid – means-tested, let alone non-means tested – than work full-time.
He has no method of paying for this debt other than printing more money – thereby surreptitiously taxing everyone through inflation, including the poor he claims to be helping, and cheapening the dollar to the point that some countries are talking another reserve currency – and saddling the next generations with enormous debts.
With his 2,500-page Affordable Care Act, he has made it impossible for hundreds of thousands, soon millions, of Americans to keep their individual or employee-sponsored group health insurance; he has stymied American medical innovation with an utterly destructive tax on medical devices; and he has caused hundreds of thousands of workers to lose full-time jobs because of the health-care costs imposed by Obamacare on employers.
His Internal Revenue Service used its unparalleled power to stymie political dissent. No one has been held accountable.
His ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were murdered by terrorists in Benghazi, Libya. No one has been blamed. The only blame the Obama administration has leveled was on a video maker in California who had nothing to do with the assault.
In this president’s White House, the buck stops nowhere.
Among presidents in modern American history, he has also been a uniquely divisive force. It began with his forcing Obamacare through Congress – the only major legislation in American history to be passed with no votes from the opposition party.
Though he has had a unique opportunity to do so, he has not only not helped heal racial tensions, he has exacerbated them. His intrusions into the Trayvon Martin affair (“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon”) and into the confrontation between a white police officer and a black Harvard professor (the police “acted stupidly”) were unwarranted, irresponsible, demagogic and, most of all, divisive.
He should have been reassuring black Americans that America is in fact the least racist country in the world – something he should know as well as anybody, having been raised only by whites and being the first black elected the leader of a white-majority nation. Instead, he echoed the inflammatory speech of professional race-baiters such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
He has also divided the country by economic class, using classic Marxist language against “the rich” and “corporate profits.”
Regarding America in the world, he has been, if possible, even more damaging. The United States is at its weakest, has fewer allies, and has less military and diplomatic influence than at any time since before World War I.
One wonders if there is a remaining ally nation that trusts him. And worse, no American enemy fears him. If you are a free movement (the democratic Iranian and Syrian oppositions) or a free country (Israel), you have little or no reason to believe that you have a steadfast ally in the United States.
Even non-democratic allies no longer trust America. Barack Obama has alienated our most important and longest standing Arab allies, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Both the anti-Muslim Brotherhood and the anti-Iran Arab states have lost respect for him.
And his complete withdrawal of American troops from Iraq has left that country with weekly bloodbaths.
Virtually nothing Barack Obama has done has left America or the world better since he became president. Nearly everything he has touched has been made worse.
He did, however, promise before the 2008 election that “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” That is the one promise he has kept.

Receive Dennis Prager's commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Dennis Prager's alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.
  • Name*
  • Email*
    Where we will email your daily updates
  • Postal code*
    A valid zip code or postal code is required

  • Click the button below to sign up for Dennis Prager's commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

Understanding True Marriage

Understanding True Marriage: "Marriage is the institution that provides social stability."

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Immigration Reform Should Start with Legal Immigration, Border Security

Immigration Reform Should Start with Legal Immigration, Border Security:

Before embarking on yet another "comprehensive" legislative effort, Congress should learn from the failures of Obamacare and start with incremental fixes that prioritize the most urgent problems. On immigration, the most urgent priorities are border and visa security, plus the ongoing failures of a legal immigration system that struggles to bring law-abiding, skilled, and would-be patriotic Americans to the United States.
The legal immigration process is unduly long, overly complex, and baffling in its inefficiency. Making matters worse is the fact that U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS) are overwhelmed by the task of implementing President Barack Obama's so-called "Dream Act by fiat." Call centers have prioritized "Dreamers" calling to register for "provisional unlawful presence waivers" to keep deportation at bay.
In addition, forms submitted to USCIS can take an inordinate amount of time to more through the system. Applicants can pay extra to apply for an expedited process. They can also hire a lawyer, which can cost thousands of dollars, who may know better how the system works (or doesn't). Or they can turn to a member of Congress for help, as many do, creating a sense of dependence on public representatives.
Millions have endured the difficulties of the legal immigration process. But there are many who give up, and who opt for other countries--notably Canada, which has many of the economic advantages of the U.S. (more, lately) with an immigration process that prioritizes skills. The U.S. should adopt a similar process and place skilled legal immigrants at the front of the line once again, both legislatively and administratively.
The problem of what to do about illegal aliens currently living in the U.S. is a serious one--and one that most Americans would like to see resolved through some sort of process that allows them to become citizens, but only after the borders are secure, so that this "amnesty" is the last. That may be too great a challenge for a government that remains deeply divided, and that is likely to stay that way through 2016.
But if there is common ground to be found between the Silicon Valley donors pouring millions into the Democrats' coffers, and the conservative House members who want to hold the line against illegal immigration, it is in making the legal immigration process easier. A smaller bill that aims to achieve that--and no more--could pass both houses, if the President and Senate would negotiate in good faith.


Saturday, October 26, 2013

When The Have-Nots Become the Haves

When The Have-Nots Become the Haves:
The following is a guest post by Dr. Robert Owens.
When the Have Nots Become the Haves
Saul Alinsky, the political thinker who seems to have had more impact on President Obama than any other, was very clear in his most important book about what his motives were and what he was aiming at, “What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. ‘The Prince’ was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. ‘Rules for Radicals’ is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”
With the November Revolution of 2008, which gave us one party rule for two years, the Progressive Democrat party saw their chance and they took it.  Within the two years it took for the people to realize they needed some balance the Progressives passed Obamacare which effectively gives government control of 1/6 of the economy.  They passed Dodd-Frank which gives them extensive control over the financial sector.  When they couldn’t push Cap-N-Trade even through a rubber-stamp Congress the President imposed it by executive order.  When they likewise failed to muster enough of their own hacks to pass the Dream Act once again it was imposed by fiat.
The anti-capitalist programs of the Progressive Bush Administration’s final days were continued and amplified by the Obama Administration.  TARP was followed by the Stimulus.  The takeover of AIG was joined by the take-over of the auto industry and by force feeding money into the economy for years of quantitative easing as the casino we call the stock market soars.
Unemployment reporting has become totally unhinged from reality as the real rate stays at levels which would easily shine the light of truth on the fiction of a recovery.
According to the government’s own Bureau of Labor Statistics the real unemployment rate (U-6) has been continuously above 13 % for the last year.  This information is readily available (one click of the mouse) and yet the media (including Fox) have told us day-by-day that it is falling and is now down to 7.2.  This typifies the manufactured reality the federal government and the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media shovel into the public trough.  If the plagiarized opinions I hear my fellow citizens share everyday are any indication the average person accepts the fiction as reality.
New research from the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee shows that over the last five years, the U.S. has spent about $3.7 trillion on welfare.
“We have just concluded the 5th fiscal year since President Obama took office. During those five years, the federal government has spent a total $3.7 trillion on approximately 80 different means-tested poverty and welfare programs. The common feature of means-tested assistance programs is that they are graduated based on a person’s income and, in contrast to programs like Social Security or Medicare, they are a free benefit and not paid into by the recipient,” says the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee.
The minority side also states that, “The enormous sum spent on means-tested assistance is nearly five times greater than the combined amount spent on NASA, education, and all federal transportation projects over that time.”  And the staggering sum of $3.7 trillion is not even the entire amount spent on federal poverty support, as states contribute more than $200 billion each year primarily in the form of free low-income health care.
The goal has always been to get enough people receiving benefits to out-vote the ones paying for the benefits.  In the fourth quarter of 2011, (the last full year for which statistics are available) 49.2 percent of Americans received benefits from one or more government programs, according to data released Tuesday by the Census Bureau.
In total, the Census Bureau estimated, 151,014,000 Americans out of a population then estimated to be 306,804,000 received benefits from one or more government programs during the last three months of 2011. Those 151,014,000 beneficiaries equaled 49.2 percent of the population.
This included 82,457,000 people–or 26.9 percent of the population–who lived in households in which one or more people received Medicaid benefits.
At the same time a large number of Americans no longer pay any federal taxes.  Even the Progressive Huffington Post states, “Some 76 million tax filers, or 46.4 percent of the total, will be exempt from federal income tax in 2011.” (Using the same year as a way of fair comparison)
Just imagine an undisciplined out-of-control shopaholic whose credit limit has just been extended. Now they can continue overspending without any accountability. That shopaholic is the U.S. government.
In the week since Congress reached a temporary deal to suspend the U.S. government’s debt ceiling the Treasury department has added another $375 billion in new debt.
The suspension of a cap on U.S. debt, which was previously fixed at $16.69 trillion, means the Treasury department can spend whatever amount of money it wants.
How much money will the U.S. government put on our grandchildren’s credit card by the next debt ceiling deadline? At the current rate of deficit spending which is $375 billion per week, U.S. public debt will reach $22.70 trillion by Feb. 7, 2014.
All these transfer payments impoverish the working middle class who pay the biggest share of their income in taxes and empower those who receive the benefits, often being the same ones who pay no taxes.  Thus the have nots become the haves fulfilling the goal of the Alinsky inspired community organizing program which has become Americas master plan.
As the have nots rise to become the haves and the haves descend to become the have nots the cycle repeats itself in an endless spiral of social warfare and the only ones who really benefit are those whose goal is power irrespective of who has what.
This is why the President and his advisors seem so oblivious to the turmoil and destruction the implementation of their plans caused.  The goal of the President and of the other Progressive leaders has always been universal single payer insurance no matter what they had to say to sell it.  Obamacare was always seen as a half-step in the direction of total government control.    So what do a few speed bumps along the way matter when the goal is to totally transform America?
Our current administration seems to have no respect for the law.
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) forbids the federal government from enforcing the law in any state that opted out of setting up its own health care exchange.
The Obama administration has ignored that part in the law, enforcing all of its provisions even in states where the federal government is operating the insurance marketplaces on the error-plagued website.
Thirty-six states chose not to set up their exchanges, a move that effectively froze Washington, D.C. out of the authority to pay subsidies and other pot-sweeteners to convince citizens in those states to buy medical insurance.  However, the IRS overstepped its authority promising to pay subsidies in those states anyway.
The imperious leaders of the have nots now have the government, and tradition, laws, and history all take a back seat to the alliance of Progressives who want to have it all.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2013 Robert R. Owens  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

Friday, October 25, 2013

"Liberals Have No Idea How Capitalism Works" Says Rand Paul

"Liberals Have No Idea How Capitalism Works" Says Rand Paul:
Listening to lawmakers talk about the economy when they do not understand the mechanisms behind capitalism can be quite frustrating. Too often, they are unaware of how the system works and why it gives rise to affordable services and products, making trade and the distribution of several products, from basic to valuable items, accessible to nearly almost every American.
But every now and then, a legislator comes along to prove that they weren’t only elected to brag about passing complicated laws on national television.
Sean Hannity had Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) as a guest on his show to ask him a few questions regarding ObamaCare, the problematic Health Insurance Marketplace website and why Americans are appalled to have learned that their insurance premiums are actually much higher now than they were before the law kicked in.
According to Sen. Paul “if you mandate what is included in your insurance policy, if you say it has to cover all kinds of new things that haven’t been covered, it has to be more expensive,” which is why so many young and healthy people are quickly discovering that their coverage is much more expensive than before. While the Obama administration is attempting to give access to health coverage to every single American through ObamaCare, the final cost was apparently never taken into consideration.
The administration keeps repeating that people will now get better coverage without having to pay as much, but consumers are slowly learning that that is simply untrue, since all they have access to is insurance premiums offering excessive coverage that do not fit their budget.
The main problem, Sen. Paul says, is that people who misunderstand capitalism are the ones who formulated the law.
“Liberals have no idea how capitalism works. They have no idea why when you go to Wal-Mart products are cheap, how they get to one point from another and how they are distributed in such a cheap fashion. Imagine this, imagine if we took Obamacare and put it in Wal-Mart and you had a $10 co-pay and then you could fill a cart up with what you wanted. That’s what would happen. I mean, it’s a disaster, but they don’t understand the intricacies, the profit motive and the efficiencies that go into distribution and trade and how you can get something, you know, a t-shirt now for $9 because of global trade, efficiencies in the marketplace. The government can never duplicate that because the government is inherently inefficient.”
Sen. Rand Paul has recently announced a constitutional amendment that would make sure that all bills that are signed into law apply equally to Americans and members of Congress. And here’s the important question we should ask ourselves: if ObamaCare also applied to members of the legislative branch, the executive branch and the judicial branch, would lawmakers have made it the law of the land?

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Bombshell investigation reveals how Washington works: politicians extort money from us, then use it to buy votes

Bombshell investigation reveals how Washington works: politicians extort money from us, then use it to buy votes:
In the CNBC interview above with Larry Kudlow, author and friend Peter Schweizer discusses his new book “Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes and Line Their Own Pockets.”  As expected, Peter’s book is drawing some criticism from the political status quo, here’s an excerpt from a National Journal article about the book and controversy it’s generating:
A new book that argues politicians in Washington manufacture crises and manipulate vote scheduling and other legislative activity as part of a Mafia-like “protection racket” to extort campaign donations. But the new book “Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes and Line Their Own Pockets,” is predictably not drawing rave reviews from House Speaker John Boehner, whose office is lashing out at author Peter Schweizer, a fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution and an editor-at-large at Breitbart. Schweizer advances a novel argument: Rather than special-interest money in Washington being funneled to politicians in order to gain access and favor, politicians run government in ways designed to extract special-interest money from various constituencies. He also says that the notion that Washington dysfunction is a product of partisanship and ideological entrenchment can be looked at in a different light: that gridlock, legislative threats, and fear of uncertainty help prime the donation pump. “It’s one of the oldest and most effective forms of extortion: the protection racket,” he writes in one chapter. “Pay me money and I will promise not to make your life miserable. Fail to pay and bad things will happen to you.” Schweizer writes that that has been the “bread and butter” of organized crime for centuries, but that “the Permanent Political Class in Washington plays the protection racket, too. Failure to pay will not get you killed—but it could kill your business.” To make his case, Schweizer describes various maneuvers in which he argues politicians engage in a form of legal extortion to extract campaign contributions from business or other special interests. His book throws out colorful terms for these maneuvers, such as “toll-booth” requirements, “milker bills,” “double-milker bill,” and “juicer bills.” In one case, Schweizer points to what he calls the “tollbooth” maneuver. In the interview, he said he first head of that phrase from a member of the “business community,” who used it to describe contributions he had to pay before getting floor action on a tax-extender. Schweizer said that led him to explore further. Schweizer depicts Boehner as the master of the tollbooth, and focuses in part on the events surrounding a 2011 vote on the Wireless Tax Fairness Act, a bill with widespread support that sailed through committee in July of that year on a voice vote. Yet, Schweizer notes that the scheduling of a floor vote on the bill lingered until the fall. Boehner eventually announced a vote would be held on Nov. 1. Schweizer notes that the day before the vote, 37 checks from wireless-industry executives totaling nearly $40,000 rolled in to his campaign, including 28 from executives at AT&T. The day of the vote, he writes, employees at Verizon, another company with a lot at stake in the bill, sent 28 checks to members of Congress. “Checks don’t just magically appear, and they don’t arrive by chance,” he writes, adding, “When corporate executives make donations on the same day at the same time, especially when a large group of them do … it is likely there has been an organized solicitation.” The book also identifies other bills for which Schweizer says votes appear to be delayed, only to see eventual floor action accompanied in by a flurry of contributions by individuals or businesses with interests in the legislation.

Our Bloodless Coup (Reader Post)

Our Bloodless Coup (Reader Post):
As I hear and read the news and pronouncements from the president and the political elite these days, I cannot help but to wonder about our country’s prospects. It is not as if I have lost faith in the American people, for I have not, is just that I am no longer sure that the will of the American people is even part of the equation anymore. We are being governed by a political class of radical leftist whose capacity for destruction knows no bounds, and by a spineless opposition without convictions who are perfectly comfortable with going along with the destruction of the republic, as long as their own perks are undisturbed.
It feels like a bloodless coup.
Much like it is on third world countries, the accuracy of our elections are being compromised from the top by an Attorney General who has institutionalized electoral fraud. His office will sue any state that attempts to clean up their electoral roles, or performs the “racist” act of requesting a picture ID to vote.
Although all of our elected government officials are sworn to protect and obey the constitution of the United States, it seems as though the minute they lift their hand off the Bible, they succumb to political expediency and carry on with total disregard for the constitution they have sworn to upheld. Ditto for our judiciary, a large number of our judges are political hacks that couldn’t care less about the constitutionality of a law. They are instead influenced by the desire to advance a political agenda that would ingratiate them with powerful politicians and interest groups.
The ever more powerful and growing government agencies like the IRS, EPA, NSA, NLRB, etc. are used as tools of repression to intimidate and crush the opposition without a peep from the alleged Fourth State. The submissive, complicit media remains silent of these abuses, and it engages in a degree of self-censorship greater than the government enforced censorship imposed by the old Soviet Union in its heyday.
Even our once independent private sector has been compromised. All of our major industries have been virtually nationalized, our banking, healthcare, education and insurance industries can no longer be said to be private. Many of our large, still independent, private sector companies benefit from unabashed crony capitalism, nurturing an environment where “Big Business” and “Big Government” openly collude with one another to share the spoils of the ever shrinking number of American laborers.
Our schools have become indoctrination centers, where the history of our nation’s founding and the principles that made us the greatest nation on earth are no longer heralded. Such teachings would conflict with a curriculum that promotes collectivism and a superficial concept of diversity. The diversity taught in our schools today has more to do with racial quotas, than with a diversity of ideas, independent thinkers are rebuked. A group of people of different racial makeups with identical points of view is the only diversity most schools are interested in. If ever a constitutional conservative speaker is invited to give a presentation at one of these campuses, his appearance is marred with hecklers comprised of diversity minded students, who are often times organized by the diversity conscience faculty, from the diversity friendly school.
Religious zealots of statism ridicule America’s Judeo-Christian values because they represent an affront to their nirvana. If you believe in the sanctity of life, you are right-wing-nut-job religious freak “waging a war on women”. If you believe in traditional marriages, you are right-wing-nut-job, bigot, homophobe who hates gay people. If you oppose reverse discrimination, you are a right-wing-nut-job racist who hates minorities. If you think our borders should be secure, you a right-wing-nut-job who hates immigrants. And so it goes with every issue that the left would never debate on its merits. Being aware that so many of their positions are untenable, they are more comfortable impugning and demonizing any group or individual who questions their rational, than defending their positions in the arena of ideas.
Under the pretext of political correctness our first amendment’s right to free speech is systematically suppressed with impunity. Media personalities are ostracized and removed from their positions, if they dare not tow the groupthink line. Law enforcement officials arrest and harass a citizen who respectfully challenges an arrogant bold face lying politician at a town hall meeting. And another official prevents a student from disseminating copies of the constitution at his school on constitution day. Even children are removed from the steps of the Supreme Court, for the incalculable transgression of praying in public.
When scandalized citizens demand that our government enforce our laws and respect the constitution, they are accused of being antigovernment right-wing-nut-jobs, or anarchists. Those who insult them are apparently too ignorant to figure out that the constitution is the document that provides the rules upon which our government was created. Therefore, how could a proponent of constitutional governance, be antigovernment as well? This nonsensical irony escapes the regime’s automatons.
As if the above wasn’t enough, it is the next initiative emanating from Washington that is design to be the final dagger through our nation’s heart. In spite of the unprecedented number of unemployed in our country, the political establishment wants to reward Millions of illegal aliens with citizenship. These men and women may have come here with the best of intentions, but they have also broken our laws in the process.
Many of them come from corrupt, impoverished, countries with centralized governments; to them anything is better than what they have left behind. This is precisely why they represent fertile grounds for demagogic politicians who will pretend to be their “champions”. If this law is passed, the left’s political control over our lives will be solidified for decades and our country would have indeed been fundamentally transformed.
In spite of all of this, pop culture and mainstream media icons continue to applaud these intrusions into the civil society as necessary evils. They tell themselves that these transgressions are essential to achieve their lifelong fantasy of a socialist Utopia. But what these history challenged fellow travelers cannot remotely envision, is that if they ever become disillusion and publicly decry their discontent, once the left is firmly in control, it is their heads that will be the first to roll.
The same can be said of all the large private sector companies that cooperate with the statist to be left alone and secure favors, they too will pay a high price in the end. Governments never admit their incompetence, and will always find a fall guy when things go wrong.
If we are unable to stop the current trends, future generations will read about America, much like we read about Rome, and when they do, they will ask themselves in disbelief…
Why did such a magnificent nation choose to commit suicide?

Barack Obama and the People of the Lie

Barack Obama and the People of the Lie: Christian Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck (1936 – 2005) wrote the definitive book on Barack Hussein Obama in 1983, although, of course, he never met him or mentioned him. The title of Peck’s book is “The People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil.” While Dr. Peck is more widely known for his best-selling “The Road Less Travelled,” his “The People of the Lie” remains one of the most important scientific contributions to the study of the origins of evil.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Senator DICK Durbin Is A Liar? Update – yes.

Senator DICK Durbin Is A Liar? Update – yes.:
[guest post by JD]
Who woulda thunk it?!
When even Carnie won’t back you up… there is always Joan Walsh. The MFM should be on this any moment.
Update – Durbin’s office doubles down. Apparently Dick was the only person in the room that heard it.
Chad Pergram ✔ @ChadPergram
Durbin’s office says the sen stands by his comments that Hse ldrshp R said they can’t stand to look at Obama, even after Carney debunked it
If this had happened, which it did not, is there any doubt that it would have been the lead quote on every MFM broadcast and TOTUS campaign speech immediately?

Welfare Fraud Is another Reason to Replace the IRS with a Flat Tax

Welfare Fraud Is another Reason to Replace the IRS with a Flat Tax:
One of my missions in life is fundamental tax reform. I would like to replace the corrupt internal revenue code with a simple and fair flat tax.
Though what I really want is a tax system that minimizes the damage of extracting money from the productive sector of the economy, so I’ll take any system with a low rate, no double taxation, and no distortionary loopholes.
The national sales tax, for instance, also would be a good option if we can first repeal the 16th Amendment so there’s no risk that politicians would pull a bait and switch and saddle us with both an income tax and a sales tax (and in my ultimate fantasy world, we would shrink the federal government to the size envisioned by the Founding Fathers, in which case we probably wouldn’t need any broad-based tax at all).
While I normally make the economic case for tax reform, there are many reasons to fix our broken tax code.
Many Americans, for instance, are rightfully upset that the tax code is a 76.000-page monstrosity that enables the politically well connected to benefit from special provisions.
So we don’t know if the rich are paying an appropriate amount. Some of them are paying too much because of high rates and double taxation, while some of them are paying too little because they have clever lawyers, lobbyists, and accountants.
In an ideal world, if someone like Bill Gates earns 10,000 times as much as I do, then he should pay 10,000 times as much in tax. That’s a core principle of the flat tax.
But this post isn’t about why we need tax reform to promote economic growth or fairness. Instead, I want to focus on tax reform as a way of reducing welfare fraud. The Treasury Department just released a report acknowledging that the IRS made more than $100 billion of improper “earned income credit” payments over the past decade and that about one-fourth of all such payments are in error.
This Fox News article is a good summary. Here are the key details.
The Internal Revenue Service paid out more than $110 billion in tax credits over the past decade to people who didn’t qualify for them, according to a Treasury report released Tuesday. …IRS inspector general J. Russell George said more than one-fifth of all credits paid under the program went to people who didn’t qualify. …George said in a statement. “Unfortunately, it is still distributing more than $11 billion in improper EITC payments each year and that is disturbing.” …The agency said it prevents “nearly $4 billion in improper claims each year and is committed to continuing to work to reduce improper claims.” The EITC is one of the nation’s largest anti-poverty programs. In 2011, more than 27 million families received nearly $62 billion in credits.
Now some background. The “earned income credit” or “earned income tax credit” is actually an income redistribution scheme operated by the IRS. It’s basically a wage subsidy. If someone earns money (the “earned income” part), the law says the IRS should augment that money with a payment from the government (the “credit” or “tax credit” part).
The key thing to understand, though, is that the EITC is “refundable,” which is the government’s term for payments to people who don’t earn enough to owe any income tax. That’s why it’s primarily an income redistribution program. Only it’s operated by the IRS rather than the Department of Health and Human Service or some other welfare agency.
And when government is giving away other people’s money, there are those who will try to abuse the program. That’s true for corporate welfare, and it’s true for traditional welfare like food stamps. And, as we see from the Treasury report, it’s true for the EITC.
That’s the bad news.
The good news is that the EITC has a redeeming feature. Some lawmakers realized traditional welfare programs were very destructive because they paid people not to work. The EITC supposedly offsets that perverse incentive because you get the money only because you earn some income.
But now let’s share some additional bad news. The government takes away the EITC once your income reaches a certain level, and this is equivalent to a big increase in the marginal tax rate on earning additional income.
And when you combine the EITC with all the other redistribution programs operated by government, you create a huge dependency trap. Indeed, the chart shows that many of these programs can be larger than the EITC (which is called “negative income tax”).
P.S. I can’t overlook an opportunity to point out that today’s complicated and convoluted tax code is the reason why we have a powerful and intrusive Internal Revenue Service. And never forget that the IRS has a long record of abusive actions.

IRS handed out $132 billion in wrongful payments under low-income tax credit program

IRS handed out $132 billion in wrongful payments under low-income tax credit program:
WA Examiner
The Internal Revenue Service has made “no significant improvements” toward ending massive improper payments under the Earned Income Tax Credit program, according to an audit released Tuesday, which shows the agency issued more than $132 billion in wrongful tax credits over the past decade.
It’s also “unlikely that the IRS will significantly reduce those improper payments in the future, in part because it does not want to discourage low-income earners who qualify from applying for the credit, according to the audit by the office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.
The IRS failed to implement required safeguards against improper tax credits and, as of 2012, was annually handing out at least $11 billion to those who did not qualify for the benefit, the audit showed
“And that is disturbing,” Treasury Inspector General J. Russell George said in a statement.
The IRS defended itself in a statement, noting that improper payments have declined since 2010 and that privacy laws hamper agency efforts to produce the quarterly reports on such payments.

JOHN HINDERAKER cruelly dissects ignorant haters….

JOHN HINDERAKER cruelly dissects ignorant haters….:
JOHN HINDERAKER cruelly dissects ignorant haters.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Ex-Apple CEO Sculley: Rollout Reflects Broken Government

Ex-Apple CEO Sculley: Rollout Reflects Broken Government: Former Apple CEO John Sculley says it would be great if the Obamacare rollout fiasco led to a realization that the private sector works better than government. But he isn't holding his breath. "I think this huge belly-flop of the president's most important program is really...

Another Mugging On Wall Street

Another Mugging On Wall Street: Extortion: It's time Wall Street bankers level with shareholders: They're being blackmailed by the Obama administration and have no idea how to defend themselves. Unwittingly, shareholders are helping finance through mortgage fines a massive wealth-transfer scheme in Washington, with no end in sight. JPMorgan Chase, one of the healthiest banks to emerge from the financial crisis, is the latest shakedown victim. Attorney General Eric Holder just

IRS sends out billions in bogus tax credit scams

IRS sends out billions in bogus tax credit scams: Washington Times:
The IRS paid as much as $13.6 billion in bogus claims for the Earned Income Tax Credit last year, according to a report the agency’s internal auditor released Tuesday morning.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration said it warned the IRS in 2011 that it was making the erroneous payments, but two years later the agency hasn’t fixed the problem.

Over the last decade, the IRS could have paid out as much as $132.6 billion in improper payments.

“The IRS has made little improvement in reducing improper EITC payments as a whole since it has been required to report estimates of these payments to Congress,” the inspector general said. “The IRS acknowledges that further reductions in the EITC improper payment rate will be difficult to achieve.”

Investigators said the IRS is still violating an executive order President Obama signed in 2009 telling agencies to come up with ways to reduce improper payments.
They were too busy thwarting applications from the Tea Party to do the job they are suppose to do with this program.  They have also given billions in child tax credits to illegal aliens.  This agency is not being managed for the public good, but it appears to be a political arm of the Democrats at this point.

Lazy liberalism is the problem with current discourse

Lazy liberalism is the problem with current discourse: Steven Hayward:
... Starting with Woodrow Wilson, “progressives” (to use a name more accurate than “liberal”) have complained that our various mechanisms of “checks and balances” prevent government from being more “effective.” This is just code for the liberal desire that its opposition should simply shut up, surrender, and submit to their rule unquestioned. It is a liberalism that has grown too lazy to argue with—or even tolerate—opposition, which is what happens when you come to believe that you embody “the side of history.” This display of contempt for the institutions of democratic deliberation reveals today’s progressives to be highly undemocratic—and illiberal, too. With their will to power checked as intended by our founders, the Left is letting out a primal scream.
This pretty well sums of the problems with current left wing politics.  They can't handle a reasoned debate anymore.  Many have sunk to name calling and insults as a substitute for arguing their positions.  And they are the ones who are calling their opposition crazy?

Monday, October 21, 2013

The Great American Wind Power Fraud

The Great American Wind Power Fraud:
By Alan Caruba

In July the Fairhaven, Massachusetts Board of Health voted to shut down the town’s two wind turbines at night between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. after dozens of residents had filed more than 400 complaints. Testing had demonstrated that the turbines exceeded state noise regulations and those specified in their operating permits.

In July the Heartland Institute’s Environmental & Climate News reported on the announcement by Nordex USA, a manufacturer of wind turbines that had accepted millions of dollars in subsidies while promising to create 750 jobs that it had shut down its Jonesboro facility. In 2008, Gov. Mike Beebe (D) had given Nordex $8 million from the Governor’s Quick-Action Closing Fund and the Arkansas Development Finance Authority had given Nordex another $11 million. The decision, said the company, was its uncertainty about receiving federal subsidies. At the time, only fifty people were employed there.

In early October, the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Healthcare, and Entitlements held a hearing on the Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC). The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) was there to argue for an extension of the subsidy. According to lobbying disclosures, in 2012 the AWEA had spent more than $2.4 million to protect the subsidy which was set to expire, but which received a one-year extension as part of the deal struck to avoid the “fiscal cliff.”

Arguing that wind energy is an important element of the mix of energy provided by coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric facilities, the facts are that in 2012 coal accounted for 37 percent of total generation, natural gas represented 30 percent, and nuclear contributed 19 percent. Wind power accounted for just 1.4 percent of U.S. energy consumption in 2012 and only 3.5 percent of the nation’s electricity generation.

Since the PTC was first enacted two decades ago, it has cost taxpayers $20 billion dollars.

One of the primary arguments for wind energy is that it is “renewable” and does not contribute to the so-called "greenhouse gas emissions" that are the cause of a “global warming.” However, the latest warming cycle ended some fifteen years ago. Not one student in our nation’s schools has ever experienced “global warming.”

Wind energy is “green” say its supporters, but it is hardly “green” to kill an estimated 573,000 birds every year, including 83,000 birds of prey according to a study published in the March edition of the Wildlife Society Bulletin. It also kills countless bats, a species that reduces the vast number of insect pests that prey on crops and transmit diseases.

A permit is being sought by the Shiloh IV Wind Project in Solano County, California, that would grant it the right to kill up to five golden eagles over a five-year period despite their protected status under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.

So wind energy is justified as reducing greenhouse gases that are not causing global warming which does not exist, is receiving millions in subsidies, and wants to kill protected species, an environmental objective. This is hypocrisy on a galactic scale.

Testifying before the congressional committee, Dr. Robert Michaels, a senior fellow of the Institute for Energy Research, noted that the subsidy which was supposed to end by now has been renewed five times. The wind industry is essentially non-competitive when it comes to energy generation from traditional sources and has also been around long enough to amply demonstrate that. In a market economy, such industries are allowed to fail.

The wind industry, however, doesn’t even need to be competitive because utilities in some thirty states are required by law to include it in their “renewable portfolio standards” that set quotes for its use. This mandate is expected to see the installation of more than 100,000 renewable megawatts over the next twenty years and wind, said Dr. Michaels, and “seems certain to get the lion’s share.”

Adding to the idiocy of wind energy is the need for such production facilities to have a back-up from traditional coal, natural gas, and nuclear facilities because wind is not available with any predictability. The consumer not only pays for the electricity these facilities provide to ensure that they will always have electricity, but pays in the form of the subsidies the wind industry continues to receive.

There is no need for renewable energy mandates. Both wind and solar are unreliable sources of energy and produce so little as to lack any justification for their existence.

The wind industry exists because it spends millions annually to convince legislators that it should not only be subsidized and because many states require its use. Take away the interference of government entities and the industry would have no real basis to exist. It is a fraud.

© Alan Caruba, 2013
Alan Caruba blogs daily at An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.

Raising the Minimum Wage Is No Free Lunch

Raising the Minimum Wage Is No Free Lunch:
Expert Commentary
We are rarely subjected to debate over the minimum wage apart from election season, but America's painfully sluggish return to economic normalcy has politicians scrambling to do something to help the working class. While the minimum wage debate usually plays out at the federal level, there is now a grassroots push across the country to raise wages beyond the federally mandated $7.25 per hour. Unfortunately, success won't guarantee a happy ending for workers.
Washington state voters are considering Proposition 1, which would raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour for workers in and around SeaTac airport. In Minneapolis there is talk of raising the minimum wage to $9.50, and in Washington, D.C. to $11.50. New Jersey's minimum wage is likely to rise to $8.25. Ohio's will increase to $7.95 in January.

It comes as no surprise that politicians love talking about and raising the minimum wage. Few are ever shown the door for being perceived as a friend of the working class. But perception and reality are rarely the same thing in the political world.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, fewer than 3 percent of U.S. workers earn the minimum wage. Those who do tend to be entry-level workers – people with little work history, less education and fewer skills than those who earn more. About one-third of minimum wage earners also earn tips, which, in many cases, actually puts them significantly above the minimum wage in reality, if not officially. In the end, the minimum wage affects very few workers.
So why should we care? For precisely the same reason that politicians do: because minimum wage workers are often the most disadvantaged among us. They cannot compete with the rest of the labor market in terms of skills, education or experience, and as a result they make less money.
For some of these people, an increase in the minimum wage is clearly a good thing – but not for everyone. This is the point that many politicians never fully grasp. Raising the minimum wage does not increase the value of the worker's labor. It increases the cost of the worker's labor. And as everyone knows, the more something costs, the less of it we buy. This is as true of workers in the labor market as it is of anything else.
Continue reading

Oh Dear, We’re Arguing

Oh Dear, We’re Arguing:
And it’s a good thing.  All those who want us to shut up and get on with it are missing the gravity of the crisis–domestic and world-wide–the lack of reliable guidelines, and the prospects, both glorious and truly alarming.  Thank goodness for the dissenters, both the ones i agree with and the ones i think are nuts.
Yes, we’re confused.  It is altogether right that we should be baffled, we don’t have clear guidelines, and history–which in any case is rarely a reliable guide to the future–is no longer studied by most Americans, so even potentially useful models from the past aren’t part of our discussion.
Take national security, for example.  The whole world is in turmoil, as it has been for some time.  Nobody can remember what the Cold War was like, and if you want an historical model for the current small-wars-headed-for-bigger-wars-and-then-maybe-a-world-war, try to sort out the pre-World War I map of Europe.  Then notice how much today’s Middle East resembles the old Balkans.
The one “lesson” that should be clear is that when people declare enmity, and are actively moving against us, we should take them seriously, assume they mean it, and act accordingly.  When jihadists, whether sweet-talking Iranians or mean-talking Sunni or Shi’ite fanatics, chant “Death to America” (as the Iranian Parliament did over the weekend), and send vicious killers into Iraq (where  the slaughter is greater than in Syria), Syria, and various African countries, we must act against them.
If we don’t, things will only get worse, more Americans will be murdered, and the chances of a really big war will increase.
Inaction–masked by “negotiations” which provide cover for our enemies to get even stronger–is now our official policy.
Maybe we’ll yet get a useful debate that will lead to better policy.
Bring it on.  We need it, bigtime.
Here at home, the Left has taken over, and has imposed statism pretending to rescue the poor, while cynically empowering and enriching the political ruling class.  I can’t remember anything approaching the degree of corruption in today’s Washington.  It goes hand in hand with the incompetence and narcissism of most of our “leaders.”  It’s a bit surprising that the corruption isn’t more obvious, but that is due in large part to the reluctance of the “opposition” to open a can of worms in which they spend a lot of their own time.  Peter Schweitzer continues his excellent work in this field, and it’s still a target-rich environment.
In my opinion, this is a large part of the explanation of the intensity of the attacks on the likes of Lee and Cruz.  Our rulers, like their counterparts in big business, like huge government programs, for two understandable reasons:  it makes it easier for them to eliminate their smaller, more creative competitors, and it generates payoffs and kickbacks for themselves and their allies.
There is one possible line of productive attack:  use the powers of the states to experiment with different kinds of solutions.  Several states have stayed out of the Obamacare fiasco.  Perhaps they will work out methods for better health care programs.  The current mess provides hope, and there are state leaders who seem to get it.
At the same time, we need an all-out war against corruption, from NSA to IRS to Homeland Security to HHS.  And corrupt leaders, whether elected or appointed, should be driven from office.
It’s a big fight, at home and abroad, and calls for civility (of the sort Jeb Bush and Karl Rove keep muttering) are entirely out of place.  We need a raucous, no-holds-barred debate to clarify the tough, painful and risky policies we must embrace–and be ready to change over and over again when we discover their shortcomings–if we’re going to win.
And we must win.

Obama’s Agenda

Obama’s Agenda: He’s not interested in budget restraint or economic growth. It’s all about crushing his political enemies. That’s a war he wants to win, unlike the real wars overseas, that he just wants to “end.”

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Let’s Talk About How Welfare Destroys The Spirit

Let’s Talk About How Welfare Destroys The Spirit: TRUTH: Welfare Destroys The Human Spirit   One of the main assertions of the collectivist is that an equal distribution of property is necessary to the well being of all as opposed to just the ‘lucky’ few who manage to amass wealth through exploitation.  This sounds good, and to those envious masses who have accepted the […]

Dennis Prager explains what feminism has achieved for women

Dennis Prager explains what feminism has achieved for women:
Dennis Prager has summarized many of my viewpoints on this blog in a tiny, tiny little article. He calls it “Four Legacies of Feminism“.
Read the whole glorious thing and bask in its wisdom!
Full text:
As we approach the 50th anniversary of the publication of Betty Friedan’s feminist magnum opus, The Feminine Mystique, we can have a perspective on feminism that was largely unavailable heretofore.
And that perspective doesn’t make feminism look good. Yes, women have more opportunities to achieve career success; they are now members of most Jewish and Christian clergy; women’s college sports teams are given huge amounts of money; and there are far more women in political positions of power. But the prices paid for these changes — four in particular — have been great, and outweigh the gains for women, let alone for men and for society.
1) The first was the feminist message to young women to have sex just as men do. There is no reason for them to lead a different sexual life than men, they were told. Just as men can have sex with any woman solely for the sake of physical pleasure, so, too, women ought to enjoy sex with any man just for the fun of it. The notion that the nature of women is to hope for at least the possibility of a long-term commitment from a man they sleep with has been dismissed as sexist nonsense.
As a result, vast numbers of young American women had, and continue to have, what are called “hookups”; and for some of them it is quite possible that no psychological or emotional price has been paid. But the majority of women who are promiscuous do pay prices. One is depression. New York Times columnist Ross Douthat recently summarized an academic study on the subject: “A young woman’s likelihood of depression rose steadily as her number of partners climbed and the present stability of her sex life diminished.”
Long before this study, I had learned from women callers to my radio show (an hour each week — the “Male-Female Hour” — is devoted to very honest discussion of sexual and other man-woman issues) that not only did female promiscuity coincide with depression, it also often had lasting effects on women’s ability to enjoy sex. Many married women told me that in order to have a normal sexual relationship with their husband, they had to work through the negative aftereffects of early promiscuity — not trusting men, feeling used, seeing sex as unrelated to love, and disdaining their husband’s sexual overtures. And many said they still couldn’t have a normal sex life with their husband.
2) The second awful legacy of feminism has been the belief among women that they could and should postpone marriage until they developed their careers. Only then should they seriously consider looking for a husband. Thus, the decade or more during which women have the best chance to attract men is spent being preoccupied with developing a career. Again, I cite woman callers to my radio show over the past 20 years who have sadly looked back at what they now, at age 40, regard as 20 wasted years. Sure, these frequently bright and talented women have a fine career. But most women are not programmed to prefer a great career to a great man and a family. They feel they were sold a bill of goods at college and by the media. And they were. It turns out that most women without a man do worse in life than fish without bicycles.
3) The third sad feminist legacy is that so many women — and men — have bought the notion that women should work outside the home that for the first time in American history, and perhaps world history, vast numbers of children are not primarily raised by their mothers or even by an extended family member. Instead they are raised for a significant part of their childhood by nannies and by workers at daycare centers. Whatever feminists may say about their only advocating choices, everyone knows the truth: Feminism regards work outside the home as more elevating, honorable, and personally productive than full-time mothering and making a home.
4) And the fourth awful legacy of feminism has been the demasculinization of men. For all of higher civilization’s recorded history, becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family. That notion — indeed the notion of masculinity itself — is regarded by feminism as the worst of sins: patriarchy.
Men need a role, or they become, as the title of George Gilder’s classic book on single men describes them: Naked Nomads. In little more than a generation, feminism has obliterated roles. If you wonder why so many men choose not to get married, the answer lies in large part in the contemporary devaluation of the husband and of the father — of men as men, in other words. Most men want to be honored in some way — as a husband, a father, a provider, as an accomplished something; they don’t want merely to be “equal partners” with a wife.
In sum, thanks to feminism, very many women slept with too many men for their own happiness; postponed marriage too long to find the right man to marry; are having hired hands do much of the raising of their children; and find they are dating boy-men because manly men are so rare.
Feminism exemplifies the truth of the saying, “Be careful what you wish for — you may get it.”
I wish I could add something to this, but I can’t because every time I think of something to add, he says it in the next sentence.
If you like this short essay, then this medium essay arguing against feminism authored by Barbara Kay would be nice follow-up.
It might be worth forwarding these articles along to your friends. And I highly recommend books on male-female relationships and roles by George Gilder, especially “Men and Marriage“.

Friday, October 18, 2013

The Political Left And The Criminalization Of Dissent

The Political Left And The Criminalization Of Dissent: Politics: wants Republican leaders arrested for "seditious conspiracy" against the U.S. The initiative, of course, won't get anywhere, but it does provide a peek into how some among us respond to disagreement. Signers of's online petition are asking the Justice Department "to arrest Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Speaker of the House John Boehner and other decision-making House Republican leaders" for shutting down

Without A Meaningful Course Correction, U.S. Is Doomed

Without A Meaningful Course Correction, U.S. Is Doomed: The least dispiriting moment of another grim week in Washington was the sight of ornery veterans tearing down the Barrycades around the war memorials on the National Mall, dragging them up the street and dumping them outside the White House. This was, as Kevin Williamson wrote at National Review, "as excellent a gesture of the American spirit as our increasingly docile nation has seen in years." Indeed. The wounded vet with two artificial legs

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Mark Levin to the ruling elite: We’re going to crush you…

Mark Levin to the ruling elite: We’re going to crush you…: marklevinshowpromo526I was going to break this down into clips, but ...

The Tea Party Victory

The Tea Party Victory: We cannot see the forest because of the trees. The prevailing wisdom “from the trees” is that the Tea Party lost. The Tea Party “kamikazes” in the Senate and Congress donned their “suicide vests” and fumbled the partial federal government shutdown and the debt ceiling negotiations.

I see it quite differently “from the vantage point of the forest:” The Tea Party has denied President Obama his long term goal of creating a positive-rights European-style entitlement state.  The Tea Party changed the conversation from fundamental change, massive second stimuli, investment banks, national value added, fuel, and carbon taxes to sequestration and haggling over nickels and dimes of federal spending, and forced the Obama administration to gamble its second term (and legacy) on the unlikely success of Obama Care, which every Democratic member of Congress now personally owns.

go to

Wind Turbines Finally Begin to Come Down

Wind Turbines Finally Begin to Come Down: At last the beginning of the end has come for the lavishly government-subsidized bird-choppers that have marred the landscape across the Western world:A wind farm that has been in the Yorkshire Dales for two decades is being torn down, and is believed to be the first to be scrapped in the UK.The first but hardly the last. As even the most devout fools give up on the debunked global warming hoax, opportunities will arise for entrepreneurs able to repurpose these useless monstrosities for anything other than scrap metal.The four wind ...

FBA's Joel Naroff: 'Insanity' in DC Is 'Huge Restraint to Growth'

FBA's Joel Naroff: 'Insanity' in DC Is 'Huge Restraint to Growth': U.S. economic growth this quarter is likely to be less robust than forecast last month given the erosion of confidence in the wake of the nasty fight over fiscal policy, a Reuters survey showed on Thursday.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Fox News Psychiatrist: Obama’s Daddy Issues Gave Him ‘Victim Mentality,’ So He Punishes America (VIdeo)

Fox News Psychiatrist: Obama’s Daddy Issues Gave Him ‘Victim Mentality,’ So He Punishes America (VIdeo): "“I think the president, going back to when his dad abandoned him, when his mother left him with his grandparents, when he describes his grandmother as intimating that she didn’t trust men of color, that all of those things led him to feel victimized, hurt and injured,” Ablow continued. “And he has extended it to this country. So, he comes to the corner office to right wrongs and to offer the mantle of victimization to as many people who will share it with him as possible.”

The forensic psychiatrist and author of many pscyhological thrillers offered a stark view of welfare recipients.

“More food stamps, don’t learn to feed yourself. Don’t find it within yourself to pull yourself up. Simply say, I’ve been victimized,” Ablow added. “Hence, I need more unemployment, more food stamps, more free health care. And you know why? Because those other people are bad. And that’s what we’ve been hearing from him.”


'via Blog this'

Morici: Obama Victory Based on 'Deception and Demagoguery'

Morici: Obama Victory Based on 'Deception and Demagoguery': To end the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling without accepting any meaningful GOP conditions, President Barack Obama has resorted to falsehoods, wounded American democracy, and damaged U.S. global leadership. The president has accused the House GOP majority of...

Think of progressives as a species of religious fundamentalists planning a redemption.

Think of progressives as a species of religious fundamentalists planning a redemption.:
Like fundamentalists they look at the world as fallen – a place corrupted by racism, sexism and class division. But the truly religious understand that we are the source of corruption and that redemption is only possible through the work of a Divinity.
In contrast, progressives see themselves as the redeemers, which is why they are so dangerous. Because they regard those who oppose them as the eternally damned. Progressives are on a mission to create the kingdom of heaven on earth by redistributing income and using the state to enforce politically correct attitudes and practices in everyone’s life. They want to control what you do, and who you are, and even what you eat. For your own good, of course. The Threat We Face | FrontPage Magazine

Anti-ObamaCare Republicans Should Have No Apologies

Anti-ObamaCare Republicans Should Have No Apologies: Budget Deal: The outmaneuvering of the House by the White House and Senate finds the media and their Democrat puppeteers pronouncing the demise of the Republican Party. Since when is spine a political liability? The real villains of the battle of the budget and debt ceiling are John McCain, Susan Collins and Bob Corker in the Senate and Peter King in the House, not Sens. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and not the House's Tea Party Republicans. These fiscal

Goldberg: ‘It’s Never Wise to Underestimate the Degree to Which Obama Does Things for Spite’

Goldberg: ‘It’s Never Wise to Underestimate the Degree to Which Obama Does Things for Spite’:
The National Review’s Jonah Goldberg said it is never wise to underestimate the degree to which President Obama launches partisan attacks out of spit for the GOP Wesdnesday on Special Report.
Goldberg said he believes often President Obama cannot “help himself” as speculation swirls about whether the president will seek to antagonize Republicans in his address between the Senate and House votes to end the shutdown:
BRET BAIER: I’m sorry, the Tea Party supporter conservatives, I know the Republican party has its own split, we’ve talked about it many times but they fired up some of the firebrands.
JONAH GOLDBERG: Yeah, I think that’s absolutely right. I think Charles is right to a certain extent that Obama is trying to divide, [implement] a strategy of divide and conquer. In effect we have a coalition going on in the right in Congress, it’s the Republicans who follow Boehner and Tea Party caucus that essentially doesn’t. They’ll work together on some things. What usually happens in the wake of these kinds of things, most Republicans and other circumstances, the Democrats, but in this case the Republicans, they are looking to put the fissure behind them and they are going to be more unified on the next issue that comes down the pike so those who broke with the Tea Party guys can say he look this was a unique thing. We really aren’t the moderates or rinos that you claim we are. I also think it’s never wise to underestimate the degree to which Obama does things for spite. There are good theoretical, strategic reasons why he might be trying to defy the Congress. But the thing about lancing the blister, whatever the phrase was, and the stuff about going after Boehner, I think the guy can’t help himself often and he simply wants to  twist and pinch and rub it in to the other side and say, hey, I was right all along. Sometimes it’s just an I told you so from him.

Charles Krauthammer: Obama Never Cared About Debt, His 'Priority Is to Increase Entitlements...'

Charles Krauthammer: Obama Never Cared About Debt, His 'Priority Is to Increase Entitlements...': At RealClearPolitics.

Brit Hume Has About One of the Best Takes on the Tea Party Out There

Brit Hume Has About One of the Best Takes on the Tea Party Out There:
Fox News’ Brit Hume has about one of the fairest assessments of the tea party out there. Hume explains why the tea party is going to extraordinary lengths to attempt to roll back government, and why that makes the tea party different from establishment Republicans.
Hume argued that tea party supporters are using an unconventional approach because the GOP has “utterly failed” to restrain the growth of government:
“Veteran political observers on both the left and right are still trying to figure out what the House Tea Party caucus and its Senate pied piper Ted Cruz were thinking when they insisted on using the threat of a government shutdown to defund ObamaCare. 
“It was a hopeless strategy that has not only failed in its stated goal, but helped send the Republican Party to its lowest favorability ratings ever. 
“In conventional terms, it seems inexplicable, but Senator Cruz and his adherents do not view things in conventional terms. They look back over the past half-century, including the supposedly golden era of Ronald Reagan, and see the uninterrupted forward march of the American left. Entitlement spending never stopped growing. The regulatory state continued to expand. The national debt grew and grew and finally in the Obama years, exploded. They see an American population becoming unrecognizable from the free and self-reliant people they thought they knew. And they see the Republican Party as having utterly failed to stop the drift toward an unfree nation supervised by an overweening and bloated bureaucracy. They are not interested in Republican policies that merely slow the growth of this leviathan. They want to stop it and reverse it. And they want to show their supporters they’ll try anything to bring that about. 
“And if some of those things turn out to be reckless and doomed, well so be it.”
Ultimately, the tea party stands for a cohesive and understandable set of demands, such as fiscal responsibility and limited government; but it is using the imagery and language of protest to attempt to win elections. This served a purpose when the tea party was all about protesting ObamaCare and the stimulus; but winning elections and then governing is a totally separate matter.
Most voters expect those who are elected to serve in the government to govern, for right or wrong, and not simply to protest against things. The tea party needs to articulate better the positive things it is for: like middle class prosperity, more equality in a free economy, and what members’ ideal of fairness is.
The tea party may even want to consider changing its imagery from one based on protest to one based on restoring good government. Because, ultimately, people will continue to confuse tea party members with “anarchists” and call them “anti-government” unless they can present themselves, and their arguments, in a more understandable way to moderate and pragmatist voters.
That being said, Brit Hume really nails why many Americans feel like the government is completely out-of-control and needs not only to be reined in, but rolled back. It’s definitely worth considering.
The post Brit Hume Has About One of the Best Takes on the Tea Party Out There appeared first on Independent Journal Review.

The double standard that exists when criticizing Christianity vs. Islam in the public realm.

The double standard that exists when criticizing Christianity vs. Islam in the public realm.: