The notes most likely weren't for her speech, for which she used prepared remarks, but for the Q&A session that followed, during which she glanced at the hand in question.
But in my opinion that's even worse.
The takeaway is that this presidential contender apparently can't remember her supposed core principles and needs a cheat-sheet when simply asked about her beliefs.
Crib Notes? This potential presidential candidate and "movement" leader was using crib notes to answer basic questions?
This would mean:
A) That she knew the questions beforehand and the whole thing was a farce. (Likely.)
and
B) That she still couldn't answer the previously agreed-upon questions without a little extra help.
You can bet that the President wasn't reading scribbles off his extremities while he sparred with Republicans and Democrats in an unscripted format in his recent Q&As.
Palin, on the other hand, seems to need a cheat-sheet just to get through a contrived lovefest with a smitten interviewer and an adoring audience.
I'm no fan of the Tea Party movement - if it can be called such - but if this is their leader I actually sympathize with them.
The HuffPo said the following about Palin and her notes, "this presidential contender apparently can't remember her supposed core principles and needs a cheat-sheet when simply asked about her beliefs", "was using crib notes to answer basic questions" and "seems to need a cheat-sheet just to get through a contrived lovefest." Our actual President on the other hand, Mr. Obama who apparently can't speak to 6 year-olds without using a teleprompter, is the most articulate and intelligent man ever to set foot in the White House.
Palin was participating in a speech / discussion event with her supporters. One can hardly condemn a person engaged in such an event for writing 6 words on on her hand, President Obama on the other hand, rarely engages in any public discussion without his teleprompter. To condemn Palin for 6 words and defend the President for reading his every word is boundless hypocrisy.
The HuffPo also accuses Palin of engaging in a prepared Q&A session onstage, condemns her for it and says that it is even worse than using notes for a speech. Lest we forget...
It was none other than the Huffington Post who engaged in a prepared question and answer session with President Obama during a White House press event! So for the Huffington Puffington Post to be condemning anyone for engaging in answering prepared questions is absolutely incredible.
Honestly though, this comes as no surprise from the bigots at the Huff Post who couldn't see the forest through the trees if you air lifted them above it to show it to them. One of the things I find interesting about the HuffPo is that every time any article is written about Sarah Palin, whether it be this one or about her daughter's ex-fiance or about her latest pair of shoes, it is immediately overrun with comments. Sarah Palin is not a public official at this time. Why all the anger? But of course, you and I already know the answer to that...
I hate to have to agree with a guy like Rahm Emanuel, but some of the liberal activists who come up with of these blatant smear attempts are just "F-ing retarded."
A Montbello mother says her 9-year-old son's death from severe asthma could have been prevented had Denver Human Services resolved problems with his Medicaid pharmacy benefits.
Advocacy lawyers who met Wednesday with the Colorado Attorney General's Office hold up Lucero's story as an example of how serious the problems are with the state's $243 million computer system that is supposed to manage benefits — and the county human workers behind it.
"The human system fell down," said Ed Kahn, a lawyer with the Colorado Center for Law and Policy, who is among a group of local and national lawyers weighing a lawsuit against the state for delays in getting food stamps and Medicaid benefits to people. "They are responsible for this kid's death."
The Colorado Benefits Management System is run through county human services offices and manages medical and food-assistance benefits for everyone in Colorado. Since its 2004 installation, the system has been beset by problems.
Last March, Lucero went to fill her son's prescriptions at a Walgreens near her home in Montbello. A worker there said Zumante didn't have prescription-drug coverage anymore.
Lucero says she called Denver Human Services every three days for four months trying to get him drug coverage. Each time she called, an automatic computer report was issued and sent to her house usually showing that all of her children — including Zumante — qualified for Medicaid.
But even when she brought in the reports to Walgreens, she was told the computer system showed he wasn't eligible for pharmaceutical benefits.
Throughout months of frustrating phone calls to Human Services' call-center operators, which often left Lucero in tears, Zumante's health weakened. She managed to reach her caseworker only once. The caseworker told her in March that the problem had been resolved.
And this, liberals say, is the reason why we need to give the government total control over the health care system. Yes, if we pass universal healthcare now we can ensure that every man, woman and child is forced to wade through the same bog of bureaucracy that Mrs. Lucero did, thereby bringing equality to all.
Denver Human Services says that Zemante Lucero's medication was covered under Medicaid. The problem wasn't that he didn't have healthcare. The problem was that Zemate didn't receive his government provided benefits due to an all too common breakdown in the bureaucracy!
So lets get this straight, a bureaucratic nightmare of a healthcare system failed to provide intended, needed and available benefits to a dying child because a bureaucrat somewhere in the system failed to enter the word "approved" into the computer. I think I've heard of this type of system somewhere before ... Can you say, "death panel?" If Zemate was 75 years old liberals might be able to tout that their utopian government healthcare system worked as intended but he was only 9 years old. The system failed, but if we force everyone into this system it will be different, dumping 350 million people into the mix will fix it right? The democrats in this country continue to find new ways to refine the definition of Orwellian. You should read the absolutely insane comments pro-obamacare leftists have left under each of these stories!
In his only Australian interview, the outspoken singer said he and his Grammy-winning band prefer to help in private with no press conferences.
"I do it myself, I don't tell everybody I'm doing it," Johnson said.
"I don't tell everybody they should give money - they can't afford it.
"When I was a working man I didn't want to go to a concert for some bastard to talk down to me that I should be thinking of some kid in Africa.
"I'm sorry mate, do it yourself, spend some of your own money and get it done. It just makes me angry. I become all tyrannical."
Johnson said AC/DC's aversion to playing at charity events goes back to turning down a slot at 1985's Live Aid.
"Bob Geldof is a canny lad. He did what he thought was right at the time but it didn't work," he said. "The money didn't go to poor people. It makes me mad when people try to use politics or charity for publicity.
"Do a charity gig, fair enough, but not on worldwide television."
I couldn't agree more Mr. Johnson. If celebrities really cared so much about the causes they support they'd keep their names out of the associated headline. The only reason they put it in there is to promote themselves as humanitarians of the year. Politicians do it, beer companies do it, oil companies do it, cigarette manufacturers do it. Pretty much every major business you can think of has a philanthropic arm. It makes consumers feel good to know that the products they purchase support a good cause. So what's the difference between the cigarette companies and the politicians and celebrities? The cigarette companies are more modest about their charity work. Cigarette companies and oil companies sell a product. Politicians and celebrities are selling an image. Which leads us to the real question; What is an image? Regardless of who's image is for sale, one thing is certain; the image that's for sale is different than the person who is selling it. Personally, I like to keep things simple and call an "image" for what it is; a lie. Prominent examples would be John Edwards or Tiger Woods. The images the media portrayed of these men was the total opposite of who they were in actuality. A regular joe who overtly associates himself with such an image is looking to create an image for himself as well...
MSNBCs Ed Schultz Advocates Voter Fraud in Massachusetts Sunday, January 17 @ 20:38:38 EST by default (3 reads)
Schultz:I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are.
And to think, these are the same people who get so self-righteously defensive when you accuse them of advocating registration fraud via ACORN. The same people who now often talk openly about Bush having stolen both the 2000 and the 2004 elections as if it were a matter of fact.
More of the same from the big thinkers on the fascist left.
The Ego has Landed Sunday, January 17 @ 11:17:15 EST by default (6 reads)
As many of you may remember, Republican Chris Christie defeated Democrat incumbent Jon Corzine last November in New Jersey's Gubernatorial race despite 3 visits from on high by the Messiah. Despite the big media political spin on the issue, the fact of the matter is that Corzine ran as a liberal Obama lackey and lost.
"New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine has embraced the president with gusto, regularly invoking his name on the campaign trail and embracing his agenda at every opportunity." -- (Politico)
So why then is Our Dear Leader, Barack Hussein Obama flying out to Massachusetts this afternoon to campaign for Democratic Senatorial candidate Martha Coakley in the run-off election to fill what was previously Ted Kennedy's seat? The conventional wisdom is that if Obama shows up, it must mean that the White House has polling data that shows that either Coakley is winning or that an appearance from The One will push Coakley over the top. But Obama's poll numbers have not been very favorable lately, and considering the embarrassment in New Jersey, not to mention his failed Olympic bid, the conventional wisdom begins to sound more and more like wishful thinking on the part of the Democrats.
Last Thursday Scott Brown, the Republican senatorial candidate, made this statement concerning a possible appearance by Obama, “He should stay away and let Martha and I discuss the issues one on one... The machine is coming out of the woodwork to get her elected. They’re bringing in outsiders, and we don’t need them.”
When I first heard this story I heard it from a liberal media outlet and of course they were predictably angry about it. But the way they said it made me think - what if Scott Brown considered the left's reaction in advance before he made the statement? What if he knew how angry it would make them? Well, then that would make the statement a dare. Scott Brown dared Obama to come knowing full well that his appearance could only hurt Coakley's campaign and Obama, always the narcissist, took the bait hook, line and sinker.
If I'm right, and Brown actually pulls it off. This will shut down the Obama White House "permanent campaign" and officially reign in the era of the "lame duck" - at least as far as the "Obama brand" goes. That on top of the irony that the "Kennedy Health Care Bill" would be definitively voted down by the very people who elected Kennedy.
CNN Senior White House Correspondent, Ed Henry reported this afternoon that the White House believes Coakley will lose the senate race. This tidbit tells us two things; 1, the conventional wisdom was wrong and 2, Obama went anyway. It's starting to look like my assertion about Brown's "dare" was correct.
January 27, 2010 - Update:
While Brown has not admitted to goading The Messiah into coming out to Massachusetts to give Coakley the kiss of death, his decisive victory certainly shows that whatever his plan was, it worked. So it appears that I was right about Brown's triple-dog-dare to Obama but I was wrong about something else.
The Obama administration is not going to give up on it's "permanent campaign", as a matter of fact they've just decided to bring David Plouffe back to ratchet it up even more.The brutal upset in Massachusetts wasn't a referendum on Obama, the liberal elite say. No, Republican senatorial candidate Scott Brown was swept into office by the fiery anger and hatred of President George W. Bush.
It's almost sad in a way, to watch these elitist snobs direct themselves right into a death spiral thinking that it is the very thing that will save them. When they crash I'll be just about a surprised as someone watching the coyote smack against the pavement after diving off of a cliff chasing the road runner. Meanwhile, I fully support Obama's decision to crank up the liberal campaign machine. I hope he is able to provide all of his party's candidates with the same assistance he gave to Coakley and Corzine.
Proof Posative that Global Warming is a Religion Saturday, January 16 @ 21:36:36 EST by default (7 reads)
If you ever had any doubt that belief in global warming is a religion, (that I like to call neo-gaianism) open your ears and listen to one of it's followers sometime.
Danny Glover:“When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin’?”
Normally I don't like to plagiarize, but I just couldn't say it any better than Tim Blair with Australia's Daily Telegraph, "His obscene opinion would be bigger news if Glover had – in the manner of others – idiotically blamed a less-fashionable deity." Blair, referring of course to the mainstream media's swift and universal condemnation of Pat Robertson's religious perspective on the issue.
Personally, what I find interesting about the politicization of the Haiti issue is how many people of both sides of the political isle egotistically want to blame it the Haitian people for angering some sort of higher power. Don't get me wrong, I blame the Hatian people too, their poverty is a result of their corrupt government, but maybe this proves that the United States is still a bit more religious, or at least more superstitious than we are commonly led to believe.
Hallelujah! Ive finally come home, Lord! Thursday, January 14 @ 16:08:06 EST by default (6 reads)
Amidst ongoing turbulence among Democrats concerning the details of the new health care reform bill, it has come out that there will be an exemption for the Amish. They will be exempted entirely from any fines or penalties from any government mandated health insurance.
The Amish hold self reliance as a religious virtue and it is literally against their religion to participate in such a program. Therefore, due to my new-found philosophical similarities to the Amish (and a vision I had ... ahem) I have decided that I also am Amish.
Praise the Lord! Hallelujah! I'm comin' home!
It is widely expected that there will be many others who experience similar epiphanies and revelations that lead them to begin converting to the Amish religion shortly as well. See you in church!
Lady Gaga as Veruca Salt -- (I WANT IT NOW!) Wednesday, October 14 @ 09:05:30 EDT by default (17 reads)
The new spokeswoman for the entitlement generation wants [_INSERT_NEW_RIGHT_HERE_] NOW!
What I wanna know is what happens when these people finally get what they want? What happens when they have free healthcare, energy use taxes, more welfare, more government housing, etc. Actually - I think we can all answer that question without thinking. What does the screaming child who has been rewarded with candy want? More candy. What does anyone who gets power want? More power.
The 1960's "peace" movement is the template. How many times will we re-live it until it goes out of style and will there be anything left to take from the responsible majority when they are done?
I know I'm projecting the whole of liberal ideology onto Baby Gaga, but is she not the poster child for entitlement liberals? You don't really think she'd be against free healthcare do you?
Daily LULZ - Joe Bidens Greatest Hits Vol I Friday, October 02 @ 18:32:38 EDT by default (16 reads)
It's always good to take a break and go for a stroll down memory lane so that we don't forget the lies of Christmas past. I still get lots of mileage out of this clip, it never fails to give me a good laugh. Biden is such a jackass. Not only does he say that Obama is "clean and articulate" (as if other black guys aren't), but he says that Obama is the "first" articulate African-American and that this is a real "storybook" triumph. What a flaky racist jerk.
Apparently CNN has been scouring the web to remove old video clips that depict the administration in a negative light. Both the YouTube version and the original video from CNN's website have been scrubbed. This is not the only video like this that has disappeared. I am going to start keeping my own personal library of these so they can't simply be removed from existence. Meanwhile, I'll try to find a copy to replace this one.
Obama Uses Compulsory Public Schools to Address Your Children Thursday, September 03 @ 07:27:18 EDT by default (30 reads)
President Barack Obama to Make Historic Speech to America’s Students C-SPAN and White House Web Site to Broadcast Speech Live
Please note speech scheduled one hour earlier to Noon Eastern Time
On September 8, 2009, history will be made. Will you be a part of it?
At 12:00 p.m., Eastern Time (ET), President Barack Obama will deliver a national address to the students of America. (Please note that this is a change from the originally scheduled time.) During this special address, the president will speak directly to the nation’s children and youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning.
The U.S. Department of Education encourages students of all ages, teachers, and administrators to participate in this historic moment by watching the president deliver the address, which will be broadcast live on the White House Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/) and on C-SPAN at 12:00 p.m., ET. We also encourage educators to use this moment to help students get focused and inspired to begin the new academic year. The Department of Education offers educators a menu of classroom activities—created by its teachers-in-residence, the Teaching Ambassador Fellows—to help engage students in the address and stimulate classroom discussions about the importance of education.
To learn more, please see the following:
Frequently Asked Questions
Classroom Activities (Pre-K – 6) PDF (115K) | MS Word (119K)
Classroom Activities (7 – 12) PDF (170K) | MS Word (184K)
To further encourage student engagement, the U.S. Department of Education is launching the "I Am What I Learn" video contest. On September 8, we will ask students to respond to the president’s challenge by creating videos, up to two minutes in length, describing the steps they will take to improve their education and the role education will play in fulfilling their dreams.
Please encourage all students age 13 and older to create and upload their videos to YouTube by October 8. Submissions can be in the form of video blogs, public service announcements (PSAs), music videos, or documentaries. Students are encouraged to have fun and be creative with this project! The general public will then vote on their favorites to determine the top 20 finalists. These 20 videos will be reviewed by a panel of judges including U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. The panel will choose three winners, each of whom will receive a $1,000 cash prize.
President Obama will speak to the students of America at 12:00 p.m., ET on Tuesday, Sept. 8, 2009. (Note that this is a change from the time originally scheduled.)
2. How can I watch the president’s address to students?
Viewers may watch the address via the Internet by visiting the White House Web site, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/, where the address will be streamed live. C-SPAN, the cable public affairs network, will cover the president's speech live on its C-SPAN television channel and provide live streaming video online at C-SPAN.org. The speech also will be aired live on C-SPAN Radio (90.1 FM in Washington, D.C., and channel 132 on XM Satellite Radio).
White House television will make the address available via satellite for local broadcast outlets. Satellite coordinates will be posted on the White House Web site and www.ed.gov upon their availability. For updates related to the president’s speech, please visit http://www.whitehouse.gov/mediaresources/ or www.ed.gov.
3. What is the duration of the president’s address?
The president is scheduled to speak for 15 – 20 minutes. The U.S. Department of Education provides resources for educators who may choose to use the president’s address as a teachable moment. Two menus of classroom activities, one for students in grades Pre-K – 6, and another for students in grades 7 – 12, may be found here:
Classroom Activities (Pre-K – 6) PDF (115K) | MS Word (119K)
Classroom Activities (7 – 12) PDF (170K) | MS Word (184K)
4. Does the White House Web site have the capacity to host all of the potential live viewers for this event?
The White House Web site is equipped with the appropriate amount of bandwidth to accommodate a large viewership.
5. Will the address be available in some form after the original broadcast date and time?
Downloadable video of the speech will be made available on the White House Web site as well as on www.ed.gov. The URL address to access the archived webcast will be posted on both sites upon availability. C-SPAN.org will provide archived and "on-demand" viewing options.
6. Will the address include captioning for deaf and hard-of-hearing viewers?
The live address broadcast on C-SPAN will include captioning.
7. Is the "Get Schooled" television event in the evening on Sept. 8 hosted by the Viacom network and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation connected to the president’s speech?
While the U.S. Department of Education is a partner in this effort, the president’s noontime address is a separate event. Get Schooled is a five-year national platform developed by Viacom and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that connects, inspires, and mobilizes people to find effective solutions to education challenges. The initiative provides resources, information, and creative programming aimed at engaging a range of audiences in an effort to address America's education crisis. A television event, Get Schooled: You Have the Right, formally kicks off the "Get Schooled" initiative at 8:00 p.m., ET on Sept. 8.
The White House has released a statement saying that they will release the transcript of Obama's speech on the White House website on Monday. The administration is also assuring the public that the speech will not contain any political elements. Personally, I'll believe that when I see it, and only when I see it. This president is so partisan in his views I have absolutely no doubt that just as Nancy Pelosi calls herself, "post partisan", Obama would also consider his points of view to be bipartisan. While the administration continues to talk about working for bipartisan health reform, to date republicans have had almost no say in any of the legislation. The American public know these things and have very good reason to be skeptical. This president was elected to the White House on a wind of "change" and bipartisanship and has turned out to be the most partisan president I have lived under.
Civilian National Security Force Becomes Reality Wednesday, September 02 @ 10:15:12 EDT by default (60 reads)
I remember this reaction to Obama's mention of a "civilian national security force" back during the election. I figured it was just some offhand comment that didn't really mean anything. Boy was I wrong.
The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new "volunteer corps" and consider whether "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" should be developed. The legislation also refers to "uniforms" that would be worn by the "volunteers" and the "need" for a "public service academy, a 4-year institution" to "focus on training" future "public sector leaders." The training, apparently, would occur at "campuses."
This is only a taste. Google "citizen corps" and you will get endless states, cities, counties and other organizations yet discovered. I think this is breaking news; I have not heard anything about it yet. I just watched Janet Napolitano do an interview about something unimportant, and behind her was a background with a readable URL; CitizenCorps.gov
According to the site, this is the "mission" of "Citizen Corps":
Citizen Corps Council activities include:
Educate residents about disaster preparedness measures;
Implement public education and outreach efforts;
Provide training to improve citizen preparedness, prevention and response capabilities;
Promote the importance of drills in the home, workplace, and school;
Coordinate citizen participation in community disaster response activities;
Coordinate volunteer opportunities that support local efforts in mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery;
Citizen Corps Council Responsibilities include:
Promote and strengthen the Citizen Corps programs at the community level, such as Volunteers in Police Service programs, CERT teams, Medical Reserve Corps units, and Neighborhood Watch groups;
Provide opportunities for special skills and interests;
Develop targeted outreach for the community, including special needs groups;
Provide opportunities of training in first aid and emergency preparedness;
Organize special projects and community events;
Encourage cooperation and collaboration among community leaders; and
Capture smart practices and report accomplishments; and
Create opportunities for all residents to participate.
Update:
Found the official list of ALL ObamaCorps organizations here.
Say Goodnight Gracie - The 8 Republicans who voted YES on Cap and Trade Friday, June 26 @ 21:07:17 EDT by default (43 reads)
The "global warming" (economic destruction) bill just passed the house 219 - 212 with 8 republicans voting YES. The time has come to clean house. I plan to begin a list of republicans who voted on the wrong side of critical issues and post it here. For now, here are the names of the 8. I STRONGLY urge anyone in these districts to vote for an alternative candidate.
Mary Bono - California, 45th district
Michael N. Castle - Delaware
Mark Kirk - Illinois, 10th district
Frank LoBiondo - New Jersey, 2nd district
Leonard Lance - New Jersey, 7th district
John M. McHugh - New York, 23rd district
David G. Reichert - Washington, 8th district
Chris Smith - New Jersey, 4th district
Yes this is who is running your country Sunday, May 03 @ 03:35:48 EDT by default (68 reads)
Apparently this video is a couple of years old. I've never seen it before. This is an environmentalist group that calls themselves "Earth First" performing a ritual they call "tree sitting".
The end result doesn't matter as long as the work is done with good intentions.
Glove Slap! default v Daily Kos on Economics part 1 Tuesday, April 14 @ 05:33:01 EDT by default (105 reads)
Feeling rather intellectual today, I decided to look around for general statements on how Democrats believe liberal economic policy will promote the economy. It is my opinion that the philosophy behind liberal economic policy stems from favoring fairness over prosperity and so it was unsurprising to me that I did not find many substantive arguments able to frame liberal economic policy as having the ability promote economic growth better than conservative economic policy. One of the better statements I did find was posted on the Daily Kos from an apparently noted author named Michael Alexander who has a Ph. D. in chemical engineering.
There is much to respond to in this article and as I do not have the time to devote to completing this in one sitting I will be posting my response in sections. Alexander’s original post will be colored blue and my responses will be written in red. And so without further ado, here is part 1 of me single-handedly taking on this accomplished liberal intellectual using simple common sense and basic economics in a mano-a-mano debate.
Both parties are capitalist parties.
You will get no argument from me here, although technically both parties are also socialist parties as well. But the debate is over what degree of control the government should have over the market, and clearly one party advocates a much larger degree of control that borders on socialism at best and is at worst straight out of the socialist manifesto.
Both agree that the primary engine of prosperity is economic growth, defined as the accumulation of capital. They differ on their notions of what is capital.
I would go further and say that the engine of prosperity is freedom. A private person cannot accumulate capital without the right to own private property. Therefore, the larger the government, the more difficult it is to accumulate capital and therefore become more prosperous. Even governmental agencies we can mostly agree upon hinder economic growth to a certain degree. For example, if someone produces a new pain medication, in order to sell it he must first submit it to approval by the FDA. While this is a practical measure intended to ensure public safety, it is inevitable that some products that would be beneficial to society will not be approved. When this happens, the inventors, investors and producers of the new pain medication may find that they have completely wasted their time and money. In this scenario that has undoubtedly occurred in reality, there is no resulting economic growth and it is quite likely that the investment loss precludes it’s inventors from further innovation possibilities; people will be less likely to invest in the inventor’s future ventures.
Republicans believe that capital is wealth.
Let me simply repeat what is generally taught in economics 101:
For economists, capital (or capital goods) includes all manufactured aids used in producing consumer goods and services. Included are all factory, storage, transportation, and distribution facilities, as well as tools and machinery. Economists refer to the purchase of capital goods as investment.
…Note that the term “capital” as used by economists refers not to money but to tools, machinery, and other productive equipment. Because money produces nothing, economists do not include it as an economic resource. Money (or money capital or financial capital) is simply a means for purchasing capital goods.
-- Economics 17th Ed. By Campbell McConnell and Stanley Brue
This means economic growth = accumulation of private wealth. Not necessarily, but I digress. Hence, their favorite economic nostrum is tax cuts on the wealthy (the investing class).
Allow me to clarify; Republican’s favorite economic nostrum is not “tax cuts on the wealthy” but rather tax cuts for everyone. Liberals refer to these types of tax cuts as “tax cuts on the wealthy” as a spin tactic meant to magnify the fact that those who pay more taxes will benefit more from a tax cut. In other words, everyone gets to keep more of what they earn. If you earn a lot money, you get to keep more of the money you earned, if you earn less money, an across-the-board tax cut will have less of an effect on you because you already pay little to no taxes. Keep in mind here that in our current tax scheme the bottom 50% of wage earners pay approximately 3% of the total tax pie. Stated another way, the top 50% of wage earners in the United States pay almost all of the taxes. Conservatives believe that the state has no right to steal from the rich and give to the poor in order to promote what liberals call, “economic fairness”. Furthermore, if history is any guide, wealth redistribution stifles competition and innovation by unfairly promoting those who are less productive and therefore inhibits economic growth and prosperity overall. Allowing everyone to keep what they have earned is not only just but promotes economic growth by allowing the productive to reinvest their earnings in future ventures. It also allows the less productive to benefit by giving them the ability to purchase the products of the productive in a low-cost market in which prices are driven down by competition.
In particular, they argue for low or even zero taxes on investment income. The deficits these create...
On the contrary, lower taxes on investment allow more people to make more investments at a lower cost which causes economic growth and actually increases even government income. Even Barack Obama will not argue against this point.
This is a crucial point as this stance makes clear the rather insidious liberal opinion that economic fairness is favorable to economic prosperity. It is at least Barack Obama’s view that it is better to cause the government and the general economy to become less prosperous by increasing the capital gains tax because it helps to lower those who make more money down closer to the level of those who make less money. In other words, if he cannot take from the rich and give to the poor, he would rather simply take from the rich in order to push them down closer to the economic level of the poor. Essentially this view postulates that it is favorable that everyone be miserable than to allow some to be unfairly less miserable than others.
Recent Pittsburgh Killings FOX News Fault CNN Claims Thursday, April 09 @ 01:43:39 EDT by default (99 reads)
CNN's Rick Sanchez blames Fox News and names Glenn Beck in particular as cause for the recent killings in Pittsburgh. It must be nice for Sanchez to feel free to express himself now that Beck has left CNN. Sanchez tag teams with some guy from mediamatters and still can't seem to win the debate against a lone gun rights supporter. He just can't understand why upwards of 1 million gun purchasers since the election wouldn't trust our dear leader President Obama on the 2nd Amendment if it wasn't for the meddling of the mighty lone propagandist FOX News!
CNN has been busy gobbling up all of these clips. Sometime in the near future there may not be any more copies of this video freely available on the internet ...
Tax Day Tea Party! Friday, April 03 @ 21:32:14 EST by default (66 reads)
Tea Partiers expect a huge turnout for the Tax Day Tea Party April 15, 2009. There will be celebrities and media coverage. Atlas will Shrug. Be there or be square! Click here to find your local Tax Day Tea Party.
Obama Seeks to Charge Vets for Service Related Health Conditions Wednesday, March 18 @ 00:15:22 EST by default (116 reads)
While the Obama administration hands out billions of dollars to prop up failed businesses, it seeks to save $540 million in tax revenue by forcing vets to use private insurance for service related health concerns. While no official details of the plan have been made available, it seems to me that the big idea is that if a veteran has private insurance he will be forced to use it and pay any deductibles involved, thus causing a cascade of side effects including higher insurance premiums for military veterans.
Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion met with Obama on March 16th after which he was quoted as saying, "It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," ... "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate 'to care for him who shall have borne the battle' given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America's veterans!"
The meeting between senior officials from veterans service organizations with President Obama, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Steven Kosiak, the overseer of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) came as a response to a letter of protest co-signed by Commander Rehbein and the heads of ten colleague organizations. The following is excerpted from the letter: "There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran's personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable."
If the government can't even afford to cover expenses for health concerns veterans receive following orders while serving in the military how in the hell does it expect to cover the health care of every single individual residing in the United States, citizen or not. It comes as no surprise to me, but it is clear where Mr. Obama's priorities lie. Illegal Alien > Injured War Hero. This government becomes more revolting every single day.
2009 State Budget Deficits by Party Affiliation Saturday, February 28 @ 01:20:33 EST by default (2483 reads)
So I was doing research on the story listed in the previous post and found that the data the man in the video refers to is actually from the last quarter of 2008. Interestingly, the data from that period is even worse for the blue states, but I decided to go with the current data and to calculate everything up and list by party affiliation based on the 2008 presidential election. The most shocking thing that I found was that every single one of the 8 states that are not in deficit voted Republican in the presidential election. You heard me right, every state that is not in deficit is red. As far as the other states, the blue states in deficit outnumber the red states by more than 2 to 1. And which two states do you think would top the list with the largest state budget deficits? That's right, moderate Republican 2008 presidential nominee John McCain's state of Arizona and President Barack Hussein Obama's hometown of Illinois. Not to mention the 4.1% deficit held by the District of Columbia. These politicians can't even balance the budget in the tiny city they work in. I'm shocked that no one else has tied all of these numbers together yet. This is a steak in the heart of big government liberal economic policy and proves that when liberals talk about economic "growth" they aren't thinking about free markets and private citizens, they're talking about government.
While businesses and homeowners struggle to stay afloat financially and have a harder and harder time getting loans from banks who are too broke to lend money because of the money they lost following the direction of liberal politicians who directed them to give loans that no one could ever expect would be payed back by anyone but the taxpayers, the government is growing to a size never before seen in American history and is borrowing money that doesn't exist to pay for activist programs and to hire employees to do work that has been created entirely by the federal government.
March 3, 2009 - Update:
While in a debate with a liberal I touched on the topic covered in this post and had state unemployment rates thrown back at me as a defense. This person only cited one rate and so the argument didn't hold any water, but the thought gave me an idea. I thought that if I compiled unemployment rate statistics in the same manner I'd again come up with results that favored conservatives. I did, and surprise, surprise, I found out that the average unemployment rate for blue states is 1.01% higher than that of red states. The highest unemployment rate is also owned by a blue state; Michigan.
As many of you may remember, Republican Chris Christie defeated Democrat incumbent Jon Corzine last November in New Jersey's Gubernatorial race despite 3 visits from on high by the Messiah. Despite the 