We’re All Bigots Now

Republicans added two magnificent new black faces to the Congress with Allen West in Florida, who beat sore loser Ron Klein 54.3 percent to 45.7 percent (with 97 percent counted, Klein wouldn’t concede), and Tim Scott in South Carolina, who crushed Democrat Ben Frasier, 65-29.

Republicans also launched two new Hispanic stars this election: Sen.-elect Marco Rubio from Florida and the new governor of New Mexico, Susanna Martinez. And we got a bonus Sikh — Nikki Haley, the new governor of South Carolina. MSNBC is still searching for the “Republicans are racist” angle in all of this.

Read all of Ann Coulter’s article here.

Get Ready For Inflation, And Then Some

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernake said he will ‘help’ the economy again by buying down our unsustainable debt by $600 Billion. He says the Fed will buy bonds to do it. OK fine. Except for the fact that they will be printing money to pay for it. That is called monetizing the debt. Something that Bernake said he would not do. There’s a nifty word for it. They call it Quantitative Easing.

For the Fed, it grows on trees.

The result of crushing debt will cause one of two things to happen. Declare bankruptcy and start over. A move that would have worked and would have been a lot cheaper if the banks, Freddie, and Fanny were allowed to do it a couple of years ago. But now, the Obama administration and Congress has increased the debt to the point that our country and foreign countries are affected, not just companies. Foreign countries would have a meltdown if we were to declare bankruptcy. OK, maybe that should still be on the table. That will teach them to believe our leaders in Washington. I mean, if China said two years ago, “no, we’re not buying your debt any more. You need to live within your means,”  we wouldn’t be looking at hyper-inflation being just around the corner.

The other option is to just print more money. What Bernake did today. Gee, all that will do will cause your savings, earnings, and investments to shrink to levels that would mean you can forget about retiring. You’ll have to work until you die, because a dollar will be worth less than a quarter, if we’re lucky. And, our debt that China, Russia, and other countries are holding will be just as worthless. And Obama just doesn’t understand why companies aren’t hiring? Maybe it’s because the need to survive is taking priority right now.

Why is all this happening? Because we have economic imbeciles in Washington that think you can put a fire out by putting gasoline on it. Some of them got thrown out yesterday. But there is still a lot of unfinished business there.

Links: Ben Bernake: Impeach Me – I’m A Damned Liar in [Market-Ticker] | Fed will spend $600B in latest bid to help economy

Election Is Over, You’re All On Probation

The people have spoken. Republicans regained majority control of the House. Question for President Obama is two-fold. Have you heard the voice of the American People? Will you listen to them?

This mid-term was a dramatic shift in power from one party to the other. But it was not a Republican victory as much as it was a victory for conservative principles. Over the last 12 months and culminating tonight, we have witnessed the ascension of conservatism in America, caused mainly by the direction that President Obama is leading us. Republicans are on notice, just as much if not more than Democrats, to get back to basics as described by the tea party movement.

Starting today, Republicans and Democrats are on probation. It’s not just the spending and debt issues that have brought the economy to its knees, but the role of the federal government that threaten to bring the American people to their knees. The message to Washington is to fix it or pay the price in 2012.

Related link: What A Conservative Is

In Denial, The Excuses Begin

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed (Fast Eddie) Rendell (also former DNC chairman) is but the first today to offer an explanation for the anticipated Democratic losses in today’s mid-term election. No doubt others will follow.

His excuse is typically nuanced. A new take on ‘we just didn’t get the message out.’ Rendell says their message was blurred. ‘We’ve got to learn to explain and communicate what we’ve done a lot more clearly,’ he said. Acknowledging the Obama effect on the anticipated poor results, Rendell also said ‘expectations were unreasonably high’ for Barack Obama when he took the presidency. Do ya think? That’s code for, this is what you get when you run on smoke like hope and change and have the media pumping you up to be America’s Messiah. The empty suit has fallen to the floor.

No Eddie, it’s not because your message was not clear. It is because the folks don’t like the message they hear or the policies they see. In living color Eddie, here’s why.

And from the Huffington/KOS/Ring of Fire crowd, we’ll know doubt hear that it’s because Obama is black.

Link: Pa. Gov. Rendell: Democratic message was blurred

Tomorrow Is Election Day, And Freedom Day

Tomorrow is Election Day. Before you head to the polling place, take a moment to remember March 21st, when the Pelosi Congress cast its vote for Obamacare. The enduring image of that day is one of Congressional Democrats arrogantly dismissing the pleas of thousands of Americans gathered outside the Capitol Building begging them not to inflict this disastrous bill on us.

In the end this bill wasn’t about health care reform; it was about control and government mandates and fines for not purchasing a government-approved insurance plan. The bill jeopardizes the very thing it was supposed to reform. Every day we hear about doctors leaving the Medicare system; increased premiums with talk of price controls; rationing becoming standard practice; and panels of faceless bureaucrats deciding which categories of treatment are worthy of funding based on efficiency calculations (which I called a “death panel”).

Continue reading Tomorrow Is Election Day, And Freedom Day

aSide Order

Candidate for Governor of Florida Alex Sink, caught here breaking the very rules that the person sending the text message on her Blackberry had proposed.

She promised an ethical administration, and promptly fired the guy on the other end of the Blackberry. To keep her promise, seems like there’s only one more person to fire.

But let’s be positive. Vote for Farid Khavari for Governor of the State of Florida. No BS, now kowtoing to political party machines. Just sound solutions.

Why the tea party movement? And why now?

Honoring our fallen veterans every summer evening for the last 38 years. A touching tradition at Cape May Point, New Jersey.

Pensacola News Journal Pulls Political Opinion Piece

The article by columnist Mark O’Brien entitled Hayward is a candidate of hype was pulled from the PNJ website late yesterday. It no doubt had something to do with a barrage of hate-mail from Hayward supporters, or the fact that Hayward was the newspaper’s endorsed candidate, or that one of the papers’ major advertisers is a contributor to the Hayward campaign. Or all three.

From memory now, since I didn’t save a copy, O’Brien wrote an opinion piece on Hayward that was less than flattering but all based on substantiated fact. Including his receiving campaign contributions from the Levin Papantonio law firm and their involvement in the BP lawsuit, and subsequent comments made by Hayward on the campaign trail. Not mentioned in that article, is Papantonio’s participation in a class action suit against BP. At any rate, aside from a columnist, O’Brien is also an opinion writer. Much the same as Juan Williams does, or did, double duty as a reporter, columnist, and opinion commentator for NPR and FOX News. O’Brien does both opinion and reporting functions.

The pulling of this piece from their website without comment shows the priorities are less about journalistic integrity than political and financial expediency. It’s no secret that the Levin Papantonio law firm is a big advertiser in the paper. It takes a willing suspension of disbelief to think that that was not part, if not all, of  Executive Editor Richard Schneider’s motivation.

Seems like only a couple days ago that the subject of journalistic ethics and objectivity came up. At issue there was who was paying the bills for the reporter. This brings a new twist to the topic which is, who is paying the bills for the paper?

Former link location: Hayward is a candidate of hype

Update Nov 1, 2010: Correction in today’s PNJ.

In Sunday’s column, Mark O’Brien erroneously stated that mayoral candidate Ashton Hayward III had urged the Pensacola City Council to hire the Levin Papantonio law firm to pursue possible legal action against BP for the April 20 oil spill.

Hayward did not specify any law firm when he urged the City Council to consider legal action.

Apparently everything else in the article was correct.  If you entertain conspiracies of coincidence, Johnson provided Hayward the cover that he needed. Both he and the candidate are allied to the law firm that was hired. Whether by contributions or the Emerald Coastkeepers club, the end result is the same. LP is on the case.

At least the paper did not attempt to deny the genesis of the article, that ‘Hayward is a candidate of hype.’

Obama On GM, More Words, Just Words

Harken back sixteen months ago when President Obama said this, ‘What I have no interest in doing is running GM,’ concerning the GM bailout and government ownership of 60% of the company.

Enter a little no spin zone with this little ditty from Reuters . . .

The Obama administration and GM executives say the White House has stayed good to its pledge to refrain from meddling in the day-to-day management of this 102-year-old industrial enterprise . . .

OK, that is if you don’t count the administration putting their own people on the Board of Directors, closing product lines, closing dealerships, and telling them what kind of car to make.

Now with an impending IPO of the new and improved BM (Barack Motors), or for the record, GM, we find that it is still the administration calling the shots.

Don’t you know the M.O. by now? We’re supposed to pay attention to what Obama says instead of what he does. He is counting on the dumb masses never finding out that he is an empty suit filled with Karl Marx stuffing.

Link: Special Report: For GM IPO, the government is back-seat driver | Reuters.

‘Tax Cuts For The Rich’ Laid Bare

Brass Oldies by Thomas Sowell

Classic songs from years past are sometimes referred to as “golden oldies.” There are political fallacies that have been around for a long time as well. These might be called brass oldies. It certainly takes a lot of brass to keep repeating fallacies that were refuted long ago.

One of these brass oldies is a phrase that has been a perennial favorite of the left, “tax cuts for the rich.” How long ago was this refuted? More than 80 years ago, the “tax cuts for the rich” argument was refuted, both in theory and in practice, by Andrew Mellon, who was Secretary of the Treasury in the 1920s.

When Mellon took office, there was a large national debt, the economy was stagnating, and tax rates were high, though the tax revenues were still not enough to cover government expenditures. What was Mellon’s prescription for getting out of this mess? A series of major cuts in the tax rates!

Then as now, there were people who failed to make the distinction between tax rates and tax revenues. Mellon said, “It seems difficult for some to understand that high rates of taxation do not necessarily mean large revenue for the Government, and that more revenue may often be obtained by lower rates.”

How can that be? Because taxpayers change their behavior according to what the tax rates are. When one of the Rockefellers died, Mellon discovered that his estate included $44 million in tax-exempt bonds, compared to $7 million in Standard Oil securities, even though Standard Oil was the source of the Rockefeller fortune.

For the country as a whole, the amount of money tied up in tax-exempt securities was estimated to be three times as large as the federal government’s expenditures and more than half as large as the national debt.

In short, huge amounts of money were not being invested in productive capacity, such as factories or power plants, but was instead being made available for local political boondoggles, because this money was put into tax-exempt state and local bonds.

When tax rates are reduced, investors have incentives to take their money out of tax shelters and put it into the private economy, creating higher returns for themselves and more production in the economy.

Andrew Mellon understood this then, even though many in politics and the media seem not to understand it now.

Mellon was able to persuade Congress to lower the tax rates by large amounts. The percentage by which tax rates were lowered was greater at the lower income levels, but the total amount of money saved by taxpayers was of course greater on the part of people with higher incomes, who were paying much higher tax rates on those incomes.

Between 1921 and 1929, tax rates in the top brackets were cut from 73 percent to 24 percent. In other words, these were what the left likes to call “tax cuts for the rich.”

What happened to federal revenues from income taxes over this same span of time? Income tax revenues rose by more than 30 percent. What happened to the economy? Jobs increased, output rose, the unemployment rate fell and incomes rose. Because economic activity increased, the government received more income tax revenues. In short, these were tax cuts for the economy, even if the left likes to call them “tax cuts for the rich.”

This was not the only time that things like this happened, nor was Andrew Mellon the only one who advocated tax rate cuts in order to increase tax revenues. John Maynard Keynes pointed out in 1933 that lowering the tax rates can increase tax revenues, if the tax rates are so high as to discourage economic activity.

President John F. Kennedy made the same argument in the 1960s — and tax revenues increased after the tax rates were cut during his administration. The same thing happened under Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. And it happened again under George W. Bush, whose tax rate cuts are scheduled to expire next January.

The rich actually paid more total taxes, and a higher percentage of all taxes, after the Bush tax rate cuts, because their incomes were rising with the rising economy.

Do the people who keep repeating the catch phrase, “tax cuts for the rich” not know this? Or are they depending on your not knowing it?

To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.