Archive for October, 2011


The thuggery of “Occupy Wall Street”

Millionaire leftist Michael Moore at "Occupy Wall Street"

“Occupy Wall Street” has been lauded by leftists as a peaceful movement that is looking for positive change in the world. However, this argument crumbles under the weight of actual facts.

Today, Breitbart TV released a video of “Occupy Denver” protesters mobbing a cop and pushing over his motorcycle. Reports of rapes and sexual assaults are piling up, but we cannot be sure of the actual number of these incidents because “Occupy” discourages protesters from telling police about crime. In fact, an “Occupy” rap sheet, which is being compiled by John Nolte, just topped 100 crimes!

In my opinion, there is no distinction between thugs and protesters on “Occupy Wall Street”. The movement is not peaceful by any measure, as members have taken to actually assaulting cops! Crime rates have skyrocketed in areas adjacent to the “Occupy” protests, and a motley crew of ex-cons, rapists, and thieves are actively preying on other “Occupy” members.

A legitimate political movement would be very different than “Occupy Wall Street”. A legitimate movement would come together every once in a while to hold protests instead of camping out in public parks and disturbing unfortunate neighbors. Such a movement would also be courteous to police officers, would acquire and obey permits, and would place great emphasis upon safety. Essentially, “Occupy” should model itself after the Tea Party, which is a very respectful, peaceful movement.

A major problem that “Occupy Wall Street” is confronting is legitimacy. In the eyes of most Americans, thousands of arrests and allegations of rape are not exactly a picturesque peaceful protest. The constant conflict at “Occupy” turns many people away from their cause and encourages an immediate dismissal of the ideas that have been presented at “Occupy Wall Street”. Another cause of this problem is the lack of focus by OWS. The protesters in the movement proclaim that “Occupy” is protesting against the “top 1%”, but any attempt to go beyond this broad summation into actual policy details pulls up some very murky results. Protester demands have included immediate and complete debt forgiveness for everyone and a “guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment”, and since no leaders have emerged in the movement, “Occupy” cannot dismiss these communist proposals.

“Occupy” claims to be a movement of the people, but I have yet to see any sort of central ideas (beyond the anti-1% rhetoric) to which every single protester agrees to and ascribes. In order for this movement to have any political relevance and impact, it must coalesce behind a central leader and come up with a simple, concrete set of demands. If this does not occur, “Occupy Wall Street” will remain a lawless mob.

Please follow the Project and share it with your friends by email, Facebook, or Twitter!

Herman Cain is pro-life

Georgia businessman and presidential contender Herman Cain

There was significant uproar regarding Herman Cain’s interview with Piers Morgan recently. When Piers asked Cain about his view on abortion, they had an interesting exchange:

MORGAN: But you’ve had children, grandchildren. If one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?

CAIN: You’re mixing two things here, Piers?

MORGAN: Why?

CAIN: You’re mixing –

MORGAN: That’s what it comes down to.

CAIN: No, it comes down to it’s not the government’s role or anybody else’s role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make.

Not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t have to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive issue.

Pro-lifers immediately jumped onto Cain’s comments, regarding them as “pro-choice”. I would don’t think the American people should be concerned, however. Cain, wisely recognizing the lack of clarity of his comments, released a statement regarding the controversy:

Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.

I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply “order” people to not seek an abortion.

My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.

As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.

I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.

Cain is pro-life, but he should have been more clear about his position when he was confronted about it.

Equal opportunity, not equal outcomes

America has always been a place of opportunity. This opportunity has inspired millions to travel to the United States with nothing more than the clothes on their backs and has allowed poor, hard-working immigrants and laborers to make a living and improve the lives of others. Scottish immigrant Andrew Carnegie provided for his impoverished family as a boy by working six 12-hour days as a factory worker, earning only $1.20 every week. After years of hard work, Carnegie made billions in the steel industry and donated his fortune toward the construction of schools and public libraries across the United States and the United Kingdom. I could name dozens more successful individuals who have overcome poverty to achieve significant economic success. But according to our president and Democrat leaders, these people should bear the burden of “caring for” millions of government-dependent Americans who, unlike their wealthy counterparts, are not willing to put in the work and intense dedication required to achieve success.

Andrew Carnegie rose from his impoverished beginnings to make billions.

Freedom is the foundation of American society, and quite often I feel that our president forgets what freedom truly means. Freedom allows people to succeed and make money, but true freedom also allows people to fail. President Obama wishes to tax those who have achieved financial success to pay for social programs that theoretically lift the poor from their hard times. But our commander-in-chief has failed to understand that a massive safety net takes away the economic freedoms of individuals by turning these people into dependent slaves that rely upon government for everything they need. Thus, by providing these social programs, Obama and the Democrats literally incentivize poverty and maliciously crush the spirit of hard work, passion, and freedom that lives within every human being.

One of Andrew Carnegie’s students, Napoleon Hill, alluded strongly to personal purpose as the reason for success in life in his book Think and Grow Rich. Like Mr. Hill, I sincerely believe that every person who has an intense desire to work hard and improve in their line of work will obtain success, and I believe this because I see it every day in my daily life. As a student, I often see intelligent people struggling in their classes because they cannot summon the purpose and drive to study adequately for tests or to even complete crucial homework assignments on time. I also constantly see that people who care a great deal about their education complete their assignments on time, seek help if they do not understand certain topics, and focus in class.

Now imagine if President Obama became the principal at my school and instituted a new grading system based upon his social policies. Instead of every student earning a different grade, President Obama’s system would be “fair” and would average everyone’s grades together. As you might imagine, however, this system would be an utter failure. Students would slack off, assuming that the “A” students would pick up the slack, and the communal average would drop like a rock. I know that if I were in that environment, I would transfer to a different school!

Through this analogy, we can see the ineffectiveness of President Obama’s social policies. Depending on the wealthy to prop up everyone else is foolish and unethical, as those who are relying upon government for their livelihoods are not relying upon themselves, and by not relying on themselves, these people sell their souls to the government and resign themselves to lives of dependence and hardship.

The Declaration of Independence says that men are endowed with certain unalienable rights that must be protected by government, and these rights are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Why the “pursuit” of happiness instead of simply happiness? Clearly, our Founding Fathers understood that true freedom and prosperity could only come from a personal search for happiness, not a government handout.

Mitt Romney (left) is the GOP candidate most likely to win the nomination and compete against incumbent President Obama for the presidency.

The presidential election is only twelve months away, and it will likely be a defining moment in America’s history. Never before have such divergent views of America and government been present in a political race, and because of this, your vote has never been more important. At the polls, people across America will make a decision that will change the lives and fortunes of millions of people throughout the nation: should the American people depend on government to provide every need and want, or should Americans work to the best of their ability to provide for themselves and be self-sufficient?

Today, at a San Francisco fundraiser, President Obama warned his supporters of the consequences of a Republican victory next November: “The one thing that we absolutely know for sure is that if we don’t work even harder than we did in 2008, then we’re going to have a government that tells the American people, ‘you are on your own.’” Clearly, President Obama fears a time in the future where Washington is unable to redistribute wealth and to keep everyone on generous government dough. In the context of American history, however, this welfare state mentality is completely at odds with the values of our country’s founding. Thomas Jefferson, the writer of the Declaration of Independence, once said that “those are governed best who are governed least”, and the Declaration of Independence itself states that every man should have the right to ”life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

By contrast to President Obama, the modern conservative movement seeks a return to the values that have made America great and an alignment with the vision of the Founding Fathers. Barry Goldwater, a US Senator who sparked the resurgence of the American conservative movement of the 1960s, summed up this vision nicely, saying that “a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have.” Especially in the past 100 years, America has undergone gradual social changes that have pushed our country to the brink of becoming a welfare state. Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare are all fantastic examples of how government has massively intruded upon the lives and the pursuits of millions of people across the United States.

People are increasingly biting the hook when it comes to the Democratic Party’s call for government to take charge in the lives of everyday Americans. A recent ad by the AARP warns politicians of the consequences of taking away the benefits of seniors for the sake of fiscal responsibility, and “Occupy Wall Street” protesters have demanded that government provide a “guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment” and immediate debt forgiveness for everyone in the United States. Clearly, many Americans want government to take care of them at the expense of everyone else, but fortunately, there is hope in 2012.

2012 will be the last stand and the final battle for conservative values and principles. If the GOP fails to retake the White House next November, the American spirit of hard work and self-sufficiency will die and give way to a collectivist entitlement society, the concept of which has failed all over the world time and time again. Republicans envision a society in which people can freely provide for themselves and their families without government handouts and entitlements, while Democrats want everyone to be dependent upon government for every need and want. Defeat in 2012 will truly be the beginning of the end for America.

What will you choose? America’s fate rests upon your shoulders.

Obama visiting Roscoe’s House of Chicken ‘n Waffles before his fundraising event. Photographers, of course, were allowed.

When President Obama is lambasting the rich for their success and blaming them for America’s problems, he invites the entire press corps to cover his remarks. But when the President wants to hit up these “fat-cats” for campaign donations in extravagant fundraisers, the Obama administration stops local press coverage in its tracks.

At two Los Angeles fundraisers this week, President Obama only allowed his handpicked White House press pool to take pictures and video of the event. Of course, only a written statement about the events was released by the press pool:

The President appeared at an intimate fund-raising dinner at the home of James and Mai Lassiter in LA’s Hancock Park area. He spoke softly to guests sitting at four tables, 8-10 seats per table. Tickets cost $35,800 per person.

Actor Will Smith, looking dapper in a three piece suit, stood near the back of the room and watched.  Boston Celtics nemesis Magic Johnson sat at a table to the president’s right.

Pool was ushered out after 10 minutes, as potus [President of the United States] opened it up for questions [...]

Pool is holding contentedly near the Lassiter’s lighted backyard pool, enjoying a cool LA breeze and snacking on individual-size pizzas.

About  8:20 p.m. local time, pool was led to the rear of the imposing Spanish-style mansion of Antonio Banderas and Melanie Griffith and into a large white tent where about 200 people sat in folding chairs, just as someone said “the program” would continue soon. That gave the crowd, who paid at least $5,000 each, time to ogle the riff-raff of the Fourth Estate as we took our seats at the rear.

Soon, to enthusiastic applause, the hosts and POTUS entered with Eva Longoria, who introduced the president, as folks stood holding cameras and cellphones above their heads.

Among those in attendance at the events were Hollywood actors and wealthy liberals, who by no means represent the average American in terms of prosperity. If these people were Wall Street businessmen with no interest in the president’s campaign, I’m sure Mr. Obama would call in the press and deliver yet another misplaced, stinging rant on their selfishness and disregard for everyday Americans.

Clearly, President Obama is consumed with his image, and rightly so: his approval numbers are going down the drain as I type this sentence. And when the president incites class warfare in his populist rants and then turns to the wealthy fat-cats themselves to pick up the tab for his reelection campaign, it becomes necessary for President Obama to cover up his deceit of his base and the American people the best he possibly can to preserve his already weak political standing and cover up his incredible hypocrisy. If Obama really stood for decency and transparency, he would step up and admit that he perpetuates the same cronyism that he so often protests in his speeches to the American public, no matter what price he would pay at the polls. But unfortunately, President Obama is just another politician.

Texas governor Rick Perry (left) listens to fellow contender Herman Cain at a recent debate

Governor Rick Perry revealed his new flat tax plan today, and it is a thing of beauty.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Mr. Perry outlines the basic components of his new proposal: a voluntary 20% income tax rate, a 20% corporate tax rate, an 18% cap on federal spending (relative to GDP), and serious entitlement reform which allows young people to privatize their Social Security. Titled “Cut, Balance, and Grow”, Perry’s proposal also repeals Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, all of which are costly, job-killing measures. Perry writes that his proposal will impose an “immediate moratorium” on pending federal regulations and will audit the existing ones to determine their impact and necessity.

Perry’s plan is a fantastic idea because it allows people to choose between their existing tax rates and the new voluntary 20% flat tax. Because of this, Perry’s plan is not regressive and will not negatively impact the poor, who can simply elect to pay their current income tax rate to escape a potentially higher tax rate under the Texas governor’s plan. Also, the income tax that Perry has proposed will preserve crucial exemptions such as the mortgage interest and state/local tax exemptions for those making less than $500,000 annually. Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, by contrast, eliminates the mortgage interest deduction and could potentially cause thousands of foreclosures across the United States as a result. Perry’s proposed 20% corporate tax eliminates special interest loopholes and grants a massive temporary tax cut to companies who bring overseas profits to the United States. His proposal to privatize Social Security is an effective and intelligent way to get the government out of the business of overseeing retirement for every American.

Cain’s 9-9-9 has several issues that must be addressed, most notably the 9% sales tax and the utter lack of exemptions in the plan. However, Perry’s “Cut, Balance, and Grow” has taken the bold flat tax proposed by Cain and has made it even better by removing the questionable portions. However, despite the plan’s strengths, it will not succeed unless Governor Perry can show passion and confidence in a debate environment, win the hearts and dollars of potential voters, and revive his struggling candidacy.

A phoenix moment for Rick Perry?

Rick Perry jogging on stage to describe his new flat tax proposal

After what I perceived to be an inadequate debate performance by Governor Rick Perry, many commentators think that Mr. Perry might be able to raise his campaign from the ashes and grasp the nomination. However, the Texas governor has had three difficult debates and has fallen into the bottom tier in recent polling data. Putting aside my skepticism, is it possible for Mr. Perry to turn his sagging poll numbers around in time for the primaries?

Rick Perry has several things to brag about. Firstly, he is cash-flush. He raised over $17 million in the first seven weeks of his campaign to conclude a lively third quarter. Even in the midst of his abysmal debate performances, Perry has continued to crank out millions of dollars in funds. Clearly, the governor is extremely capable of raising tremendous amounts of money.

On policy, Perry has experienced some problems, particularly regarding immigration. Alec Baldwin described Perry’s immigration stance perfectly in his Saturday Night Live impersonation of the governor by saying, “I believe we need to build a fence to keep the illegals out; however, should any illegals get through and have children here, I believe we should open our hearts and pay for their education.” However, Perry’s brand new flat tax proposal, which seems to be modeled off Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, could win the hearts of voters not quite sold on the viability of Cain’s proposed national sales tax. By excising the controversial portions of Mr. Cain’s plan, Perry has created a very attractive flat income tax proposal that will appeal to mainstream Republicans as well as tea party voters.

However, in my view, neither money nor an attractive plan will be useful to Mr. Perry unless he can solve his biggest problem: debating. On issues other than the economy, Mr. Perry speaks slowly and haltingly and thus comes across as weak and diffident. Also, Perry is extremely confrontational with Mitt Romney, almost to the point of looking petty. Because of this, the governor is forced to run a campaign of negativity, putting out anti-Romney ads by the dozen in an attempt to improve his standing. Perry must start to focus on his personal strengths, such as his extraordinary record of job creation in Texas and his new flat tax proposal. If Mr. Perry can get his act together and speak confidently to the American people in the next debate, he may regain much of the support he has lost to Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich.

Rick Perry could turn his ailing campaign around and rise from the ashes, but the dramatic phoenix moment that he needs to secure the GOP nomination will not come with just money and good policy. Without exuding confidence and strength on his own accord, Rick Perry will be just another unmarked tombstone of the democratic political process.

We could have done better in Libya

Libyan rebels celebrating their victory

“The NATO alliance worked like it was designed to do, burden sharing. In total it cost us $2 billion, no American lives lost, we carried the burden a lot of other places where NATO is-the primary burden like in Afghanistan–and this was really burden sharing.”

That from Vice-President Joe Biden in an interview with CNN’s Chief Political Correspondent, Candy Crowley. The Libyan mission has indeed been a success, but its drawn-out nature has caused the unnecessary deaths of many Libyans. And even though the United States largely relied upon NATO for the success of the Libyan mission, we have wasted billions of dollars. How could we have done better?

The Libyan conflict should have been solved quickly and with immense force. Both NATO and the United States should have put all their cards on the table immediately to challenge Gaddafi’s oppressive rule over the Libyan people. Instead of just sending periodic airstrikes and cruise missiles to help the rebels, the NATO coalition should have hit Gaddafi’s forces in every way possible, utilizing heavy equipment such as tanks and sending a massive air raid to completely level Gaddafi’s palace and compound. Another idea would be to only go after Gaddafi, and the United States Navy SEALs would be more than capable of completing that task cleanly, covertly, and inexpensively (For those who don’t know, a small group of SEALs assassinated Osama Bin-Laden at the beginning of May). Experienced boots on the ground would also have helped the Libyan rebels a great deal as both instructors and combat leaders. Putting NATO and US troops on the ground in Libya would have been a strong sign of US support of the Libyans and would have greatly improved our image and our impact in the region over time. Also, by quickly resolving the conflict, the United States would have spent less money to do so.

I am glad that no American lives were lost in Libya, just like Vice-President Biden. However, had we intervened with ground troops and risked the lives of a few Americans, we could have averted much of the loss of life among Libyan rebels. Considering that our president thought it important for the United States to even enter the Libyan conflict to aid the rebels in their efforts to break free from Gaddafi, I’m somewhat surprised that he didn’t deploy any ground troops there.

Now after the fact, Libyan rebels have gained their freedom from Gaddafi’s oppressive rule. Good for them! But hopefully, President Obama will have a more rapid, more powerful military response ready for a similar situation in the future.

Businessman Herman Cain speaking at the CNN Las Vegas debate on Tuesday.

At a fiery debate on Tuesday, newly crowned front-runner Herman Cain took plenty of heat on his 9-9-9 tax plan from other candidates. The Georgia businessman handled himself well in the debate and managed to deflect most attacks on his bold proposal. However, is Cain’s 9-9-9 plan fatally flawed?

In the debate, Michelle Bachmann pointed out that a 9% federal sales tax could easily become a 90% tax due to tax increases by Washington politicians. Rick Santorum cited a study that claimed that taxes would go up for 84% of Americans. Romney piled on as well, adding that the federal sales tax would be a burden on those living in states that already have state sales taxes.

Bachmann’s line of reasoning against 9-9-9 is not even an indictment of the plan; it is an indictment of politicians and their endless desire to squeeze more money out of the American people. Regarding the claim that taxes would go up for 84% of Americans under the plan, I disagree. 9-9-9 eliminates the 15% payroll tax and replaces it with a 9% sales tax. Income tax rates and corporate tax rates are also cut to 9% each, a dramatic decrease from our current rates. The idea that 84% of Americans will suffer under higher taxes is ludicrous.
A common indictment of 9-9-9 is that it will adversely affect the poor. Nearly half of Americans don’t pay a single cent in federal income tax right now, and that to me is fundamentally wrong. Everyone in America should be contributing something in taxes, even if it is just a dollar or a hundred dollars. The 9% federal income tax would largely be offset for the poor through the elimination of the payroll tax and the lowering of corporate tax rates, which will lead to lower prices on goods for American consumers. Also, Cain’s proposed “empowerment zones” offer tax reprieves for struggling low-income areas.
In my opinion, 9-9-9 is a solid plan that will throw out our current mess of a tax code and replace it with three low, simple taxes. However, 9-9-9 still needs to be changed. For example, home mortgage interest deductions would go away under Cain’s plan. This could potentially cause a wave of devastating foreclosures for those that are barely paying their bills each month, and because of this, I think Cain’s plan should include a provision that either allows for such deductions or gradually phases them out (a grandfather clause would work nicely).
Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is a work in progress, but it is bold and smart. I think it’s time for the GOP candidates to stop criticizing Cain’s plan and to start suggesting possible revisions to the already fantastic 9-9-9.
For more information about the debate, check out this link. For a 9 point defense of Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, check out this link to Citizens4Cain.com.

An overview of the House GOP jobs plan

Turns out that when President Obama was challenging the Republicans to show them their jobs bill, they had one all along. And it is darn good.

The “Plan for America’s Job Creators” seeks to empower small businessmen and women to create jobs. The plan does this by auditing current federal regulations and requiring congressional review and approval of future regulations. The proposal also streamlines the tax code and lowers the corporate tax rate to 25%. Domestic energy production is also a major component of the bill, as well as significant spending cuts. These cuts are based off the House GOP budget plan, which cuts a whopping $6 trillion over 10 years from government spending. Obamacare is also repealed in the Republican jobs plan.

President Obama didn’t have anything nice to say about the plan, however, when he mentioned it today. He said that the GOP sought after “dirtier air, dirtier water and less people with health insurance.” Since the passage of Obamacare, the number of uninsured Americans has risen to over 50 million people, so I’m not sure where Obama is coming from on that attack. As for “dirtier air” and “dirtier water”, give me a break. We’d be much better off without the EPA breathing down the necks of small business owners and manufacturing plants, which are crucial for economic growth.

Although the GOP plan will never survive the Senate, it does an excellent job of codifying exactly what the American people want in a jobs plan: sound money and job creation. The stimulus clearly has not worked, so why not try something new: the Plan for America’s Job Creators.

To read the full text of the Republican proposal, click here. To read the summary, click here or select the image below.

The House Republican Plan (click image for a summary of the proposal)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers