Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Donkeys and Elephants
Become active in politics. Help destroy the myth that “politics are dirty.” The fact is: politics are essential. The Lord has stressed that we ought to be concerned and involved in promoting good government. You simply have to realize that the political process is the way to attain that objective.
-D. James Cannon
-D. James Cannon
Book List
- I have granted every contributor admin privileges so that you can add your favorite political books yourself. Just follow the same format and be sure to keep this comment first in the list. Thanks!
- "The Constitution of Liberty" by F.A. Hayek (Jeff)
- "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith (Devin)
- "1776" by David McCullough (Devin)
- "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek (Jeff)
- "A Matter of Interpretation" by Antonin Scalia (Devin)
- "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand (Rich)
- "1984" by George Orwell (Devin)
- "The Birth of Plenty" by William J. Bernstein (Devin)
- Very quick read: "The Curses of Entitlement: 30 Frightening Consequences of Government Payments" by Roger Fritz (Rich)
- "The Tempting of America" by Robert H. Bork (Devin)
Labels
- abortion (3)
- AIG bonus tax (1)
- Bin Laden (1)
- Books (1)
- BP (1)
- Budget (2)
- Bush (1)
- Cash for Clunkers (1)
- Change (1)
- common sense (1)
- Conservatism (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Corruption (1)
- Democrats (1)
- economy (3)
- Fort Hood (1)
- Gay Marriage (1)
- global warming (1)
- GM (2)
- Health Care (11)
- Immigration (3)
- Jobs (1)
- KSM Trial (2)
- Language (1)
- LeBron James (1)
- libertarian (1)
- MA election (1)
- Media (1)
- Mid-term Election (1)
- military (1)
- Morals (1)
- Obama (7)
- Obama's Prime Time Speeches (2)
- Our Duty (1)
- Palin (1)
- Phil Davison (1)
- Political Correctness (1)
- Political swings (1)
- Propaganda (1)
- Public Unions (1)
- Reconciliation (1)
- Ron Paul (1)
- Social Justice (1)
- stimulus (2)
- Supreme Court Activism (1)
- Taxes (5)
- The War in Afghanistan (1)
- timeless principles (1)
- Tort Reform (1)
- Torture(d logic) (1)
- Utah politics (1)
21 comments:
I listened to the first 20 minutes or so on the radio on the way home from work before I became angry and had to turn it off. I just get so frustrated when I hear government officials declaring that the government will use more government to solve problems created by government.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100128/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_fact_check
I'm still in shock over the Andrew Jackson-like momemt of utter defiance towards the Supreme Court ("they've made their decision, now let them enforce it" were his exact words). I mean it's one thing to disagree with the decision, but to do what he did in the State of the Union Address right in front of their faces...that's HUGE!!!
Personally I think it's a symptom of his frustration over their recent loss in Massachusetts, but still! That's VERY dangerous territory, and I think now we're starting to see exactly how arrogant our President REALLY is.
As for all the other stuff, I think it was more disingenuous talking points designed to deceived the ignorant public (in his mind) that he's going to moderate when he really has no such intention. But I guess we'll see...
There was also some really funny commentary I heard on Rush today that I wanted to share: 1- "now I know what it's like to hear a propaganda speech from Hugo Chavez..." I know it's a little extreme but I just though it was funny.
2- "Obama is always the least experienced AND most condescending person in the room" Technically that's a general statement, but I think it was particularly apparent for that State of the Union speech: more partisan spin and half-truth plus the blame game, and he honestly expects us to be too wrapped up in his god-like charisma (aside from being too stupid) to even notice that he's just a stubborn, conceited, condescending political hack.
Oh, I also had a follow-up comment to the Supreme Court issue: what does Obama expect Republicans to do in the future when the SC passes decisions THEY don't like? It just amazes me how quickly he (and many other liberals) are so quick to throw the ENTIRE INSTITUTION under the bus when, if anything, it has on the whole been MORE favorable to THEM (at least since the 1930s's "New Deal" Court)!
That was actually the childish attitude I was thinking of in my post on an earlier discussion involving the Stare Decisis issue. Anyway, I just think it's totally ridiculous and uncalled for, at least for a decision like that one. If you're going to take the SC head-on like that, you better have a REALLY strong case not only that their decision was wrong, but that they overstepped their bounds. But in this instance I think it was obvious that it was a purely political manuever (per usual), and I think that very well might have been the final straw that ensures his self-fulfilling prophecy as a one-term President (except not as a "good" one, but more like Jimmy Carter).
Well I knew I could leave it up to you all to mention things you don't like, so maybe I'll try to mention some of the things that I liked.
1. The president seemed focused on the economy. One thing I liked in particular is the tax credit for businessed ($5k per new employee hired plus some kind of other help that will amount to a cost of about $33 billion to the government.) I thought this was a great move by Pres. Obama and hopefully can spur growth by non-government employers.
2. I'll admit I'm not an expert on this, but it seems that nuclear power would be a lot less detrimental to our environment than burning coal, which loads the atmosphere with the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. I would support the move to nuclear power, and I liked how Pres. Obama mentioned this in his speech.
3. I like the idea of expanding pell grants, the $10,000 tax credit for families paying for four years of college.
I think the last few weeks have been a sort of wake-up call for Pres. Obama and the democrats. I really see them losing big-time come election time in November, and that doesn't necessarily make me feel bad. I've been somewhat disappointed with the democrats this last year, and especially disappointed with the infighting in congress. I don't think Pres. Obama has been strong enough in being bipartisan. That being said, I think he's been a pretty centrist president minus a few issues. I hope this coming year is less expensive than the last.
Has anyone been following the whole Tim Tebow abortion commercial controversy? I don't feel like pro-choice groups have a leg to stand on, and I'm very happy that CBS has decided to air the commercial. For one, doesn't it seem backwards that no one has a problem with commercial after commercial promoting drinking and promiscuity but the story of a mother making the choice (sort of ironic) to not abort her child (who turns out to be one of the most charismatic and successful college football players the game has ever seen)is divisive and controversial? And for two, isn't there an amendment in the constitution that specifically legalizes free speech? (That was a rhetorical question, by the way.) I think it's a great story, and if you are pro-choice, it seems that this story might help more women make a more informed choice about their bodies. Sorry this comment was so long.
I didn't listen to the Speech. We aren't carrying TV, and I was at a choir practice anyway. I still haven't read the transcript.
From the commentary, though, one thought really shines through: I appreciate Bill Clinton more and more. I used to think his constant triangulating to public opinion was a bad thing, but now I am realizing the good side of it - he was responsive to the desires of the people. So, regardless of his personal shortcomings, Bill Clinton's stock has risen greatly in my estimation. It is sad that Pres. Obama can't borrow a few pages, a chapter or two - heck, everything but the cover! from Bill Clinton's political book. If he did, we might have another chance at . . . SURPLUSES, and . . . PROSPERITY. Bill Clinton's famous SOTU speech, January 1995 "The era of big government is OVER." And he meant it. Creighton, I admit you were right about Bill.
I'm with Chris on the Clinton comparison. You've got to tip your hat to a guy who realized he had wildly overreached in his first 2 years, his party ended up getting whipped in the midterm elections, so he repented by working excellently with a Republican majority in Congress to do some great things: balance the budget, declaring the era of big government to be over, expand free trade via NAFTA and other trade agreements, welfare reform, tax cuts to spur private sector job growth, and create surpluses. Granted, we weren't at war in two countries back then (at least to the same degree as we are now) and the dot com bubble burst towards the end of Clinton's second term. But having Obama now to contrast with Clinton makes me appreciate Clinton's bipartisan, centrist policies (minus his sexual indiscretions - to put it nicely - and dishonesty in the aftermath) much more than I did before.
The lessons of Clinton seem lost on the current Pres. After watching the SOTU, he still is full speed ahead on unpopular liberal policies that the majority of the electorate don't want: government takeover of health care, cap and tax, er, cap and trade, the latter of which has been dead in the water for six months now in the Senate. I think Americans are tiring of the notion that government is the answer to every problem imaginable, all of which were created by a predatory private sector. I agree with Jeff - whether Obama opens his eyes and responds to the electorate, following in Clinton's footsteps, could be the difference between a one term failure (Jimmy Carter) and a two term success (Clinton).
p.s. I wonder what compliments we will be giving Pres. Obama 12 years from now when we look back on his presidency.
Compliments 12 years from now?
How about, Thanks for not running for a second term :)
Here's another one, and a step in the right direction: thank you for not trying KSM in New York City! I still say he belongs in front of a military tribunal, but good for Mayor Bloomberg for stepping up, putting his foot down, and demanding they move the circus to another place. Good on the Administration for listening to him. A step in the right direction for sure.
I'm I the only one who's really surprised Eric Holder still has his job as AG?
I agree with you Devin. I hope the trial is moved (or has it officially been moved?). I agree with you as well, Creighton, and I was happy to hear his thoughts on how to fix our economy.
However, how would raising taxes for individuals making more than $250,000, and offering a $3-5,000 tax credit for new hires create employment? The individuals who are able to hire for a decent wage make more than $250,000, and a credit of that size does nothing. All that happens is you pay an employee $20,000 for their first year instead of $25,000. You still have the problem of paying them full wages next year, and oh yeah, your tax rate just went up so good luck affording them.
One thing I find pretty funny: Obama calls out the supreme justices, and Alito MOUTHS a reply and he is getting more grief over it than the President. "He was way out of line in doing that."
and Creighton: 100% agree with you on the Tebow commercial. I love the story and appreciate having good examples in positions like the one he is in. The missionaries need to knock on his door.
I don't think it's official, but the gears are in motion, and it looks highly unlikely that the administration will force the KSM trial upon an unwilling NYC (even Sen. Schumer wants it moved).
One of the things that irked me about the SOTU was the fact that your student debt would be forgiven after 10 years if you went into public service, but you have to wait 20 years if you choose to be a selfish, much less noble, money-grubbing employee in the private sector.
Huh??
I understand that generally, public positions do not pay as well as private, but there are plenty of lower-level private sector jobs that pay just the same or lower than public employees. Why penalize these people by doubling their forgiveness window by adding an additional 10 years? That doesn't seem "fair" to me. Barack Obama's contempt for the capitalist private sector really shined through when he let that slip out of his mouth.
Washington Times columnist Mark Steyn, commenting on the proposed 10 yr. public vs. 20 yr. private debt forgiveness plan, put it nicely:
"In the past 60 years, the size of America's government work force has increased five times faster than the population. Yet the president says it's still not enough: We have to divert more of our human capital into the government machine. He's explicitly telling you: If you start a business, invent something, provide a service, you're a schmuck."
The 10 year public sector repayment has been around for a while now, and the private did not even exist. How many years do I have to work before he'll pay the balance on my mortgage? Obama is going to make all my hopes a dreams a breeze! If my wife and I budgeted our money like he does (with this proposed "spending freeze"), we'd be able to say we're climbing farther out of debt each month by only spending $8,000 more than what I make each month rather than $8,050. We'd still be spending significantly more than what we make, but it'll work itself out.
Has it been around for a while? A complete forgiveness of all remaining student debt if you're still paying on it for 10 years and you're getting paid with tax dollars? The way he said it, it seemed like a new proposal.
Good point about the gimmicky spending freeze. It's like saying that right now, we're spending money at 250 mph but we're going to ease off the gas and bring the speed down to 249.5 mph. It will slow it down a little bit, but we're still speeding towards the financial disaster cliff. Woo hoo!
Yeah, he is a trickster. I just double checked and the public sector forgiveness passed in October of 2007. Possibly the stipulations are changing? There is a small catch, though. Normal student loan repayment is 10 years, and to qualify for the forgiveness you have to stay current on your payments for 10 years. Months in forbearance or default won't count towards the 10 years. So the only way it would ever take you more than 10 years to repay and keep payments current is to make above the poverty line, but lower than your payments being 15% of your gross monthly income. That way your payments will be reduced to 15% of what you make, and the time to repay is extended accordingly.
And yes, I like to explain things in the most confusing way possible.
Awesome, thanks for the info. And silly me, I should know better than to take Obama at his word alone :) It's sad it has come to that, but it is true. Case in point, thanks Nic:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100128/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_fact_check
Doublespeak: http://reason.tv/video/show/obamas-doublethink-doubletalk
Post a Comment