The Right Stuff Roundup - February 8, 2012
984
Reads
|
Now We Have Proof: "Anybody Could Become President"! When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President. Now I'm beginning to believe it. Clarence Darrow, US defense lawyer (1857 - 1938) Social Security Trust Fund Outlook Takes $1 Tril Dive The outlook for Social Security's trust fund has deteriorated to an astonishing degree over the past year, new Congressional Budget Office projections show. The nonpartisan budget scorekeeper released the estimates Tuesday as part of broader economic and budget forecasts. CBO expects the trust fund to peak in 2018 and decline to $2.7 trillion in 2022 — a full $1 trillion less than Social Security's own actuaries predicted last year. The new trajectory suggests that the trust fund's current depletion date of 2036 may jump ahead several years when Social Security's trustees release their annual report this spring, making the retirement program more central to the 2012 election . The trust fund doesn't mean much for the government's ability to afford benefits — Social Security's assets are offset by Treasury's equal debt. But it does give the program the legal authority to pay all promised benefits until its special Treasuries are spent. Under current law, once the trust fund is gone, Social Security could only pay 78% of benefits. Since older retirees and the disabled would be protected, new retirees would face much deeper cuts to a benefit that is not especially generous to begin with... CBO was moderately more pessimistic than SSA a year ago, but has grown much more so, guided by incoming economic data. The 2-percentage-point payroll-tax cut doesn't affect the trust fund outlook, because that money is repaid to Social Security. Ted Graham, Investor's Business Daily CBO In Process Of Updating Obamacare Estimates Congressional Budget Office bean counters are taking a fresh look at President Obama’s national health care law, and will have updated figures on key provisions in March, director Doug Elmendorf testified this week in Congress. Though he stopped short of saying there would be a full re-scoring of the law. Several factors could make the health care law significantly more costly than advertised at the time of passage in March 2010. For instance, the law was crafted in a way to delay enactment of the major spending provisions until 2014, to make the legislation appear cheaper under the CBO’s 10-year budget window (then 2010 to 2019). Now, the budget window has moved up to 2022, meaning it takes into account an extra three years of full enactment. When Elmendorf testified before the House Budget Committee on Wednesday, Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif., asked him thecost estimates for Medicaid spending and health insurance exchange subsidies would be effected now that CBO’s long-term unemployment forecast has deteriorated. Campbell noted that at the time of its original estimate, CBO was expecting an unemployment rate of 4.9 percent in 2014, but now that’s projected to be 8.7 percent. “That piece alone would raise the cost of the Affordable Care Act,” Elmendorf said, referring to the formal name for the legislation. “I don’t know by how much.” Elmendorf said the CBO would update its estimates of the cost of coverage expansions under the health care law. On Thursday, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., also pressed Elmendorf on health care cost estimates, arguing that the number of employers who would be dumping workers on government-run exchanges and simply paying a fine would be higher than originally projected. Elmendorf responded that in addition to updating the coverage provisions for March, the CBO was working on a separate analysis that would contain a range of estimates about how the cost of the health care law would be affected if certain assumptions were wrong one way or the other. Philip Klein, Beltway Confidential Marx, Jesus, Or Obama, Who Are You Going To Believe President Obama has hit a new low. By promoting his reasoning for hiking taxes on the rich at the National Prayer Breakfast, he diminished the seriousness of his proposals and manipulated Jesus' teachings for his own political purposes. Listening to Obama talk about taxation almost as a form of worship was beyond the bounds as he said, "For me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus's teaching that for unto whom much is given, much shall be required." He was quoting and distorting the Gospel of Luke and the Parable of the Faithful Servant. And, as Christians, we are greatly grieved by what Obama has done... The Bible we read also speaks out against covetousness and theft. And the promotion of division and class warfare promoted by this administration clearly promotes the citizenry to desire the wealth owned by others. We believe that the Bible's teachings are clearly understandable and are accessible to all that will take the time to read it. There is much to be learned by diligent study of the Word of God; we pray that Obama will take more care when he quotes scripture in the future. There are many passages throughout the Bible that mandate the poor and widowed should receive care, and we believe private charity is much better than a faceless government bureaucracy at delivering the care and individual attention required when people are in need. We cannot find anywhere in our Bible a call for high taxes and the confiscation of private property. Instead, we find those passages in the Communist Manifesto. Maybe Obama is confused. Floyd & Mary Beth Brown, TownHall Government Unions Support California Tax Hike Two well-connected government unions in California are teaming with Gov. Jerry Brown to support a multibillion-dollar tax increase. The California Teachers Association and Service Employees International Union were the top two spenders for lobbying in 2011 with combined efforts totaling more than $10 million, according to Sacramento Bee. Now they’re using their muscle to champion Brown’s tax hike. Brown’s plan “would raise tens of billions of dollars by temporarily increasing the sales tax and the income tax on wealthy Californians, generating about $35 billion over five years,” according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The involvement of government unions is nothing new, according to Heritage’s James Sherk, senior policy analyst in labor economics. He said these actions illustrate how unions lobby and support initiatives that lead to higher taxes and bigger government. … More Much of the money unions collect from dues goes to lobbying, which is then used to advocate for tax increases to sustain their members’ salaries. The CTA and SEIU are two prime examples. “Unions consistently press for higher taxes and more government spending across America,” Sherk said. “The labor movement has made higher taxes and more government spending one of its top priorities.” Alison Meyer, Foundry Gospels Contradict Obama's Idea Of A Socialist Jesus President Obama has taken a very powerful name in vain in defense of his class warfare economic policies. In fact, Obama encourages a sin Jesus Christ repeatedly admonished: envy. Attending the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, President Obama declared that raising tax rates on higher incomes "coincides with Jesus' teaching that 'for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.'" It is disgraceful enough for a president to use a religious event to push an economic agenda that has already insured his place in history as the food stamp president. But Obama began his remarks by claiming there was nothing political in what he would be saying. He was there, he said, so that he and the attendees could "come together as brothers and sisters and seek God's face together." After getting "caught up in the noise and rancor that too often passes as politics today, these moments of prayer slow us down. They humble us," the president said, adding that "we can all benefit from turning to our Creator, listening to Him, avoiding phony religiosity, listening to Him." This from a president who has conspicuously neglected attending religious services during his time in office — until recently, that is, with his re-election campaign revving up. It looks to be a cynical manipulation of those who hold deep religious beliefs, little more. Sanctimonious talk about "turning to our Creator, listening to Him, avoiding phony religiosity" from a president leftist comic Bill Maher is convinced is really a secular humanist just like his mother, whom Obama described as having "a healthy skepticism of religion as an institution." Considering that the rest of Obama's prayer breakfast speech was all politics, how can he not be judged guilty of "phony religiosity" himself? The president said televangelists "come by the Oval Office .. . and we'll pray together." Imagine the media clamor if a Republican president said this. But don't expect a peep in the news raising church and state issues about this. According to President Obama, Jesus's "command to 'love thy neighbor as thyself '" is behind his expansion of government and regulation, and his tax increases. Everything his administration has been doing, from foreign aid to Uganda to Dodd-Frank making "too big to fail" a permanent fixture of financial institutions, is apparently based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. Then, a moment later, he shamelessly pivots and quotes C.S. Lewis — a conservative who would be appalled by Barack Obama's ideas — saying that Christianity has no "detailed political program." In fact, Christ repeatedly warned against exactly the kind of class envy Obama has made the foundation of his economic policies and campaign rhetoric. When asked if the Jews should pay taxes to Rome, Jesus famously asked to be shown the tribute coin bearing the image of Tiberius and replied, "Render therefore the things that are Caesar's to Caesar and the things that are God's to God." The left would like to interpret that as, "pay your taxes and shut up." But it has throughout most of the history of Christianity been used by the church as a restriction on state power — especially as relates to interfering with religious practice. In the Parable of the Generous Employer, Christ condemns the worker who complains to his boss that "thou hast made them equal to us that have borne the burden of the day" by paying other workers more. "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?" the employer asks in response, in a Gospel passage that eloquently champions private property. Jesus Christ was no socialist. In fact, unlike the utopians who lead the Democratic Party today, Christ realized that "the poor you will always have with you." Editorial, Investor's Business Daily House Committee Examines Obama's Unconstitutional Appointments President Obama’s illegal non-recess appointments are unconstitutional and defy the process the Founding Fathers intended, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told a House committee Wednesday. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee invited a handful of constitutional law experts to discuss the four controversial appointments Obama made in January. Citing delays in the Senate, Obama installed Richard Cordray as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Richard Griffin Jr., Sharon Block, and Terence F. Flynn as members of the National Labor Relations Board. Lee, a constitutional expert and scholar, relentlessly defended the U.S. Constitution, saying Obama’s appointments defied checks and balances, taking away the power that belongs to the people. “Constitutional government is designed to not be so efficient so laws don’t get passed quickly,” Lee argued. “Just because there are delays, the Constitution shouldn’t be circumvented.” The central debate at the hearing was whether or not the constitutional process of checks and balances should be circumvented for efficiency. Defenders of Obama’s decision focused their arguments on delays, saying the process is not efficient. … More C. Boyden Gray, who served as White House counsel for President George H.W. Bush, urged Congress to take action in response to Obama’s decision. He warned against relying on the courts to do so. “Because Congress cannot be sure that the courts will retroactively correct the CFPB’s and NLRB’s exercise of unconstitutional power even if they have been unconstitutionally staffed, it is all the more incumbent upon Congress to explore whatever checks and balances are available to pressure the Administration not to repeat its unconstitutional appointments, and to nominate a new CFPB Director and NLRB members who would secure the Senate’s advice and consent.”... Lee and his colleague Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said they will file amicus briefs in one case that has attempted to challenge the illegal appointments. Alison Meyer & Rob Bluey, The Heritage Foundation The Fight To Reform Education Would any concerned parent willingly send their children to an average public school in this country if there was an option available? The word “concerned” in the question should be a tipoff that the answer is no. Still, states, localities and the federal government continue to dump billions of our hard-earned tax dollars into a system that is rotten to its core. Don’t think things are that bad? A student in Washington state named Austin took a video camera into his school’s cafeteria and asked students basic questions about U.S. history. The answers, although funny, are pathetic. Progressives say it’s because teachers are forced to “teach to the test” – meaning standardized tests designed to measure knowledge of important topics such as English, science and math. Lee White, executive director of the National History Coalition, told the Huffington Post, "They've narrowed the curriculum to teach to the test. History has been de-emphasized. You can't expect kids to have great scores in history when they're not being taught history." That would hold some water, of course, if those students who failed at history were excelling at other topics. But they’re not... Our education spending has skyrocketed. Our test scores have not... If meaningful reform is to come, and that’s a big “if,” it’s going to come from the state level. One person actually trying to bring change to public education is Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. The Wall Street Journal says Gov. Jindal “wants to create America’s largest school voucher program, broadest parental choice system and toughest teacher accountability regime – all in one legislative session.” School choice and a voucher program that allows students and parents to choose any school that best suits their needs have been proven winners in the fight to improve education quality. They’ve also been the top target of teachers’ unions because families often choose private schools where the teaching staff is not unionized. Gov. Jindal believes that every child deserves an equal opportunity in education, but that the current system doesn't allow for it. Emboldened by what has happened in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina, Gov. Jindal is now pushing for statewide education reform. Educational choice is one of the few good things to come out of the storm, which laid waste to dozens of the nation’s worst public schools. Instead of rebuilding the old, failing system, the state transformed most of the schools in Orleans Parish into autonomous charter schools. Student achievement has improved dramatically... Gov. Jindal’s plan would allow students in failing schools statewide to take the roughly $8,500 the state spends on their education to any accredited school they wish. The threatened loss of money would apply market forces to bad schools that routinely fail without consequence. Needless to say, unions representing teachers don’t like the idea. Teachers’ unions also aren’t crazy about the governor’s idea to reform tenure, the mechanism that makes it nearly impossible to fire bad teachers. His plan would grant it to teachers rated “highly effective,” but deny it to those who don’t make the grade – no matter how long they’ve taught... Michael Walker Jones, executive director of the Louisiana Association of Educators, said of the school choice plan, “If I'm a parent in poverty I have no clue because I'm trying to struggle and live day to day.” Jindal and choice advocates could not have written a more tone-deaf line for their opponents if they’d tried. Progressives think everyone but them is simply too dumb and/or distracted to negotiate school choice. You “have no clue,” but they, helpfully, know what is best for you and your children – as evidenced by the state of public education in America today. It’s the philosophy behind every progressive policy idea – from education to “financial reform” to ObamaCare. It is rare and refreshing to hear one of them actually say it. Jones, in working to stop needed reforms, gave reformers their greatest arrow in a quiver full of arrows tipped with facts, studies and statistics. As Jindal continues his push to improve education in his state, there will be more “gaffes” of this sort. Progressives aren’t used to being openly challenged on such a large scale. Gov. Jindal is. For the sake of Louisiana’s students, let’s hope he wins. Derek Hunter [Radio Host], TownHall Indiana Enacts Right To Work; Arizona Moves To Restore Voters' Voices Indiana’s Senate yesterday passed—and Governor Mitch Daniels (R) signed—the state’s long-awaited right-to-work law, making it the 23rd state in the nation and the first state in the union-heavy Rust Belt to give workers the right to choose whether or not to pay union dues. Meanwhile, 1,700 miles away, Arizona is considering a bill that would restore voter control over government by, among other measures, stripping government unions of their collective bargaining power. Indiana’s move is a victory for the state’s workers—and the state’s economy. Now Hoosiers cannot be forced to pay union dues just to keep their job. This freedom makes union organizers a lot less aggressive, which attracts businesses investment. Heritage’s James Sherk explains that in counties in right-to-work states the share of manufacturing jobs is one-third higher than in adjacent counties in non–right-to-work states. Unions, however, bitterly oppose Right-to-Work: it costs them money. They do not want workers dissatisfied with their union representation to stop paying dues. That means less money in their coffers. Sherk writes that Right-to-Work will allow Indiana’s working families to save $18 million a year in previously forced dues. As Indiana makes its right-to-work move, Arizona—already a right-to-work state—is taking a significant step in restoring voter control over public policy and saving taxpayers money. The Tucson Citizen reports on the measures the state legislature is considering: "Senate Bill 1485, sponsored by Sen. Rick Murphy, R-Phoenix, would ban collective bargaining in government. Three other bills also tackle the issue. They would: ban withholdings of any portion of workers’ wages to pay for labor dues; immediately ban third-party deductions from employee paychecks without annual authorization; and require government employees to do government—not union—business while on taxpayer time." The AFL-CIO is already shouting down the effort, calling Arizona the “New Wisconsin” and warning that the measures “would wipe out public-sector unions in our state.” However, the reality is that Arizona is taking measures that bring some common sense to the state’s public policy. Collective bargaining in government means that the voter’s elected representatives do not have final say on spending or policy decisions. Instead elected representatives must come to agreement with government unions before deciding public policy — leaving voters in the cold. As recently as 1959 the AFL-CIO agreed that this was undemocratic. Government unions negotiate contracts that benefit them at the public’s expense. But government should serve the public, not the other way around. … More Despite the recession being over, unemployment still remains high, economic recovery remains slow, and states and local governments are facing busted budgets that are out of control. It’s no surprise that states like Indiana are seeking to improve their job-creating climate and that states like Arizona are trying to find ways to prevent more destructive spending in the future. Giving workers freedom in their workplaces — and voters control over their government — is a significant step forward. Mike Brownfield, The Heritage Foundation Political Correctness And Muslims The story is grisly: a husband and wife murdering their three young daughters, ages 19, 17 and 13, by drowning them along with their stepmother. The couple was assisted by their 21-year-old son. All were found guilty of first-degree murder in Ontario, Canada. They were sentenced to life in prison. Mohammad Shafia and his wife, Tooba, immigrated to Canada from Afghanistan in 2007. Being Muslims, they believe in Sharia law, which in some cases allows so-called "honor killings" -- that is, if a family member deviates from strict Muslim teachings, other family members can execute them. Of course, that's insane. But under the Taliban in Afghanistan and in some other parts of the world, "honor killings" are allowed. In his eyes, Shafia's three daughters were guilty of becoming westernized, wearing nontraditional Muslim clothing and associating with the dreaded Christians. So this demented father ordered the girls killed, as well as his first wife, whom he believed was aiding them in their alleged transgressions. Reporting on the story in America has been scant and strange. According to the Media Research Center, the initial Associated Press report made no mention of the fact that the convicted murderers are Muslim. They were described as "Afghan." In fact, the only theology mentioned in the AP dispatch is Christianity, used while describing the boyfriend of one of the daughters. On NBC's "Nightly News," anchor Brian Williams said this: "A verdict has been reached in a murder case that's gotten a lot of attention because it involved so-called honor killings of family members. In this case, an Afghan family living in Canada. It is a culture clash getting a lot of attention to our north." Culture clash? Between whom? Afghans and Canadians? What is Williams talking about? The reporter on the story, Kevin Tibbles, also avoided using the word "Muslim." He described the motivation for the violence as "a strict religious family that felt it had been disgraced." What religion? Incredibly, the reporter didn't say. This is no coincidence. The politically correct U.S. media are frightened by Muslim violence. They avoid the issue whenever they can. Just think about what would happen if a Catholic father murdered his daughter for having an abortion.Would the AP and NBC News not have mentioned the religion involved? I think we all know the answer to that question. Political correctness is dangerous because it obscures the truth. It allows certain people and groups to avoid scrutiny for destructive actions. Today, the press in America is dominated by liberal editors who believe they are protecting "minorities" by failing to mention facts that might cast them in a negative light. Thus, honest reporting is becoming almost obsolete when certain groups are involved. Shafia, his wife and his son are Muslim fanatics who believe they have the right to commit murder in the name of their religion. Somebody get that dispatch to the media. Bill O'Reilly, Nationally Syndicated Columnist Obama's Green Energy Investments Continue To Fail In recent days we learned sales of the Volt and Leaf cratered, President Obama's failed green jobs program is under investigation, and another "clean energy" company's in trouble. Green is the new red. Each week, it seems, brings fresh evidence that the Obama administration's obsession with so-called clean energy is an increasingly costly failure. January car sales data out this week provided additional proof that consumers are turning their backs on electric cars, making President Obama's pledge to get a million of them on the road in three years look even more ridiculous.Chevy sold just 603 Volts in January. (It sold almost five times as many gas-guzzling, 12 mpg Suburbans that same month.)Nissan moved just 676 Leafs, and the company hasn't sold more than 1,000 in five months. And these dismal sales figures come in a month when overall auto sales were surprisingly strong — hitting a high not seen since May 2008. Consumers' lack of interest in electric cars helped push another Obama-backed company — Ener1 — into bankruptcy protection late last week, despite the $118 million grant its battery-making subsidiary got from the Energy Dept. As the CEO put it, the company suffered a lack of demand, thanks to lower-than-hoped-for electric car sales. Ener1 joins two other failed green companies — Solyndra and Beacon Power — that took $571 million in taxpayer subsidies down with them. To top things off, the House is stepping up its probe into Obama's $500 million green job training program, according to a USA Today story this week. An earlier Labor Department inspector general report found the program placed just 8,000 people in jobs after 17 months, or about 10% of the program's goal. The IG went so far as to suggest scrapping the program altogether and returning unspent money to the Treasury. Unfortunately, like a bad investor, Obama wants to double down on his failure. "The payoffs on these public investments don't always come right away," he said in his January State of the Union speech. "Some technologies don't pan out; some companies fail. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy." That may be so, but solar, wind and electric cars are hardly new technologies — electric cars were being sold back in the late 1800s. Indeed, the only thing new here is Obama's naivete about their potential, and his eagerness to waste so much taxpayer money pushing them. Editorial, Investor's Business Daily |
|
Fastest-Climbing Red County ContributorsMost-Followed Red County ContributorsTop CommentersMost-Followed Colony Rabble |
Comments
Post new comment