As usual, the mainstream media is not paying attention to the actual substance of a story, opting for focusing on the style in which it was delivered. When Benjamin Netanyahu said that the world needs to draw a red line between two levels of nuclear material development in Iran, it was deadly serious business. In all honesty, the line should have been drawn months ago, and Iran shouldn’t have been permitted to enter into the second stage of nuclear weapon development. But, that is a hypothetical debate that serves absolutely no purpose at this point.
What does matter is that while the press, including FoxNews, is running around babbling about the cartoon-style bomb Netanyahu used to illustrate his point on the floor of the UN, the real issue is being ignored. It is highly unlikely that diplomacy will hold the solution to the Iranian nuclear problem. That is being kind, in that I’m suggesting that diplomacy has any chance whatsoever at this point. The reality is that by this time next year, unless there is some major change in the status quo, Iran will have a working nuclear weapon for use against Israel, the U.S., or anyone else that happens to anger their leaders at any given time. I am not engaging in exaggerations here. Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he pointed out that the “mutually assured destruction” that prevented nuclear war with the Soviets will not work with the Iranians. They prize death, and look forward to paradise in a hereafter if they are martyred for their cause – they want to die. And no matter how much Obama and his supporters would like to deny it, our president is fully aware of that because he was exposed to that mentality at an early age.
Yes, I am pointing out what should be repeated time and again when it comes to foreign policy decisions made by this administration. Obama was raised to be a Muslim, for at least part of his childhood. I am not saying anything about radical Islam here, but I am saying that we have to stop allowing this president to have a pass for being incompetent on these issues. As Netanyahu was pointing out the dangers of radical Islam, Obama was claiming that this world has no place for individuals that insult Mohammed.
Now, we can debate out the finer points of Obama’s love affair with Islam all we like, but at this point, it can be likened to Nero celebrating while Rome burned. The fact is that Netanyahu’s suggestion for dealing with Iran probably will not work at this point. It is unlikely that anyone will find anything short of military action that will induce that nation to stop the production of nuclear material. But, Netanyahu was absolutely right about one thing – a nuclear-armed Iran is no different from a nuclear-armed al-Qaeda. So, the question for everyone now is, do we keep babbling about cartoon bombs, or do we start talking seriously about preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon? We’re sitting in an interesting time, when social media makes it possible for the people to speak directly to leaders, media, etc. The media has essentially stopped playing watchdog over our government, and there has been talk of boycotts against advertisers, and other things like that. Maybe instead of boycotting businesses, we need to start telling the media what we really think – by contacting them directly via social media, and by getting the message across through the television ratings. Advertisers will leave when there isn’t an audience, after all. So, maybe start with this one issue. Take a moment, and tell your favorite (or least favorite) mainstream media personality that you want real news on Iran, and not fluff about cartoon drawings. And pass it on.
On Wednesday, the Obama campaign released an ad showing the President explaining his economic plan for his next four years. Big promises with no detailed actions are the mainstay of the production, but we offer a viewer’s guide to put the rhetoric in perspective (video embedded as well).
Obama ad: “Table”
Today, I believe, as a nation, we are moving forward again.
Now, Governor Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double-down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.
The housing bubble and certain bust was not caused by tax rates on the rich or a lack of government intervention in the economy. Bad mortgages that banks were forced to make to those that could not pay them was the underlying issue. Having agencies that operated under Congressional oversight back those bad loans fueled the issue into a nightmare. To mitigate bad risk pushed on them by the democrat-pushed Community Reinvestment Act and the failed social policies it represents, financial institutions packaged portions of bad loans with good into mortgage-back securities. Had the bad loans not been forced on banks in the first place, the bubble would not have been so deep and the recession would either have been shallow or non-existent. It is government over-reach that caused the crisis – not the rich, free market policy or a lack of regulation.
Create a million new jobs
Help businesses double their exports
Tax breaks for companies that invest in America
Produce more American energy
Double fuel efficiency of cars
Create the best work force in the world
Hire 100,000 math and science teachers
Train 2 million Americans with job skills
Cut the growth of tuition in half
Increase student aid programs
Reduce the Deficit by $4 Trillion over ten years
Use half the savings from the Afghanistan draw-down to pay down the debt
Use the rest for “nation building” at home
Ask the wealthy to pay more
The plan outlined above is straight from the video. No details left out, because there weren’t any. But, we’ll go through each of the four main points and compare to the President’s past promises and his record on achieving them.
#1 Create a million new jobs
Obama says that the government will help businesses double their exports and give tax breaks to those companies that invest in America. Tax breaks were given to businesses for hiring during Obama’s first term. This practice was ineffective because it was temporary, too small and based on an incentive that businesses didn’t need. Businesses hire when they need to produce more product, conduct more research or otherwise expand. Government over-regulation, Obamacare, the threat of other taxes being increased and an unstable economy prevent hiring. A craptastic deduction isn’t going to change that.
If Obama had led the way to reduce the amount of time, effort and money businesses had to spend dealing with government rules they would naturally apply those resource to growing their businesses. As Reagan once said, “Government is not the solution, government is the problem.”
No specifics were given as to how the government would double exports. The Obama administration has not been a force helping American businesses in foreign markets or global competition. Our corporate tax rates are the highest in the world and an unfair burden in the global marketplace. Under Obama’s leadership, the United States has dropped to #7 in economic competitiveness from #1 during the last administration. America has also slipped to 18th in the world in economic freedom.
From the President who didn’t feel it necessary to meet with his own jobs council even once during his first term, details may be difficult.
#2 Produce more American Energy
The Obama administration has been the most hostile to conventional energy sources since Jimmy Carter. Gas is more than $3 more expense per gallon than at the start of his term, utility bills have skyrocketed (which he did say would happen under his plan), and groceries are costing Americans much more – all due to increased energy costs.
Being firmly in the way of the XL pipeline, limiting offshore drilling while giving money to South America to drill off of their coast, bad loans to failing renewable energy companies, using regulation to choke the coal industry and poor handling of the BP spill seemed the foundation of the Obama energy plan in his first term. With no re-election to worry about, why should voters think that he will do much of anything else?
#3 Create the best workforce in the world
Simply hiring 100,000 teachers will not create a more educated workforce. Our entire education system is in dire need of an overhaul. The system simply churns out kids, caters to the lowest-common denominator and rewards ineffective teachers as much as effective ones. Teachers unions have been effective at keeping their membership and dues at their desired levels by making bad teachers difficult to fire and great teachers impossible to reward. In true socialistic fashion, success is suppressed from a simple lack of reward.
The President’s plan offers no actions that will “slow the growth of tuition”. Will he cut professor and staff salaries? Will he reduce the cost of buildings or the cost of their maintenance? Will he reduce the availability of classes? Wishing for a thing does not make it so. Obama’s plan to make more government education subsidies and assistance availability will only increase the cost of secondary education. More dollars chasing fewer goods .. sound familiar? The tuition bubble is the fault of too much government intervention. We either have to accept higher tuition or less government inflationary pressure. He can’t have it both ways unless price controls are put in place – then the government will have to decide who can or cannot go to college when the seats are rationed.
Obama has no specifics on how to improve the education system, he simply says we need more of the same – a lot more.
#4 Reduce the Deficit by $4 Trillion over ten years
The President relies on the end of the war in Afghanistan to pay down the deficit. The total cost of the Afghanistan war, over ten years, has been less than $600 billion dollars. Obama says that half the savings will go to the deficit. That would be, optimistically, $300 billion if the war ended today. That isn’t even close to the $2 trillion that would be required to supply half the deficit reduction the President has promised. He also assumes that no other major military action will be ordered under his leadership. Obama’s pushing back into Afghanistan, attacking Libya, drone strikes in Syria and other middle east nations and who knows how many other “kinetic military actions” or “overseas contingencies” will be required to respond to “man made disasters” in the second term, it is difficult to understand the math proposed by Obama.
Obama promised to cut the deficit in half during his first term. He has done precisely the opposite while not managing to get a budget passed even when his party held the majority in both houses of Congress. The Senate, who has the responsibility to craft a budget, is still led by Democrats and has yet to pass a budget under Obama’s leadership. The President failed to lead on the findings of his own Simpson-Bowles deficit commission enacting exactly none of their recommendations.
Obama ends the video saying that “it’s time for a new economic patriotism” – sounds a lot like, get ready for Obama’s new normal – 1% or less GDP growth, high unemployment and skyrocketing numbers of Americans on government assistance. Several democrats have referred to their tax the rich proposals as helping the wealthy be more patriotic. Perhaps that what Obama means with this new term.
I was driving home the other day, when I happened to see a bum sitting on the curb talking on a cell phone. How did I know that he was a bum you might be thinking? Well I was born and raised on the lower east side of Manhattan in New York City. So believe me I know a bum when I see one. (Did you ever hear of the Bowery?) Therefore, I started thinking, what a country we live in that a bum can have a cell phone. America is truly the land of plenty. I am sure if you went to other countries you would not find bums with cell phones, why in a lot of countries cell phones are not even allowed. Yes the standard of living is high in our country, good for us. Then I started thinking, here is a bum probably living on the street, probably has to panhandle for food, has not taken a bath in God knows how long and is wearing someone else’s thrown away clothes. I started thinking about priorities. Now I don’t know where he got the phone, maybe he panhandled the money for it, maybe he stole it, maybe it was donated, but however he got it, it just seemed odd to me that a bum would have a cell phone. And who would he be calling? Do other bums have cell phones, do they all belong to a club, For BUMS ONLY and they have to call each other to find out when the next meeting is?
Well I found out that the government has a program (that’s right another one) that gives cell phones to people if they are on welfare or on food stamps or any other government handout. I started thinking why? Where are our priorities as a country? Do bums really need a cell phone? In my book America, A Society Gone Wrong I talk about government waste and cell phones for bums definitely falls under government waste. I have said many times I believe in helping people when they are down, because we all need help at one point or another in our lives. However, cell phones for bums? Come on, I have to draw the line there.
It’s getting to the point in this country that the average person would be a fool for working. Why should they? You can apply to the government and get a check every month to live on, food stamps, so food is not a concern, government housing, so you have a place to live. (I’m not going to get into a man I saw at the supermarket cashing a welfare check then buying $50 worth of lottery tickets) No wonder we have so many people sneaking into this country, everything is free. Well, not really, because it has to be paid by someone. I mean the government pays for it, but where does the government get the money? That’s right from the people who do work for a living and pay taxes. Now I don’t know about you, but that just does not seem fair to me. We have a president who keeps talking about paying our fair share, but what’s fair? Who determines what’s fair? Our president? Congress? No one should have to pay more than 20% of their income for taxes, I don’t care how much they make. Anything more than that is just plain theft. If our government cannot get by on what they bring in, than they have to do what the rest of us have to do, stop spending so much on asinine things. Like cell phones for bums.
It’s been 17 days since the attack on the Consulate at Benghazi, and Obama still hasn’t said publicly that it was a terrorist attack. He’s left that to his surrogates, including Press Secretary Jay Carney, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The bizarre situation that we’re left with is a dead-asleep press that is largely ignoring the entire situation, with few exceptions. While CNN has managed to get far more information on the ground in Libya than even our FBI has (since they have yet to make it to the scene, as of reports on the evening of September 27th), they are not really saying much of anything beyond the canned responses that have apparently been approved by the administration. And when CNN was reporting slightly on the contents of a journal owned by Ambassador Chris Stevens, the response from the administration was that it should have been given to the family without any reports on its contents hitting the airwaves. Everyone in the U.S. should have seen enough crime dramas over the years to know that is an extremely bizarre statement, presuming that the government ever had any intention of investigating the attack in the first place. Any normal person would think that knowing what Stevens was writing in the days before the attack might be relevant to the investigation, right?
Secretary of Defense (CC)
And now we’re down to trying to figure out who knew what, and when. For now, it’s become clear that the administration knew from day one that this was a terrorist attack. It had nothing to do with the video that slandered Islam. In the coming months, it wouldn’t be surprising to find out that none of the attacks on Western embassies in the Middle East and North Africa had anything to do with that film. But, beyond all of that, the fact that the administration has admitted fairly quickly that they knew from the beginning the true nature of the attack in Benghazi is unsettling. It was not a situation where the press was exerting any great pressure on them about the situation – they were taking the story they were being spoon fed with the noted exceptions of FoxNews, and a few foreign press agencies. While I’m not generally a conspiracy theorist, this definitely causes me to think there’s something more to this whole story.
While the administration has been very quick to point out what a great man Ambassador Stevens was – that’s to be expected – the fact that he was assigned to Libya is a little puzzling. It’s become clear over the past couple weeks that Libya was far less stable than the administration was leading people to believe – and they knew it. Stevens specialized in the Middle East and North Africa, and admittedly, there were other far more stable outposts in the region where he could have been assigned. I suggest this right now because of one glaring fact – Stevens was openly gay. Given the level of hatred and intolerance seen exerted against gays in Islamist nations, the last place any responsible member of the administration should want to place an openly gay diplomat is one where there is even a hint of radical Islamic activity. Either the administration is entirely incompetent, or someone really didn’t care about the safety of Stevens at all when choosing his assignment. Of course, these are issues that may or may not have been addressed in that journal the administration didn’t want CNN reporting about – and apparently didn’t want to read themselves.
There is no proof apparent of what I’ve suggested above. It is merely an observation, based on the few facts available right now – call it an exercise in basic logic. And perhaps it is a suggestion to the few people out there that are really interested in finding out the truth about this attack. Beyond searching for information on the radicals in Libya, another priority should be investigating what was really going on in the administration before the attack. Did Stevens have any enemies in the administration? Were there any under-the-table deals going on between the administration and Islamist organizations on the ground in Libya? Is there really a credible connection to al-Qaeda, or is it merely a matter of a single man with previous associations with that organization having a hand in the planning? And, like any other questionable situation in the Federal Government, how high does it really go? That last one is very important, primarily because Obama detractors have a horrible habit of giving him far too much credit when it comes to just about everything. Bluntly, he’s too much of an amateur in foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, to personally manage being puppetmaster on something like this. The Islam apologist policies he follows are really his undoing in the region – radical Muslims respect him less than the right-wing in the U.S. does because of it. The bottom line is that we are nowhere near the end of this one, if there is even one person determined to stay the course, and figure out exactly what happened. And it will be interesting to see what the truth really is.
Tim Kaine — known here as Gov. Flowmax after closing Virginia’s interstate rest stops — occasionally comes down on the right side of an issue. During the Fairfax Chamber of Commerce debate between Senate candidates Kaine and former Sen. George Allen, Kaine observed that he would be “open” to the idea of everyone paying some level of federal income tax.
Subsequent media and online coverage was dominated by the charge that Kaine wants to tax everyone. Republican websites instantly pounced on the tax statement in an effort to put Kaine on the defensive. This is typical of today’s politics where candidates and consultants go for short–term political advantage at the cost of long term damage to the country.
Readers of last week’s column know I think it’s a good idea for every adult to pay federal tax. Otherwise some enjoy Taxation Without Participation where those who don’t pay federal taxes are happy to vote for politicians who will increase the taxes of those who do.
There is no government free lunch, although it may seem like it as long as the Chinese allow Uncle Sam to run a tab. If everyone pays, then everyone is aware of the cost of government when taxes increase. Normally Democrats oppose this.
The whole idea of some individuals being exempt from responsibility is another of the modern “progressive” ideas that have done so much to damage the nation. “Forward” into oblivion one might say.
Contrast “progressive” tax policy with Biblical tithe policy. God — who one would think knows something about the human heart and fairness — did not exempt anyone from paying their obligation. Luke 21:1 – 4 relates the incident of the widow’s mite: And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury, and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites. So He said, “Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all; for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had.”
The widow’s poverty did not exempt her, in fact it served to glorify her. Yet modern man, who evidently has a more finely attuned sense of justice than God, doesn’t think everyone should contribute to the nation’s upkeep. What’s more, the widow paid the same percentage tithe as those in “their abundance.” Proving God doesn’t believe in “progressive” tax rates either, but that’s a topic for another column.
Kaine was also asked if he supports eliminating charitable and mortgage interest deductions. Kaine answered that he supports broadening the base and rather than enduring a political battle over each deduction, he supports setting an aggregate total.
What this innocuous phrase means is Kaine wants the federal government to decide what’s a reasonable amount for you to give to charity. I’m sure if Kaine has his way the federally–approved donation deduction will be somewhere between the widow’s mite that Joe Biden delivers by motorcade each December 25th and the 30 percent Mitt Romney has donated to charity in 2011.
If instituted, the fed’s final decision on what’s allowed will be closer to the 3 to 5 percent charitable average for the US. For Christians who give a 10 percent tithe, this means they will be paying taxes on at least half of the money they donate. Proving Leviathan tolerates the worship of God as long as you save some Mammon for it.
This is a curious policy for a Catholic like Kaine to support, but it’s not the only issue where the former governor has a secular take on his faith. When the subject came up Kaine didn’t come right out and say he supported “abortion.” After all, this wasn’t the Democrat National Convention where abortion is part of the party platform.
Kaine’s genuflection came when he declared support for a woman’s right to exercise “constitutional choices.” But certainly not the “constitutional choice” that allows a woman to carry a concealed weapon. Kaine’s bloodless euphemism is just his feeble attempt to conceal the ugly truth of abortion.
Kaine will tell you that as a Catholic he is personally opposed to abortion, but is not willing to impose his beliefs on others. This is a classic dodge that weaselly Southern Democrats have been using for over 200 years.
Before the Civil War Democrats claimed to be personally opposed to slavery, but unwilling to impose their beliefs on the planter aristocracy.
The outcome in the one case was involuntary servitude, in the other involuntary death. I fail to see any improvement in Democrat philosophy over the years.
It’s a real shame that Tim Kaine is not willing to extend his “open” to everyone paying taxes to being “open” to everyone being born.
On Wednesday U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton finally admitted al Qaeda in North Africa was behind the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where the American ambassador and three others were murdered.
Clinton’s statements further muddied the administration’s fumbled explanations about exactly what happened on Sept. 11. For purely partisan political reasons, Barack Obama’s administration has denied terrorist involvement in the Benghazi attack.
To ever admit that the United States is still involved in fighting a war against al Qaeda flies in the face of Obama’s re-election campaign strategy of showcasing the killing Osama bin Laden and the debilitation of Al Qaeda.
Remember Vice President Joe Biden shouting from the Democratic National Convention stage: “Osama bin Laden is dead and GM is alive”?
To hear “progressive” politicians and their obedient sock puppets in the “progressive” Party Pravda tell it, to put two and two together and reason that al Qaeda had access to technology which allowed them to watch the DNC convention, hear what was said and plot a 9/11 revenge is angry, bigoted, conspiratorial racist hate speech from violent right wing extremists who cannot stand having a black man in the Oval Office.
It could not possibly have anything to do with the fact that his domestic and foreign policies can be defined as “man caused disasters”.
While taking care of extremely important, top priority re-election business on a daytime television talk show, Obama cautioned the ladies that describing the incident was impossible due to an ongoing FBI investigation. However, more than two weeks after the fact, FBI agents are still not in Benghazi, much less at the crime scene conducting an investigation.
The more America learns about the 9/11 terrorist attack on the Benghazi consulate, the more it looks like a complete security failure and a calculated government cover-up.
This foreign policy sleight of hand deceit matches the consistent pattern of “evolving” economic news at home.
The latest economic reports reveal that second quarter GDP growth was revised down from 1.7 percent to 1.25 percent. New orders for U.S. manufactured durable goods fell in August by the most in 3-1/2 years, the biggest drop since January 2009. This clearly indicates a sharp slowdown in factory activity.
Fear that Washington will fail to reach an agreement and avoid the “fiscal cliff” has reduced businesses incentive to boost production.
From Benghazi to an Ohio manufacturing facility, the strategy and tactics are always the same. Make the news sound better that it is then enlist your multiple press secretaries within the “mainstream media” to put that “ news” on the front page of the paper, make it a magazine cover story, or put it on as breaking news television.
When far fewer people are paying attention, have those same media minions disclose the truth in a far less prominent place and in a far less spectacular manner.
Welcome to Obama’s America. Is this really what America wants?
DENVER,Sept. 27, 2012 /Christian Newswire/ — The Colorado Personhood Coalition has filed suit in Denver today, after an unjust dismissal by the Secretary of State’s office.
An unsuccessful lawsuit from Planned Parenthood shortened the petitioning time by about 60 days, giving the Colorado Personhood Coalition fewer petitioning days than any other Colorado ballot initiative. In spite of this, the Personhood Coalition collected over 112,000 signatures, about 30,000 more than signatures collected in 2010.
Other initiatives were also granted a 15 day curing period to make up lost or invalidated signatures, which the Colorado Personhood Coalition was denied.
After turning in far more than the number of signatures required for ballot placement, the Secretary of State’s office determined that the amendment could not appear on the ballot, discounting over 6,800 registered voters’ signatures.
“The Secretary of State’s actions unconstitutionally deprived us of our fundamental right under the State and Federal Constitutions to the initiative process which is core political speech,” explained Gualberto Garcia Jones, J.D., legal analyst for Personhood USA. “After being denied the same time frame that every other initiative received, and denied the opportunity to appear on the ballot, we have filed a writ of mandamus to ensure that our rights are recognized and the hard work of our volunteers is not dismissed.”
The Colorado Personhood Coalition’s language is different than any other in the nation, addressing a myriad of issues in detail that have never before been explored, including birth control, IVF, miscarriage, and rape.
“Our nearly 1,500 volunteers worked incredibly hard,” commented Susan Sutherland, Director of the Colorado Personhood Coalition. “Despite the odds, we did the work and got the signatures. We deserve to be on the ballot, and we will not quit until every signature is counted and ultimately, every innocent human life is protected in Colorado.”
Anywhere, but in particular, they should not be allowed to vote in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The court case drags on here, and the excuses keep piling up. When the logistical issue of having poll workers check ID’s was thrown out, they jumped to the problems for voters acquiring ID’s. Considering that all voters should have been informed during the primaries that they would need photo ID to vote, and since there’s been intermittent press coverage on this all year, it is difficult to understand why anyone that actually wants to vote hasn’t managed to get the ID required at this point. Even the primary individuals that were the cause for the current case have ID now. And, PennDOT, the agency charged with providing the needed ID’s, has relaxed requirements for obtaining a “voter only ID.” Then there is also the issue that apparently the majority of Pennsylvanians are in favor of needing photo ID to vote. That came out after Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson indicated he may block the law at least in part. Today he was set to hear testimony from plaintiff witnesses – presumably the court was treated to a parade of persons incapable of finding a PennDOT office, and acquiring a free Voter ID.
On the legal end, the arguments have been laughable, and beyond frustrating. Those against Voter ID have been clinging to their “it will disenfranchise the elderly and minorities” contention, in spite of evidence to the contrary. And then on the other side is the frustrating, vicious cycle on voter fraud. There is no real proof of voter fraud in the Commonwealth, but the only reason why there isn’t is because there is no requirement to verify anyone’s identity when they cast a ballot. Sadly, it calls to mind Nancy Pelosi’s infamous “you have to pass it to know what’s in it” statement – we have to implement the law to know how bad the voter fraud problem is in the first place.
And if it would turn out there is no real fraud, I for one will not believe it. Over the years, I have seen so many irregularities at the polls that made me wonder whether or not certain individuals had been visiting several polling stations to cast ballots. But hey, maybe I misunderstood it when I’d overhear people talking about visiting several polling stations in one day, and casting provisional ballots at each one. But, that’s not fraud, right? Well, it’s not the sort that can stand up in court.
But, this is supposed to be about stupid people that shouldn’t vote. At this point, it’s become fairly obvious that the only people in Pennsylvania that should be having any difficulty with getting a Voter ID are either functionally illiterate, or otherwise mentally incapable of completing a simple form with a legal name and birth date. One no longer needs to prove residency anymore to get the precious little photo now – that I personally find objectionable, of course. And to keep things in perspective, one must remember that Pennsylvania is control state, as in all liquor sales are funneled through the Commonwealth. We only recently started being able to purchase beer in our supermarkets, and at least in the ones near my home, one must provide a state-issued photo ID just to get a brew at the grocery store. It doesn’t matter what age someone is because the cash register system will not permit the transaction to go through without the cashier scanning the barcode on the back of all ID’s. So, if you are so stupid that you can’t manage to get an ID so you can buy a six-pack at the grocery store here, I sincerely question whether or not you should be permitted to vote. Yes, I said it. Voting is a right, and thanks to this nonsense here in Pennsylvania, I’m moving to the point where I think it should be a privilege. If people can’t manage to do simple things like obtain a photo ID, they really shouldn’t be voting at all. I’d go farther and suggest that if people can’t pass a basic test that shows they understand the offices they are casting ballots on, they shouldn’t be permitted to vote. I can just hear the left-wing screaming foul on that last one, since they wouldn’t be able to rely on welfare-dependent, illiterate constituents to keep them in office.
What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.
Tonight: Yaron Brook (@YaronBrook), executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, talks with us about his new book, “Free Market Revolution. How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government” and we mull over the implications of Obama’s UN address.