Tag Archives: fiscal cliff

Fiscal Cliff Will Happen

fiscalcliff

With events scheduled for in the White House and on the road, Barack Obama is back on the campaign trail spreading his message, with the clear and obvious intent of pressuring Congress into agreeing to his “fiscal cliff” terms.

While he will make claims to a willingness to listen to all ideas and negotiate with all parties, in fact he will endlessly argue for ending the current tax rates on Americans making $200,000 and above while accusing Congress of holding middle income families hostage.

To present the illusion he has been working hard to arrive at a successful resolution, Obama held closed doors meetings with big unions, big business and as an afterthought, small business owners.

Can you say all theatrics, no work?

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell R-KY, categorized the White House efforts as nothing but a public relations ploy: “Rather than sitting down with lawmakers of both parties and working out an agreement, he’s back out on the campaign trail, presumably with the same old talking points we’re all familiar with.  Look: We already know the president is a very good campaigner.  What we don’t know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on a big issue like this.”

Obama is planning to use American citizens as human props in the ongoing campaign to rally his base.  He will call upon his followers to pressure Congress into submitting to “progressive” demands to raise taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs.  Obama will preach that if a stalemate persists, taxes on middle class American will go up because Republicans held them hostage to protect tax cuts for the rich.

Can you say economic justice?

Economic justice is a Marxist concept where economic policies must result in the distribution of economic benefits equally.

Obama’s push to let tax rates expire on incomes over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families will hurt small businesses, the sector responsible for most new jobs growth in America.

Obama loves to characterize the tax increase as asking financially successful Americans to pay more in order to save government programs that face spending cuts.  The fact is, ending current tax rates for “the rich” would fund the United States federal government for less than nine days.

For Obama to propagate the false notion that taxing the rich will solve America’s fiscal problems is a red herring.  By consciously using middle class Americans as human props in attempts to sway public opinion in his favor, he is displaying true contempt for middle class Americans.

The United States federal government is borrowing forty cents of every dollar spent to prop up a slumping economy and support the deprived underclass it created using big government socialist programs to render American citizens dependent upon government.

Foreign debt buyers are slowly ending their investment in America’s bankruptcy and the Federal Reserve is now purchasing over sixty percent of America’s Treasury Bonds.

Can you say The Weimar Republic?  Can you say Zimbabwe?  Can you say today’s Eurozone on more steroids than the Soviet body builders at the 1952 Olympics, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lance Armstrong, Sammy Sosa, Jose Canseco, Lyle Alzado, Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire combined?  Can you say the worst economic downturn ever?

America does not have a revenue shortage.  America has a spending addiction.

Giving the United States government more money to spend is like trying to sober up an alcoholic by having them drink a gallon of gin.

In the ongoing “progressive” campaign to “fundamentally transform” America, the fiscal cliff created by “progressive” big spending will happen because “progressives” want it to happen.

And “progressives” will blame successful Americans.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/fiscal-cliff-will-happen/

Join the Revolution

Just Let It Happen Boehner

485793_10151058251061657_947492276_n

Following the re-election of Barack Obama, the rhetoric coming from Capitol Hill concerning the “Fiscal Cliff” has been extremely high, but what’s all of the commotion really about?

The Fiscal Cliff is a series of automatic spending cuts to all levels of the federal bureaucracy (mostly defense) in addition to automatic tax increases. You may have also heard of the fiscal cliff as a sequestration.

The Democrats in Congress want to resolve the “crisis”, by raising taxes on the upper tier of tax payers in order to raise revenue. The Republicans, however, do not want to raise taxes on any American, while they would like to make reforms to entitlement programs, but have offered no real solution to the revenue shortfalls in their plans.

On November 9th, the President’s first address to the media following his reelection, he declared that he would veto any legislation offering tax cuts to those making more than $250,000. This means the President doesn’t want to extend the Bush Tax Cuts any further.

The President’s position has put Republicans in between a rock and a hard place. They don’t want to raise taxes on the wealthy, but the President is basically giving them no other options.

For the past three Sundays, Bill Kristol has insisted that the Republicans in Congress should compromise with the President and submit to raising taxes on the wealthy. Remember now, this is the same man that thinks the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate political party and the Arab Spring wasn’t real.

Bill Kristol is by all accounts a dope, and no one on Capitol Hill should heed his “advice”.

However, I do have a suggestion for the Republicans – just let the President lead America straight off of the fiscal cliff.

By coming to any agreement, the media will portray the President as the hero, and the Republicans the enemy – it’s a lose/lose for the Republicans, so just let it happen.

The facts of the matter are that no matter what happens and no matter what deal is agreed upon, America will head over a fiscal cliff.

Any freshman macroeconomic major will confirm that when you raise taxes on those who already fund the government the most (excluding China of course), you are asking for more problems than you ever originally bargained for.

Raising taxes on the wealthy may lead to short term gains, but it will create bigger problems in the long term.

If the Republicans let the President have his way, I can see two good things that come from that, aside from the many bad things.

First, every single tax paying American will feel the effects of the Presidents arrogance and liberal bias. As long as you’re a tax paying America, your taxes will be going up. Americans don’t like their taxes going up, so that will not bode well for the President.

Secondly, there needs to be spending cuts in the government. This fiscal cliff is the only foreseeable way that spending will be cut. Instead of having politicians examine the budgets of every department of the federal government, having across-the-board style cuts will force the bureaucrats to cut spending in wasteful areas.

Finally, I just don’t understand why the President doesn’t negotiate going back to the Clinton era economics. After all, the Clinton era was so magical and there were no problems then, right? All we’d need to do is raise taxes across-the-board and cut federal spending beyond any level that is currently perceived to be possible.

Either way, the next month or so left before the sequestration is to take place is going to be a quite divided time for America, aside from the Lame Duck session of Congress.

I don’t want to see taxes raised on any American, but sadly is looks likely. And for that, we should all thank Barack Obama, John Boehner, Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, and Nancy Pelosi.

Follow Chris On Twitter

Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis

christmas

11/25/12 Finally, the Democrats bring race into Benghazi. Racists everywhere! And it’s that time of year again: the war on Christmas is in full swing. Also, should Republicans bend to Obama’s demands and let the country go off the fiscal cliff, or fight it? Tune in tonight at 10pm ET/7pm Pacific on the CDNews Network on Blogtalk Radio.

UPDATE: Listen to a replay of the show here, or follow the link to download.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on Blog Talk Radio

Distinguishing Leadership from Politicianship

Defendants await a ruling from the Prince William Co Human Rights Commission

Defendants await a ruling from the Prince William Co Human Rights Commission

The feds aren’t alone in dealing with budgets this time of year. Although “dealing” is somewhat generous, since Uncle Sam doesn’t have to balance his. Congress and the President are content to blame unforeseen circumstances — George Bush, climate change or a spontaneous reaction to an anti–Mohammed video — for causing deficit spending, while they wait in the ‘withdrawals only’ line at the National Bank of China.

State and local governments don’t have that luxury and how your local elected officials deal with budgets can provide a useful benchmark in evaluating the performance of Republicans in Congress during discussions designed to avoid the fiscal cliff. (There is no need to evaluate Spendacrats. They will spend as much as possible and mislead gullible Republicans when it comes to budget “cuts.”)

Where I live in Virginia, Corey Stewart, chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors, takes an approach to cutting the budget that I wish Congressional Republicans would emulate. Stewart has actually marked individual programs for termination or severe cuts. This alone qualifies as leadership.

Lazy, gutless politicians avoid being pinned down on which programs to cut. And this failure includes both conservatives and liberals. Instead they advocate “equitable, across–the–board cuts.” This budget–cutting socialism is a gift to the lazy at the expense of the competent. In this way the Intergovernmental Steering Group for Immediate Climate Action and Icecap Outreach gets the same ten percent cut as the police department.

This is politicianship and elected “leaders” do it so they won’t be blamed for eliminating a program a handful of “community activists” support. Come election time the shameless pol can even claim he “saved the program from drastic cuts that would have imperiled its mission.”

Arlington County, VA politicians use another dodge. They direct the county executive to choose the budget cuts. When outraged poodle owners want to know why working–women–doggie–daycare was cut from the parks and recreation budget, the spineless “leader” blames a heartless, cat–owning bureaucrat.

Skeptics will say Stewart had to cut the budget because he’s running for Lt. Governor and a tax increase would make it impossible for him to win the nomination. But Stewart could just as easily call for across–the-board cuts or delegate to the county executive like Arlington Democrats. Not doing so is an important point in his favor.

Stewart wants to cut $9 million from the 2014 budget so property tax bills will remain flat. Some of his larger cuts include eliminating $3.6 million from the Health Department and $626,000 from the Juvenile Court Services Unit.

Stewart courageously advocates ending $941,000 in feel–good donations to non–profits. If he succeeds, supervisors will no longer be able to use public tax dollars to subsidize their private charitable preferences. Stewart also vetoes “arts” grant donations, the Northern Virginia Regional Commission, Northern Virginia Family Services and Legal Services of Northern VA.

An almost $2 million cut comes from the Transportation & Roadway Improvement Program — another public money kitty that allows individual supervisors to spend our taxes on traffic light installations and road improvements in their district.

In addition to fellow board members, Stewart is willing to take on friends of the library, seniors and the school board. He would close neighborhood libraries two days a week, make senior recreational tours self–supporting and remove four middle school police officers.

This is why leadership is hard. Decisions to cut spending are unpopular, particularly with those who were doing or receiving the spending. The vast majority of politicians in Washington just want to be loved and re–elected, without being bothered to make decisions that produce discord at town meetings. One of the few exceptions is Sen. Tom Coburn (R–OK) and you can imagine how popular he is.

If you ask me, it makes more sense to keep the libraries open and save $500,000 by abolishing the Prince William County Human Rights Commission. This pretentious engine of local moral posturing has been wasting money since 1993. Our own little Nuremburg duplicates federal and state programs, while entertaining a punishing 145 cases a year, most of which have — according to the executive director — “no probable cause.” Which is a nice way of saying the plaintiff is either lying, delusional or a board member of Mexicans Without Borders.

When asked by reporter Graelyn Brashear if the commission is effective, the director said that’s a tough question because there are no measures of success. Translated for taxpayers, it means this job is almost as good as being a diversity bureaucrat in the school system.

Budget cutting, like liberty, requires constant vigilance. According to Stewart the PWC budget more than doubled between 2000 and 2006, while during his seven years as chairman it only increased a total of 6.6 percent.

Stewart’s budget cutting won’t win him friends on the board or get him invited to speak at annual banquets put on by non–profits to flatter the politicians who distribute tax dollars. But it is leadership and it is a standard conservatives should apply to politicians at all levels.

Uncertain of Congress, Walmart Moves Dividend Payment

walmart1

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. moved its planned dividend into late December from early January to help its investors avoid a possible jump in taxes on shareholder payouts, which is part of the so-called ‘fiscal cliff.’ In the face of looming cuts scheduled to occur January 1st and the possible ensuing tax rate changes, this decision by the board of Wal-Mart may save its shareholders taxes by paying dividends while the upper four brackets’ rate is at 15%. The expiration of the so-called Bush tax cuts would mean a dividend tax increase to 39.6%.

Should Congress and the President manage to negotiate and resolve details of the fiscal cliff conundrum, those who receive dividend payments next year will not be affected. But if tax rate issues are not resolved by the end of December, the Bush era tax cuts will expire and tax rates on investments may increase dramatically. Yahoo Finance reported:

“In light of this uncertainty, the board determined that moving our dividend payment up by a few days to 2012 was in the best interests of our shareholders.”

Oftentimes, the general public think dividends are investment returns only available to the wealthy. Many do not realize their retirement accounts may be invested in the stock market.

Watch as the folks at the Wall Street Journal discuss this.

BREAKING: Mainstream Media Uncovers Looming “Fiscal Cliff,” Overlooks “Fiscal Abyss”

Fiscal-Cliff

Mainstream media outlets are now warning of the United States’ impending “fiscal cliff” after months of vigorous investigative journalism and heated legal battles forced the Obama administration to grant a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents detailing federal budget projections.

The subject documents, which have been publicly available through the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) website, like, forever, show that the federal government’s financial outlook has been Wile E. Coyote-ing over a “fiscal abyss” long before President Obama was re-elected on November 6th, 2012.

Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary and communications director for the Guild of Mainstream Media Outlets, explained during a November 14th press conference, “We are facing an unprecedented fiscal state of affairs and the President is ready to address this very important issue. We applaud the media for bringing the issue into Americans’ homes.”

In response to an inquiry from a reporter with The Laissez Faire regarding the timing of media’s coordinated announcement of the newly discovered “fiscal cliff,” Carney responded by growing a mischievous smirk, covering his mouth with both hands, and squeaking “Tee-Hee, Tee-Hee!” before gleefully frolicking off the press stage.

The looming “fiscal cliff” refers to the short-term projected economic impact of 1) allowing the Bush-era tax cuts and payroll tax cuts to expire and 2) the imposition of automatic spending cuts under the Budget Control Act of 2011 (i.e., the “sequestration” cuts that trim federal spending across the board resulting from an indecisive super-committee), both set to occur on January 1st, 2013, which the CBO predicts would result in a short-term drop of 0.5% in gross domestic product and an increase in unemployment to 9.1% by the end of 2013.

However, reasonable economists across the country warn that the long-term federal budget outlook is far more dire than both CBO budget projections and the short-term impacts of the media’s newly discovered “fiscal cliff” might suggest.

A group of renowned economists have expressed greater concern over a longer-term “fiscal abyss” in a recent white paper titled, “Holy Shit! Federal Government owes Nearly $100 Trillion!” The white paper cites a study by the non-partisan National Center for Policy Analysis which calculates an estimated $84 Trillion of unfunded federal liabilities (the study notes the $84 Trillion is a “conservative estimate”), a dismal outlook that far dwarfs the media’s conveniently timed announcement of the headline-hoarding “fiscal cliff.”

R. Runner, Ph.D,  a senior research fellow at the Acme Institute of Super Obvious Studies, explained that the federal government “…simply makes too many promises that it can’t keep in the interest of political expediency; many of which are far contrary to the principles and ideas transcribed in the documents that founded this great country. And quite frankly,” he added, “their actions are immoral.”

In a technicolorful analogy, Dr. Runner further noted that, “We’re not looking out toward some distant ‘fiscal cliff,’ or ‘fiscal abyss,’ whatever you want to call it. We’re beyond the land’s edge of any metaphorical ‘cliff.’ Much like the laws of physics would wait for Wile E. Coyote to process the fact that his chase led him over the edge of a canyon before applying the force of gravity, we’re now beginning to process the fact that the government’s promises are unsustainable and soon, like the ill-fated cartoon coyote, the laws of economics will catch up to us sending our economy plummeting to the bottom of our own fiscal canyon if drastic cuts in spending and vast reductions in scope of government do not happen soon.”

Despite the media’s paltry attempt to bring relevant economic information to the citizens’ attention (coincidentally at the heels of a major presidential election), they failed to discuss the dismal long-term outlook beyond the impending ‘fiscal cliff.’ They further failed to discuss the implications of an ever-growing federal government made up of elected (and unelected) officials who continue to make short-term promises for political gains, meanwhile bludgeoning the principles of individual rights into a gory pulp of federally-mandated collectivism whose end game will necessarily be a two-class society: the underclass, and the political class.

Crossposted at TruthInJest.

President softens rhetoric, hints at mandate in remarks on economy

obama_ad_rect1-460x307

Today in remarks on the economy, President Obama used softer words to spread the same message – taxes should go up only on those making $200,000 or more while making a veiled reference to Democrats having a mandate after Tuesday’s election.

Obama’s drew a line in the sand on tax policy. The President said “I refuse to accept any solution isn’t balanced” and continued by referring to his requirement that those families making more than $200,000 should be required to pay even more in taxes than they do today while others should see no changes to their tax liability.

Making a veiled reference to Democrats having a mandate after the election, Obama said “On Tuesday night, we found out that a majority of Americans  agree with my approach” disregarding the fact that Republicans who oppose his plan were widely re-elected in the House and Senate.

Acknowledging that the “fiscal cliff”, put in-place by the White House’s proposal of sequestration as a budgeting tool, will damage the economy, the President said “If Congress fails to come to agreement on a deficit reduction plan by the end of the year, taxes on everyone will go up.” “Nobody, not Republicans, not Democrats want taxes to go up on people making less than $250,000 a year.”

Obama did also make remarks intended to show a willingness to compromise. “I’m not wedded to every detail of my plan. I am open to compromise” he remarked. But with hard lines on tax policy and no guidelines on spending cuts, compromise may be difficult.

Obama’s remarks also ignored the cost to the economy that his signature health care law, war on energy and tax proposals have had. A staggering number of companies have announced layoffs in the wake of his re-election. The President also clearly misunderstands how businesses make hiring decisions as he said that businesses should no longer be affected by uncertainty. Obama said that “business will know that consumers won’t see a huge tax increase” as if the taxation of the consumer base was a driving decision factor. The costs and additional taxes in Obamacare, defense cuts in sequestration and his war on traditional energy sources were often cited by American companies as reasons for layoffs and moving facilities overseas.

Despite the president’s push for a balanced approach, Obama pushed to have the tax increases go in now, while negotiating for an actual budget deal until later when he exclaimed “Let’s not wait! Even as we’re negotiating a broader deficit reduction package, let’s extend the middle-class tax cuts right now.” Obama pushed the Senate tax plan passed this summer that would continue the Bush tax cuts for families making less than $200,000 while letting them expire for small business owners and consumers that make more. The bill, S. 3412  entitled the “Middle Class Tax Cut Act” extends the Bush tax cuts for one additional year, but only for those individuals and families meeting the threshold.

Key provisions of the bill extend through the end of 2013:

  • an increase in the American Opportunity tax credit
  • an increase in the child tax credit
  • increased earned income credit for those families with more than 2 children
  • continues the practice of disregarding tax credits and tax refunds in determination of eligibility for federal assistance programs
  • increases the exemption from the Alternative Minimum Tax which will currently hit middle-income families
  • will reduce tax deductions for those making over the $200k and $250k thresholds

The Stock Market: Three Days Post Election

3 days after election

FRIDAY 10:30 AM. The graph is obvious. Three days after the reelection of Barack Obama the stock market is still reeling. The media is blaming it on European challenges and a built in cushion because so many expected Romney to win the election. Pad it as they may, the stock market is now facing the reality of the ‘fiscal cliff’ and a tax and spend president. Only gold owners are smiling today.

This is November. The fiscal cliff is the sequestration or automatic cuts that Congress agreed on that would happen if they could not find a way to stem our ever growing debt. Concerns about the impact of the fiscal cliff were highlighted Thursday in a report from the Congressional Budget Office. If fully implemented, the U.S. economy is expected to shrink by 0.5% in 2013 and the unemployment rate  rise to 9.1% from 7.9%.  Lower growth and higher unemployment combined with continued rising costs could put the country back into a depression.

Many middle class Americans wonder how this will affect them. Of course, everyone will feel the impact of higher goods costs. Most everyone knows someone who has struggled to find a job in this economy. More often people think the Stock Market ups and downs are only important to the wealthy. But retirement programs and 401Ks often are invested in the market and drops in market value can translate to dramatic changes in retirement plans.

Today the president will speak about his ideas to bridge this fiscal cliff. No doubt he will express hope that the Republican controlled House of Representatives will agree to his plans. Maybe the president will offer an outstretched hand rather than his snide “elections have consequences” remark of  his first term. And if that happens maybe the market will react in a positive direction.

Maybe.

We should all be watching closely.

 

Economic Advisor to State Department: Downgrade of US Likely

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

An economic analyst invited by the State Department to brief a group of foreign journalists on the U.S. economy. Her presentation included a forecast of the US economy for the next few years. Her prediction–not so good. Without a plan to change direction of the spending she expects that another downgrade of the United States Treasury Securities is very possible.

Prior to August, 2011 the United States Treasury had maintained a AAA rating. By signing approval to increase the debt limit the US saw it’s first rating drop as many companies lowered it to AA+.  Our neighbor to the north, Canada, has maintained its AAA rating for example while countries like UAE and Bermuda are rated AA.

Kathy Bostjancic is director for macroeconomic analysis at The Conference Board. A specialist in the U.S. economy and financial markets, she is a member of the team that produces the U.S. economic forecast and global outlook for The Conference Board. From her bio: Kathy Bostjancic  oversees and is a regular participant in The Conference Board Economics Watch™ monthly webcasts and author of The Economics Watch U.S. View. She appears regularly on Bloomberg Radio and TV and in the financial press.

The outlook from Ms. Bostjancic is not so rosy. She voiced concerns that the sequestration cuts (the fiscal cliff) will not be acceptable to either party but there are few options to pay to keep the impacted programs:

 

At the beginning of her presentation: So we’re looking at GDP growth for 2013 – let’s make sure I have the right number – I think we’re looking at roughly around 1.5 percent or so.

And a little bit later: And I should add, actually, in all fairness, that the fiscal cliff has already impacted fourth quarter growth and third quarter growth to some degree, because orders – business orders have plummeted and business shipments – again, businesses are just paralyzed right now trying to see what happens with the election and the fiscal cliff.

Al Wafd News: Why is there this pessimistic – over-pessimistic look to the U.S. economy?

Bostjancic: A little of this a little of that and then …In terms of the downgrade, there is a concern – I mean, to me, it seems the odds of us getting downgraded again are very high, because I don’t see either side, Republicans or Democrats, in favor of the sequestration of spending.

And she concludes in this election day speech: And in the short run, whether Obama wins or Romney and even the composition of Congress, unless somebody sweeps, which I think one party doing that is extremely low and unlikely – if we continue to have gridlock and divided government, the outcome of the election is not going to have much impact on the short-term economy. But it’s the medium-term view where we really need some clarity, and that’s where politicians can have some impact for good or worse. But laying out a credible, medium-term fiscal plan is what’s really needed, whether something such as Simpson-Bowles or something else. But therein lies – of course, everything’s wrapped up in that, and that’s where the real disagreement and the bipartisanship seems to be lacking right now.

Some think a downgrade of the US Treasury bonds will not directly affect them. But they might. Mortgage rates and credit card interest could rise. Retirement plans that include bond funds or the stock market may be impacted. The worth of the US Dollar may be lessened which could affect every day purchases. This over spending by the government and possible downgrade is sure to be felt by most Americans.

You can read the complete presentation at the State Department’s Website.

WaPo: To blunt ‘fiscal cliff’, administration could assert broad powers

obamaSnooty-300x180

More than not, it seems as though the Washington Post is from another country – if not another planet. In proposing a solution to the “fiscal cliff”, Washington Post writer Zachary Goldfarb proposes that the White House should take unilateral action and assert broad powers to re-arrange tax and fiscal policy – all from the executive branch.

First, the “fiscal cliff” is only an issue because the White House decided to force sequestration down the throats of Harry Reid and John Boehner in response to earlier budget crisis – a remedy neither leader wanted but saw as a compromise with the President. Reid felt it risked too many cuts and Boehner expressed concerns over using it as a budgeting tool.

Mr. Goldfarb now sees the same opportunity that perhaps the White House did when they pushed sequestration and the fiscal cliff:

The Obama administration could blunt the economic harm caused by the “fiscal cliff” at the end of the year by using its unilateral powers over spending and taxes, for instance, by freezing how much in taxes is taken out of payroll checks, according to former senior officials and other tax and budget experts.

Unfortunately for the ill-informed WaPo writer, taxation is function of Congress. The President cannot simply choose to not collect taxes that Congress has imposed. We don’t have a king or dictator here Mr. Goldfarb. Actions such as the author proposes would be against the President’s oath of office and reason for impeachment – if Congress had the gumption to take action.

What Goldfarb fails to understand is the fundamental framework of our government set forth in the Constitution. Congress debates and passes legislation and the President makes sure those laws are enforced. If the President fails to do so, he is certainly failing in his duties.

The reason the separation of powers are so ingrained in the Constitution is to prevent the type of power-grab that the Post article proposes the administration should enact.

At one point in the article, it’s not even clear if Goldfarb understands what he’s proposing:

But the Treasury Department could try to blunt the impact by freezing withholding tables at 2012 levels. The law gives the Treasury secretary the authority to set withholding tables at his discretion, though they are supposed to comply with the law.

What does that even mean?

Ignorance of our system of government is exactly why liberal/socialistic ideas seem plausible. Only those taking the time to understand the long term consequences of such short-term thinking will see it as dangerous.

The President must not usurp the taxing authority of Congress to ease the pain that the President’s administration caused in the first place. Actually, Congress must not allow the President to usurp its authority at all.

As if to prove that the maneuver would be unconstitutional the author dedicates the final paragraph to quoting Gregory F. Jenner on how the tactic is viable because no one will call the President on it:

“I think it’s possible. Who’s going to challenge him?”

If Congress will not, we will replace them. So to answer Mr. Jenner’s question – We the people will challenge him.

Reviewing the news: Benghazi, Bad polls, bad ads, Mitt-mentum and more

The last week has brought some incredible news to light about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, showed us that many of the battleground polls being cited are weighted wrong, saw Mitt Romney’s momentum accelerate and taught us that voting for the President is like sex.. or something.

Benghazi and the Obama Administration

The murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya has taken a startling turn ever since the Obama administration made the incorrect claim that their deaths were at the hands of protesters angry about a YouTube video.

It has since been shown that there was no protest and that terrorists tied to Al-Qaeda executed a well-planned attack, one that may have been intended to take the ambassador prisoner to use as a bargaining chip in negotiations with the White House.

Shortly after the attack, it was reported that former President Bill Clinton told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that she should resign. As Secretary Clinton has already stated that she won’t be staying long into President Obama’s second term if he wins re-election, perhaps she’s just riding it out. Of course, we also learned that she’s doing so with the help of a new legal defense team – just in case any of the Benghazi fall-out drops on her.

And then yesterday, Lt. Col Schaffer told Fox News that he had sources telling him that the President was watching the Benghazi attack as it happened. So exactly where did the idea of a protest and YouTube video come from? Why didn’t the President authorize back-up for the team trying to defend the consulate staff and ambassador when they asked three times?

Polls have too many Democrats in them

Gallup released a poll this week that demonstrated most election polling is using incorrect weightings. In the 2008 election, voters went with democrats 12% more than republicans, or D+12.  In the new Gallup poll, it suggests that likely voters are going Republican by a 4% margin (R+4), but pollsters are using weightings of D+3 to D+7 in many states. These mis-weighted polls show mis-leading figures in key states. As HotAir.com’s Ed Morrisey put it, the models being used in states like Virginia (D+4) are “rather laughable.”

Mitt Romney’s surge accelerating

Ever since the first Presidential debate showed that Mitt Romney is not the monster Obama has portrayed him to be, Romney started surging in key polls and fund raising.

That momentum has accelerated with Romney raising $21 million more than Obama in the first half of October leaving the Obama campaign so desperate to raise cash they went to Bank of America for a $15 million loan.

Spinning Jeeps and Cliffs

In the Presidential debates and on the campaign trail, Obama and company mentioned several times that sequestration (aka “the fiscal cliff”) came from congress, not his administration. In fact, the White House pushed sequestration on Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. John Boehner even though neither wanted it.

Left-leaning news outlets, the Obama campaign and liberal blogs have been attempting to paint Mitt Romney’s citing of a Bloomberg.com article as an attempt to scare Ohio voters. Although the article clearly shows that company officials had been considering moving some or all Jeep production to China, the liberal slant is that Romney lied.

Voting for the President is like sex for virgins .. or something

The Obama campaign elicited the help of actress, writer, director Lena Dunham to be featured in an advertisement for the President’s re-election bid. In poor taste, Dunham compares voting for Obama for the first time to having sex for the first time.

 

Karen Harrington: More than Just the Anti-DWS Candidate

KH Headshot

By now we’ve all heard the popular #FireDebbie meme, and conservatives and Libertarians alike long for the day when Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) no longer sits before us as a spokesperson for the Obama administration…but what do you know about the woman who just might make that happen?

Karen Harrington, businesswoman with a 30-year record of private industry success, is overcoming the DNC machine with her own innovative messaging and is now within striking distance of the Democratic darling. She is getting tremendous support nationwide (including through social media), is raking in the campaign cash, and is very likely to unseat Wasserman Schultz in this year’s election.

The most recent polling data, taken in early October, shows Harrington trailing by just 4.5% (MOE is 5%). This upward trend is happening throughout the GOP, with Connie Mack IV (also running to unseat Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson in FL), Romney-Ryan, and even Todd Akin (R-MO) beginning to see a shift in the tides. Harrington is faring well among Independents, as well (35%), which will work to her advantage since the combination of Republicans and Independents in the district outnumbers Democrats. The most promising piece of data to be extracted from this poll is that 16.1% of voters are still undecided.

Harrington’s first foray into politics was to run against Wasserman Shultz in 2010, but she was defeated by a double digit margin. A few short months ago, with Wasserman Schultz owning a seemingly insurmountable lead, it appeared she might be headed for a similar upset this year. But after a tremendous amount of hard work – and some major public missteps by her opponent – the campaign has begun to see the fruits of its labor.

Much like Mitt Romney, Karen, who identifies as a “conservative by nature,” cites her business acumen as her primary qualification for Congress. She believes that her years in the private sector have made her “fiscally responsible,” one who understands that “you have to rely on yourself to be successful.” Her ideology is as far removed from the “You didn’t build that” mantra as one could imagine.

She says there are three primary issues on which she clearly delineates herself from her opponent:

“1) [Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz] definitely supports bigger government. She supported the failed stimulus plan and has stood by that position. She has tried to convince us that it has saved us from falling off that cliff, which we’re all barely hanging on to.

2) [Wasserman Schultz] believes government-run healthcare will help all Americans have good healthcare. I’m opposed to that for all kinds of reasons: it takes away our choice, our access to good healthcare, and it is not affordable. As a business owner, it adds an enormous tax burden onto all of us. Ultimately, I believe [the Democrats’] goal is to destroy private insurance as a whole and force everyone into a single-payer system.

3) [Wasserman Schultz] believes we should punish success and raise taxes on higher income levels; I want to keep taxes at a flat level for all Americans and get this economy going. She believes jobs will be created through more government interference, and I believe it’s in the hands of the private sector.”

Beyond these issues, Harrington supports the standard GOP platform. She also supports school choice (a state-run vouchers program) in Florida, arguing that “if the public school system continues to fail our children, parents have a right to make another choice.” She advocates for a major overhaul of the 60,000-page tax code. Though she seems to favor the Flat Tax conceptually, she believes that real reform is a must for our economy, so she doesn’t rule out other options, even the FairTax. She explains, “Here we are in October and we still don’t know what our taxes will look like in January, and they expect us to grow our economy, to invest, to expand? There’s so much uncertainty. Nothing should be off the table.”

On the significance of being the “anti-candidate,” Karen acknowledges a great deal of the support she’s experienced comes from citizens who have been willing to speak with her primarily because of whom she’s running against.

“It was absolutely pivotal when we started over seventeen months ago,” she explained, “to build this campaign and make it a national race. Twitter and Facebook were tremendously important in engaging voters, even outside of the district.” While this certainly might have been what caught the attention of Americans to begin with, Candidate Karen Harrington has come into her own. She is a confident, personable, nonsensical woman who articulates her vision for America clearly.

She has been endorsed many sitting Congressmen and women, including former Presidential candidate, Michele Bachmann, and by several key players late in the game, including former Governor Jeb Bush and popular Florida Senator Marco Rubio.

She doubled Wasserman Schultz’s fundraising in the last FEC reporting period ($712K to $369K) and is hoping this trend will continue in the final weeks; the goal is to pull in those last undecided voters, as well as motivate existing Republican supporters to come out and help her unseat Wasserman Schultz.

Harrington summarized her thoughts on why she’s running for office this way: “I’m just very excited for my country. I think it’s been a long four years for all of us as Americans, so much uncertainty, and it would be an honor to serve the will of the people of my district.”

There are many ways supporters can help make this happen: Follow her on Twitter @Karen4Congress or using the hashtag #FireDebbie; check out the Obama-Wasserman Schultz debt clock at firedebbie.com; and Like her Facebook page. Learn more about her at karenforcongress.com, and of course, political messaging costs money, so she invites donations of any size to help her bring home the win in South Florida’s 23rd Congressional disctrict.

I.M.F. meeting concludes with dire economic outlook and pleas to the U.S.

IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde

IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde

In a comuniqué from the I.M.F. at the conclusion of it’s twenty-sixth meeting, the International Financial and Monetary Committee (IFMC) said that global growth is slowing and “substantial downside risks remain” while pleading with U.S. leadership to resolve it’s debt crisis sooner, rather than later.

The policy-setting body of the I.M.F., the I.F.M.C, said that while central bank measures so far have made improvements, more is needed “to secure a sustained recovery from the crisis.”

In a direct plea to the United States the committee begged U.S. leadership to resolve fiscal disagreements that might lead to the “fiscal cliff” which would trigger huge budget cuts and tax increases on top of those already going into effect within Obamacare. The current inability of the President to lead Congress in compromise on the budget has garnered international attention and created uncertainty in the global economy.

While Democrats decry candidate Mitt Romney’s framework approach to fiscal reform as “lacking details”, it may well be the only way to end the divisiveness in Washington that has been a feature of the current administration and give the global economy the foundation it needs to recover from years of recession.

The I.F.M.C. noted that emerging economies are suffering due to weak external demand and called on the international community to “provide broader support” for the Arab region.

The committee announced that it has been using windfall profits from gold sales to bolster low-income nations during the recession and expects to continue to be able to do so. A total of $3.8 billion in gold profits is expected to be used to fund poorer countries.

Member nations have pledged large amounts of money to the fund to bolster its finances. More than $461 billion in total borrowing has been offered to the IMF by member nations.

Loans to needy nations are based on a controversial concept called “conditionality.” Receivers are not required to provide collateral against the loan, but instead required to make policy changes to bolster their financial systems or risk having the money withheld. Conditionality may give the I.M.F. power over receiver nations to impact policy in a way that differs from the country’s desired social and economic direction.

The I.M.F. describes itself as “an organization of 188 countries working to foster global monetary cooperation” and is headquarter in Washington, D.C.

As Clock Ticks, Democrat Majority Refuses To Address Budget Or Looming Defense Cuts

senate

“The responsible thing is to fix this problem now and not leave the Defense Department in turmoil. They won’t even send an answer to Sen. Thune and I and McCain’s request for where the cuts are going to occur.”

WASHINGTON, September 13—Sen. Sessions joined Sens. John Thune, John McCain, and Kelly Ayotte today on the Senate floor today to discuss several items that the Senate’s Democrat majority has yet to address as Congress prepares to recess ahead of the November elections.

Among the outstanding items are: automatic sequestration cuts scheduled to take effect on January 2, any budget or appropriations bills, and the defense authorization bill.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said the chamber is unlikely to take up any individual spending bills this year (the House of Representatives has passed 7 so far), and this year will mark the first time in over 50 years that the Senate has failed to pass a defense authorization bill to lay out the spending and priorities of the Defense Department.

Meanwhile, it has been 1,233 days since the Senate’s Democrat majority has adopted any budget plan at all.

Recent Entries »