Republican Mega-Conference CPAC Begins Today February 10, 2011Posted by Admin in Interviews, News.
Tags: agenda, allen, conference, conservative, cpac, Forbes, grover, norquist, paul, rick, ron, santorum, steve, union, Washington, west
As the major elected officials, business leaders, and politicos descend on Washington D.C. for the annual CPAC conference, you will hear many stories about the status of the conservative movement, how Republican congressmen can’t seem to implement their agenda, and who’s running for president in 2012. Lost in the shuffle of all political manuevering that goes on at CPAC and Washington D.C. for that matter, we’ve decided to remind our viewers of the campaign promises and policy changes that many Republicans promised from balanced budgets to spending cuts that have yet to be implemented. For your viewing pleasure we have Presidential hopeful and former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, CPAC headliner Rep. Allen West, Tea Party favorite Rep. Ron Paul, Americans for Tax Reform chief Grover Norquist, and conservative leader and former Presidential Candidate Steve Forbes.
Sen. Rick Santorum – Former U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania & 2012 Presidential Hopeful
Rep. Allen West – U.S. House of Representatives & CPAC Headliner
Rep. Ron Paul – U.S. House of Representatives & former Presidential Candidate
Grover Norquist – Americans for Tax Reform
Steve Forbes – Chairman & CEO Forbes Inc. and former Presidential Candidate
Related CPAC stories:
A Billion Here And a Billion There! January 10, 2011Posted by Admin in Dan Mangru.
Tags: billions, boehner, capitol hill, Congress, dc, republicans, spending, tax cut, trillions, Washington
Originally Published December 17, 2010
By Dan Mangru
One key premise of negotiation is to frame the deal within the context that everyone wins. Everyone wants to feel that they got what they wanted. Nobody wants to be a loser.
Well, today in Washington, D.C., there are no losers, just politicians.
You see, Republicans wanted to extend the 2001/2003 tax cuts for all Americans. They believe that lower taxes are key to running an economically viable nation.
That’s not altogether a bad idea.
Democrats feel that increased spending and lower/middle class tax rebates are the way to get our struggling economy back on track.
(Column continues below)
That’s debatable, but there are some good uses for government spending. The sad thing is that those cases are few and far between.
For instance, cyber security and space exploration are examples of good government spending. Having our national databases hacked by the Chinese and relying on the Russians or the Chinese for a ride up to the space station … not such good ideas.
But I digress. I mean why have things like cyber security and a space program (which is being phased out by the Obama administration) when you have so many other important things to spend on in a new stimulus … err, I mean…Tax Cut Bill.
You see, like Rahm Emanuel says, you never should let a good crisis go to waste. Here America was in crisis facing a massive tax hike in the middle of a recession. Congress literally had to act now as the holidays were approaching and the tax hikes ready to rear their ugly head come January 1.
This was an opportunity. Sure, Congress could have just passed an extension of the tax cuts. But that would have been too easy.
Congress also could have followed the law and passed a dollar in spending cuts for every dollar in tax cuts per the Reagan-era PAYGO law. But that would have been too responsible.
So what did our friends in Congress decide to do? They decided to pass a win-win deal for Democrats and Republicans.
The Republicans wanted an extension of the tax cuts no matter what. The Democrats were happy to give that to them at a price.
In the end, an extension of some tax cuts ended up being a $990 billion debacle.
Yep, that’s right, $990 billion (although I presume that it was strategically valued at $990 billion so that it wouldn’t be over the magic $1 trillion mark, but then again has there ever been a government budget figure that wasn’t underestimated?). This bill is even larger than the $787 billion Obama porkulus bill.
So what’s exactly in this $990 billion bill? Necessary items for the growth of our nation, of course.
Some of the goodies in our beloved tax cut bill are the railroad track maintenance credit, a 7-year recovery period for NASCAR raceways, accelerated depreciation for business property on an Indian reservation, tax credits for mine rescue training, tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia, and special tax breaks and subsidies for the rum industry.
What’s really been ailing our economy is that rum prices are just too high. Why should we pay $20 for a bottle of Capitan Morgan? That’s ridiculous.
Well, good thing that the new tax cut bill addressed that with a $235 million subsidy for rum makers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
Whew! Crisis averted.
Yet, our friends in Congress didn’t stop there.
It turns out that the ethanol lobby didn’t feel like they were getting their fair share, so they got $6 billion.
Technology companies such as Microsoft and Boeing wanted in on the action, so they got $6 billion too.
All in all about $55 billion of goodies handed out to friends. Ah, the change that we can believe in. Apparently, the only thing that really changes is which party to blame this time.
It gets even worse. Had Congress just passed the income tax cuts ($359 billion), Alternative Minimum Tax Indexing ($140 billion) and the Estate Tax Changes ($68 billion), the total cost of the bill would have been $568 billion as opposed to $990 billion.
So how does the bill almost double in size?
Well, throw in about $56 billion in unemployment payments for people who have been out of work for up to 99 weeks, add in $120 billion of a payroll tax holiday, $21 billion of refundable tax credits, with a $146 billion dash of business expensing writeoffs, and a sprinkle of $80 billion so-called business tax extenders (i.e. major government subsidies for green technology), and you can start to see how the bill becomes so big.
Now for the $64,000 question: how do we pay for it?
Well some of you might suggest that we cut existing spending to pay for new spending.
While that might seem logical, you must remember this is Washington, D.C., that we’re dealing with.
Why do things like cut spending, and balance the budget, and pay down the national debt, when we can crank up the old printing press?
You guessed it, Obama is just going to put in a call to his buddy at the Federal Reserve Mr. Bernanke, and tell him to oil up the machines because he needs a fresh trillion dollars printed up ASAP.
Don’t you just wish that you could fire up your HP printer at home and just start printing money? When the power bill comes every month, don’t worry about it. Just make sure that there is ink and paper in the printer and you’ll be just fine.
While that seems preposterous to you and me, this is the real power that our president has, and he’s teaming up with Congress to put our country further in debt.
Keep in mind, because Obama “compromised” by extending the Bush tax cuts, he’s going to expect the Republicans to “compromise” by extending the debt ceiling.
Currently, the U.S. is only legally authorized to have $14.3 trillion of debt. However, that can be changed by an act of Congress. And when President Obama reminds the Republicans that their tax cut bill was the trillion dollars that put them over the edge, the Republicans will cave in to his demands to allow the nation to go trillions more in debt.
How high can the ceiling go?
It just depends how high Obama is willing to ask. Maybe he’ll go for just another trillion. If he’s daring maybe he can push the debt ceiling to $17 trillion maybe, even $19 trillion. After all, he is the Compromiser-in-Chief.
So in the end every political party got what they wanted, a win-win deal. Republicans got tax cuts and Democrats got more spending.
Yes America, only in Washington, D.C., can we make a deal that not only increases spending but decreases tax revenue. Simply put, we have to pay for more with less.
Hopefully, when the new class of representatives and senators comes into office next year, we will have a change for the better. Maybe the threat of the Tea Party can keep newly elected politicians honest.
For our sake, I hope so.
Why Obama Is No Roosevelt – WSJ Opinion Piece November 4, 2010Posted by Admin in News.
Tags: barack, Congress, D.C., democrats, election, fdr, franklin, government, healthcare, john boehner, midterm, obama, obamacare, president, regulation, republicans, roosevelt, speaker of the hosue, wall street journal, Washington, wsj
Why Obama Is No Roosevelt
Roosevelt: ‘Your government has unmistakable confidence in your ability to hear the worst without flinching and losing heart.’ Obama: We don’t ‘always think clearly when we’re scared.’
Whatever the outcome of today’s election, this much is clear: It will be a long time before Americans ever again decide that the leadership of the nation should go to a legislator of negligible experience—with a voting record, as state and U.S. senator, consisting largely of “present,” and an election platform based on glowing promises of transcendence. A platform vowing, unforgettably, to restore us—a country lost to arrogance and crimes against humanity—to a place of respect in the world.
We would win back our allies who, so far as we knew, hadn’t been lost anywhere. Though once Mr. Obama was elected and began dissing them with returned Churchill busts and airy claims of ignorance about the existence of any special relationship between the United States and Great Britain, the British, at least, have been feeling less like pals of old.
In the nearly 24 months since Mr. Obama’s election, popular enthusiasm for him has gone the way of his famous speeches—lyrical, inspired and unburdened by the weight of concrete thought.
About the ingratitude of Democratic voters the president brooded in a September Rolling Stone interview. “If people now want to take their ball and go home,” he declared, “that tells me folks weren’t serious in the first place.” His vice president, Joe Biden, had a few days earlier contributed his own distinctive effort to seduce Democrats back to the fold by telling them to “stop whining.”
The results of this charm campaign remain to be seen. What’s clear now is that we’ve heard quite enough about the “angry electorate”—a peculiarly reductive view of citizens who’ve managed to read all the signs and detect an administration they were not prepared to live with.
Nothing wakened their instincts more than the administration’s insistence on its health-care bill—its whiff of totalitarian will, its secretiveness, its display of cold assurance that the new president’s social agenda trumped everything.
But it was about far more than health-care reform, or joblessness, or the great ideological divide between the president and the rest of the country. It was about an accumulation of facts quietly taken in that told Americans that the man they had sent to the White House had neither the character or the capacity to lead the country.
Their president was the toast of Europe, masterful before the adoring crowds—but one who had remarkably soon proved unable to inspire, in citizens at home, any belief that he was a leader they could trust. Or one who trusted them or their instincts. His Democratic voters were unhappy? They, and their limited capacities, were to blame.
These are conspicuous breaks in the armor of civility and charm that candidate Obama once showed—and those breaks are multiplying.
At a Democratic fund-raiser a few weeks ago, the president noted, in explanation for the Democrats’ lack of enthusiasm, that facts and science and argument aren’t winning the day because “we’re hard-wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared.” The suggestion was clear: The Democrats’ growing resistance to his policies was a product of the public’s lack of intellectual capacity and their fears.
Decades ago another president directly addressed Americans in a time of far greater peril. “Your government has unmistakable confidence in your ability to hear the worst without flinching and losing heart,” Franklin Roosevelt told his national audience. The occasion was a fireside chat delivered Feb. 23, 1942. No radio address then or since has ever imparted a presidential message so remarkable in its detail, complexity and faith in its audience.
It was delivered just a few months after Pearl Harbor, a time when the Allied cause looked bleakest. It would be known to history as “The Map Speech.” The president had asked Americans to have a map at hand, “to follow with me the references I shall make to the world- encircling battle lines of this war.” He took them through those lines, the status of battles around the globe, the enemy’s objectives, centers of raw material and far more. By the time they had finished poring over their maps with him they had had a considerable education.
It is impossible to imagine what might have been the effect if the current president, who is regularly compared to FDR—always a source of amazement—had tried anything like a detailed address explaining, say, the new health-care bill. Though this would have required knowledge of what was actually in the bill (a likely problem) and a readiness to share that news (an even greater one).
Visit WSJ.com on Tuesday night for live commentary from The Wall Street Journal editorial board.
Despite the ongoing work of legions grinding out endless new and improved proofs that FDR was a despoiler of democracy and our economic system, it is worth remembering the reason virtually all serious historians rank him among the top three of our greatest presidents.
Franklin Roosevelt led the nation through 12 years begun in incomparable national misery virtually to the end of the war. When he died, an anguished country mourned as it had not done since the death of Lincoln. Americans trusted him. The story is told of a man found weeping when Roosevelt’s funeral train went past, who was asked if he had known the president. “I didn’t know him,” he replied. “But he knew me.”
The times are now vastly different—no one expects a candidate with the powers of an FDR these days. But the requirements of leadership don’t change. Despite charm and intellect, Americans have never been able to see in Mr. Obama a president who spoke to them and for them. He has been their lecturer-in-chief, a planner of programs for his vision of a new and progressive society.
Plenty of suggestions, none of them feasible, are in the air now about how he can reposition himself for 2012, and move to the center. Mr. Obama is who he is: a man of deep-dyed ideological inclinations, with a persona to match. And that isn’t going away.
The Democrats may not take a complete battering in the current contest, but there is no doubt of the problems ahead. This election has everything to do with the man in the White House about whom Americans have lost their illusions. Illusions matter. Their loss is irrecoverable.
Ms. Rabinowitz is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.
Tags: bernanke, Biden, budget, D.C., dan mangru, debt, deficit, fed, federal reserve, gdp, geithner, mangru, mangru report, obama, report, trillion, Washington, wnd, worldnetdaily
by Dan Mangru
On a warm D.C. Friday evening, our pals over at the U.S. Treasury, led by our revered Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, put out a little report that they didn’t want you to see. After all, who’s looking for news on a Friday night?
In that little report, they just happened to mention that U.S. debt will rise to at most $13.6 trillion (as if the government has never underestimated a time or two).
For all of you 110 million taxpaying Americans, that’s $123,636 each, and that’s probably just the low estimate.
But it gets even better. By 2015, based on our current path of spending, out debt will be a paltry $19.6 trillion.
For those keeping score, that’s $178,181 for each taxpaying American, assuming that there are 110 million taxpaying Americans by 2015.
You see, our buddies in Washington, D.C., named Obama, Biden and Geithner want as few Americans as possible paying taxes.
Currently 47 percent of taxpayer-eligible Americans do not pay income taxes and that number is rising steadily.
So, let’s say if that number creeps up and only 100 million Americans are paying taxes, then each taxpayer will have a bill of $196,000 even. Considering this is the federal government we are talking about let’s just round it up to an even $200k.
For most taxpaying Americans, this means that you will owe more than what you take in during any given year, which sounds about right considering that by 2015 our debt will be 102 percent of our GDP, meaning that we will owe more than what we collect.
(Editor’s Note: To read the entire article please CLICK HERE NOW.)