History Facts: Economy, Taxation, and Integrity

History Facts:

Economy, Taxation, and Integrity

Calvin Coolidge represents the exact opposite of Left-wing politics.. Coolidge had integrity. He deserves a lot more respect than he ever got. ~C.A. Davidson

“Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.”

key“We must have no carelessness in our dealings with public property or the expenditure of public money. Such a condition is characteristic of undeveloped people, or of a decadent generation.” ~Calvin Coolidge

Senator Selden Spencer once took a walk with Coolidge around the White House grounds. To cheer the President up, Spencer pointed to the White House and asked playfully, “Who lives there?” “Nobody,” Coolidge replied. “They just come and go.”

It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones. ~Calvin Coolidge

Amity Shlaes
Author, Coolidge

calvincoolidgeCalvin Coolidge and the Moral Case for Economy

AMITY SHLAES is a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg, a director of the Four Percent Growth Project at the George W. Bush Presidential Center, and a member of the board of the Calvin Coolidge Memorial Foundation. She has served as a member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal and as a columnist for the Financial Times, and is a recipient of the Hayek Prize and the Frederic Bastiat Prize for free-market journalism. She is the author of four books, Germany: The Empire Within, The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, The Greedy Hand: How Taxes Drive Americans Crazy and What to Do About It, and Coolidge.

The following is adapted from a talk given at Hillsdale College on January 27, 2013, during a conference on “The Federal Income Tax: A Centenary Consideration,” co-sponsored by the Center for Constructive Alternatives and the Ludwig von Mises Lecture Series.


WITH THE FEDERAL DEBT spiraling out of control, many Americans sense an urgent need to find a political leader who is able to say “no” to spending. Yet they fear that finding such a leader is impossible. Conservatives long for another Ronald Reagan. But is Reagan the right model? He was of course a tax cutter, reducing the top marginal rate from 70 to 28 percent. But his tax cuts—which vindicated supply-side economics by vastly increasing federal revenue—were bought partly through a bargain with Democrats who were eager to spend that revenue. Reagan was no budget cutter—indeed, the federal budget rose by over a third during his administration.

An alternative model for conservatives is Calvin Coolidge. President from 1923 to 1929, Coolidge sustained a budget surplus and left office with a smaller budget than the one he inherited. Over the same period, America experienced a proliferation of jobs, a dramatic increase in the standard of living, higher wages, and three to four percent annual economic growth. And the key to this was Coolidge’s penchant for saying “no.” If Reagan was the Great Communicator, Coolidge was the Great Refrainer.

Enter Coolidge
Following World War I, the federal debt stood ten times higher than before the war, and it was widely understood that the debt burden would become unbearable if interest rates rose. At the same time, the top income tax rate was over 70 percent, veterans were having trouble finding work, prices had risen while wages lagged, and workers in Seattle, New York, and Boston were talking revolution and taking to the streets. The Woodrow Wilson administration had nationalized the railroads for a time at the end of the war, and had encouraged stock exchanges to shut down for a time, and Progressives were now pushing for state or even federal control of water power and electricity. The business outlook was grim, and one of the biggest underlying problems was the lack of an orderly budgeting process: Congress brought proposals to the White House willy-nilly, and they were customarily approved.

The Republican Party’s response in the 1920 election was to campaign for smaller government and for a return to what its presidential candidate, Warren Harding, dubbed “normalcy”—a curtailing of government interference in the economy to create a predictable environment in which business could confidently operate. Calvin Coolidge, a Massachusetts governor who had gained a national reputation by facing down a Boston police strike—“There is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere, any time,” he had declared—was chosen to be Harding’s running mate. And following their victory, Harding’s inaugural address set a different tone from that of the outgoing Wilson administration (and from that of the Obama administration today): “No altered system,” Harding said, “will work a miracle. Any wild experiment will only add to the confusion. Our best assurance lies in efficient administration of our proven system.”

One of Harding’s first steps was to shepherd through Congress the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, under which the executive branch gained authority over and took responsibility for the budget, even to the point of being able to impound money after it was budgeted. This legislation also gave the executive branch a special budget bureau—the forerunner to today’s Office of Management and Budget—over which Harding named a flamboyant Brigadier General, Charles Dawes, as director. Together they proceeded to summon department staff and their bosses to semiannual meetings at Continental Hall, where Dawes cajoled and shamed them into making spending cuts. In addition, Harding pushed through a tax cut, lowering the top rate to 58 percent; and in a move toward privatization, he proposed to sell off naval petroleum reserves in Wyoming to private companies.

Unfortunately, some of the men Harding appointed to key jobs proved susceptible to favoritism or bribery, and his administration soon became embroiled in scandal. In one instance, the cause of privatization sustained damage when it became clear that secret deals had taken place in the leasing of oil reserves at Teapot Dome. Then in the summer of 1923, during a trip out West to get away from the scandals and prepare for a new presidential campaign, Harding died suddenly.

Enter Coolidge, whose personality was at first deemed a negative—his face, Alice Roosevelt Longworth said, “looked as though he had been weaned on a pickle.” But canny political leaders, including Supreme Court Justice and former President William Howard Taft, quickly came to respect the new president. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, after visiting the White House a few times that August, noted that whereas Harding had never been alone, Coolidge often was; that whereas Harding was partial to group decisions, Coolidge made decisions himself; and most important, that whereas Harding’s customary answer was “yes,” Coolidge’s was “no.”

The former governor of Massachusetts was in his element when it came to budgeting. Within 24 hours of arriving back in Washington after Harding’s death, he met with his own budget director, Herbert Lord, and together they went on offense, announcing deepened cuts in two politically sensitive areas: spending on veterans and District of Columbia public works. In his public statements, Coolidge made clear he would have scant patience with anyone who didn’t go along: “We must have no carelessness in our dealings with public property or the expenditure of public money. Such a condition is characteristic of undeveloped people, or of a decadent generation.”

If Harding’s budget meetings had been rough, Coolidge’s were rougher. Lord first advertised a “Two Percent Club,” for executive branch staffers who managed to save two percent in their budgets. Then a “One Percent Club,” for those who had achieved two or more already. And finally a “Woodpecker Club,” for department heads who kept chipping away. Coolidge did not even find it beneath his pay grade to look at the use of pencils in the government: “I don’t know if I ever indicated to the conference that the cost of lead pencils to the government per year is about $125,000,” he instructed the press in 1926. “I am for economy, and after that I am for more economy,” he told voters.

Coolidge in Command
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones,” Coolidge had once advised his father. And indeed, while Harding had vetoed only six bills, Coolidge vetoed 50—including farming subsidies, even though he came from farming country. (“Farmers never had made much money,” he told a guest, and he didn’t see there was much the government could rightly do about it.) He also vetoed veterans’ pensions and government entry into the utilities sector.

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection.com for his great cartoon

The Purpose of Tax Cuts

In short, Coolidge didn’t favor tax cuts as a means to increase revenue or to buy off Democrats. He favored them because they took government, the people’s servant, out of the way of the people. And this sense of government as servant extended to his own office.

Senator Selden Spencer once took a walk with Coolidge around the White House grounds. To cheer the President up, Spencer pointed to the White House and asked playfully, “Who lives there?” “Nobody,” Coolidge replied. “They just come and go.”

But as unpopular as he was in Washington, Coolidge proved enormously popular with voters. In 1924, the Progressive Party ran on a platform of government ownership of public power and a return to government ownership of railroads. Many thought the Progressive Party might split the Republican vote as it had in 1912, handing the presidency to the Democrats. As it happened, Progressive candidate Robert LaFollette indeed claimed more than 16 percent of the vote.

Yet Coolidge won with an absolute majority, gaining more votes than the Progressive and the Democrat combined. And in 1928, when Coolidge decided not to run for reelection despite the urging of party leaders who looked on his reelection as a sure bet, Herbert Hoover successfully ran on a pledge to continue Coolidge’s policies.

Unfortunately, Hoover didn’t live up to his pledge. Critics often confuse Hoover’s policies with Coolidge’s and complain that the latter did not prevent the Great Depression. That is an argument I take up at length in my previous book, The Forgotten Man, and is a topic for another day. Here let me just say that the Great Depression was as great and as long in duration as it was because, as economist Benjamin Anderson put it, the government under both Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt, unlike under Coolidge, chose to “play God.”

Lessons from Coolidge

Beyond the inspiration of Coolidge’s example of principle and consistency, what are the lessons of his story that are relevant to our current situation? One certainly has to do with the mechanism of budgeting: The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 provided a means for Harding and Coolidge to control the budget and the nation’s debt, and at the same time gave the people the ability to hold someone responsible. That law was gutted in the 1970s, when it became collateral damage in the anti-executive fervor following Watergate. The law that replaced it tilted budget authority back to Congress and has led to over-spending and lack of responsibility.

A second lesson concerns how we look at tax rates. When tax rates are set and judged according to how much revenue they bring in due to the Laffer Curve—which is how most of today’s tax cutters present them, thereby agreeing with tax hikers that the goal of tax policy is to increase revenue—tax policy can become a mechanism to expand government. The goals of legitimate government—American freedom and prosperity—are left by the wayside.

Thus the best case for lower taxes is the moral case—and as Coolidge well understood, a moral tax policy demands tough budgeting.

Finally, a lesson about politics. The popularity of Harding and Coolidge, and the success of their policies—especially Coolidge’s—following a long period of Progressive ascendancy, should give today’s conservatives hope. Coolidge in the 1920s, like Grover Cleveland in the previous century, distinguished government austerity from private-sector austerity, combined a policy of deficit cuts with one of tax cuts, and made a moral case for saying “no.” A political leader who does the same today is likely to find an electorate more inclined to respond “yes” than he or she expects.

Coolidge and Moral Economy, complete article

Advertisements

Heritage YouTube Video: Real American Update: Tax Abuse vs. Liberty

Michele Bachmann Explains Why the Tea Party Is Important

by Tyler McArthur

The modern Tea Party stands for three very basic things. Number one, we are taxed enough already. Number two, government should not spend more money than what it takes in. Number three, government should live under the constitution. ~Michelle Bachmann

Tea Party Defined—the Voice of Real Americans

YouTube video:

In remarks this week at The Heritage Foundation, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) defended the Tea Party and said its principles are shared by most Americans.

teapartywhatwestandforThis agenda, she said, is hardly extreme. “If these are the principles we stand for, I think whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, they are ones that you would agree with.”

In her 50 minute speech, Bachmann hit on several other conservative themes. Among other proposals, she called for a drastic simplification of the tax code, the termination of the Export-Import Bank, and increased border security.

The Tea Party is close to Bachmann’s heart. She was one of the first in 2010 to identify with the Tea Party’s protest against the growing size of the federal government. She also founded the House Tea Party Caucus.

The speech was one of the last of Bachmann’s congressional career. The four-term Representative and 2012 presidential candidate has elected to not seek re-election next month.

Watch the video above for her whole speech.

Do you belong to the Tea Party or support its mission? Tell us in the comments.

Ebola: What We Know and What We Should Do About It 

Lawmakers and the public are turning to The Heritage Foundation for leadership and answers about Ebola. A new report by Heritage expert David Addington explains the facts about Ebola, what we know about its spread, and what the government can do to contain it.

Read the report here  and please share it with your friends and family so that we can all stay safe.

Obamacare Is Turning Out As Bad As Predicted 

The facts are in. As The Heritage Foundation predicted, Obamacare is turning out to be a disaster. Heritage expert Robert Moffit has more in a new article in the National Interest .

  • Deductibles increased. Average deductibles on employer-based health plans run about $1,000, while average Obamacare deductibles are about $2,000.
  • Premiums increased. The president promised to lower all premiums by $2,500 annually. The opposite happened. Premiums increased by 100 percent for 27-year-olds in some states. They increased by 50 percent for 50-year-olds in others. For employees who get their health insurance through small businesses, 11 million saw premium increases, while just six million saw premium decreases.
  • Competition was reduced. The number of insurers offering coverage on the individual markets in all fifty states declined by 29 percent. Over half of counties in America have only one or two insurance providers.
  • And we still don’t know how many are covered. The Congressional Budget Office reported 6 million had signed up for Exchange plans. The administration said 8 million, then backtracked.

And what about the so-called crucial 18- to 34-year-old demographic, which would determine the health of the program? Well, the administration said 35 percent of enrollees were in that range, which sounds pretty close to their goal of 40 percent. “But thanks to excellent reporting byPolitico,” Moffit notes, “we learned that [this] number included children enrolled in the exchanges. Nice try.”

 

THE POWER TO DESTROY:

Court sides with IRS in tea-party targeting scandal

Bush-appointed judge says ‘no harm done’

judicialtyrannyA federal judge has sided with the Internal Revenue Service and dismissed lawsuits by tea-party groups seeking redress for the secret targeting of their applications for tax-exempt status, which the groups argued were intentionally delayed for political purposes.

The tea party organizations immediately announced they would appeal the decision by Washington, D.C., District Judge Reggie B. Walton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush.

Walton ruled that two lawsuits by Texas-based True the Vote and Linchpins of Liberty, along with 41 other conservative groups, were moot because the IRS took steps to address the scandal and “publicly suspended its targeting scheme.”

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law & Justice, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the tea party groups, said he plans to appeal the case.

“The decision by the court is disappointing. However, it does not deter our efforts to seek justice for our clients. We are reviewing the decision and plan to appeal,” Sekulow said in an emailed statement.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/court-sides-with-irs-in-tea-party-targeting-scandal/#X4W9WFEIbj6Yg61j.99

Abuse Report: Corruption, Liberal Social Media

Abuse of the Vote Process:

1. Touch Screen Voting Machine Turns GOP Vote into Dem Vote

Bob Allen

Why don’t we hear stories where a touch screen voting machine produced Republican votes?

vote-vote-fraudarticle“Calibration error” joins “hard drive crash” in the 2014 Democratic Party lexicon.
Republican state representative candidate Jim Moynihan went to vote Monday at the Schaumburg Public Library.

“I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” Moynihan said. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”

The conservative website Illinois Review reported that “While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race.

Moynihan offered this gracious lesson to his followers on Twitter: “Be careful when you vote in Illinois. Make sure you take the time to check your votes before submitting.”

This was a calibration error of the touch-screen on the machine,” Scalzitti said. “When Mr. Moynihan used the touch-screen, it improperly assigned his votes due to improper calibration.”

They were simply too obvious with their “fix.” They needed to adjust the algorithms tabulating the votes behind-the-scenes, and not let the machine display what it was doing. I’m sure they’ll get it right now, and the accurate vote counts will join Lois Lerner’s emails. Ooops!

[See also, “Democrat Caught on Tape Stuffing Arizona Ballot Box.”]

Vote for a Republican, the vote goes for the Democrat. Nice.

No doubt these machines were maintained and installed by workers for the SEIU—just laboring away for their Democrat overlords.

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2014/10/touch-screen-voting-machine-turns-gop-vote-dem-vote/#tu00g4E032XBq0pI.99

2. Corruption:

$40 Million for 6 Years of Presidential Vacations

govwasteabounds.

Mark Horne

Barack Obama’s last three Presidential vacations cost $6.2 million.
As a friend made me think, when he sent me this story, if this man ever opens his mouth again about “income inequality” and “economic injustice,” someone needs to tell him to shut up. A Secret Service agent would be perfect. The next two years can’t be over soon enough. I’m sure he’ll add another $5-$10-million to this obscene bill to shove down our throats before he’s done.

According to the Washington Examiner, “Taxpayers get stuck with $6.2 million tab for just 3 Obama vacations; $40m over 6 years.”

Three recent and lavish vacations by the first family cost taxpayers more than $6.2 million just for transportation and security, bringing the pleasure price for President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama’s trips to tens of millions of dollars since taking office, according to federal documents.

Taxpayer watchdog group Judicial Watch told Secrets that new cost calculations for security showed that the first family’s 2012-2013 vacation to Honolulu and the first lady’s 2014 ski trip to Aspen, Colo., reached nearly $1 million.
Has the President or the First Lady ever shown any interest in the plight of the poor other than in their campaign rhetoric? Barack Obama telling us that America needs a raise sounds so hollow because nothing in his life or his actions shows that he has ever cared about such people.

[See also, “Obama Blissfully Unaware of His Own Class Envy Campaign.”]
Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2014/10/40-million-6-years-presidential-vacations/#yEqbbhEQbkuWrR4z.99

Here’s what happens when you don’t stand up to bullies:

3. Christian School Forced to Have Islamist Lead Assembly or be Closed

Tim Brown
Well America, all you have to do to see what Islam is going to be attempting in America, and have attempted and gotten in America, is to look across the pond to the United Kingdom. In the UK, they have appeased the Muslims and have kowtowed to them now to the point where a British Christian school is being threatened with closure if they do not allow a Muslim imam to lead their assemblies.
America is following in the footsteps of those that she broke away from for independence. She is embracing multiculturalism, sodomy, and socialism. One cannot take fire in their bosom and not get burned, but modern Americans are doing just that. They watch the Brits set themselves on fire with such nonsense and yet are happily led to the slaughter without even a peep being heard. America, Britain is your future if you do not take a stand now while you are still free!
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/10/christian-school-forced-islamist-lead-assembly-closed/#movPrmjDbVZTWMe5.99

 

4. Liberal Intolerance Proven from Social Media

Mark Horne

RushSocialMedia2PIXYou’ve noticed that the liberal intolerance is showing up all over the culture. A CEO gets kicked out of his own company for supporting a winning California vote to define marriage as one man and one woman many years earlier. In other words, he held the stated position of Barack Obama at the same time that Obama held it. A state college system ends all Christian campus groups. A newspaper man is fired for disagreeing with homosexual mockery of Christianity. A Christian college loses a city contract and has its accreditation threatened.
All of this is entirely un-American and sickeningly intolerant. Where is that intolerance coming from?

I think the only answer is psychological. We have a semblance of a political perspective in this nation that now goes by the name of “Liberalism.” (That name was stolen from the real Liberals who were anti-war and pro-free-market. It was a bait-and-switch propaganda strategy.) This political perspective won’t explain much. But, for whatever reason, it is held by people who are, as a matter of personal psychology, more likely to be close-minded and intolerant. What we see in the political arena is simply the manifestation of their own psychological limitations.

They do in public life what they have always done in their personal lives.

Here is what I mean: CNS News reports, “Liberals More Likely to Unfriend Because of Opposing Views on Politics.”
Those at both the left and right ends of the spectrum, the ‘consistent liberals’ and the ‘consistent conservatives,’ comprise about 20 percent of the public overall, and according to Pew, “have a greater impact on the political process than do those with more mixed ideological views,” because they are more likely to vote, donate to campaigns and participate in politics.

When it comes to social media, consistent conservatives and consistent liberals vary in the way they consume the media as well as how they react to it.

According to the study, 44 percent of consistently liberal Facebook users have hidden, blocked or defriended, or stopped following someone on social media because they disagreed with a political post. In contrast, 31 percent of consistently conservative individuals did the same.

In the end, the disciplines of tolerating dissenting views and trying to engage in reasoned conversation are not just needed for the sake of personal character. They are needed because the lack of that tolerance results in a repressive political system.

Comments

In my town, one fears to have Republican stickers on our cars, as the liberals will KEY the paint jobs.

Don R Sherwood

John Gallion ·

Leftists are what they are because they are emotionally and mentally ill. They should be treated that way. They make decisions in life based fully on emotions. Reason has nothing at all to do with the Leftist world view. If confronted with facts that contradict their points they resort to name calling and childish breath-holding and even violence. And I’ve had a fire-breathing feminist Leftist I knew in grade and high school completely wig out at me (and others from her past) and De-friend all of us on Facebook because we disagreed with her views. Everyone knows who the crazy lady is: the feminist leftist!
Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2014/10/liberal-intolerance-proven-social-media/#hQAKdVUPIrHZFlsd.99

 

5. Administration Freed Illegal Immigrants Charged With Violent Crimes

Melanie Batley

crimeIllegal immigrants charged with violent crimes and serious felonies were among the hundreds of criminals the Obama administration released from jails across the country in February 2013, newly released documents show.

According to records obtained by USA Today, the government released inmates charged with offenses ranging from kidnapping and sexual assault to drug trafficking, armed assault, and homicide.

The evidence contradicts previous assurances by the administration that the 617 criminals who were released as part of a cost-cutting exercise were low-risk offenders charged with misdemeanors “or other criminals whose prior conviction did not pose a violent threat to public safety,” USA Today reported.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Illegal-immigrants-obama-administration/2014/10/23/id/602647/#ixzz3H0cDFlrA
Commentary:

6. Using a Double Standard on Hate Crimes to Bash Israel

Evelyn Gordon

israelmourns2Hateful graffiti targeting a minority have repeatedly been scrawled on cars and buildings, including houses of worship, yet police frequently fail to arrest the culprits. Innocent people have been viciously attacked and occasionally even murdered just because they belong to this minority. Clearly, this is a country awash in racism and prejudice that it’s making no real effort to stem, so it deserves harsh condemnation from anyone who cares about such fundamental liberal values as tolerance and nonviolence, right?

That’s certainly the conclusion many liberals leaped to about a similar wave of anti-Arab attacks in Israel. But what I actually just described is the recent wave of anti-Semitic attacks in the United States, and there has–quite properly–been no similar rush to denounce America. Since the American government and people overwhelmingly condemn such attacks, and America remains one of the best places in the world to live openly as a Jew, liberals correctly treat such incidents as exceptions rather than proof that the U.S. is irredeemably anti-Semitic. But somehow, Israel never merits a similarly nuanced analysis.

Consider just a few of the attacks I referenced in the first paragraph: This past weekend–on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish year–swastikas were spray-painted on a Jewish fraternity at Emory University in Atlanta, and also on a synagogue in Spokane, Washington, on the other side of the country. In August, a Jewish couple was attacked in New York by thugs who shouted anti-Semitic slogans, threw a water bottle at the woman, and punched her skullcap-wearing husband. In July, pro-Israel demonstrators were attacked by stick-wielding thugs in Los Angeles. On August 9, an Orthodox rabbi was murdered in Miami while walking to synagogue on the Sabbath; police insist this wasn’t a hate crime, though they haven’t yet arrested any suspects, but local Jews are unconvinced, as a synagogue and a Jewish-owned car on the same street were vandalized with anti-Semitic slogans just two weeks earlier. And in April, a white supremacist killed three people at two Jewish institutions near Kansas City, Kansas.

A Martian looking at this list, devoid of any context, might well conclude that America is a deeply anti-Semitic country. And of course, he’d be wrong. Context–the fact that these incidents are exceptions to the overwhelmingly positive picture of Jewish life in America–matters greatly.

Yet that’s no less true for anti-Arab attacks in Israel. As in America, both the government and the public have almost unanimously condemned such attacks.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2014/10/08/using-a-double-standard-on-hate-crimes-to-bash-israel/

 

State Government: Character, Tax, and Wisconsin

Dinner Topics for Monday

keyWisconsin Governor Scott Walker shows how to conduct the government of his state with good character. It’s called integrity. It results in liberty, prosperity, and peace. And it should be an inspiration to us all.

Scott Walker’s Blueprint for America’s Renewal

Rush Limbaugh

newspaperRUSH: The New York Times.  What is this, a tiny little paragraph?  One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 lines.  National Briefing, Midwest.  It’s page A14 of the New York Times today.  Here’s the headline:  “Wisconsin: Assembly Passes Governor’s Tax-Cut Plan — The Wisconsin Assembly has passed Gov. Scott Walker’s $504 million tax-cut plan. The chamber approved the bill on Tuesday by a vote of 61 to 35.” It wasn’t even close.

“The Senate passed it earlier this month. Assembly approval sends the bill on to Mr. Walker for his signature. The governor wants to use a portion of the state’s projected $977 million surplus to pay for cuts in property and income taxes.”

The solution to this country’s problems gets 10 lines in the New York Times.  I’m amazed they even ran the story, but it gets 10 lines.  I think this is one of the biggest and most under-commented on, including in conservative media, stories this year.  This is simply huge, what Governor Walker has done.

No matter how you look at this, A, let’s look at Wisconsin. One of the bluest of blue states. One of the bluest of the blue universities. One of the headquarter states for malcontent state unions. One of the headquarter states for malcontent Democrat Party union activism.  They did everything they could not just to destroy Walker’s political career; they tried to destroy his reputation and his political life.  They attempted to recall him a couple of times.  The Democrats in the Senate walked out. 

WalkerHe persevered.  He overcame.  He dominated, and he won.  And in the bluest of blue states unemployment is around 3.5%.  The schools have been reformed and so the unions do not control every aspect of it now.  There is a surplus of nearly a billion dollars in this economy.  There’s no oil fracking going on there like there is next door in the Dakotas.  There is a near $1 billion surplus and he’s returning half of that to the residents of the state in the form of a property tax cut and income tax cut, and it rates 10 lines in the New York Times. 

Elsewhere across the country we have economic decay, frustration, unemployment, no job prospects, certainly no career prospects

We’ve got the answer in practical and real political terms and real-life experience — and particularly for the Republican Party, the blueprint for how to win elections and the blueprint for how to govern after you win elections, the blueprint for economic revival, the blueprint for employment revival, the blueprint for budgetary solvency.  It’s amazing!  It is a huge story. 

I interviewed Governor Walker for the Limbaugh Letter two issues ago, maybe the current issue. The upcoming interview, by the way, Bill Donohue, the Catholic League, and that is also fascinating. You’ve got to read that.  You’ve got to read the upcoming issue of the Limbaugh Letter with Bill Donohue, the Catholic League.  But this interview with Scott Walker in the preceding issue is just indescribably good.  I just ask a couple questions and get out of the way.

The Democrats are living in mortal fear that this is gonna be discovered.  The Democrats are living in mortal fear that this is gonna be uncovered, discovered, massively, widely reported.  They’re living in mortal fear that the Republicans are gonna get their butts in gear and learn from this and try to replicate it.  So far there’s no sign of that.  This is Paul Ryan’s state as well, and there are presidential rumblings for him.  There are also presidential rumblings for Walker.  I have no feeling on that.  But, man, I was surprised to see this story in the New York Times.  Just 10 lines as printed, and every important detail is there. 

“Walker introduced a bill in January that would send $406 million to technical colleges to reduce their property tax hit and cut income taxes by $98 million by reducing the lowest bracket to 4% from 4.4%.”

So the poor are getting a tax cut.  Everybody is, actually, ’cause property taxes are being cut.  “The end result would be a $131 reduction in a median homes tax bill this December and $46 in annual income tax savings for the average worker.”  I look at this, and I wonder why conservative media is not glomming onto this, and why the Republican Party isn’t. But it’s worth paying a lot of attention to. 

By the way, Walker? When you listen to him talk, when you listen him campaign, he doesn’t sound like any of these other Republican governors who wants to cross the aisle and work together and have bipartisanship. The Democrats didn’t offer him any of that.  The Democrats offered no cooperation whatsoever.  All they offered was personal destruction.  They threatened; they intimidated.

They threatened harm against his family, these union people did, and he persevered.  One of the reasons that so few people know about it is that he’s not out beating his chest over all of this and trying to get people to look at him and then say, “Look at me! Look at me! Look at me!” He’s just going about his business.  I just want to take the occasion to congratulate him and to thank him again, by the way.  Now, on the other side of this, what’s the alternative? 

The alternative is what we’ve got going right now.  The alternative is the Russians rebuilding the Soviet Union under Vladimir Putin, while Obama fills in his brackets for March Madness. 

Library Ban Books? Why?

Why have these books been banned by your Librarian?

keycensor—19th and 20th century dictionaries define censorship as the act by an official of striking immoral or objectionable material from printed matter. In times of war, such as World War II, it meant removing matter that was sensitive or harmful to national security. Today, we are in a culture war. The censoring officials are agents of Political Correctness and America’s dictatorial regime. In this case, Librarians are censoring, not immoral passages, but wholesome books about good moral character. The ruling parties preserve all that is vile and indecent, and suppress Biblical morals, and whatever else that seems to be good and wholesome. Now libraries get in an uproar when parents want to censor immorality to protect their children. Something is wrong with this picture. ~C.A. Davidson

BannedBooks-284x275Librarians confronted over ban on books

Tax dollars supporting politically correct censorship

Librarians across America are set to observe”Banned Books Week” by highlighting titles that recently have faced censorship.

But the librarians themselves this year are being accused of banning books.
The claim comes from advocates for the community of ex-”gays.”

“Every week is ‘Banned Books Week’ for the ex-gay community,” says Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Gays and Ex-Gays.
“Books about leaving homosexuality are routinely censored in high schools and community libraries across the United States, while gay-affirming books are readily available for any young person questioning their sexuality,” she said.

PFOX this year is joining Voice of the Voiceless in urging the American Library Association to include ex-”gay” books as part of its “Banned Books Week,” Sept. 22-28.

The groups say ALA has refused to acknowledge the routine banning of ex-”gay” books even as members work to eliminate censorship of other books.
Christopher Doyle, president of Voice of the Voiceless, said there’s a genuine need.

His group advocates for former homosexuals, individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions and their families.

“What if a sexually-abused child walks into a public library looking for information as to why he/she has unwanted homosexual feelings? That child is not going to receive accurate information from homosexual-affirming books, which often promote the myth that people are ‘born gay’ and cannot change,” he said.

“As a former homosexual and victim of childhood sexual abuse, having access to ex-gay literature would have provided me with some much needed hope that I could heal from that abuse and overcome unwanted SSA. The very idea that a school or community library is banning a book because of political correctness is contrary to our country’s ideals of liberty and the pursuit of self-determination,” he said.

Griggs cited one case.

“Kristin Pekoll, the librarian in charge of young adult books at the West Bend Community Memorial Library in Wisconsin, advocates for children’s books with gay themes but refuses to accept our donation of ex-gay books for children,” she said. “Public libraries are supported by all citizens, and it is appalling that tax dollars are supporting such narrow minded thinking and viewpoint discrimination.”

Christopher Doyle, president of Voice of the Voiceless, said there’s a genuine need.

His group advocates for former homosexuals, individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions and their families.

ALA, in fact, features Pekoll as a speaker at its conferences on intellectual freedom and the First Amendment, PFOX said.

The two organizations are calling on Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, to make a statement in opposition to the censorship of children’s ex-”gay” books from the West Bend Community Memorial Library.

“Public libraries should be for everyone,” commented Griggs. “People seeking positive life change need the love and support of their friends, family, communities, schools, workplaces and places of worship.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/librarians-confronted-over-ban-on-books/#ruBcchgR8R862Pzb.99

Government, Tax vs. American Citizen

Government and Taxes vs. the American Citizen

taxauditseniorI just received an audit on my tax return for 2012 from the IRS. It puzzles me!!!  They are questioning how many dependents I claimed.
I guess it was because of my response to the question:   “List all dependents?” I replied: “12 million illegal immigrants; 3 million crack heads; 42 million unemployed people on food stamps; 2 million people in over 243 prisons; half of Mexico; and 535 useless persons in the U.S. House and Senate.”  Evidently, this was NOT an acceptable answer.

I KEEP ASKING MYSELF, WHO DID I MISS?

President Obama: Gun Control, Terrorism, and Taxes

Obama Arms Muslim Terrorists With Machine Guns But Wants U.S. Taxpayers Disarmed

Keep in mind that the “Syrian rebels” are the ones connected with Al-Qaeda (Read: terrorists, enemy)

by Philip Hodges ObamaSyria_large

The Obama administration announced recently that it would start overtly arming the Syrian “rebels.”

Overtly, as opposed to covertly. I have a hard time believing that they’re just now starting to arm the rebellion. They’ve been doing this for a long time under the radar. It’s just that, now, they’re making it public. Apparently, there had been a delay in getting the arms to the rebel groups in Syria, but it’s being reported now that those shipments are finally coming in.

The Washington Post reported last week: “The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures.

The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear — a flow of material that marks a major escalation of the U.S. role in Syria’s civil war. The arms shipments, which are limited to light weapons and other munitions that can be tracked, began arriving in Syria at a moment of heightened tensions over threats by President Obama to order missile strikes to punish the regime of Bashar al-Assad for his alleged use of chemical weapons in a deadly attack near Damascus last month.”

When they say “light weapons,” they’re not talking about slingshots: “The CIA has been delivering light machine guns and other small arms to Syrian rebels for several weeks, following President Barack Obama’s decision to arm the rebels. The agency has also arranged for the Syrian opposition to receive anti-tank weaponry like rocket-propelled grenades through a third party, presumably one of the Gulf countries that has been arming the rebels, a senior U.S. intelligence official and two former intelligence officials said Thursday. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the classified program publicly.”

They call them “light weapons” when they’re talking about arming terrorists. If Americans had these so-called “light weapons,” they’d go to jail. They’re illegal. (Well, essentially illegal.) Can you imagine if Obama allowed only semi-automatic rifles with magazines with no more than a 10-round capacity to be sent to the rebels? They’d laugh. They want real weapons. Like real assault weapons. Machine guns. Anti-tank weapons such as RPGs. And I’m sure that’s not all.

The dark irony here is that U.S. taxpayers are working and paying taxes to a government that is slowly but surely disarming Americans through regulations in the name of getting guns off the streets and out of the “wrong hands.” It’s about “public safety and security.” And the children.

All the while, this tax money is being spent on arming terrorists overseas with machine guns and RPGs. Makes perfect sense.
Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/09/obama-arms-muslim-terrorists-machine-guns-wants-u-s-taxpayers-disarmed/#pipSStRg3pVDXxMk.99