The question Left of center is, “How do you feel about it?” How do you feel about ObamaCare? How do you feel about gun violence? Do you feel that the rich pay their fair share? Feelings are legitimate, but apply to relationships and people, not public policy issues. I love my family. But I think about public policy.
Sadly, too many Americans “feel” about public policy issues which unfortunately “liberates” them from thinking. As a result, more and more people are becoming unaccustomed to rational analysis and thought.
I don’t visit the doctor to hear how he feels about my health, nor a plumber to learn his feelings about my leaky pipes. We want expertise, not feelings. Continue reading
Most people do not know that the National Football League is treated as a tax-exempt nonprofit organization, nor do they realize that the NFL receives a special broadcast antitrust exemption. None of that makes sense. But on top of it all, the NFL and its commissioner, Roger Goodell, are corrupt and lawless which is one more reason not to give the NFL special tax and legal treatment.
First, the NFL is clearly a for-profit business and should be treated as such. Giving the NFL, a big business with billions in revenues every year non-profit status is absurd. Sports is a big business, not a nonprofit foundation. Continue reading
The Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787 — more than 225 years ago. That is long enough ago that it is easy to take for granted the rights protected by the Constitution. If given a chance to reflect, what constitutionally protected rights do Americans think are the most fundamental to our freedom? I conducted an informal poll, asking this question. The answer came almost universally—free speech and press. Both of these liberties form a part of the foundation upon which our freedom is based. But they are not the cornerstone of our freedom.
So, what is the cornerstone of the freedom that America has enjoyed for more than 225 years? It is found in our rights to property – our economic rights. The right to own and control one’s property, the fruits of one’s labor, and one’s inventions and creations is the cornerstone of our freedom. Why, you ask? How can the right to own something be more important than free speech? The answer is simple. Without property rights, no other important right can long survive. Property rights are the rich and fertile soil in which all other rights can grow and mature. Continue reading
It is not surprising that there are liberals in Washington proposing new stealth carbon taxes. What is surprising is that a few “conservatives” support the idea. Even more inexplicable is the fact that some have called the carbon tax a “once in a generation opportunity.”
Let me see if I’ve got this right. A huge, gargantuan tax increase — one that would make everything cost more — is a “once in a generation opportunity?”
Every single day for the last 30 years and every single day for the next 30 years, liberals will crawl over top of each other to be the first one to sign-on to a new energy tax. This is a deal that liberals will always be willing to give. Continue reading
The economy is not some theoretical concept or ivory tower idea. A strong economy means that Americans have jobs and growing incomes. It means that families can provide their children with the care and opportunities that will provide for a bright future. Conversely a weak economy means fewer jobs and less opportunity. It means lower incomes and it means that families have to do without.
Too often big government slows the economy by taxing and spending too much. Those who support more and more government taxes and spending always argue that government can do something good with the money. But the problem with that argument is that families and businesses also can do a lot of good with that money if government doesn’t take it away from them. Continue reading
Dr. Thomas Sowell, the Stanford University based economist, wrote this week that when he was teaching he would ask his students to consider this: “Imagine a government agency with only two tasks: (1) building statues of Benedict Arnold and (2) providing life-saving medications to children. If this agency’s budget were cut, what would it do?” Sowell posits that the agency would naturally cut back on medications for children. He explains that is the only result that would lead to getting the budget cuts restored. And he pointedly explains why the government wouldn’t cut back on the silly statues: “If they cut back on building statues of Benedict Arnold, people might ask why they were building statues of Benedict Arnold in the first place.”
Dr. Sowell is absolutely correct! Years ago, when I served on a local school board I witnessed this almost reflexive response every year the budget was tight. The most absurd things were never offered for cuts. They always threatened to cut the things that would most outrage the public. They talked about cutting bus routes for kids that lived far away from schools. They talked about crowded classrooms. Continue reading
With the sequester deadline looming, there has been a marked uptick in the hyperbole emanating from Washington. Little wonder, a Pew Research poll says that only about one in four is paying close attention to the sequester.
This must be disconcerting to the White House because it has been full-court pressing the issue — suddenly releasing criminals from prison, falsely claiming that teachers are being pink-slipped, holding campaign style events with President Barack Obama personally issuing overblown and false warnings that firemen and policemen and teachers will be pink-slipped, that air traffic will be at greater risk, that waiting times at airports will increase and that meat will not be inspected and may be tainted. The White House even announced that it won’t deploy an aircraft carrier to a hotspot because of sequester budget constraints. Continue reading
by George Landrith
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified on Capitol Hill this morning about the events of September 11, 2012 in which the American Consulate in Benghazi was attacked and burned to the ground and four Americans murdered, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. Panetta said that he had a pre-scheduled 30 minute meeting with President Obama at the White House at 5 p.m. that day. Panetta said that they spent 20 minutes talking about the American Embassy in Egypt that was surrounded by angry mobs and the unfolding attack in Benghazi. Interestingly, he said that Obama did not ask for any information about what military resources were in the region or for options of what might be done to protect the Americans in Benghazi. Continue reading
President Barack Obama and, for that matter, most of America seem woefully ignorant about a scandal unfolding at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. As hard as it is to believe, outgoing Administrator Lisa Jackson actually appears to have had agency personnel create a fictitious employee by the name of “Richard Windsor” so that Jackson could appropriate the Windsor’s email address for her own purposes.
We’re not talking about some alias to be used for personal correspondence but a totally false identity in whose name official business was allegedly conducted created specifically to avoid federal record-keeping and disclosure requirements. And none of this would ever have been uncovered were it not for the courage of a still anonymous whistleblower and the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Christopher Horner, an attorney with the legal smarts and experience needed to unravel it all. Continue reading
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finally made it to Capitol Hill to testify about what happened five months ago in Benghazi, Libya on September 11th — the 11th anniversary of the original 9/11 attacks. What we knew before Hillary’s testimony is that a well-planned and coordinated terrorist attack in Benghazi killed four Americans, including our Ambassador. After Ms. Clinton testified, the mainstream media rushed to tell Americans how amazing Ms. Clinton’s performance was and how small-minded the Republicans had been. As usual, the mainstream media demonstrated itself to be shamelessly dishonest and embarrassingly servile. But there is nothing new in that. Continue reading
As a candidate for president, Barack Obama promised to lead the most open, most transparent administration in history. He has not kept that promise. Time and again, members of his administration have failed to keep faith with the American people. Acting in secret, they have taken sometimes extraordinary steps to shield their actions from the public.
The latest example involved Lisa Jackson, who has led the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency since the beginning of the president’s first term. Jackson is resigning, but only after it was revealed she used a fake name (Richard Windsor) to create a fake e-mail address to conduct official EPA business. Continue reading
“In Eastern Europe and around the world, memorials, boulevards, and plazas are renamed for Ronald Reagan — because they see him as their liberator.”
by George Landrith
Presidential greatness is determined by making an enduring impact – by changing the course of history for the better. By this standard, few are Ronald Reagan’s equal.
He changed the way Americans viewed themselves and the way the world viewed America. Continue reading
Every December, when outdoor temperatures are dropping, prominent atheists are using the approaching Christmas holiday as an excuse to stoke the flames of the culture war. It happens every year like clock work. This year is no different.
One of the most outrageous examples happened a few years ago. Dan Barker, the Co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation (based in Wisconsin) traveled to Olympia, Washington to post an anti-Christmas sign next to a nativity display at the state capitol. For the record, there is also a Menorah on display and a large “Holiday Tree” which is part of a local business’ charitable effort to benefit poor children. Barker dismissed the idea that his sign was merely another religious display. He said, “It is not a religious display. It is an attack on religion.” Continue reading
by George Landrith
With a long history of federal overspending and the recent explosion of more federal debt, it is obvious that the federal budget must be cut back to a reasonable size. We need an intervention. But the Budget Control Act — which would force an “automatic sequester” of $500 billion in across-the-board defense spending cuts over the next decade, in addition to the $487 billion in defense cuts already scheduled — is not a good solution to our spending crisis. Continue reading
With the budget and fiscal crisis facing the United States and difficult economic times surely ahead for the foreseeable future, President Barack Obama has vociferously argued that Republicans must agree to tax increases. He argues for what he terms are modest tax increases on the wealthiest Americans that are equal to the tax rates during President Bill Clinton’s time in office. Why is Obama only interested in Clinton era tax rates, but not Clinton era federal spending rates? Continue reading