Rush Limbaugh address the CPAC today. He outlined what real conservatism is, what America needs to do to recover, and why Democrats are threatening the very foundations of the Constitution and American values.
The Strong Conservative Blog
- Strong Conservative
- Toronto
- "People should not fear the government, government should fear the people." - V
2009-02-28
2009-02-26
2009-02-24
Bravo Bobby
I'm a big fan of Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana, and he proved why he's been so successful at such a young age tonight. He outlined why the Democrats' stimulus bill is garbage and a giant waste of tax payer money that will do little if anything to help the economy recover. He outlined why the major mistakes Republicans have made over the past 8 years in regards to deficits and joining in with earmarks and bureaucratic enlargement.
Jindal nailed it when he said the strength of America stems not from government but from its people.
Jindal will likely be a major player in the GOP for years to come. It's amazing to think that kid from Indian immigrants has risen to be a conservative governor in a state like Louisiana with a history of corruption, racism, and bigotry. God bless America.
Jindal nailed it when he said the strength of America stems not from government but from its people.
Jindal will likely be a major player in the GOP for years to come. It's amazing to think that kid from Indian immigrants has risen to be a conservative governor in a state like Louisiana with a history of corruption, racism, and bigotry. God bless America.
2009-02-22
Be Encouraged
The economy might stink, your portfolio might be worth half what it was last year, you might have lost your job, but have hope.
"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat, nor about your body, what you will put on. For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of ? If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass, which is alive in the field today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things will be added to you."
Christ said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." Our troubles will eventually pass, so take heart because "the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever."
So have faith, "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat, nor about your body, what you will put on. For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of ? If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass, which is alive in the field today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things will be added to you."
Christ said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." Our troubles will eventually pass, so take heart because "the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever."
So have faith, "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
2009-02-21
2009-02-20
Obama Should You Make You Nervous
Eric Holder says America is a "nation of cowards"; yes, the same guy that pushed for the pardoning of Mark Rich. Then today, the White House responded to the very accurate and timely criticism from Rick Santelli, one of the best traders in America and a guy who knows the market better than anyone in the Obama administration, by saying he "doesn't know what he's talking about." What nerve from a guy who's last real job as a community organizer isn't a real job. The President would do well to focus on actually stimulating the economy instead of picking on individual private citizens like Santelli, Limbaugh, and other perceived enemies in this Nixon-like fashion.
For a president to target people like this is either stupid or scary. Stupid because Obama should be focused on the big issues, or scary because they deliberately attack anyone who criticizes them. Santelli knows exactly what he's talking about and Obama, Geitner, and Gibbs should take note because since they've put their little plan into action the economy has tanked.
Obama has done nothing but stimulate pessimism, fear, and doubt. He has not cut taxes, that is an absolute lie. He is giving a rebate, even to people who don't pay taxes. Hello socialist redistribution. The tax rates remain the same and will go up in 2010 once the tax cuts passed by Bush expire.
Obama is proving to be nothing but a fear mongering liar who has continues to break promises on public finance of his campaign, taxes, the Iraq War (I'm glad he lied about that one), his pastor, his church, his involvement with Blagojevich, Rezko, NAFTA, and many other issues.
Beware America, you elected a far left socialist who is carrying out his promise to redistribute wealth.
Now watch Rick Santelli speak the truth about Obama's stupid mortgage plan that will reward irresponsibility.
For a president to target people like this is either stupid or scary. Stupid because Obama should be focused on the big issues, or scary because they deliberately attack anyone who criticizes them. Santelli knows exactly what he's talking about and Obama, Geitner, and Gibbs should take note because since they've put their little plan into action the economy has tanked.
Obama has done nothing but stimulate pessimism, fear, and doubt. He has not cut taxes, that is an absolute lie. He is giving a rebate, even to people who don't pay taxes. Hello socialist redistribution. The tax rates remain the same and will go up in 2010 once the tax cuts passed by Bush expire.
Obama is proving to be nothing but a fear mongering liar who has continues to break promises on public finance of his campaign, taxes, the Iraq War (I'm glad he lied about that one), his pastor, his church, his involvement with Blagojevich, Rezko, NAFTA, and many other issues.
Beware America, you elected a far left socialist who is carrying out his promise to redistribute wealth.
Now watch Rick Santelli speak the truth about Obama's stupid mortgage plan that will reward irresponsibility.
2009-02-19
The Revolt Against Obama Begins
Personal responsibility? Obama says it, but if you can't pay your mortgage, your neighbors via the government will pay it for you. Can't afford health care? Don't worry, the government will pay for it. Banks and auto-companies can't make a buck? Nationalise them.
Watch these traders react to Obama's mortgage plan.
But perhaps there's a real solution that actually involves real personal responsibility. Instead of taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive, Obama should be encouraging the productive, efficient, and hard working. Yes, it's now my turn to speak truth to power, to speak truth to socialism.
Now high school students are doing the job journalists won't, "Even though I don't support him, I think it's cool he's here," said Brandon Miller, 18. "I just don't believe all the things he's telling us. His goal is just too big and broad." Amen. Kids are actually learning in some schools, incredible.
Having the government pay people's mortgages will only encourage people to not pay their mortgages. Then again, perhaps Obama's goal of wealth distribution involves making more and more people dependent on government. Socialism? Yes, how progressive and as a society we'll become progressively less free and more bound to Big Brother.
Watch these traders react to Obama's mortgage plan.
But perhaps there's a real solution that actually involves real personal responsibility. Instead of taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive, Obama should be encouraging the productive, efficient, and hard working. Yes, it's now my turn to speak truth to power, to speak truth to socialism.
Now high school students are doing the job journalists won't, "Even though I don't support him, I think it's cool he's here," said Brandon Miller, 18. "I just don't believe all the things he's telling us. His goal is just too big and broad." Amen. Kids are actually learning in some schools, incredible.
Having the government pay people's mortgages will only encourage people to not pay their mortgages. Then again, perhaps Obama's goal of wealth distribution involves making more and more people dependent on government. Socialism? Yes, how progressive and as a society we'll become progressively less free and more bound to Big Brother.
2009-02-18
The Fear Agenda
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and President Obama rammed the stimulus through Congress, barring or limiting GOP input despite promises of "bi-partisanship". So the big bill was pushed through, it will lead to $800 billion in new government spending and almost doubling, yes doubling, the deficit in one year. Generations from now, Americans will likely still be paying for Obama's big spending. The danger is that Obama used words like "catastrophe" and "disaster" to scare Congress into rushing the bill and the American people into thinking it was actually necessary.
To solve a debt problem, Obama's solution was to dig the government deeper in debt and revert back to Keynesianism and protectionism, the very things that failed to solve the problems of the Great Depression.
Not only that, after Congress passed the bill in a rush, Obama let it sit on his desk for 3 days before finally getting around to signing it on Tuesday.
Thomas Sowell points out: "There is the same complete inconsistency in the bill itself. Despite the urgency in President Obama’s rhetoric, as well as in Congress’s haste in passing a bill which few — if any — members had time to read, much less consider, most of the actual spending will take place next year at the earliest."
This is unhealthy for democracy and is the complete opposite of the transparent government Obama promised. The "stimulus", as so many have pointed out does very little stimulating except of the government itself.
As the government increases in size, the private sector will have even less capacity to generate wealth, innovate, create jobs, and provide opportunity. Every new government job, program, and policy is a drain on the engine of wealth that is capitalism and free markets. There has been no action on fixing the oversight of banks or financial institutions, nor has there been any effort to abolish the destructive practice of mark-to-market accounting.
Instead, it seems increasingly apparent that Obama is using fear to move the country towards bigger government, and ultimately socialism. That said, this bill is Obama's. He owns it, and if it fails, his presidency will likely be over with in 2012.
Sowell succinctly concludes, "The last thing the administration can risk is delay that could allow the market to begin recovering on its own. That would undermine, if not destroy, a golden opportunity to restructure the American economy in ways that would allow politicians to micromanage other sectors of the economy the way they have micromanaged the housing market into disaster."
To solve a debt problem, Obama's solution was to dig the government deeper in debt and revert back to Keynesianism and protectionism, the very things that failed to solve the problems of the Great Depression.
Not only that, after Congress passed the bill in a rush, Obama let it sit on his desk for 3 days before finally getting around to signing it on Tuesday.
Thomas Sowell points out: "There is the same complete inconsistency in the bill itself. Despite the urgency in President Obama’s rhetoric, as well as in Congress’s haste in passing a bill which few — if any — members had time to read, much less consider, most of the actual spending will take place next year at the earliest."
This is unhealthy for democracy and is the complete opposite of the transparent government Obama promised. The "stimulus", as so many have pointed out does very little stimulating except of the government itself.
As the government increases in size, the private sector will have even less capacity to generate wealth, innovate, create jobs, and provide opportunity. Every new government job, program, and policy is a drain on the engine of wealth that is capitalism and free markets. There has been no action on fixing the oversight of banks or financial institutions, nor has there been any effort to abolish the destructive practice of mark-to-market accounting.
Instead, it seems increasingly apparent that Obama is using fear to move the country towards bigger government, and ultimately socialism. That said, this bill is Obama's. He owns it, and if it fails, his presidency will likely be over with in 2012.
Sowell succinctly concludes, "The last thing the administration can risk is delay that could allow the market to begin recovering on its own. That would undermine, if not destroy, a golden opportunity to restructure the American economy in ways that would allow politicians to micromanage other sectors of the economy the way they have micromanaged the housing market into disaster."
2009-02-13
Obama Should Use Hindsight to Gain Foresight
Change and hope has turned into "same old" and "fear". Obama has continued down the same path as Bush on Iraq by keeping Secretary of Defense Gates and not changing the status of forces agreement with the Iraqis. And while he's promised to close Guantanamo Bay there is no plan as to where the prisoners will go. Miami? No, they'll most likely end up in Kabul, Kandahar, or some other backwater place under the same conditions they are now if not worse.
Secondly, Obama talked about "optimism" during his inaugural address, but since that day he has stoked the fears of Americans by promising catastrophe and devastation if the "stimulus" (and I use that term very loosely) is not passed. The problem is that the "stimulus" does very little stimulating for the economy, but a great deal for the government. This provides an enormous amount of evidence to those, like myself, who labelled Obama a socialist.
The credit crunch has been caused by ineffective regulation (although not over-regulation, quite the opposite), bloated government bureaucracy and incompetence, and irresponsibility on the part of Wall Street brokers who lent money too easily and average Americans who borrowed too eagerly. The central problem is bad debt and too much of it, but Obama's solution is for the US government to take on more. Not only will the government taking on more debt under Obama’s plan, but it will be printing money as though there are no consequences or repercussions. The probability of dangerous inflation levels and a market that doesn't react to his economic plan could present a perfect storm that will exaggerate the severity of the recession.
If Obama is serious about stimulating the economy and being bi-partisan about it, he should follow the examples of a Democrat and a Republican of the past who implemented well targeted financial policies to stimulate economic growth: John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.
Kennedy and Reagan both faced economic problems and implemented tax cuts across all income levels to stimulate investment, savings, and consumption. A serious problem that has plagued America is massive levels of debt. Don’t get me wrong, some debt is good but some is very bad. Credit card debt is bad because it allows consumers to purchase what they normally couldn’t afford without saving up first. Mortgage debt, on a first home, is good as it allows people to build equity, credit, and assets (i.e., wealth). As Reagan said, “You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?” Indeed, we are.
The deficit and national debt have been ignored for far too long. Reagan, and others before him, warned of the dangers of prolonged debt that ignored the reality that at some point in the future someone will have to repay it: “For decades, we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.”
Jobs have been leaving America in various sectors for decades. Sometimes that is a healthy development in the process of “creative destruction”, but other times it is because America is not competing well or at all. Capital will flee from areas where it is restrained and burdened to go to areas where it can thrive and grow. The examples of Ireland, Singapore, and Hong Kong are proof of how an economy unrestrained by taxes and government regulation can prosper.
Kennedy stated, “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."
If President Obama really wants to stimulate the economy, he needs to bring down corporate and individual taxes dramatically. His belief that government is the only solution to the present recession is nothing short of an admission that socialism is necessary to revive capitalism, but unlike Kennedy’s statement, Obama’s paradox is false. Kennedy’s statement was not just a flash in the pan, but represented his deeply held convictions on stimulating economic growth: “Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government."
A tax cut would essentially give every tax payer a raise, and few choose not to spend more or increase their lifestyle after getting a raise. Indeed, America needs to save more as well. Smarter, but not more, regulation for credit card companies and predatory lenders may be appropriate to move the country away from the perpetually mortgaged/indebted culture that pervades America.
Obama is setting himself up for failure and the country up for, at best, a Carter-esque malaise if not, at worst, tremendous hardship. Spending more money to get out of a problem rooted in debt will not work. What is needed is fiscal discipline, smaller government that allows capital to grow and thrive, and incentive for businesses and individuals to invest. It is just as likely that doing nothing would be every bit as effective as passing this stimulus package loaded with pork, expanded government bureaucracy, and immense increases in entitlement program spending. President Obama is fond of quoting Lincoln, so I will end with his words: “You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading it today.”
Secondly, Obama talked about "optimism" during his inaugural address, but since that day he has stoked the fears of Americans by promising catastrophe and devastation if the "stimulus" (and I use that term very loosely) is not passed. The problem is that the "stimulus" does very little stimulating for the economy, but a great deal for the government. This provides an enormous amount of evidence to those, like myself, who labelled Obama a socialist.
The credit crunch has been caused by ineffective regulation (although not over-regulation, quite the opposite), bloated government bureaucracy and incompetence, and irresponsibility on the part of Wall Street brokers who lent money too easily and average Americans who borrowed too eagerly. The central problem is bad debt and too much of it, but Obama's solution is for the US government to take on more. Not only will the government taking on more debt under Obama’s plan, but it will be printing money as though there are no consequences or repercussions. The probability of dangerous inflation levels and a market that doesn't react to his economic plan could present a perfect storm that will exaggerate the severity of the recession.
If Obama is serious about stimulating the economy and being bi-partisan about it, he should follow the examples of a Democrat and a Republican of the past who implemented well targeted financial policies to stimulate economic growth: John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.
Kennedy and Reagan both faced economic problems and implemented tax cuts across all income levels to stimulate investment, savings, and consumption. A serious problem that has plagued America is massive levels of debt. Don’t get me wrong, some debt is good but some is very bad. Credit card debt is bad because it allows consumers to purchase what they normally couldn’t afford without saving up first. Mortgage debt, on a first home, is good as it allows people to build equity, credit, and assets (i.e., wealth). As Reagan said, “You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?” Indeed, we are.
The deficit and national debt have been ignored for far too long. Reagan, and others before him, warned of the dangers of prolonged debt that ignored the reality that at some point in the future someone will have to repay it: “For decades, we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.”
Jobs have been leaving America in various sectors for decades. Sometimes that is a healthy development in the process of “creative destruction”, but other times it is because America is not competing well or at all. Capital will flee from areas where it is restrained and burdened to go to areas where it can thrive and grow. The examples of Ireland, Singapore, and Hong Kong are proof of how an economy unrestrained by taxes and government regulation can prosper.
Kennedy stated, “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."
If President Obama really wants to stimulate the economy, he needs to bring down corporate and individual taxes dramatically. His belief that government is the only solution to the present recession is nothing short of an admission that socialism is necessary to revive capitalism, but unlike Kennedy’s statement, Obama’s paradox is false. Kennedy’s statement was not just a flash in the pan, but represented his deeply held convictions on stimulating economic growth: “Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government."
A tax cut would essentially give every tax payer a raise, and few choose not to spend more or increase their lifestyle after getting a raise. Indeed, America needs to save more as well. Smarter, but not more, regulation for credit card companies and predatory lenders may be appropriate to move the country away from the perpetually mortgaged/indebted culture that pervades America.
Obama is setting himself up for failure and the country up for, at best, a Carter-esque malaise if not, at worst, tremendous hardship. Spending more money to get out of a problem rooted in debt will not work. What is needed is fiscal discipline, smaller government that allows capital to grow and thrive, and incentive for businesses and individuals to invest. It is just as likely that doing nothing would be every bit as effective as passing this stimulus package loaded with pork, expanded government bureaucracy, and immense increases in entitlement program spending. President Obama is fond of quoting Lincoln, so I will end with his words: “You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading it today.”
2009-02-06
2009-02-04
And They Said Palin Wasn't "Vetted"
The critics decried McCain and conservatives (they're quite different for the record) for selecting Sarah Palin for his running mate. She wasn't "vetted" by the media they complained, she's not ready, she's got no experience! Did Obama? Judging by his presidency so far, it seems his only qualification for the White House was self-promotion having no executive, managerial, or ownership experience of anything, anywhere, ever.
And now, Leon Panetta has been found to have received $700,000 in "fees" for various services. First Bill Richardson, then Geitner, then Daschle, now Panetta. Is anyone doing any kind of research for the new President? Or, could it be that Obama doesn't really have any idea what he's doing because for the first time in his life he has to make decisions that matter. The buck stops with him.
"Mr. Panetta received $56,000 from Merrill Lynch & Co. for two speeches and $28,000 for a speech for Wachovia Corp., according to disclosures released ahead of Thursday's scheduled Senate hearing on Mr. Panetta's nomination."(WSJ) How nice, who knew Panetta was so riveting?
Panetta also performed lobbying services despite that he wasn't a registered lobbyist. It seems he took some cues from Daschle on that one and therefore conveniently avoids Obama's lobbyist rules. Not that those matter, President Obama would probably provide a waiver for such an appointment as he did for a Defense Department appointee.
So will the Obamamaniacs question these "convenient" exceptions to the President's promises and "rules"? Is the change only to occur when it is politically convenient for the new President? I wouldn't express such cynicism except that Obama specifically ran his entire campaign on the word "change". Despite that, he seems to be following the "ways of Washington" with benefits and privileges to insiders like his predecessors and buddies in the Democratic party.
And now, Leon Panetta has been found to have received $700,000 in "fees" for various services. First Bill Richardson, then Geitner, then Daschle, now Panetta. Is anyone doing any kind of research for the new President? Or, could it be that Obama doesn't really have any idea what he's doing because for the first time in his life he has to make decisions that matter. The buck stops with him.
"Mr. Panetta received $56,000 from Merrill Lynch & Co. for two speeches and $28,000 for a speech for Wachovia Corp., according to disclosures released ahead of Thursday's scheduled Senate hearing on Mr. Panetta's nomination."(WSJ) How nice, who knew Panetta was so riveting?
Panetta also performed lobbying services despite that he wasn't a registered lobbyist. It seems he took some cues from Daschle on that one and therefore conveniently avoids Obama's lobbyist rules. Not that those matter, President Obama would probably provide a waiver for such an appointment as he did for a Defense Department appointee.
So will the Obamamaniacs question these "convenient" exceptions to the President's promises and "rules"? Is the change only to occur when it is politically convenient for the new President? I wouldn't express such cynicism except that Obama specifically ran his entire campaign on the word "change". Despite that, he seems to be following the "ways of Washington" with benefits and privileges to insiders like his predecessors and buddies in the Democratic party.
Global Warming Means...
Colder weather all over the place, even in Florida. Got it?Do not question the Goracle, he's infallible!
2009-02-03
Daschle Pulls Out
Tom Daschle withdrew his nomination for Health and Human Services Secretary, and rightly so. The limousine liberal is a disgrace for advocating higher taxes while scamming out on paying his own.
Just watch this old video to see what a joke Daschle is.
Just watch this old video to see what a joke Daschle is.
2009-02-02
Deliquent Daschle
Is Tom Daschle the hope and change Obama promised? I certainly hope not. Can you imagine if a Bush nominee had tried to weasel out of $140,000 in taxes!! They'd probably be lynched, just look at Scooter Libby who wasn't even involved in the whole Valerie Plame affair. Richard Armitage admitted he was the leaker and Libby still went to jail for "mis-remembering".
The WSJ reports: "Asked Monday if he's still committed to Mr. Daschle, Mr. Obama replied, "Absolutely." Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) also voiced strong support for Mr. Daschle and said he expected to hold a confirmation hearing for him as early as next week."
So if Daschle's indiscretions don't disqualify him, what would exactly? I think the American people deserve to know. First Geitner, now Daschle. Limousine liberals love taxing others but sure find convenient ways of avoiding their own government confiscation schemes. "According to the forms, Mr. Daschle earned more than $2 million in the past two years."(id) Must be nice.
Obama might say "change", but so far he's been a typical politician. He's continued a number of Bush's policies (Sec. Gates, FISA, bailouts, etc.), and conveniently adds waivers to appointees who don't meet his lobbying standards.
The WSJ asks: "The question is whether Democrats are going to treat Mr. Daschle according to the standard that Mr. Daschle set when he was running the Senate."
Like Gore, Daschle, Clinton, Geitner, and other liberals, it's do as I say, not as I do:
And what standard was that? Well, on taxes, you may recall that Mr. Daschle's Senate Democrats led the campaign against "Benedict Arnold corporations" that earn too much income overseas. The companies do this legally, in part to avoid a U.S. corporate tax rate (35%) that is the developed world's second highest, but that hasn't stopped the Daschle Democrats from comparing them to traitors.
Then there was the assault on legal tax shelters, led in the Daschle Senate by Democrat Carl Levin. The Levin hearings encouraged the Justice Department to prosecute employees who sold tax shelters for KPMG, though no tax court had found them illegal. Most of the KPMG charges were later thrown out of court, but not before careers were ruined and life savings spent on legal defense fees. Under political pressure in 2002, the IRS disclosed the names of users of a KPMG shelter, including William Simon Jr., a Republican candidate for California Governor. Democrats cried that Mr. Simon was a tax cheat, and he had to release years of tax returns to show otherwise.
Daschle said to "committee staff he had grown used to having a car and driver as majority leader and did not think to report the perk on his taxes, according to staff members."
I think Daschle needs a real job washing dishes, sweeping streets, or busing tables. He's lived high on the hog thanks to hard working taxpayers for far too long. Daschle's appointment should be withdrawn immediately or Obama's change mantra is meaningless. It's pretty hard to argue that Health & Human Services is in desperate need of Daschle, not unlike the argument that the economy is in desperate need of Obama's porkulus, I mean stimulus, plan.
The WSJ reports: "Asked Monday if he's still committed to Mr. Daschle, Mr. Obama replied, "Absolutely." Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) also voiced strong support for Mr. Daschle and said he expected to hold a confirmation hearing for him as early as next week."
So if Daschle's indiscretions don't disqualify him, what would exactly? I think the American people deserve to know. First Geitner, now Daschle. Limousine liberals love taxing others but sure find convenient ways of avoiding their own government confiscation schemes. "According to the forms, Mr. Daschle earned more than $2 million in the past two years."(id) Must be nice.
Obama might say "change", but so far he's been a typical politician. He's continued a number of Bush's policies (Sec. Gates, FISA, bailouts, etc.), and conveniently adds waivers to appointees who don't meet his lobbying standards.
The WSJ asks: "The question is whether Democrats are going to treat Mr. Daschle according to the standard that Mr. Daschle set when he was running the Senate."
Like Gore, Daschle, Clinton, Geitner, and other liberals, it's do as I say, not as I do:
And what standard was that? Well, on taxes, you may recall that Mr. Daschle's Senate Democrats led the campaign against "Benedict Arnold corporations" that earn too much income overseas. The companies do this legally, in part to avoid a U.S. corporate tax rate (35%) that is the developed world's second highest, but that hasn't stopped the Daschle Democrats from comparing them to traitors.
Then there was the assault on legal tax shelters, led in the Daschle Senate by Democrat Carl Levin. The Levin hearings encouraged the Justice Department to prosecute employees who sold tax shelters for KPMG, though no tax court had found them illegal. Most of the KPMG charges were later thrown out of court, but not before careers were ruined and life savings spent on legal defense fees. Under political pressure in 2002, the IRS disclosed the names of users of a KPMG shelter, including William Simon Jr., a Republican candidate for California Governor. Democrats cried that Mr. Simon was a tax cheat, and he had to release years of tax returns to show otherwise.
Daschle said to "committee staff he had grown used to having a car and driver as majority leader and did not think to report the perk on his taxes, according to staff members."
I think Daschle needs a real job washing dishes, sweeping streets, or busing tables. He's lived high on the hog thanks to hard working taxpayers for far too long. Daschle's appointment should be withdrawn immediately or Obama's change mantra is meaningless. It's pretty hard to argue that Health & Human Services is in desperate need of Daschle, not unlike the argument that the economy is in desperate need of Obama's porkulus, I mean stimulus, plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)