Views on the News
Views on the News*
April 18, 2015
The enemy of conservatism in America is the leftist establishment, the leftist-controlled institutions of news, education, and entertainment. Take away these big, fat incestuously connected institutions, and the left is a circus sideshow and nothing else. Democrat “leaders” like Obama, Hillary, Pelosi, and Reid are slow-witted, mean-spirited, and narrow-minded sock puppets filled by the chubby hands of the leftist establishment. Winning elections, particularly the 2016 presidential election, will help advance our policy issues, but an even greater benefit can come if we use this election to discredit the leftist establishment. Viewers are shunning films and new television programming made by Hollywood leftists. Parents, students, and conservative media are exposing leftist totalitarianism in classrooms. The leftist establishment media is losing audiences in a steady decline, motivated in large part by conservative disgust with its slavish following of the party line. In the 2016 election cycle, which includes the battle for the Republican nomination and then the battle in the general election, Republican candidates must publicly announce that they will decline interviews with news organizations patently hostile to conservatives, that the Republican nomination debates will exclude these as well, and that this ban will extend throughout the general election. This would be an overt campaign to de-legitimize this corrupt gaggle of leftist organizations as serious news organizations worthy of the attention of America. So we must treat these leftist news outlets as the ideological hacks that they are and deny them the chance to make Republicans look bad or silly by “gotcha” questions. This is how the left operates with conservative media. Hillary or Harry or Nancy or Barry never give interviews to Human Events or National Review or Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin. Republicans candidates must learn to communicate with voters through reputable cable news outlets, like Fox News, which are not overtly hostile to conservatives. There are many conservative talk radio programs to which any interested Republican can tune in. There are dozens of internet news outlets (e.g., American Thinker). The print media still exists, and local newspapers would welcome exclusive interviews, hosting debates, etc. Attacking the establishment leftist media is attacking the real enemy of conservative values and policies. This collusion by vast news corporations, that are supposed to provide protection for the news consumer by actual competition, could become one of the major campaign issues. Making Big Media the issue could be precisely the means to truly energize conservatives and, by making Democrats the obvious toadies of Big Media, to deflate the left in 2016.
(“Make the Leftist Media the 2016 Issue” by Bruce Walker dated April 11, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/make_the_leftist_media_the_2016_issue.html )
While we endure the daily lies of President Obama, do we really want to have another four to eight years more of Hillary Clinton’s lies? It’s not like we don’t have ample evidence of her indifference to the truth and that is not what America wants in a President, now or ever. The office of President has already been degraded to a point where neither our allies nor our enemies trusts anything Obama says. Do we really want to repeat the process that is destroying our nation? Hillary Clinton’s message is that America needs a woman President. Having already elected an abject failure because he was black, one can only hope and pray that enough voters will conclude that America needs to avoid race or gender to be the determining factor. In 1974 the 27-year old Hillary was fired from a committee related to the Watergate investigation. When asked why Jerry Zeifman fired her, “Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee, and the rules of confidentiality.” The revelations about the emails and the millions the Clinton foundation received from nations with whom she was dealing as Secretary of State would be sufficient for those in charge of the Democrat Party to convince her not to run, but I was wrong. I was wrong because the Democrat Party is totally corrupt. It is not as if anyone paying any attention would not know that she is politically to the far Left, a politician who does not believe that the powers of our government are derived from “the consent of the governed.” The New York Times columnist William Safire called Hillary ‘a congenital liar… compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.’ It was not too long ago that a person so encrusted in a reputation for scandal would not be considered a possible presidential contender. We have enough time to ask ourselves if we live in a republic where merit, integrity, and honesty are still the standards by which we select our President.
(“Avoiding Hillary Misery” by Alan Caruba dated April 12, 2015 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71116 )
Environmentalists subscribe to continually changing prophecies of apocalyptic disaster. Our topsoil is being washed into the ocean (The Road to Survival -- 1948). DDT is exterminating birds (The Silent Spring -- 1962). Overpopulation will result in starvation (The Population Bomb -- 1968). We will run out of resources and strangle on pollution (The Limits to Growth -- 1972). Acid rain from burning coal will destroy our forests and crops (circa 1985). Hairspray will destroy the ozone layer and cause cancer (1980s). Burning fossil fuels adds CO2 to the atmosphere that will cause disastrous global warming (1988-2015). These prophecies and many others were claimed to be scientifically justified. The science is always secondary and almost always poor science. What’s important is the thrill of impending doom and the call to activists to engineer a rescue. When one prophecy fades or is declared corrected, a new one emerges to take its place. Prophecies of doom have always been with us. The Book of Revelations has inspired men’s imagination for two thousand years. In about 1800, Thomas Malthus predicted that the exponential nature of population growth would lead to widespread famine or disease. In 1856, Nongqawuse, a teenager of the Xhosa tribe in South Africa, prophesied that if the tribe killed their cattle and destroyed their crops the British would be swept away. The tribe did this and most of them starved to death. Now we have prophets demanding that we destroy our fossil fuel infrastructure and replace it with windmills and solar power stations. If we actually did this, the economic consequences would be very costly. Solar and wind power, on a national scale, would cost 5 or 10 times more than our current sources of power and be less reliable. This easily discovered fact is rarely discussed by environmentalists, much less by the crony capitalists of the alternative energy industry, basking in a flood of subsidies and mandates. Apocalyptic environmentalism has psychological advantages for those tortured by feelings of inadequacy and envy. By making one’s cause in life the prevention of an apocalypse, an individual can raise his status and make his life meaningful. Working to prevent the ruination of the Earth is obviously a task of great import. The fact that Earth is in no danger of being ruined and the prophecies are largely imaginary doesn’t matter. The prophecies are too good to check. Believers in environmental prophecies of doom lash out with undisguised fury when their prophecies, and their “science” are treated with skepticism. When the Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg published a book skeptical of environmental dogma, environmental activists, including John Holdren, now Obama’s science advisor, spared no effort to destroy Lomborg’s reputation and career by publishing an 11-page collective rant denouncing Lomborg in Scientific American magazine. When climate scientist Roy Spencer published a peer-reviewed paper critical of computer climate models in an obscure European journal, the editor of the journal was forced, by pressure from the climate science establishment, to resign. The editor’s mistake was assuming that free and open discussion was allowed in the discipline of climate science. Believers in apocalyptic climate change often accuse dissenters of being in the clutches of evangelical religion and thus insensitive to scientific arguments. In the Bible belt, atheists who criticize and ridicule religion are not driven from their occupations, much less put on trial for crimes against humanity. They are usually met with smiles and gentle nudging in the hope that they will see the light. There is no Spanish Inquisition in Alabama or Texas, except among the climate-change professors at Texas A&M where there is a loyalty oath to the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change that the members of the faculty have signed and that is displayed on the Internet.
(“Environmentalism and Envy” by Norman Rogers dated April 14, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/environmentalism_and_envy.html )
As we approach the 2016 elections, we now know that neither race, nor sex, is a predicate for being the leader of the free world. Experience, knowledge, and moral integrity are the critical success factors. There is something tragic when a political party is able to offer only the past as their idea of the future. President Obama is already widely seen to have been a failure, presiding for six years while the nation’s debt soared to $18 trillion and millions remain unemployed. His foreign policies were administered by Hillary Clinton in his first term and her idea of what to do with nations that are our enemies is to “empathize” with them and even “respect” our differences with them. The most recent examples have been the negotiations with an Iran determined to have nuclear weapons and opening the door to diplomatic recognition of Cuba, a Communist dictatorship ninety miles from Florida. These have been cited as proof of a national decline. As we close in on the 2016 elections, we are also at risk of having begun the new century from a position of leadership and strength we may not be able to achieve again due to our debt and the failure of a vision for a better future. We have watched America decline from the most powerful nation on Earth, a leader for freedom, a stalwart opponent of the Soviet Union and Communism, to one led by a pathetic apologist who never passes on an opportunity to criticize America and emphasize its failure to live up to its ideals. We’re not perfect, but we still provide justice and opportunity as no other nation on Earth. The 2016 elections can either take us backward to past times, the 1990s, or forward to face the great challenges of our present and future times. We had financial success along the way, but we also had a massive financial failure in 2008 that originated earlier thanks to progressive ideas about home ownership. In 2001 we responded to the worst homeland attack since Pearl Harbor, fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but not grasping the full scope of the Islamic threat. The most disquieting aspect of the months ahead will be the role of the mainstream media that, with a few exceptions, will be the cheerleader for failed progressive ideas, policies and programs. They will likely forget the many scandals that have led to Hillary Clinton’s present bid to be the next President. We are living in an era of decline that must be rejected and turned around with the “old fashioned” virtues of a marketplace economy free of a tax code no one can comprehend; environmental policies that slow and kill development; and a federal government grown too large to do anything well (remember the introduction of ObamaCare). All of us of voting age have a heavy responsibility to know and understand the times in which we live and to make wise choices or know we shall be living in an era of failure for the nation we love.
(“Living in an Era of Decline” by Alan Caruba dated April 13, 2015 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71137 )
Taxes are not the price of a civilized society as liberals claim, but the price of a government cluttered with failed and harmful programs. Gallup finds that most people think they pay too much in federal income taxes, and a Reason-Rupe poll finds that, on average, people think more than half the tax dollars sent to Washington are wasted. Those views would be even more negative if people felt the full pain of funding the $4 trillion federal government. If people were hit directly with the full costs of $950 billion farm bills and $1 trillion foreign wars, they would reject most government expenditures but instead politicians use “fiscal illusion” techniques to hide a lot of the costs. Here are some of the techniques:
· Debt. The government finances half a trillion dollars a year of its spending by borrowing. People see the benefits of the spending, but the costs are deferred by deficits and debt.
· Withholding. The federal government requires employers to withhold income and payroll taxes from paychecks, making earnings disappear before workers see the cash.
· Refunds. The IRS has rigged the withholding system so that more than three quarters of tax filers get refunds every April, making the government appear to be Santa Claus.
· Business Taxes. The government collects billions each year from taxes on businesses, the employer half of the federal payroll tax, and the corporate income tax. The burden is embedded in the cost of the product making the collection invisible to individuals.
· Real Bracket Creep. The federal income tax is indexed for inflation, but not for real economic growth, resulting in the government automatically and invisibly gaining a larger share of incomes over time.
· Penalize a Minority. Higher-income households pay a much larger share of their income to federal income taxes than do lower-income households, resulting in a small minority of earners paying the great majority of taxes.
· Complexity. Congress spread the tax burden across multiple different tax bases, made income tax hugely complex, and reducing understandability of the cost of government.
· Regulations. Congress has conferred benefits on voters by regulations, hiding the costs of such mandates on individuals in the form of lower wages and higher prices.
· Smoke and Mirrors. The government uses accounting tricks to hide costs, such as the “salami strategy,” where the full costs of projects are only revealed one slice at a time, so that by the time the full costs are evident, the project is too far along to be canceled.
All these techniques make the “price” of government seem artificially low, so that people demand too much of it. At the same time, fiscal illusions embolden politicians to spend money on activities that make no economic sense. Fiscal illusion is fiscal dishonesty. Whether people believe in small government or big government, they should want lawmakers to trade-off the costs and benefits of programs in a transparent way. So, one goal of federal tax and spending reforms should be to repeal as many of these techniques as possible. If the full costs of our democracy were imposed on the common people today, they would definitely know what they wanted: a much smaller federal government.
(“Tax Day: Not Painful Enough” by Chris Edwards dated April 14, 2015 published by The Daily Caller at http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/14/tax-day-not-painful-enough/ )
Obama is the most dangerous President in history. He lied when promising the world that the U.S. would never allow Iran’s war fanatics to have nuclear weapons. While Obama was demagogically repeating “Never! Never!” his alter ego Val Jarrett carried on secret talks with the mullahs, resulting in today’s total surrender. We now have a fuzzy “framework” (that Iran denies even agreeing to), which gives the world thirteen years before the mullahs can set off Armageddon. After thirteen years, all bets are off, assuming the enemy doesn’t violate its “promises” tomorrow, which it has a long history of doing. Dick Cheney has correctly called Obama “the worst president in history.” I think history will brand him with that flaming scarlet letter, because no U.S. leader has ever empowered a nuclear suicide cult. No U.S. president before this one could even imagine doing something so monstrous. Obama has gone rogue. Arab nations are also in danger of nuclear Armageddon from the mullahs, or blackmail under a threat of total destruction. Israel is officially target #1, but it is ready to retaliate with overwhelming force. My guess is therefore that Saudi Arabia will be the first big target for Iranian assault. The Iranians have already taken over the strategic country of Yemen, encircling Saudi Arabia from the south. They also threaten Arabia from their side of the narrow Gulf, and they have developed a giant pincer movement to surround Israel and aim at Egypt and Arabia. Khomeinist Shi’ites have always believed they are divinely entitled to Arabia, with the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Today they are closer to that goal than ever before, simply by waging proxy terrorist war in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Already they threaten Arabia across the Gulf. The mullahs can choke off the world’s oil supply when the time is right, and nuclear weapons will keep them immune to retaliation. Our puffed-up, preening President is therefore the most dangerous character in history. Never before has an American President surrendered to a fanatical suicide cult with nukes. Now Obama tells us three lies. One is that this sleazy deal is the best we can possibly get. The 2nd lie is that the only alternative is war. The 3rd lie is that Obama’s “framework” isn’t a “treaty” at all, so it doesn’t need to meet the constitutional standard of advice and consent by the U.S. Senate. This “deal” is so full of holes it’s hard to see any paper. Four-star admiral James (“Ace”) Lyons is telling us outright that Obama has let the U.S. government be penetrated and sabotaged by the fascist Muslim Brotherhood, which has long-proclaimed genocidal goals. If it were up to Obama, we would be threatened by nuclear Arabs as well as nuclear Iranians. Fortunately, Egypt caught the Muslim Brotherhood in time and knocked down Mohammed Morsi, who is now in jail. Obama commands the greatest military force in history, and he’s done nothing but sabotage them under cover of “peace” negotiations. Everything he has done in the last six years increases the chance of war, which is already going on everywhere Obama tried to fix things. The latest U.S. defeat is in Yemen, but we’ve knocked down the pillars of stability in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Iraq. In Eastern Europe we’ve endangered the Ukraine, but Putin has threatened everybody in sight. The only regime we’ve respected is Iran’s openly genocidal cult. Obama tried to overthrow Israel’s elected government more than once, and Israel is stable today in spite of Obama, no thanks to his repeated attempts at sabotage. The U.S. Constitution, which Obama publicly despises, has a very clear definition of treason: “aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war.” At some point, the sane and sensible people of this country will have to have it out. You can call your senators and House members, because if Congress does not stand up for its constitutional powers, Obama will get his way. We have to be heard, we must act now.
(“Obama as Nuclear Arsonist” by James Lewis dated April 15, 2015 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/obama_as_nuclear_arsonist.html )
* There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news. I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning. Updates have been made this week to the following sections:
· National Culture at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/Culture/philosophy.php