Friday, February 8, 2008
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Monday, February 4, 2008
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Friday, February 1, 2008
What's splitting the Reagan coalition?
How is it that a successful conservative governor who wants to eliminate the IRS, defend the sanctity of life and marriage, appoint judges like Scalia and Roberts, and fight Islamic fascism to the finish is running third in the Republican primaries?Answer: Since mid-November of 2007, there has been a push by the conservative "new media" to destroy the Republican opponents of Mitt Romney.
The dominant conservative publication The National Review had set the tone for this by endorsing Mitt Romney. Around the same time, Rush Limbaugh was visiting his idol from childhood, William Buckley, the founder of The National Review and considered by many to be the founder of the modern conservative movement.
Within days, Rush Limbaugh and other "conservative" talk show hosts and columnists were excoriating Huckabee.
Instead of offering an honest analysis of Huckabee's political career, they sought to portray him as a hayseed born-againer who loved raising taxes and wanted to bring about an Orwellian Big Brother state.
In the meantime, Romney decided to go negative against Huckabee in Iowa, where Huckabee had grabbed the lead. Romney's attack ads were a blatantly dishonest attempt to portray Huckabee as a crime loving tax-raiser, and, coupled with the constant barrage of misinformation from the talk shows, alienated a core constituent group of social conservatives who correctly recognized the attacks on Huckabee as a slam against themselves and their values.
The rift that is now splitting the conservatives will not be healed during this election process. The Christian right and the FairTax activists now see that they are welcome just as long as they go along with the Republican establishment. To think that someone like Huckabee who represents these groups should be president is considered heresy by the elitists who want to control the nomination process.
The secular elitists who enjoy the posh lifestyle and rubbing elbows with political snobs are embarrassed that grass-roots activists like conservative Christians and FairTaxers are in their tent and are succeeding in driving them out, ensuring that a liberal, be it Romney, McCain, Clinton, or Obama will be in the White House next year.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
Cost of Romney's Mass. Health-care Plan Skyrocketing
According to recent reports, the cost of Massachusetts' health insurance mandate will rise 85 percent, or $400 million, in 2009. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R), meanwhile, has been on the presidential campaign trail praising the program he put into place.According to The Boston Globe, the cost increase is largely due to an increase in the number of people signing up for state-subsidized health insurance. State and federal taxpayers are likely to shoulder the cost increase.
"Essentially, the people who signed up under the mandate were the people who were getting subsidies," said Michael Tanner, director of health and welfare studies at the libertarian Cato Institute.
Carmen Balber, a consumer advocate at Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, added, "What we've seen happen in Massachusetts is that lots of people are signing up for subsidized care," although "just 7 to 8 percent of the people who have newly signed up for health insurance have enrolled in a program they must pay full price for."
Tanner told Cybercast News Service that the state will likely need to raise taxes to cover the additional costs.
Romney, however, has been campaigning on the health insurance plan as a success.
"We put in place a plan that gets every citizen in our state health insurance, and it didn't cost us new money," he said during the Republican debate in New Hampshire on Jan. 5. "It didn't require us to raise taxes."
Mitt Romney likes to brag that he got universal coverage in Massachusetts without a tax increase," said Tanner. "I don't think that's going to be true for long."
Click here for full story...
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
The Truth About The Economic Stimulus Package
What a way to buy votes.With the threat of a recession looming in the near future, President Bush and Congress agreed to an economic stimulus package of "tax rebates" for lower to middle class households.
People eligible would get anywhere from $300-$1200 in the hope that they will spend the money and restore the lost momentum in the U.S. economy.
The $150 billion package would also give businesses $50 billion in tax incentives.
The normally super-slow federal government displayed tremendous speed in developing this package, which proves that when it comes to buying votes, both parties can spend recklessly and without regard for sound economic principles.
Many of the recipients do not pay taxes, so to call it a "tax rebate" is foolish. It is really a welfare check.
No word yet on where the money for this package comes from.
It would have been better to just tell everyone that does pay taxes to deduct the allotted rebate from their next payment to the IRS, but that wouldn't buy as many votes for either party.
Better yet, the best way to stimulate the economy would be to pass H.R. 25, also known as the FairTax. The FairTax would unleash the economic power of individuals, small businesses, and large corporations.
With the FairTax, every person with a job or business pays no income tax, so they get a full paycheck instead of having deductions taken from their pay and sent to the government agencies like the IRS and Social Security Administration.
The income tax is then replaced with a national sales tax of about 23%, which replaces the embedded taxes that are found in every product or service.
The result is that the prices of products and services remains virtually unchanged while reducing the size of government, getting the IRS out of our lives, and giving the poorest of Americans a real economic boost.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Do we need another Reagan?
The folly of the Republican establishment in looking for a Ronald Reagan clone borders on cultism.Reagan was a fine man who led the conservative movement to prominence, not a Reagan movement.
But the Republican establishment and elitists have determined that the only way for the conservative movement to make progress is to have a Reagan clone as the presidential nominee.
Would we want a Reagan clone today? No way!
Reagan turned tail and ran when the terrorists struck in Beirut on Oct. 23, 1983, killing 241 American soldiers. His lack of backbone in this situation became the default policy on terrorism until we were struck on 9/11.
In 1986, Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act, also known as Simpson-Mizzoli. This law gave amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and laid the groundwork for the invasion of our country by millions more that has happened since.
Reagan was great at battling liberalism and Communism, but his national security policies made America a soft target, and we are paying a heavy price for that today.
The Reagan purists of today slam Mike Huckabee because he's not Reaganesque. I say that's fine with me.
We need a conservative leader who can bring solutions for the problems we face in 2008, not 1980.
That leader is Mike Huckabee.
ConservativeKids.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
