The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

Posts Tagged ‘Bill Clinton

The Trick or Treat Media

leave a comment »

The media has been full of tricks if you’re a conservative and treats if you’re a liberal this week of Halloween.  But this year the scary holiday has taken a more frightening turn in the Northeast as Hurricane Sandy slammed the east coast.

Our thoughts and prayers are turned to those in harm’s way dealing with the aftermath of this terrible storm.  We praise those good souls who are at the ready and hurrying to the aid of those in great need whether physically, emotionally, or spiritually.  God Bless them all.

Unfortunately we are in a political season and presidential campaign where one side has openly stated “Never let a good crisis go to waste”.

Obama Biden sign under waterNo sooner had Hurricane Sandy come ashore did some in the media find a story they thought could damage Mitt Romney’s bid at the Presidency with the election only a week away.

MSNBC  followed the Democrats lead singer Bill Clinton who basically said the storm (Sandy) and the President’s response to it showed the real difference between Romney and Obama.  MSNBC then proceeded to explain why Romney isn’t ready for Hurricane Sandy, as if Romney was the current President.  The Huffing and Puffington Post ran a piece completely devoid of facts accusing Romney of wanting to completely abolish FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) using an editorial from the NYT as “proof” and a silly story by another HuffPO contributor that claimed Romney never contacted a Massachusetts Mayor when her town saw flooding from the Green River and 75 homes in a trailer park were flooded.  As if that was a major statewide disaster…

The New York Times then chimed in with its own op-ed explaining to all of us simpletons how Big Government is necessary for Big Storms.  Tell that to the people of Joplin, Missouri who were mobilizing and rebuilding after devastating tornadoes ripped it apart and before Big Government had time to put on its pants for work.

The misinformation of the media aside, the real story of serious cuts coming to FEMA is being ignored because it isn’t politically beneficial to the President.  The reality is President Obama’s budget sequestration proposal (try as he might to deny it’s his) will cut FEMA to the bone.

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB):

The Federal Emergency Management Agency Will Be Hit With $878 Million In Cuts.
FEMA’s Disaster Relief Funding Will Be Hit With The Largest Cut At $580 Million
FEMA’s State & Local Programs Would Receive $183 Million In Cuts
What’s more, the OMB report explains just how devastating the Obama sequestration will be in other areas, along with FEMA:

“On the non-defense side, sequestration would undermine investments vital to economic growth, threaten the safety and security of the American people, and cause severe harm to programs that benefit the middle-class, seniors, and children.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s ability to respond to incidents of terrorism and other catastrophic events would be undermined.”

Let us review. blogged on this as well reporting The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler said the idea of sequestration was “a White House gambit”.  Bob Woodward’s book called The Price of Politics stated members of the Obama administration proposed the idea to Senator Harry Reid.

“Lew, Nabors, Sperling and Bruce Reed, Biden’s chief of staff, had finally decided to propose using language from the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit reduction law as the model for the trigger. It seemed tough enough to apply to the current situation. It would require a sequester with half the cuts from defense, and the other half from domestic programs.”  (Excerpt from The Price of Politics)

But many in the media would have you believe it’s Mitt Romney and the Republicans who want to rid the world of FEMA, when in fact they simply want more control given to local and state government at the first response level.

But that headline isn’t nearly as attention grabbing as “Romney to Shut Down FEMA!”

Silly media, tricks are for kids, treats are for Halloween.

Raising Taxes Does NOT Raise Revenue: Debunking the Liberal Myth

with 2 comments


The politics of taxation are about to get a smack down.

The left argues that we need to tax the most affluent among us at a much higher rate than we currently do because, they have more and therefore should pay more.  That argument is fine as long as the word “fair” is left out of the debate.  Because making someone pay more of their income by percentage than someone else is simply not fair.

The right argues that we should tax the most affluent among us at a lower rate, suggesting this will encourage wealthy Americans to spend more of their disposable income to spur the economy if indeed they have more disposable income due to lower taxes.  The “trickle down” effect is disputed by the left as non-existent, arguing tax breaks for the wealthy do not translate into job growth or a better economy for the middle and lower classes.

Time to put the argument to rest and I believe this explanation of the Laffer Curve does just that.  Take the next 6 minutes and get a solid education on the economics of taxation from a UCLA Professor of Political Science and Economics.


This would give ample weight to the idea that corporate and individual income tax should not be higher than 33% and probably best between 25 and 30%.  Like former President Bill Clinton said at the Democrat National Convention, it’s arithmetic!

The numbers are hard to refute and even harder for the left since it was someone from their side that came to the end conclusion.

Despite the vast majority of Democratic opinion that rails against the Laffer Curve’s theoretical constructs (at least when it comes to lower-level tax rates), Dr. Tim Groseclose, Professor of Political Science and Economics at UCLA, claims that its tenets are “very uncontroversial among economists.”

President Obama’s plan will increase taxes on those making over $250,000 from 33% to 36%.  If he gets re-elected, it will be interesting to see how the Laffer Curve comes into play.

The Laffer Curve could turn Obama and the Democrats tax plan into a real “Laffer”.


Written by DCL

September 10, 2012 at 4:14 pm