This Sounds Like A Lose Lose Situation

CNS News is reporting today that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is predicting that if tax rates rise in 2013, the economy will slip back into recession. Unless Congress acts, there will be a significant tax increase on January 2013.

The article points out that Congress will not act to change the projected increase in taxes until after the election. Great. Translated loosely, that means that Congress does not want to take responsibility for any actions they might take regarding taxes. As you know, President Obama is already saying that he won’t do anything to stop the drastic defense cuts included in sequestration unless the Republicans agree to raise taxes. Does anyone honestly believe that additional tax revenue will be used to pay down the deficit? In the past, when taxes have been raised, has spending ever actually remained the same or been cut?

The article concludes:

While CBO included mandatory spending cuts from the federal budget sequester (the “fiscal cliff”) in its analysis, the vast majority of the impact to the economy will come from the tax increases – the expiration of the Bush tax cuts — due to their sheer size.

CBO estimated that the combination of spending cuts and tax increases would reduce the federal deficit by $487 billion in fiscal 2013, with the vast majority of that figure coming from tax increases.

CBO projects that if current tax policies are kept in place and do not expire in 2013 as scheduled, revenues would be $5 trillion less between 2012 and 2022.

Congress is not expected to address either the mandatory spending cuts or the expiration of the Bush tax rates until after the election.

We need to examine the way that we look at taxes, tax rates, etc. The American public has been fed a line that somehow the government has a legitimate right to the earnings of the American people. It does not. There is nothing greedy about wanting to keep money that you have worked hard to earn. There is something basically wrong about taking money from people who have worked hard to earn it and giving it to people who have chosen not to work. I am sure we have all heard stories about people who refused to take low paying jobs because they could make more money simply by being on welfare and they didn’t have to go to work all day. Because of the amount of taxes taken out of all of our paychecks, the line between making money at the bottom of the economic spectrum and collecting welfare has become very blurred.

It’s time to remember that money belongs to the people who have earned it–no one else is entitled to it–not even the government. Unless we elect an administration that understands that people are entitled to the rewards of their hard work (they did build that!), we are going to wind up in the same place as the bankrupt countries of Europe.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Impact Of Paul Ryan On The Presidential Campaign

Yesterday Fred Barnes posted an article at the Wall Street Journal explaining how Mitt Romney‘s choice of Paul Ryan as his Vice-Presidential running mate has impacted the presidential campaign.

The choice of Paul Ryan has moved the future of Medicare to the front of the debate.

The article states:

The economy remains a central issue, as do Mr. Obama’s overall record and Mr. Romney’s past one. But now the looming fiscal crisis, Medicare, and the size and role of government are front and center of the campaign. The presidential contest has been elevated into a clash of big ideas and fundamental differences. Neither presidential candidate, but especially Mr. Obama, could have imagined this. Credit Mr. Ryan.

This shift has been damaging to the president and helpful to Mr. Romney. The slogan of Mr. Obama’s campaign is “Forward,” but he’s become the status-quo candidate. Mr. Romney, having adopted slightly revised versions of Mr. Ryan’s bold plans for reducing spending and reforming Medicare, is now the candidate of change. This might have happened to some extent without Mr. Ryan in the race, but it certainly wasn’t inevitable.

There have been a lot of personal attacks on Mitt Romney from the Obama camp during this campaign. Mitt Romney has been accused of being responsible for the cancer death of someone’s wife, insinuations have been made that there is something unseemly about his wealth, and he has been accused of all sorts of nefarious things. The addition of Paul Ryan to the ticket will not only spread out the attack–it will change to debate to actual substance.

The more Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan talk about issues, the more foolish the President’s minions look when they engage in personal attacks.

Enhanced by Zemanta

He Might Just Fit Right In

Talk radio is abuzz today with the story of Representative Todd Akin and his totally stupid remarks about rape. Representative Akin is running for the Senate seat currently held by Claire McCaskill.

The Washington Examiner reported today that despite pressure to drop out of the race, Representative Akin will continue his run for the Senate. I personally think he should drop out, but on the other hand, he hasn’t said anything dumber than has been said in Congress before.

Do you remember this YouTube video of Representative Hank Johnson questioning the military on their plans to increase troop strength in Guam?

Double standard, anyone?

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Kind Of Logic Makes My Head Hurt

The Hill posted an article yesterday about Robert Gibbs‘ comments on Fox News Sunday.

The article reports:

Senior Obama campaign adviser Robert Gibbs defended the administration’s record on Medicare from GOP attacks on Sunday, saying that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) should “thank President Obama” for strengthening the program.

President Obama took $716 billion out of Medicare and put it into Obamacare. I fail to see how taking money out of anything strengthens it. Does this mean that if I refuse to pay my taxes to the Internal Revenue Service I am strengthening the IRS? With Robert Gibbs’ logic, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

On Tuesday, the Washington Examiner reported:

And those health care provider cuts are not that far off under Obamacare. They start this coming January, when Medicare payments to doctors are set to be slashed by 31 percent. That’s right, by 31 percent. If you don’t think current Medicare beneficiaries are going to have trouble finding a doctor who will see them after the government starts paying those doctors 31 percent less, you probably failed Econ 101.

When Obamacare was first drafted, it did not cut Medicare spending so quickly. But to keep the final Obamacare price tag under $1 trillion, it allowed the scheduled cuts to occur. By contrast, Ryan’s Fiscal Year 2012 budget fully paid for doctor Medicare reimbursement payments.

Any senior citizen who votes for President Obama in November needs to understand that they are voting against available medical care for senior citizens in the very near future.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Fact Checking Paul Ryan’s Plan For Medicare

Fox News posted a story today about the attacks by the Obama campaign against Paul Ryan‘s plan to reform Medicare. It seems as if the plan that the Obama campaign is criticizing is not the right plan!

The article reports:

The president’s accusations largely refer to Ryan’s 2011 plan, ignoring the fact that the House Budget Committee chairman rolled out a different version in 2012 — taking into account Democratic critiques. Though the 2012 plan is more moderate, Obama and his surrogates have all but ignored the newer version as they amp up their accusations against the Romney-Ryan ticket. 

Most glaringly, the campaign has omitted a key point. 

While Ryan’s 2011 plan proposes to give seniors a government payment to buy private insurance, his 2012 plan offers seniors a choice. 

Under the blueprint, seniors could use the payment to buy private insurance or stay in traditional Medicare. 

The bottom line here is simple–Medicare is going broke. Medicare needs to be reformed in order to survive. Taking over $700 billion out of Medicare to fund Obamacare does not help Medicare. We need a serious discussion of how to fix Medicare–not rob it blind to fund more government programs.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Real Cost Of Obamacare

Last week Fox Business posted a story about the cost of Obamacare to businesses. The CEO of Papa John’s Pizza has stated that the cost of Obamacare will be about 11 to 14 cents more per pizza. McDonald’s has stated that Obamacare will cost each of its restaurants between $10,000 and $30,000 depending on whether the employees work full or part-time.

The article reports:

Schnatter (John Schnatter, CEO of Papa John’s Pizza) has made no secret of who he supports for the 2012 election, and said he does not support the health-care overhaul. The pizza mogul hosted a fundraiser for GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney at his Louisville, KY home in April. He acknowledged the cost would not impact him as badly as it stands to hurt his smaller counterparts. Papa John’s has a high volume of orders, so therefore it can distribute the costs among its clientele so they won’t feel such a hit.

The Obama Administration has not shown itself to be a friend of small business. The President’s statement of “You didn’t build that” is only one indication of the disdain he has for the entrepreneurs of America. President Obama does not understand that it is the entrepreneurs who have built America and kept it strong. It is time that he was sent out into the private sector to learn that lesson.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Speaking The Truth To The People Who Are Willing To Listen

A elderly friend of mine yesterday told me that Mitt Romney hates old people and that if Mitt Romney becomes President, he will end Medicare. She was not aware of the fact that President Obama has cut Medicare about $700 billion to fund Obamacare (nor was she interested in hearing that). Unfortunately, she will vote in November. But I am not sure she is typical. There were two other senior citizens sitting with us who immediately told her the truth. She didn’t listen, but at least she heard it. That means that three of the four of us knew the truth and will vote accordingly. At least that was good news.

Scott Johnson at Power Line posted an article (and video) of Paul Ryan‘s visit to The Villages in Florida. He was accompanied by his mother, Betty Ryan Douglas.

Here is the video:

The story at Power Line includes a quote from a Power Line reader:

I was at The Villages today to hear Paul Ryan. While waiting for over 2 hours before he spoke, I was struck by conversations in the crowd. It was not about “Protecting and Strengthening Medicare.” In fact, (probably about 75% of the crowd were retirees) most of the conversations were centered on “Protecting and Strengthening America.”

People see this nation adrift! From the “You didn’t build that” comment by Obama to the recent silly Biden comments-this adds to the correct perception that the Obama Administration did not and does not have an answer to get us on the right track!

Senior citizens vote, and most have been around long enough to be able to distinguish truth from fiction. That is my hope for the 2012 election.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Exactly What Does ‘Swiftboating’ Mean ?

People who understand the way the political game is played will tell you that the person who controls the vocabulary controls the debate. That is why conservatives talk about politicians who are “Pro-Life” and liberals describe the same people as “Anti-Abortion.” There are other examples, but that is one of the more obvious.

The media has used the term ‘switfboating’ to describe attacks on Senator John Kerry‘s military record when Senator Kerry ran for President in 2004. The implication is that the attacks are false. An examination of the facts shows that the attacks were valid. Now the media is using the term ‘swiftboating’ to describe the attacks on President Obama regarding the leaking of national security information. Again, the media would like to convince the public that the attacks are false. They are not.

Yesterday Paul Mirengoff at PowerLIne posted an article with some interesting insights into the claim that President Obama is being swiftboated.

The article reports:

There are also differences, though. The dispute about Kerry’s Vietnam service was entirely about the past. The issue had nothing to do with policy or national security. It was relevant only because it pertained to Kerry’s character and because Kerry had made his service a talking point in the campaign.

Obama’s “dishonorable disclosures” are another matter. The current critics contend that Obama is jeopardizing our national security and the lives of our operatives by talking about U.S. operations in order to enhance his image. This constitutes a potentially more explosive charge than any leveled by the Swift Vets.

It is also important to remember that Senator Kerry, after he got back from Vietnam, was part of a dishonest smear campaign to tar all Vietnam veterans as brutal, uncivilized soldiers. There are many of us with close ties to people who served in that war who truly resent that implication. The way the Vietnam veterans were treated when they came home is still a national disgrace, and Senator Kerry added to that disgrace.

Meanwhile, back to the matter at hand. I posted the video of the military people who have spoken out against the security leaks on Thursday at (rightwinggranny.com).

Please watch the video and decide for yourself.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

There Is A Time And A Place For Fun–This Is Not It !

This is a campaign ad from the Republican party. It is not a joke–the audio you hear is actually real. I have no problem with having fun and being lighthearted, but this is a presidential campaign that will decide the future of America and American small business. The bottom line here is, “How much freedom do you want as an American citizen?”

This is the video (now on YouTube):

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Development In The Presidential Race

Today’s Washington Examiner is reporting that Hillary Clinton has rejected the idea of running as Vice-President on President Obama’s re-election ticket in order to prepare for her own 2016 run for President.

The article reports:

But Clinton, exhausted from four years of international travel and diplomacy, shrugged off the suggestion to lay the groundwork for her own 2016 bid with her husband at her side, according to author Ed Klein.

“As recently as a couple of weeks ago, the White House was putting out feelers to see if Hillary Clinton was interested in replacing Joe Biden on the ticket,” Klein told Secrets. “Bill Clinton, I’m told, was urging his wife to accept the number two spot if it was formally offered. Bill sees the vice presidency as the perfect launching pad for Hillary to run for president in 2016.”

I think Hillary made the right decision. If the polls are any indication of anything, there is no way President Obama wins a second term in an honest election. It would not do Hillary any good to be on a losing ticket. If President Obama wins a second term, it is quite possible that some of his policies would be well outside the mainstream of America. President Obama’s comment to Russian President Medvedev (rightwinggranny.com) about having more flexibility during his second term is not comforting.

The video included in the article adds some details:

There are only 20-some days to change the ticket. This may be interesting.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Disturbing Picture Of President Obama

Dinesh D’Souza, an Indian American conservative political commentator, has written a number of books explaining some of the background of Barack Obama. As a person who was not raised in the American culture, Mr. D’Souza has a lot of insight on how America looks to someone not steeped in its culture. The movie, 2016, currently showing in selected theaters, is based on one of Mr. D’Souza’s books.

Fox News posted an article yesterday by Denish D’Souza detailing a recent event in Mr. D’Souza’s life.

Recently Mr. D’Souza received a call from someone named George, who was asking for money to pay the hospital bill for his son, who was seriously ill. After confirming the facts of the matter, Mr. D’Souza sent him the money he needed. The part of this story that is unique is that George is President Obama’s brother.

The story at Fox News details some of the reasons that George was not able to ask his brother for help. As in many families, political issues have caused divisions within the family that have overridden family ties. That is horribly unfortunate, and in this case meant that George had to ask a friend to help him in his time of need, rather than asking his brother.

The family disruption is sad, but the way that the President has treated his brother is even sadder. Please read the entire article to learn the history of this relationship. It is disturbing to see an American President treat a family member in this manner.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Words Have Consequences

Yesterday Guy Benson at Townhall.com posted a story about the “Crumb and Get It” Bakery in New River Valley, Virginia. This mom and pop bakery has been open for about three months, and the advance team for Vice President Joe Biden was hoping to use the bakery for a photo-op for the campaign. When the advance team approached the owners about doing the photo-op, Chris McMurray, the owner of the bakery said, “no.”

The article reports:

Why in the world would a new business owner say “no” to a photo op with the Vice President of the United States? McMurray said it was President Obama’s recent remarks about small business and who built what. “Very simply, ‘you didn’t build that’” McMurray said. “Speaking of small businesses and entrepreneurs all across this country and actually last night my wife was up all night. No sleep, she’s worked a full 24 hours.”

It isn’t surprising that the owners said no to the photo-op. What is surprising is what happened next.

The story continues:

Secret Service officers associated with Vice President Joe Biden bought a pile of cupcakes from the baker who refused to host Biden at his shop — and they did so out of gratitude. It’s a startling news nugget at the bottom of a local report. “Shortly after Crumb and Get It told Biden’s advance people ‘no’ — the secret service walked in and told [owner] Chris McMurray “Thanks for standing up and saying ‘no’ — then they bought a whole bunch of cookies and cupcakes,” according to the Valley Reporter (Va.). McMurray refused to host the Biden entourage as a protest of Obama’s comment, made in the nearby town of Roanoke, that “if you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that.” The Secret Service’s purchase proved to be a herald of things to come, as Virginia locals rewarded McMurray with a rush of business this morning. The bakery ran out of food by 1:15 pm.

I think there are a lot of small businessmen who have worked long hours to build their businesses and are trying to keep their businesses running in the Obama economy who feel that way. The combination of over-regulation and the impending taxes which will take effect on January 1st have created a very difficult business climate. I am very concerned as to whether or not America’s economy can survive four more years of Obamanomics.

Thank you, Chris McMurray, for your courage.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

New Heights In Insanity

Yesterday the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) posted an article about their filing an amicus brief to defend the World Trade Center cross. This is the story:

The legal argument is absurd. American Atheists, which has filed a lawsuit to remove a cross from the new museum at Ground Zero, is making some astonishing claims.

The atheists say they are suffering both physical and emotional damages from the existence of the cross. That’s the right. The mere existence of this memorial has brought on headaches, indigestion, even mental pain. They even make a bizarre suggestion about erecting a “17-foot-high A for Atheists” to promote their non-beliefs at the site.

These claims are ridiculous. And so is the lawsuit. In just a matter of days, we will be filing a critical amicus brief defending this Ground Zero cross, which consists of two intersecting steel beams that survived the Twin Towers collapse on 9-11. We have a unique opportunity to not only urge the court to reject this flawed lawsuit, but to send a powerful message to the court: that more than 100,000 Americans are standing with us in this brief – urging the court to keep this powerful memorial in place.

If you haven’t signed your name yet, there’s still time to do that. Add your name to our brief now. We want to top the 100,000 mark. And we need your help to do it. Add your name here.

The National September 11 Memorial & Museum already has filed papers with the court defending the cross.

According to the museum, the cross is an “important and essential artifact” that “comprises a key component of the retelling of the story of 9/11, in particular the role of faith in the events of the day and, particularly, during the recovery efforts.” As the museum correctly points out: the 9/11 Museum is “not in the business of providing equal time for faiths, we are in the business of telling the story of 9/11 and the victims of 9/11.”

Absolutely correct.

If you choose to get involved, here is what to do:

Add your name to our brief defending this Ground Zero cross now.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Impact Of High Taxes On Athletic Competition

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal posted an article about the impact of Britain’s tax policies on athletic competition in that country.

The article reports:

…After Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt won his third gold in London last week, reporters asked him why he doesn’t compete in the U.K. more often. “As soon as the law changes I’ll be here all the time,” he said.

What aspect of British tax policy causes this sort or reaction?

The article explains:

The British government has granted an exemption to income linked to Olympic and Paralympic competition. But normally Britain takes a cut of an athlete’s worldwide endorsement earnings—that means overseas sponsors in addition to those in the U.K.—proportional to the time spent in Britain. By comparison, the U.S. only taxes nonresident athletes on endorsement fees paid by American sponsors. France does the same.

The article explains that since Mr. Bolt‘s contract with Puma is worth $9 million, any time spent competing in Britain could cost Mr. Bolt a very large sum of money. Because of these tax laws, many top athletes simply do not compete in Britain.

For example:

Rafael Nadal excused himself from this year’s Aegon Championships, the traditional warm-up to Wimbledon, on fiscal grounds: “I am playing in the U.K. and losing money. I did a lot more for the last four years, but it is more and more difficult to play in the U.K.” Mr. Nadal competed in the Gerry Weber Open in Germany instead.

Because of the tax policies, the quality of athletic competition has suffered in Britain, the fans are less likely to attend, and there is less economic activity in the area of sports competition for the country to tax. Everybody loses.

Pay attention, American Congress!

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Cost Of Security Leaks–From The People Who Understand

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted the video “Dishonorable Disclosure” yesterday. It deals with the consequences of the security leaks coming from the Obama Administration. The video is about twenty minutes long and is riveting. This is the story from the people who live it. Please watch the video and share it with your friends.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Are The Rights Of A Private Vendor ?

Today’s Boston Herald posted a story about Andrea Taber, owner of the Ever So Humble Pie Co. in Walpole. Ms. Tabor sells her pies at the Braintree market on Fridays. She has caused a controversy by refusing to accept Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards as payment for her pies at the market.

The article reports:

“I don’t think American taxpayers should be footing the bill for people’s pie purchases,” said Andrea Taber, proprietor of the Ever So Humble Pie Co. in Walpole, who peddles her wares at the Braintree market on Fridays and now finds herself in the middle of the state’s raging fight over welfare benefits.

The article concludes:

Businesses must apply and be approved to accept EBT cards, and normally are not obliged to do so. Department of Transitional Assistance Commissioner Daniel Curley said the state wants welfare recipients to “access healthy food,” but he declined to weigh in on whether farmers markets that choose to accept EBT cards can compel their vendors to take part.

I have very mixed emotions on this issue. I would like to think that EBT cards are used to make healthy food purchases, but I really don’t like the idea of anyone being able to control another person’s food purchases. The issue is complicated by the fact that the taxpayers are paying for those food purchases, but it still feels intrusive to me.

It will be interesting to see how this controversy ends.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Obviously Have Pursued The Wrong Career

National Review Online posted a story today about Harry Reid‘s wealth and some of his investment history. Harry Reid was a law student who worked part time to put himself through law school. He has been a public servant for all be two years of his work history. His current salary is $193,400, basically higher than it has been during his working life. Harry Reid’s current net worth is between 3 and 10 million dollars. Obviously, this man is an investment genius–he should be on Wall Street.

When Harry Reid began his career in the Nevada legislature in 1982, he was worth between 1 and 1 1/2 million dollars.

The article at National Review details some of Senator Reid’s strategies for acquiring wealth. They involve such things as questionable land deals and insider stock trading. The land deals are clearly at the edge of legality; the insider trading, although legal at the time for Congress, is now illegal.

The Democrats have attacked Mitt Romney for being rich. He has been accused of everything from soup to nuts. However, no one is disputing the fact that he made his money honestly through hard work and intelligence. It is also to his credit that he started from scratch–he did not inherit his father’s wealth. It is amazing to me that an honest, successful businessman would be so strongly attacked while the source of the Senate Majority Leader’s wealth is overlooked.

One of the things I would like to see happen in November is to have the voters elect a Congress that is interested in the prosperity of American citizens–not using the office to line Congressional pockets.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Truth About Medicare

Paul Ryan is not going to end Medicare. His plan leaves it intact for those of us over age 55 and changes it for younger people to insure that it will be there for them. Of course, if you watch Democrat campaign ads or see the fund raising emails, you wouldn’t know that.

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article today on the Democrats ad campaign regarding Medicare. He mentions the much-overlooked fact that President Obama cut $716 billion from Medicare to finance Obamacare.

The Republicans are learning–the have produced the following ad:

Facts are such inconvenient things.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quote Of The Week

This quote is from an article posted at Townhall.com today by Guy Benson. The article deals with the lies currently being told by Debbie Wasserman Shultz (DWS) about Paul Ryan‘s plan to save Medicare.

This is the quote:

Just a reminder: I do not pick on DWS because she’s an easy target.  I hold her to account because she is Barack Obama’s hand-picked leader of his party.  She’s not a fringe player.  She’s the DNC Chairwoman, installed at the request of the president of the United States.  This seems like a good commercial for Mitt Romney: “I picked Paul Ryan.  He picked Debbie and Joe.  I’m Mitt Romney and I approve this message.”

That works for me.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why The Government Shouldn’t Meddle In Business

President Obama is citing his bailout of the auto industry as one of his accomplishments. I wonder if he has seen the numbers.

The Detroit News posted a story today that a report by the Treasury Department has estimated that the government will lose more than $25 billion on the $85 billion auto bailout. That is almost a third of the cost of the bailout!

The article states:

The report may still underestimate the losses. The report covers predicted losses through May 31, when GM’s stock price was $22.20 a share.

On Monday, GM stock fell $0.07, or 0.3 percent, to $20.47. At that price, the government would lose another $850 million on its GM bailout.

The government still holds 500 million shares of GM stock and needs to sell them for about $53 each to recover its entire $49.5 billion bailout. At the current price, the Treasury would lose more than $16 billion on its GM bailout.

This is how much it cost the taxpayers to avoid General Motors’ going through a structured bankruptcy. The government bailout violated the basic bankruptcy laws. The bailout was nothing more than the taxpayers giving the company to the unions. This sort of activity needs to be avoided in the future!

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Historical Site Has Been Endangered By The United Nations

It isn’t news to anyone that some adherents of the Muslim religion do not have a lot of respect for the traditions and practice of other religions. In March 2001, the Taliban dynamited and destroyed the Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan on orders from leader Mullah Mohammed Omar.

Wikipedia reports:

The smaller of the statues was built between 544 and 595, the larger was built between 591 and 644.[9] They are believed to have been built by the Kushans, with the guidance of local Buddhist monks, at the heyday of their empire. The larger figure was also said to portray Dīpankara Buddha. They were perhaps the most famous cultural landmarks of the region, and the site was listed by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site along with the surrounding cultural landscape and archaeological remains of the Bamiyan Valley.

Note that the site was listed by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. Well, on Thursday, the Daily Caller reported that UNESCO is placing the Church of the Nativity on the list of World Heritage in Danger sites. It will be placed under the internationally sanctioned administration of the Palestinian Authority (PA) (a group dominated by Fatah.

Does anyone remember how Fatah treated the Church of the Nativity in 2002?

The Daily Caller article reminds us:

…the future of the church is now at risk.

That’s because the responsibility for the caretaking of this site has now been entrusted to the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority, which has not proven itself worthy of such responsibility. Fatah has been, since its founding in 1964, complicit in the harassment, persecution, assassination, imprisonment and expulsion of Christians from Palestine. In fact, it was Fatah gunmen who commandeered the church, held monks hostage within its walls and wired it with explosives in 2002 during a standoff with the Israel Defense Forces. Where was the respect for this holy site then? Who can guarantee that respect exists today? The international community has turned to the United Nations and specifically to UNESCO.

Christianity does not depend on the existence of the Church of the Nativity. The mistreatment of that church will not greatly impact what Christian people believe. It will, however, show, beyond a shadow of doubt, what the PA is made of. I truly do not see a lot of difference between the past behavior of Fatah toward the Church of the Nativity and the behavior of the Taliban toward the Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan.

If this is the best that the UN can do to take care of an important part of the heritage of Christianity, they need to be relived of their responsibilities.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Preparing For The Coming (???) Attack On Paul Ryan

Actually the attack on Paul Ryan has already begun, but here’s some ammunition for present and future attacks.

Ed Morrissey posted an article at HotAir today about Erskine Bowles‘ comments on Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. As you remember, Erskine Bowles was the co-chair of Barack Obama’s deficit committee (the one that President Obama appointed and then totally ignored the conclusions of). Erskine Bowles is a Democrat budget wonk and a presidential adviser. His committee made serious recommendations about the deficit that were not even seriously discussed by President Obama.

HotAir posted what Erskine Bowles said about Paul Ryan’s budget plan:

“Have any of you met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing, uh. I always thought that I was OK with arithmetic, but this guy can run circles around me. And, he is honest. He is straightforward. He is sincere.

And, the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion…just like we did.

The President came out with his own plan and the President came out, as you will remember, with a budget and I don’t think anyone took that budget very seriously. Um, the Senate voted against it 97 to nothing. He, therefore, after a lot of pressure from folks like me, he came out with a new budget framework and, in the new budget framework, he cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. And, to be candid, this $4 trillion cut was very heavily back-end loaded. So, if you looked at it on a 10 year basis and compared apples-to-apples, it was about a $2.5 trillion cut.”

Erskine Bowles did not come out in support of Paul Ryan’s budget, but his statement shows an obvious respect for the budget (and for Paul Ryan). At some point we have to stop accusing people of pushing granny over a cliff and actually start looking at where we are and what we need to do to avoid going over the cliff ourselves. I believe Paul Ryan would be a wonderful person to lead that discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

How You Answer When You Are Caught With Your Hand In The Cookie Jar

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today which featured my nominee for the Quote of the Week.

Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was being interviewed on Fox News Sunday. She was asked about the Obama ad accusing Mitt Romney causing the death of Joe Soptic’s wife. Ms. Wasserman Schultz  pointed out that the ad was produced by Priorities USA, an Obama-affiliated super PAC run by a former Obama White House staffer. She then stated, “I have no idea the political affiliation of the folks who are associated with that super PAC.” Wow. Did she think it was a pro-Romney ad?

When you listen to the entire interview, you begin to wonder if the Democrat‘s main objection to Mitt Romney is that he was successful as a businessman. I wonder how many people in America think that America needs a successful businessman to put the economy of America in order.

Please follow the link to the Washington Free Beacon to watch the video. This is how you avoid answering a question when you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar!

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Muslim Brotherhood Makes A Move In Egypt

Reuters is reporting today that Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi, a leading figure in the Muslim Brotherhood, has ordered Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi to retire.

The article reports:

President Mohamed Mursi also cancelled a constitutional declaration that limited presidential powers and which the ruling army council issued in June, as voting in the election that brought Mursi to power drew to a close.

There had previously been much debate over the fate of 76-year-old Tantawi, who had ruled Egypt as head of the military council after Mubarak was toppled last year, but the timing of the announcement to replace him was a surprise.

The move sidelines Tantawi, whose presence had cast a shadow over Mursi’s rule, and appeared to whittle away at the remaining powers of the military, from whose ranks every president for 60 years had been drawn until Mursi’s election.

This move essentially transfers power away from the military and strengthens the power of the President and the Parliament. The Parliament that was elected in Egypt was largely fundamentalist Islamists who support Sharia Law. Taking control of the military breaks down the last barrier to Sharia Law and to Egypt becoming what Iran became after the 1979 revolution there. The next step will be the official breaking of the treaty with Israel (which will only happen when Egypt feels that it has gotten all the U. S. foreign aid money it is going to get).

Unfortunately, the outreach initiative by the Obama Administration to the Arabs in the Middle East has resulted in a loss of  freedom for the people of the Middle East, heightened tensions in the area as the countries align against Israel, and the probable loss of Iraq and Afghanistan to extreme Islamists.

I am not sure a new administration in Washington can solve these problems, but I can pretty much guarantee that four more years of President Obama will make them worse.

Enhanced by Zemanta