define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true); define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true); No Runny Eggs » Politics

No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Archive for the 'Politics' Category

April 16, 2008

I’m back

by @ 9:31. Filed under Politics - National.

I feel a little bit like I’m running in a remake of “Airplane”…boy,  I picked  the wrong  week to quit blogging….so much fun that I missed!

Just for a couple:

China called Nancy Pelosi the “least popular person in China,” for her comments about China’s handling of their Tibet “crisis.”   This maybe the only issue I’ve ever agreed with Nancy on but even so, it can’t be good for your ego to be the least popular person in at least 2 of the world’s major countries!

Barack Obama’s now well publicized comments talking about how non coast line people handle the stress of economic uncertainty "it’s not surprising they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them . . . as a way to explain their frustrations".  

Giving Barack, or his wife for that matter, opportunities to ad lib are the best way to ensure that he does not win the election in November.   Contrary to what he has in his carefully prepared and scripted speeches, when ad libbing, Barack shows his contempt for anyone who has any tie to traditional values.   His ad lib script continues to show his  conviction that if you believe in anything other than the government solving all your problems, you are just another flat earther.

April 14, 2008

Blogger Protection Act

by @ 9:19. Filed under Politics - National, The Blog.

I should’ve pounced on this when Fausta had it almost 2 weeks ago, but it took Jon Ham’s catch of North Carolina’s lone co-sponsor to get me jumping. Rep. Jeb Hensarling introduced The Blogger Protection Act, H.R. 5699, on April 3. The bill is designed to put into the United States Code the current Federal Election Commission regulations that give bloggers the same protection from campaign finance laws given the rest of the media and declares advocacy by uncompensated bloggers does not constitute a contribution to a candidate.

There are currently 36 (37 if one counts the non-voting Puerto Rican representative) co-sponsors to this legislation, all Republicans. Paul Ryan is the only Wisconsin Representative among them. Where are the other 7? Where are the Democrats? Heck, where’s the Republican leadership; I see only Roy Blunt and Eric Cantor from the leadership team on the co-sponsor page.

April 11, 2008

“Hope” or same old “compassionate” Left?

(Major H/T – Fred)

If memory serves, Mary Katharine Ham has been hammering the operators of Huffington Post and Daily Kos for “less-than-civil” comments left on their sites on her weekly appearances on “The O’Reilly Factor”. I wonder where this little gem from Ejike Ofoemezie of Canton, Georgia on a blog hosted on Barack Obama’s official campaign site would fall on that scale:

It is unbecoming of an old man who is a part of the problem America has today to tell us not to hope. What a deaf man? If McCain has given up on hope and life, the rest of America has not. He should pay a deserved visit to the undertaker. So, someone should please remind McCain there is a place called a zoo where the likes of him should take abode while the rest of America moves on.

Just in case the Obama campaign decides to scrub their servers, I did take the liberty of grabbing a screencap, complete with both an apparently-unused link to report objectionable content and a graphic stating that the blog is on a server paid for by Obama For America (click for a full-sized graphic)…

ofoemezies-obama-blog.jpg

Revisions/extensions (4:44 pm 4/11/2008) – Sorry about the lateness of the update; I was away from the keyboard all afternoon. I don’t know if it was Fred or Winged Hussar of Grizzly Groundswell (who had it first), or Charlie Sykes (who picked it up in the 11 o’clock hour), but we got results. Into the memory hole it went, but not before Winged Hussar and I both got screencaps. I’ll put my money on Charlie; it disappeared about an hour after he posted on it. Fred also notes a few other nuggets of material (enough for not one but two pages of archives) from Ejike are still there.

Also on top of it – Psycmeister’s Ice Palace.

April 10, 2008

FairTax?

by @ 11:38. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

In the wake of Buzz’s comments on The Tax Bomb post (TownHall version), I guess I should explain why I am philosophically-opposed to a national sales tax. It’s been a few years since I did this (I thought I put it here, but it must be my old age showing), and I’m still a bit under the weather (literally; it’s a rainy, ugly Thursday here in the land of cheese and beer), so I may jump around a bit.

First, let me be clear that the current tax code is fouled up beyond all repair. Its tentacles reach into every crevice of life, and at nearly 20% of Gross Domestic Product with promises of ever-increasing taxes, it simply takes too much money. My ideal tax code would be an absolute-flat tax where everybody that works pays the exact same amount. Of course, that would require the death of the welfare state and the reduction of the federal government to its absolute minimum core Constitutional principles, two items that even Republicans are loathe to consider.

That brings me to my first objection to the FairTax; it does not do anything to begin the process of actually reducing the amount of money going to government. Indeed, at 23% of the gross sales, or if you prefer to use the traditional sales-tax percentage, 30%, it is expressly designed to not reduce the amount of money going to government.

Next, the fact that it would tend to be paid in drabs and dribbles mostly-hidden from the view of the consumer is odious. Indeed, the fact that, other than the purchase of vehicles and homes, it would go by all-but-unnoticed makes a national sales tax more-likely to be increased in any given year than the individual income tax. That is borne out by the history of the sales tax here in Wisconsin. 25 years ago, it was 4%. Then came a “temporary” percentage-point increase to 5% that somehow became permanent. The counties whined that they needed more revenue streams, so they were given the authority to lump in a 0.5% sales tax, and most counties, including Milwaukee, promptly tapped in. Milwaukee wanted to replace its convention center, so in went a 0.25% sales tax on prepared food, 2% tax on hotel rooms and 3% tax on car rentals in Milwaukee County (to an unelected board). Then Bud Selig came knocking for cash to “help” build a new ballpark, and in went a 0.1% sales tax in the 5-county area surrounding Milwaukee. In short, a restaurant meal that was taxed at 4% when I was young is now taxed at 5.85%, a 46.25% increase that, once inflation is taken into account, is something north of 300%.

I also take umbrage with is the concept of a “prebate”. Ultimately, the supporters are going to have to make the hard decision of keeping the IRS to verify, either through income or amount of purchases, the amount of the “prebate” to give to a particular individual, accept that the “prebate” is yet another welfare program, or jettison the concept and thus lose whatever left-of-center support might otherwise be gained.

As for the dreams of eliminating the IRS and the “underground” economy, I don’t suppose many of the supporters of the FairTax have had to deal with the BATF. Moonshiners have, and the BATF makes the IRS look like altar boys. Speaking of moonshiners, 221 years of taxation and zealous enforcement didn’t exactly stop their underground economy.

One more thought on the underground economy. If you’ve ever underreported the amount you paid for a used car because you didn’t want to pay the entire amout of the state sales tax, raise your hand. Apparently enough of you did so that many states now base their used-car sales tax on the Kelly Blue Book value instead of the actual sales price. Keep in mind that the state sales tax is anywhere between a quarter and a sixth of what the FairTax would be.

April 8, 2008

County P-I-Gs don’t like ethics

by @ 16:48. Filed under Politics - Milwaukee County.

JSOnline’s DayWatch is reporting the county board supervisors are balking at an ethics package that would bring the county ethics enforcement more in line with enforcement elsewhere in the state. The excuses are pretty woeful, even for the Board, so let’s start fisking:

Supervisor Elizabeth Coggs-Jones said the plan fostered a presumption of guilt any time someone filed an ethics complaint against county officials.

Could it be that most times, county officials are guilty of ethics violations? Say, is it just me, or does anybody else note the irony of who is bitching here?

She and others questioned the idea of having the district attorney’s Public Integrity Unit conduct the first reviews of complaints, something that District Attorney John Chisholm suggested as a way to avoid having two simultaneous probes – one by the Ethics Board and another by the DA.

After all, there’s more taxpayer money to be spent in a 2-step investigation.

Under the proposed revisions, all complaints would be kept confidential, with nothing made public unless there was a finding of wrongdoing. That follows the state ethics system and many other municipal ethics codes, supervisors were told. But it changes current county practice in which ethics complaints are immediately made public.

If the secrecy provision were enacted, ethics complaints would likely be publicized by the complainants or otherwise leaked, supervisors said.

Supervisor Lynne De Bruin said political opponents could use the code as a weapon against supervisors, disclosing the existence of an ethics complaint they or a supporter had filed.

Again, hiding something? Worried about not being able to immediately retaliate against those that note the odor?

They also objected to a new standard that would forbid county officials from accepting “anything of value” that could be construed to compromise their ability to act fairly on county business.

Hell, they can’t possibly survive on a generous full-time salary plus Rolls Royce benefits for part-time work </sarcasm>.

Rockefeller the dumbf*ck

by @ 16:01. Filed under Politics - National.

Revisions/extensions (5:19 pm 4/8/2008) – I apologize to the Fox News gang for the auto-pingback on an AoSHQ-worthy rant.

(H/T – among others, Ace, whom I’m using because this is not going to be profanity-free, and because Slublog fed Ace a classic Slu-Shop)

West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller (D for dumbfuck DhimmiRAT) really stepped on his crank earlier today when he uttered the following horseshit:

"McCain was a fighter pilot, who dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet. He was long gone when they hit. What happened when they [the missiles] get to the ground? He doesn’t know. You have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues.”

Shall we play, “How Many Ways Is the Jackass Wrong?” For $50, when were laser-guided munitions introduced to the Southeast Asia area of operations? 1972, which was, give or take a few months, 5 years after McCain was shot down.

Let’s go for double-Jeopardy, where the scores can really change. Has any of the US Navy versions of the A-4 ever been provisioned to carry laser-guided weapons? BZZZZT!!! The only precision-guided weapons the early-Vietnam era of the Skyhawk carried were the AGM-12 Bullpup command-guided missile (for those in Rio Linda, the pilot had to hand-fly the missile over its 10-nm range) and the AGM-62 Walleye EO-guided bomb (entered service in 1967, range of 15 miles, and was a fire-and-forget weapon). Later A-4s did carry the AGM-65 Maverick EO-guided missile as well as the Walleye II, and, after the Navy retired the A-4 in 1975, some versions did gain the ability to use laser-guided munitions, but those came about after McCain was shot down.

As for not seeing them hit, McCain typically carried plain iron bombs at low level, which meant he saw them hit and what they hit. Indeed, that was the mission profile on the mission he was shot down.

Oh, and CDR Salamander corrects the idiotic claim the A-4 is a “fighter plane”; the “A” stands for “Attack”. Yes, the Marines and other countries later slapped a couple of Sidewinders on the A-4, and TOPGUN (and “Top Gun”) used them as the analog to MiGs in Dissimilar Air Combat Training, but the Navy didn’t slap the Sidewinders on them.

Yes, there is late news that Rockefeller did apologize for being abso-fucking-lutely wrong. I can’t speak for McCain, but the phrase, “too little, too late” comes to mind.

The Tax Bomb

by @ 10:41. Filed under Politics - National, Taxes.

Sorry about that; I accidentally hit “Publish” way before I was ready.

(H/T – Flip)

While the old OpinionJournal may be dead, I do appreciate the fact that the entire The Wall Street Journal editorial page is free to all. In today’s edition, John Cogan and Glenn Hubbard peer into the future of the bite of the individual income tax.

First, let me steal what Flip rightfully called “The Ugliest Chart You’ll See All Day”, which estimates the percentage of Gross Domestic Product taken by the federal government over the last 2 years and next 5 years through the individual income tax structure…

ed-ah326a_hubba_20080407201615.gif

…and make some uglier observations. First, note that the divergence between the code as it existed at the end of 2007 and as it did at the end of 2000 actually begins this year. I don’t have the time to research just what parts of the Bush tax-rate cuts of 2001 and 2003 expired already, but some of them already have. Since one can’t expect a Congress controlled by Democrats to give so much as a 1-year extension to tax-rate cuts both of their candidates are committed to eliminating entirely, the divergence should actually begin at 2009. Further, one can’t simply move the “current tax code” line up to meet that; those same Dems as well as select Republicans (including their Presidential nominee) cannot be expected to restore those tax-rate cuts that are already expired, so even if the remainder of the tax-rate cuts were to survive, the individual income tax would likely take something north of 9.3 cents of every dollar produced by the economy, compared to 8 cents in 2006 and an estimated 8.6 cents in 2007.

Even the focus on the indivudal income tax, while historic in its rise under the time bomb the Democrats are intent on setting off, is misleading. While it is the largest single component of the federal government’s drag on the economy, it is far from the only one. The total federal drag on the economy, euphemistically called “federal revenues”, is 18.8% of GDP. While Cogan and Hubbard focused solely on the individual income tax increases in store from the Democrats when they said that either Barack Obama’s or Hillary Clinton’s plans would result in the feds taking 20% of the GDP, the amount that they would have the goverment take will be higher than that as “corporate” income taxes will also be jacked up at astronomical rates. I may not be an economist, but I’ll lay what’s in my wallet against what’s in their wallets in saying that the federal government’s total drag on the economy will be closer to 25% of GDP by 2012 than 20% of GDP.

That reminds me of something my Congressman, Paul Ryan (R) has been saying lately. By the time his children are his age (roughly 2040), if there is no increase beyond inflation in discretionary spending and no changes in the welfare programs (misnamed “mandatory spending”), the federal government would be taking 40% of GDP. For those that didn’t do the math, that’s double the tax burden just to keep the current level of government we have now, and that doubling is on top of historically-high taxes.

I honestly could go on all day with the rest of the opinion piece, but I do want you to read it.

April 7, 2008

Because I said so…

by @ 7:00. Filed under Politics - National.

From the Politico.Com  

Barack Obama did not hunt or fish as a child. He lives in a big city. And as an Illinois state legislator and a U.S. senator, he consistently backed gun control legislation.
But he is nevertheless making a play for pro-gun voters in rural Pennsylvania.

By highlighting his background in constitutional law and downplaying his voting record, Obama is engaging in a quiet but targeted drive to win over an important constituency that on the surface might seem hostile to his views.

The need to craft a strategy aimed at pro-gun voters underscores the potency of the issue in Pennsylvania, which claims one of the nation’s highest per capita membership rates in the National Rifle Association.

I find it interesting that rather than address his position on the ability to own and use handguns, Barack Obama is busy telling people that he has a background in constitutional law.   This sounds  a lot like an answer I  used to  give my young boys when they’d debate me on why they should do certain things.   If it was a subject that I didn’t think they were old enough to debate, they would occasionally get a; “Because I said.”   While this is an adequate answer for 5 year olds, I don’t see how that  kind of response gets Barack  in good with pro-gun folks.    Beyond that,  I have other questions:

  1. Is a lawyer having a “background” in constitutional law all that unique?   Gosh, I kind of thought that a lawyer  having a “background” in constitutional law is like a doctor having a background in medicine.   Yes I know he taught some constitutional law courses but there is a vast difference between teaching a class and actually practicing it.   This follows along the well know and factual sports analogy of those who can’t play coach, those who can’t coach ref.   Barack is somewhere between a ref and a coach when he is implying to the pro-gun audience that he is an actual  player.
  2. OK, I know why the slobbering media hasn’t, but why hasn’t  an attender of one of these  pro-gun rallies  asked Barack straight up, what his position on hand guns is?   There’s plenty of evidence that gives every indication that Barack doesn’t believe that the Second Amendment allows citizens to own handguns for self defense.   Instead of allowing him to “position himself” let’s ask him and deal with his answer…assuming he’ll actually give an answer that has substance.
  3. Having a “background” in constitutional law, does Barack believe the whole constitution should be enforced or does he take the Animal Farm approach to the constitution where all amendments are equal but some amendments are more equal than others?

With District of Columbia versus Heller  likely to have a decision by June, Barack may be able soft shoe himself through the primaries but it won’t be so easy in the general election.   Heller, and the fact that its decision will be the first rendered on gun control by the US Supreme Court in nearly 70 years, will give a focal point for gun rights issues.   Assuming, as many who  ARE constitutional lawyers  have, that the Supreme Court finds the law, that in essence causes the complete abolition of handguns, not to align with the Constitution, Obama needs to be asked whether and why he agrees or disagrees with the Court’s decision.   Drawing on his extensive constitutional law background it should be easy for Barack Obama to explain why the Supreme Court is wrong.  

Obama may  be able  to pass off his “centrist” persona in the primaries but states like Pennsylvania are going to play much differently in the general election.

April 5, 2008

The Clinton’s Lament

by @ 7:00. Filed under Politics - National.

The primaries have gone horribly wrong for the “Candidate of Inevitability.”   When she sees how Mugabe is being supported by his party, do you think she cries alone, at her Chappaqua home, “Why  don’t they love MEEEEEEEE?”

Mugabe Will Fight On, His Party Says

Didymus Mutasa, the governing party’s secretary for administration, told journalists after an all-day party meeting that there was a consensus that Mr. Mugabe should stand in a second round of voting.

"Mugabe, our dear old man, remains our candidate," Mr. Mutasa was quoted as saying in The Herald. "We shall take him and carry him along with us."

Or do you think her thoughts are, “if someone who can actually arrest and torture their opponents can’t fix an election, what chance does mere lying and personal assassination stand?”

April 4, 2008

Now even the anti-endorsements are getting strange

by @ 8:56. Filed under Politics - National.

(H/Ts – Allahpundit and Matt Lewis)

I’ve chronicled wacky endorsement after wacky endorsement after wacky endorsement in this Presidential election season. Now, we have the wacky unendorsement:

More than 20 leading social conservatives signed an open letter to Senator John McCain expressing their displeasure over the prospect of an "M&M" ticket being pushed by Karl Rove, Sean Hannity and others in the economic wing of the Republican Party.

Among the signers are those, such as Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation, who once supported Mitt Romney and now publicly regret it.

Strange days indeed.

April 3, 2008

Perhaps this is why Red Fred’s so mad at us meddling voters

by @ 11:55. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

If you’ve read anything this morning, you know that Fred Kessler (D-Milwaukee) is pushing for an effective perpetual appointment of Supreme Court justices, with automatically-renewing 10-year terms unless a supermajority of 21 state Senators vote to revoke the appointment. Now, Dan Bice, late of the Spice Boys but still with the Journal Sentinel, is reporting Red Fred is going to be facing disciplinary charges from the Office of Lawyer Regulation regarding his conduct during his wife’s hotly-contested judicial race in 2004. Bice doesn’t mention it, but if my memory serves, the final arbiter of those disciplinary charges is the same Wisconsin State Supreme Court that the voters just unpacked.

Revisions/extensions (6:20 pm 4/3/2008) – I get (uncredited) results; either Bice or Greg J. Borowski, who posted it on the All Politics blog for Bice, put in a mention that the complaint could well make it to the state Supreme Court.

Photoshop of the day

by @ 11:40. Filed under Politics - National.

Shamelessly swiped from silent E, who swiped it from somebody, who swiped it from somebody, who swiped it from Moonbatologist Claire

choice08sm.jpg

From left to right – Moebama, Shemcain, Larrary.

The gun-grabbers are feeling their oats

by @ 10:54. Filed under Guns, Politics - National.

Amanda Carpenter highlights Barack Obama’s flop back to gun banning….

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama told the Pittsburgh Tribune. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

No, BHO. Concealed-carry creates a potential atmosphere where innocent people can defend themselves during altercations, with the side benefit of making the criminal lifestyle a bit less appealing.

So, why is BHO going back to his disarmament roots? According to The Washington Times, that’s what the fools in Philly want.

Columbia’s President criticizes Obama

by @ 8:00. Filed under Politics - National.

I thought Barack was going to improve the  reputation of the US throughout the world?  

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) – Colombia’s president sharply criticized U.S. presidential contender Barack Obama on Wednesday for opposing a trade deal with his country, calling the Democrat out of touch with the realities of the South American nation.

It’s good to know that it’s not just North American countries Obama is out of touch with!

Oak Creek voting breakdown

by @ 7:42. Filed under Politics - Oak Creek.

Kevin Fischer’s posting of Franklin’s votes in key multi-municipality races info got me to digging for Oak Creek’s breakdown in those races. While the PDF file the city put up is marked unofficial, the link says it is official:

Turnout – 27.49%

Supreme Court: Gableman 3109 (59.93%), Butler 2079 (40.07%)
Eliminate the Frankenveto: Yes 3735 (72.84%), No 1393 (17.16%)
County Executive: Walker 4243 (77.44%), Taylor 1236 (22.56%)
County Supervisor District 9: Cesarz 2238 (52.82%), Balistreri 1999 (47.18%)
Circuit Court District 40: Dallet 2890 (66.85%), Norman 1433 (33.15%)

April 2, 2008

Craps channels your average Scooby Doo crook

by @ 15:54. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Or am I just imagining things when I think of that when I see Jim “Craps” Doyle (WEAC/Potawatomi-For Sale) uttered this after us meddling voters undid his packing of the state Supreme Court – "It is a tragedy that such a fine judge and good human being was trashed during the campaign. Justice Butler has served with distinction and honor on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and I thank him for his fairness, his sense of justice and his lifelong commitment to public service."

No, it’s not a tragedy. It’s a sign of sanity.

Fraley the Magnificent strikes again

by @ 9:12. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Yes, he called it. The moonbat half of the Cheddarsphere is acting like there’s a full moon and they’re fresh out of blood.

I’ll get the popcorn.

Spring election instant react

I know a few of you were keeping an eye on the live thread, and I have to thank Pete, Coop and Dad29 for helping me out with the results. I really should be sleeping, but there’s a couple of random thoughts I still need to do:

– Be afraid, Doyle. Be very afraid. An 18-point win for Scott Walker does not bode well for your chances in 2010, stacked Government Accountability Board or not.
– That having been said, other than Walker, Paul Cesarz, Mark Borowski, and Joe Rice (who did not have an opponent), the tax revolt is dead in Milwaukee, Waukesha and Racine Counties. $400,000 for a shed? Why not? $9 million in borrowing for maintenance? Go right ahead. $12 million for a Taj Mahal fire station? You betcha. $66 million for a makeover? Hey, at least it’s not $110 million. You wasted the breathing room we gave you last time? Go ahead, here’s some more.
– Fortunately, it spread further out. Attempts to jack taxes in Germantown, Hartford and Jefferson got shot down.
– Sanity will soon return to the state Supreme Court. Dickie Scruggs’ friends had best find a new state to try to pillage. The bad news; Doyle gets to choose the next judge of Burnett County.
– On the other hand, the same voters who delivered the margin of victory for Justice-elect Gableman decided that in the battle of stinky and extra-smelly, they would take extra-smelly.
– Bold prediction of 2008: there will be a lot of 3-3 ties broken by Hizzoner here in Oak Creek.
– Finally, a blogger makes good on an election. Congratulations, Kathy.
– I hope the guards at the jail Michael McGee-Jackson Jr is at took away his shoelaces; his world is crashing in on him.

April 1, 2008

Wisconsin spring general election live thread

Welcome to the NRE Wisconsin spring general election live thread, covering the non-partisan portion of the 2008 elections. The elections I’m keeping an eye on:

– Wisconsin State Supreme Court – Louis Butler (inc.) vs Michael Gableman
– State constitutional amendment limiting the governor’s use of the line-item veto
– Milwaukee County Executive – Scott Walker (inc.) vs Lena Taylor
– Milwaukee County Board – various races including the 9th
– Jailbird Milwaukee Alderman Michael McGee’s re-election bid
– Kenosha’s 5th Aldermanic race with Kathy Carpenter
– Racine County’s 3rd Supervisory race with Lou D’Abbraccio

March 28, 2008

Response to RNC Chair Mike Duncan

by @ 11:11. Filed under Politics - National.

As I noted on this morning’s edition of The Morning Scramble, John Hawkins asked RNC Chair Mike Duncan about those conservatives who might sit out in November (Hawkins’ question in bold, Duncan’s answer in normal type):

Here’s an argument that I don’t agree with, but that I hear a lot: it goes something like this, “The GOP is doing a poor job of representing conservatives. So, what we need to do is deliberately lose in 2008 and then, after a few years of Hillary or Barack in charge, America will be sick of the Left, the GOP will be serious about conservative principles again, and the Party will come back stronger than ever and more representative of conservative views.” Again, I don’t agree with that, but I hear it a lot. What do you say to that?

Well, that is a fallacious argument. It’s also dangerous and let me paint a picture of why. Taken to the extreme, that would return us to 1964 when the Democrats controlled the government entirely.

Look at all the programs that were introduced during that period of time that we’ve had trouble managing, that were are expensive, that have caused us to raise taxes.

So, I think if people sit down and think about turning the entire government over to the Democrats and what that would do to them individually — it would take money away from their families, take jobs away from small businesses, and I think it would be disastrous for our economy. That would be a nightmare in my estimation.

I am not a Party guy, so I’m not overly-wedded to voting for the person with an “R” behind his or her name no matter what. At the same time, I recognize that this is a two-party country, and while the Republican Party mostly tolerates conservatives even as certain elements including its last few standard-bearers stabbed us in the back, the Democratic Party has no desire for anything approaching conservatism.

I also recognize that while conservatism is still the most-popular philosophy in America, it is shared by neither the majority of Americans nor the majority of those who care enough to vote. Indeed, the liberals’ two-pronged strategy of driving people out of the political arena and creating a sufficient number of teat-suckers wholly dependent on government has pretty much borne its fruit.

I personally believe it’s now or never for conservatives in the GOP. I say that knowing we’ve already lost the executive on paper, and knowing the NRCC and NRSC will do everything in its power to save the liberal incumbents. There is a reason I didn’t use “Democrats” in the previous paragraph; it’s a bipartisan rush to liberalism among those in government. Indeed, I’ve called them the bipartisan Party-In-Government.

I note that Duncan brought up the aftermath of 1964. It would have made a bigger impact on me had the out-of-control spending on items the federal government has no business spending a penny on, like health care and education, not repeated itself the last 6 years, mostly under effective Republican control. It would have made a bigger impact on me had the tax rate cuts reduced the government’s take of the economy instead of increased it; indeed, those cuts were sold as not reducing the government’s take.

The only reason I am willing to try one last attempt to turn the GOP to the right is I don’t believe the Democrats will make the same mistake they did in the 1820s and 1850s and allow another party to rise up to challenge it on anything beyond the local level.

March 26, 2008

Dissembling that would put a tear in Hillary’s eye!

by @ 20:25. Filed under Politics - National.

On last night’s “Hardball,”Chris Matthews took up the case of Hillary’s changing, fantastical recollections of her trip to Bosnia.   Sitting in to fend for Hillary was Pennsylvania Representative Joe Sestak.   Sestak dissembled responses in a way that made “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is,” look  accurate and revealing.

In the matter of Hillary’s faulty recollection of her Bosnia trip, the ending exchange was:

MATTHEWS:   Are you defending lying?   Is that what you"˜re defending, or what are defending?   Tell me what you consider fair ball in the game, if you will, of getting elected president.   How big a fish can you claim to have caught, if you caught none?   That"˜s all I"˜m asking.

SESTAK:   Well, Chris, you know, I went to the Naval Academy.   There was an honor code there, but very few people read that honor code.   That honor code says, Hey, you won"˜t lie, steal or cheat.   But it also says if you see someone who does, you don"˜t, then report them.   You have a choice.   You report them or you counsel them because we recognize that we"˜re humans.   Whether it"˜s Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy or Hillary Clinton or Senator Obama, we all have our faults.   The question is this.   Who"˜s ready on day one because of what she learned in Bosnia…

(more…)

Bolting fringe candidates

by @ 16:54. Filed under Politics - National.

Bolt #1 (H/T – Jim Geraghty) – Mike Gravel has bolted to the Libertarians.

Bolt #2 (H/T – Dad29) – Alan Keyes will be kissing off to the Constitution Party on Tax Day.

Which one doesn’t make sense, or do both of them smack of nonsense?

Same old tax-and-spend from the ‘Rats

by @ 13:49. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Yesterday, the Senate ‘Rats voted to try to tax and spend their way out of a problem created by taxing and spending. What a fucking surprise; they’re ‘Rats after all. Higher taxes and higher gubmint spending is all they know.

Revisions/extensions (2:40 pm 3/26/2008) – This one’s too long to put in italics and keep XHTML validity because I have to put the tag before every single paragraph.

Oh, just for shits and grins, let’s do some math for the effects through June 2009 using the Journal Sentinel numbers (note; positive numbers are increases to the general fund, negative numbers are decreases from the general fund):

– Expected budget shortfall before Senate “action”: -$652 million (say, wasn’t that about the amount government grew?)
– Taxing out-of-state operations of multi-state companies: $130.5 million
– Reducing the corporate tax rate: -$5.2 million
– Taxing hospitals (at a rate of $416 million in exchange for $408 million in additional federal funds Medicaid taxes, not exactly a money-maker for the hospitals): $125 million to the general fund
– Playing with trains between Kenosha and Milwaukee: -$200 million (with the side “benefit” of increasing the car rental tax from $2 to $15 to pay for the “local contribution” to this boondoggle)
– School payment delay from June 2009 to July 2009: $125 million (do note that this bill comes due in the FY 2010-2011 budget)
– More child care subsidies: -$18.6 million
– Various spending cuts: $127 million (do note that this is not only the last item in the news story, but the one item that the Journtinel did not put a solid dollar amount on, noting that it was $40 million more than what Jim “Craps” Doyle wanted and $350 million less than what the Assembly wanted)
– Expected budget shortfall after “Senate” action: -$368.3 million

Not exactly a fix, sports fans. Do take special note of the actual effect of the hospital tax; the only entity making out in this is state government.

Silence of the Wolves

by @ 13:43. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

I find it rather interesting that some of the same actors attempting to silence Rick Esenberg and raising every specious “argument” against Judge Mike Gabelman are themselves silent about Justice Louis Butler’s very-cozy relationship with a Milwaukee law firm.

March 25, 2008

If I were as smart as Kevin Fischer…

by @ 19:17. Filed under Politics - Oak Creek.

…I would have offered this place up to the various candidates in Oak Creek like he did for Franklin’s candidates.

I guess that’s the difference between Oak Creek and Franklin; the latter has a very vibrant local blogosphere, while the concept never really took off in Oak Creek. I probably deserve a heap of blame for that; I declined an early offer to be one of the “Community Bloggers”, and I don’t do a lot of local focus here (I think that’s related).

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]