Our # 1 describes why Republicans are and should be mistrustful of Democrats and deals with them. Story #2 tells the unbelievable tale of how some people on Medicaid in Michigan have to pay Union dues to SEIU. #3 in the meantime says Karen Kraushaar has decided not to do a press conference unless the other two accusers of Herman Cain join her. #4 shows that despite the Democrats saying the Republicans are in cahoots with Wall Street, Wall Street seems intent on donating more money to Obama and other Democrats. #5 introduces you to Leo Gerard, President of the USW and the man calling for more violence at OWS. #6 shows that while the wealthy are much better off than they’ve been, that hasn’t come from the poor. Everyone is better off than they used to be. Frank Luntz in #7 has a focus group for the last GOP debate who were unanimous in who they thought won the debate.
1. Why Republicans Can’t Trust Democrats
…In a recent article in Commentary, Steven Hayward reports on how President Reagan experienced the true cost of agreeing to raise taxes in exchange for spending cuts. IN REAGAN’S CASE, IT HAPPENED WHEN HE MADE A DEAL WITH CONGRESS BEFORE THE 1982 ELECTIONS ($1 IN REVENUE FOR $3 IN SPENDING CUTS).
That deal, which came to be known as TEFRA (the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act), featured what was then, to date, THE LARGEST TAX HIKE IN AMERICAN HISTORY. TEFRA came a little more than a year after the enactment of the Kemp-Roth bill, which slashed marginal tax rates at every level by 23 percent over three years and was the heart of what came to be known as “Reaganomics.”
. . . ALL THE “TAX INCREASES” TO WHICH REAGAN AGREED AS PART OF TEFRA WERE TEMPORARY EXCISE HIKES ON CIGARETTES AND TELEPHONE CALLS. The bill also featured technical changes in the tax code (such as the elimination of depreciation schedules and the reduction of tax credits and deductions).
The result:
. . THE “BALANCED APPROACH” HE HAD ADVOCATED IN THE 1982 BUDGET DEAL HAD NEVER COME TO PASS. TEFRA was designed to bring about $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in new revenue, which meant that, on paper, it advanced Reagan’s goal of shrinking the federal government. IN PRACTICE, THE RESULTS OF TEFRA WERE ALMOST EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. WHILE THE TAX INCREASES WERE REAL, CONGRESS NEVER DELIVERED ON THE SPENDING CUTS. By one calculation, the 1982 budget deal actually resulted in $1.14 of new spending for each extra tax dollar.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282917/i-thought-supercommittee-was-supposed-reduce-deficit-veronique-de-rugy
The Super Committee needs to pay attention to this precedent. The Democrats are calling for immediate tax increases and spending cuts that occur in the future. Like Charlie Brown in the cartoon, Republicans shouldn’t trust the Democrats just like Charlie can’t trust Lucy.
2. SEIU siphons ‘dues’ from Michigan Medicaid Payments
If you're a parent who accepts Medicaid payments from the State of Michigan to help support your mentally-disabled adult children, YOU QUALIFY AS A STATE EMPLOYEE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU). THEY CAN NOW CLAIM AND RECEIVE A PORTION OF YOUR MEDICAID IN THE FORM OF UNION DUES.
Robert and Patricia Haynes live in Michigan with their two adult children, who have cerebral palsy. The state government provides the family with insurance through Medicaid, but also treats them as caregivers. FOR THE SEIU, THIS MAKES THEM PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND THUS MEMBERS OF THE UNION, WHICH RECEIVES $30 OUT OF THE FAMILY'S MONTHLY MEDICAID SUBSIDY. The Michigan Quality Community Care Council (MQC3) deducts union dues on behalf of SEIU….
Hmmm, perhaps Wall Street is not the only group motivated by “greed.” Never trust a Democrat or a Democratic constituent.
3. Karen Kraushaar rethinking joint press conference
Attorney Joel Bennett tells CBS News Karen Kraushaar, one of the women who accused Republican presidential contender Herman Cain of sexual harassment in the 1990's, HAS NOW DECIDED SHE WILL NOT APPEAR PUBLICLY UNLESS CAIN'S TWO UNNAMED ACCUSERS ALSO AGREE TO COME FORWARD WITH HER.
Yesterday, Bennett said Kraushaar decided to have the press conference with Sharon Bialek, and was also hoping to have any other woman there. Bialek came forward on Monday to accuse Cain of "sexually inappropriate" behavior in the 1990s.
But Bennett says Kraushaar has now concluded she would be the focus of all the attention with only Bialek at her side, so she has decided to wait and see if the two other women who alleged harassment will agree to join her….
It appears Karen Kraushaar doesn’t believe Sharon Bialek’s story either.
4. The Blue Wall Street Blues
… Actually, I will go on - because there's even more. A third bomb went off this week after the l'affaire Corzine exploded like the Hindenburg over Lakewood, New Jersey. This past Monday, the Washington Post let the cat out of the bag on more embarrassing facts:
- WALL STREET IS THE BIGGEST CONTRIBUTOR, THIS ELECTION CYCLE, TO BARACK OBAMA;
- WALL STREET'S MADE MORE MONEY IN THE THREE YEARS OF MR. OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY THAN UNDER THE EIGHT YEARS OF GEORGE BUSH; and
- Wall Street's bonuses have more than recovered from the dip during the Crash of '08.
The truth, as the saying goes, will set you free. And the truth about the link between Blue Wall Street and the Democrats has now gone viral. THE DEMS HAVE MET THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE, YOU MIGHT SAY; AND HE IS THEM.
We'll see if this story proves to have legs. In the meantime, over at American Interest, Walter Russell Mead sums it up very well in a penetrating essay. Mead analyzes the obvious fault lines emerging within the Democratic coalition. The fracturing is being caused by the current #OWS nonsense, the Great Recession itself and the fiscal crises affecting federal and state budgets.
The implication is obvious: rupturing the uneasy alliance between Blue Wall Street and Blue America should be a primary objective of conservatives next year. IN POLITICS, FACTS ARE BULLETS. THE LAST THREE WEEKS HAVE PROVEN THAT THE DEMOCRATS' NARRATIVE FOR ELECTION 2012 WAS NOTHING MORE THAN AN EXERCISE IN CYNICISM.
Tell every Democrat you know.
The Democrats continue to get contributions from Wall Street big time. Now don’t you wonder what Wall Street gets for their money considering the condemnation the Libs give them in public? Never trust a Democrat.
5. Leo Gerard: Union Gangster
THE UNITED STEELWORKERS (USW) MARXIST PRESIDENT LEO GERARD BELIEVES IF BIG LABOR CAN’T GET WHAT IT WANTS THROUGH THE BALLOT BOX IT’S TIME TO START CRACKING SKULLS.
The Canadian-born Gerard loves a brawl. In 1999 he helped the violent anarchists protesting in Seattle block access to the World Trade Organization meetings. USW sent 1,400 goons to shut the talks down. Gerard’s agitation helped to push Algoma Steel of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, into bankruptcy in the 1990s.
USW president since 2001, Gerard wholeheartedly supports the labor-backed Occupy Wall Street movement – and wants it to become even more violent.
“YOU’RE DAMN RIGHT WALL STREET OCCUPIERS SPEAK FOR US,” he recently told left-wing radio host Ed Schultz. “THEY DO IN PITTSBURGH, THEY DO IN CHICAGO, THEY DO IN OAKLAND, THEY DO IN SAN FRANCISCO, THEY DO ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY. AND I THINK WHAT WE NEED IS, WE NEED MORE MILITANCY.”
But occupying cities isn’t enough in the view of this man who began his career in labor activism at age 11 by handing out leaflets before a strike…
OWS is being propped up by the Unions. That may explain the violence you are seeing across the country.
6. How Occupy Wall Street is getting it Wrong
….THE WEALTHY ARE FAR BETTER OFF THAN THEY USED TO BE. But their improvement has not come at the expense of those down the economic ladder. Economists Bruce D. Meyer of the University of Chicago and James X. Sullivan of the University of Notre Dame find that over the past three decades, both the poor and the middle class have made substantial material progress.
"MEDIAN INCOME AND CONSUMPTION BOTH ROSE BY MORE THAN 50 PERCENT IN REAL TERMS BETWEEN 1980 AND 2009," they reported last month in a paper for the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington. Those in the bottom tenth of the income ladder enjoyed comparable gains.
Not that everything is copacetic. The Great Recession has wrought havoc on the middle class and the poor — eliminating jobs, reducing income and slashing the value of homes.
But if it's any consolation, THE RICH HAVE SEEN THEIR TAKE SHRINK AS WELL. BETWEEN 2007 AND 2009, NOTES STEVEN KAPLAN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO BOOTH SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, THE SHARE OF ALL INCOME GOING TO THE RICHEST 1 PERCENT OF AMERICANS FELL BY A FULL QUARTER….
…When the economy crashes, it's those with the least education, fewest options and slimmest resources who suffer most. That's true, by the way, in noncapitalist societies as well as capitalist ones. In either, people who have done nothing wrong often suffer.
At moments like this, it's not surprising that many Americans would resent the wealthy and feel the urge to punish them. BUT THE OWS DEMAND FOR ACTION AGAINST THEM IS THE EQUIVALENT OF HONKING YOUR HORN WHEN YOU'RE STUCK IN A TRAFFIC JAM. IT MAKES A LOT OF NOISE, WITHOUT GETTING YOU ANYWHERE.
I’ve been amazed by the ignorance of the OWS protesters. In fact, seeing many of them protesting at the debt they incurred from college, I think the Universities should refund their money as it seems they haven’t learned a thing.
7. Frank Luntz: Who Won the Republican Debate?
THE GROUP UNANIMOUSLY PICKS GINGRICH AS THE WINNER and would like to see Gingrich go up against Obama
THE GROUP UNANIMOUSLY PICKS GINGRICH AS THE WINNER and would like to see Gingrich go up against Obama
From the Shaun Hannity Program and worth the 3 minutes it takes to see it. Gingrich’s stock is rising.
No comments:
Post a Comment