Saturday, September 19, 2015

Carly Fiorina is Right About Planned Parenthood

   I'm so sick and tired of seeing so-called "fact checkers" claiming that Carly Fiorina's statement regarding Planned Parenthood during the GOP debate is somehow "false." They're missing the point completely.
   Actually they're not, they understand exactly what the point is and they're using the ignorance of the typical liberal voter to convince them they needn't watch those uncomfortable videos themselves.
   Whether or not the EXACT IMAGE Carly mentioned does or does not appear in those videos the point she's making is still very valid. Planned Parenthood is full of abhorrent people doing abhorrent things to unborn children. In addition, they're selling body parts illegally, and it's time we as a nation make a stand for what's morally right and what's morally wrong.
   To use the appearance of a single image as the basis for her entire statement's truthfulness is itself the most untruthful manipulation I can imagine. Shame on the leftists who are perpetrating this kind of deceit upon the easily malleable.
   Watch the videos. Any of them. Then come back and tell me in good conscience that Carly Fiorina is substantively wrong. The truth is: Carly Fiorina was RIGHT about Planned Parenthood, and the leftist media is lying about her statements to hide their own shame. The fact checkers are wrong.

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Back in the saddle for the mid-terms

   Hello all. Well I've taken a leave of absence for the past couple years; funny how life seems to get in the way sometimes. But I'm back. And with these mid-terms shaping up to be the most important in a long while, (perhaps ever?) I'll be popping in periodically with my thoughts on things.
   For starters, Marco Rubio threw me for a loop a year or so ago when he got on his ill-advised amnesty tour. But I liked what I saw in his new ABC interview. I agree that we're not likely to round up 12 million illegal aliens and deport them, so something has to be done to solve this problem. I just haven't heard the solution I like yet.
   My ears are open. If Marco can put a plan on the table that makes sense, I'm willing to listen to him again. I have to say, I absolutely did like his tone on Hillary and climate change legislation.
   Who knows...? It's early in the season.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Herman Cain's Abortion Chinese Finger Trap

   Over the past week or so Herman Cain has been tripped up repeatedly over the abortion issue. Let's make something 100% clear: Herman Cain is as anti-abortion as they come. He's a Baptist minister with strong convictions, and he would veto ANY bill making it easier to fund or have an abortion.
   But here's what I like about Herman Cain, and it's just one of the reasons why I think he'll do great with the independents once he's earned the GOP nomination: he recognizes that abortion is a tricky issue and we all have a dubious relationship with it.
   While we can state that we're firmly against it, each and every one of us knows, deep down in that darkest of places that we don't want anybody to know about, that there are circumstances we can concoct where we might ask our Creator for forgiveness and make the worst kind of decision. And liberals can say they support it, but they too know deep down that what they're advocating for is the death of a baby, even if they try to deflect that reality with obfuscation.
   If your trusted doctor told you your child would be born deformed, blind, mentally retarded, what would you do? There are certainly some among us who would chose to have that baby, but there are many who would not. And of the people who choose to have the baby, do they consider that child's ultimate life? Would that child wish to be alive, going through life perhaps with continual care, at some point losing their parents and being forced upon the state, and never finding the love of a man or woman mate?
   There are horrible conditions that children can be born with and those conditions create horrible decisions for parents and families every single day. Herman Cain recognizes that, and once again has the balls to speak out about it. If we as conservatives didn't give him so much grief, he'd be more free to speak truthfully about his feelings. Cut the guy some slack, is my advice. We all know that he's clearly conservative and would seek at all times to have the strength of conviction.
   The truth is, he abhors abortion. The truth also is, he understands there will be times when families will be forced to make the most awful of decisions for the betterment of their lives and, just perhaps, the betterment of the child as well.
   Life isn't simple. Jesus Christ himself understood that when he offered to forgive us our sins.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Art Laffer Brings Reality to 9-9-9 Discussion

   This just in from Herman Cain's campaign. He does a nice job of defending his 9-9-9 plan against criticisms from the left AND the right. Also note that Larry Kudlow, Steve Forbes, Dick Morris and Paul Ryan have also offered praise for the plan...

   One of my favorite criticisms of my 9-9-9 tax reform plan is the one where people indicate they would support the plan if only we could find a way to guarantee Congress could never change the rates in the future.
   They must really like the plan to ask for that. Has any other presidential candidate ever been asked to guarantee that the tax rates he proposed could never be changed?
   I realize, of course, that much of this owes to the introduction of a new federal tax – the consumption tax – as part of the equation. It makes people nervous because they figure politicians can’t raise a tax that doesn’t exist. So once the consumption tax is in place, they say, 9 percent will only be the starting point for politicians to raise it and the other taxes, and 9-9-9 quickly becomes 10-10-1011-11-11 and who knows what else?
   That’s why it’s nice to have respected economist Arthur Laffer bring a little reality to the discussion in a piece he wrote last week for the Wall Street Journal. Mr. Laffer, you might remember, was the originator of the Laffer Curve, a notion in economics that demonstrates you get diminishing returns from higher marginal tax rates because they discourage investment and economic growth. Specifically, his Laffer Curve showed that you can collect the same amount of revenue from a lower marginal rate as you can from a higher marginal rate because of the impact the rates have on the economy.
   Contrary to some of what you hear in current conversation, the theory of the Laffer Curve was proven correct when Ronald Reagan cut marginal tax rates across the board in 1981, and federal revenues soared. So did deficits, of course, and that’s the part you usually hear about. But that’s because federal spending soared even more. Excessive spending, not insufficiently high tax rates, was the problem then and it’s still the problem today.
   So having established Mr. Laffer’s credibility on economic and tax matters, it’s nice to see that he cuts to the chase about 9-9-9 by pointing out a couple of things.
   First, for all the hand-wringing about introducing one new tax, critics seem to lose sight of the fact that we eliminate so many existing taxes that do so much damage to the economy. The payroll tax robs many people of large portions of their take-home pay. We eliminate it. The estate tax forces people to sell family businesses after their founders pass away. We get rid of that, too. The capital gains tax discourages investment – a mistake that contributes mightily to unemployment – by presuming to punish people who profit from putting their capital at risk. With 9-9-9, that comes to an end.
   Even worse, the myriad of taxes in our complicated code encourages people to engage in an absurd assortment of tax-avoidance maneuvers, and to spend obscene amounts of money on tax lawyers and accountants just to help them minimize their tax burdens. Mr. Laffer estimates that for every dollar of personal and business taxes paid, another 30 cents is spent just on the expenses necessary to comply with our complicated tax code. Consider that, just in terms of federal taxes alone. If $2.3 trillion is paid in taxes, that would mean $690 billion is spend on tax lawyers, accountants and other related compliance costs – because the tax code is so complicated that people can’t figure it out for themselves, or because they’re looking for ways to manipulate their tax liability.
   What could we do for the economy if we suddenly freed up that $690 billion to be used in more productive ways? What would happen if people stopped making economic decisions that have no purpose whatsoever except tax avoidance?
   You know the answer.
   Finally, Mr. Laffer points out how silly is the criticism that the rates could be raised in the future. They certainly would not be raised while I’m in the White House. My veto pen would see to that. But yes, future presidents and Congresses can change the tax code. That’s true of any tax, any plan or any rate that anyone ever proposes.
   But I believe it would be harder for politicians to raise rates under the 9-9-9 plan than it is under the current system. That’s because, under the simplified tax code that the 9-9-9 plan achieves, everyone would know if their taxes were being raised. It would be visible and obvious, and people would feel it.
   Today, I doubt most people are even fully aware of the rate they pay. With the mangled web of exemptions, deductions and progressive marginal rates, only people who study the matter intently can really be sure. Under 9-9-9, everyone will know that they pay a 9 percent income tax and a 9 percent consumption tax, and that their employers pay a 9 percent corporate tax. Thus, any proposal to raise these rates will hit home instantly, and I have no doubt such an attempt would generate a massive reaction from the populace.
   One of the ways I seek to empower the people is by giving them a government whose workings they can actually understand, and 9-9-9 is the centerpiece of that effort. It’s nice to have someone with the credentials of Arthur Laffer affirm that it can, and will, work.


Herman Cain

Friday, October 21, 2011

Herman Cain's Opportunity Zones Speech in Detroit

   More details still to come, obviously, but here is Mr. Cain's speech about "opportunity zones," which he delivered this morning from Detroit. It's a shame that the introductory comments from the guest speakers weren't included, because they were quite inspired as well.

Cain's Plan to Turbo-Charge Impoverished Areas

   Well the ink's barely dry, and I don't have all the details yet, but I just broke the law and watched Herman Cain's speech from Detroit on my cell phone while driving to work and I'm excited. His campaign has just announced an exemption from federal income taxes on ALL people at or below the poverty line, making his plan effectively 9-0-9 for the truly poor.

   In addition to this, he's offering additional exemptions for businesses in impoverished areas of the country, such as this part of Detroit. He used the beautiful (but deserted) building behind him as an example of the type of structure that would be of interest to entrepreneurs, if only onerous regulations didn't keep them from trying.
   I'm sure the details of his plan will be endlessly debated for weeks, but once again Mr. Cain has proven himself to be bold beyond compare. Just giving a speech in run-down Detroit shows an audacity of hope unlike any other candidate. The more I watch this man, the more excited I become.
   If you haven't watched this speech yet, I recommend you hunt it down on the internet. Dr. Martin Luther King's niece introduced Mr. Cain with a short speech that brought tears to my eyes.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Former Clintonista Dick Morris Makes EXCELLENT Defense of 999

   Former Clinton advisor, Dick Morris, has turned into a real fan of Herman Cain's bold 9-9-9 tax and jobs plan. While Mr. Cain has done a commendable job of defending his plan against allegations that it would "raise taxes on the poor" over the past few weeks, he failed to do so in a decisive way at Tuesday's debate, leaving many with the feeling that Mr. Cain came away bruised on the issue.
   In this excellent rebuttal, Dick Morris explains what Mr. Cain should have during the debate. He makes a very compelling argument as to why Herman Cain's plan would work, and should be considered much more broadly.

   Please check out Mr. Dick Morris' excellent website offering all manner of political commentary at:
   In short, Herman Cain's tax plan is extremely bold, would create millions of new jobs, and would blast the economy into a tremendous growth phase. So said Art Laffer, who helped architect Ronald Reagan's economic plan. 999 absolutely WILL NOT raise taxes on the poor, and it IS NOT regressive.
   If you're not familiar with the plan, then please read it here: