[Don't forget: (1) This week's broadcast of "Truth That Trasnforms" (Sunday, 5 pm, ch. 55.1 in Orlando; (2) The editorial cartoons at Worldmag.com; and (3) The upcoming Sunday Special.]
Posted By Ed Feulner On October 6, 2011
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/06/morning-bell-remembering-steve-jobs/print/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Steve Jobs, who died yesterday at the too-young age of 56, was a living refutation of all that liberals constantly tell us about our country — that we’re falling behind others and live now in a “post-American world,” as one of Barack Obama’s favorite books puts it in its title. As anyone who’s ever handled an Apple product or had his life improved by the technological innovations our system has produced in just a decade (that means all of us) will tell you, Jobs and innovators like him epitomize that immeasurable quality the left somehow finds most abject — American exceptionalism.
The meme of the left is that drudgery and mediocrity is not just our future but probably also our just deserts–for being too imperialistic, consumerist, wasteful, patriarchal, or what have you.(For an inexhaustible list of all our ills and sins, please check with the mob gathered at the “Occupy Wall Street” protest.) One should compare this deadened vision with the wonders Jobs wrought.
Apple Computer, the company Jobs founded at the age of 21 along with his friend Steve Wozniak, was valued at the close of business yesterday at $350 billion and some change, more than $100 billion ahead of Microsoft. General Electric, another American giant, weighed in at less than half the price, $161 billion. Ford, GM and Volkswagen? Respectively, $40 billion, $35 billion and $42 billion. That should give some idea of where we are in the 21st century. That beauty contest, how much a company is worth, is a result of decisions made by millions of investors voting with people’s savings (that is, for most of us, the sweat of our brow and our hedge against an uncertain future). Investors voted for Jobs’ company because consumers loved its products, and consumers bought Apple products not because they were ordered to do so by central planners but because they saw them as magic.
From computing to music to journalism, Jobs changed the way the world did its business and leisure. Very little of what we do today has not been impacted somehow by Jobs and his company. He certainly changed my life from my first Apple III with floppy discs almost 30 years ago, costing about $6000 and possessing a small fraction of the capabilities of my streamlined new iPad 2, all at less than 10 percent of the cost of that early dinosaur. Macs, with their trademark coloring and sleek design, transformed the way people came to see computers, from gizmos only nerds understood or liked to things almost as organic as the partly bitten apples of the ever-present logos. Creative designing and thinking flowed naturally from a Mac, powering the creativity and productivity that have become the hallmark of the American economy, our present problems notwithstanding. In music, Jobs changed the industry by taking it digital. As for journalism and reading in general, we have now gone back to where we started: the biblical tablet. The elegant slab we take with us wherever we go can do the same for us and take us, no matter where we are, anywhere in the universe our imagination wants to visit.
All this was the result of the happy coincidence of genius in an individual and a system. Jobs was an individual with special DNA, no question. But this half-Arab boy who was given up for adoption at birth and went on to drop out of college was able to transform the lives of individuals across the world because he lived and worked in this country. The genius of the American system is comprised of the rule of law, respect for private property and the freedom of the individual to strive to be better than himself and his neighbor and reap the rewards that come from his innate abilities and effort. All of these and many other liberties are safeguarded in our Constitution. It is all part of what makes us an exceptional country.
This is not to say that we don’t have problems. We are indeed falling behind — not behind other countries but behind our promise and potential. Our government spends too much, tries to tell us how to run our private lives, and ties down in red tape the genius that brought you Apple. The great and sometimes cacophonous debate we are having in our country at the moment results from the fact that Americans have finally woken up to the threat our system confronts and are doing something about it.
This is not what you hear. Daily we are told by our government leaders, the media, and academia that we are as exceptional only in the way that every other country on the U.N. roll, from Albania to Zimbabwe, is exceptional. We are told that we have to manage our decline as a power and that the great debate over ideas that we’re having is evidence that “our politics is broken.” Typically, a columnist from a Manhattan paper has titled his most recent book That Used to Be Us, a line, we’re sad to say, that came straight from a speech by Barack Obama.
This is nonsense. Steve Jobs may have given to liberal causes and politicians throughout his life, but his life proved the existence of the American Dream. As anyone who’s Googled something in her iPad and then Tweeted about it will tell you, Steve Jobs and those like him symbolize American Exceptionalism every day. - Edwin J. Feulner > President, The Heritage Foundation [bold and italics emphasis mine]
Friday, October 7, 2011
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
#131 - Before You Blame the Banks for Increased Fees ...
[Note: Like you, I'm upset to have to the possibility of new fees being imposed by the banks. But before you join the finger pointing at the banks, consider that the banks are only responding to the recent new regulations signed into law that restrict other ways banks can seek profits. When the government acts in such ways, they fail to inform us that a natural result of doing so will always be companies passing the costs to them on to consumers; it's just the natural course of things. And of course, this is another case where you don't hear the full story from the mainstream media. Below are a list of regulations for which we can be sure we'll end up paying.]
Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations - by Human Events http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44874 07/16/2011
The government in the United States, both federal and local, has enacted laws and regulations that drag down the economy and restrict individual liberty. Some regulations are so broad that they govern entire segments of the economy, while others tell us what we can and cannot do in our own homes. As President Reagan? once said, “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.” Here are the Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations:
1. ObamaCare overkill: If you think the 2,000-plus-page ObamaCare law is a travesty, wait until you see the regulations it spawned. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is beginning to release regulations based on the health care legislation passed last year. One section on Medicare took up six pages in the original law, yet HHS turned that into 429 pages of new regulations. At that rate, there will be more than a hundred thousand pages of regulations in place for doctors to consider before seeing a patient. [Any reason why we shouldn't expect fewer doctors as many get frustrated by it all.]
2. EPA’s carbon dioxide fixation: Talk about job-killing regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in order to combat “climate change” will raise the cost of energy. Forget about creating jobs. The EPA’s regulations will add a new burden on business, increase the cost of material for the construction industry, and hit consumer in the pocketbook, dampening the outlook for economic growth.
3. Lightbulb ban: Unless Congress overturns a 2007 law, the incandescent lightbulb will be phased out in 2012, and fluorescent bulbs will be the only choice for consumers. Instead of being able to buy a 39-cent bulb, Americans will be forced to pay $6 for the energy-efficient alternative, with its harsh bright light. Do we really need Washington nanny-state legislators to decide what is “best” for us, right down to how we light our own homes?
4. TSA abuse: Whoever is writing the regulations for the Transportation Security Administration needs to lighten up. TSA officials think they are making the skies safe by patting down infants and grandmothers in wheelchairs, while giving travelers the option of being subjected to harmful radiation or on the receiving end of sexual abuse. There are plenty of other ways to ensure safety, like profiling young to middle-age male travelers from the Middle East.
5. Union favors: As payback to his Big Labor support, President Obama? signed an executive order in February 2009 that tells federal agencies to require “Project Labor Agreements” on federal construction projects, meaning higher labor costs as contractors are forced to use union workers. Now the National Labor Relations Board is seeking to prevent Boeing from building a plant in South Carolina because it is a right-to-work state. By “protecting” workers, fewer jobs are created. Is that what we want?
6. Food crackdown: Federal regulators are tightening regulations on food manufacturers in order to combat childhood obesity. But as usual, the regulators are going overboard, cracking down on breakfast cereal, Girl Scout cookies, and all kinds of snack foods, including nuts, bagels and fruit juice. According to HUMAN EVENTS' Audrey Hudson, the food industry says the government is imposing “multibillions of dollars” of changes, with no evidence it will do anything to help kids stay healthy.
7. Outside smoking ban: The city of New York has made it illegal to smoke in all parks, on beaches, and in pedestrian plazas. This includes, you're hearing right, a smoke-free Times Square. That will be 1,700 parks and 14 miles of public beaches that city officials will have to monitor in case someone lights up. Don’t New York's Finest have anything better to do?
8. Trash violations: Beware of what you put in the trash, at least in New York City. The city’s Sanitation Department is enforcing a rule that says trash from households or businesses cannot be thrown in receptacles on the street meant for pedestrians. But do the workers really need to ticket elderly residents and fine them $100 for throwing their used newspapers into the trash cans?
9. Illegal garden: Julie Bass decided to grow some vegetables in her front yard because the price of organic food was on the rise. Now, she has been hit with a misdemeanor charge and is facing three months in jail, because Oak Park, Mich., says her garden violated the city code, which requires that front yards consist of “suitable, live, plant material.” The city says vegetables aren’t “suitable” for a front yard and are going to court to prove their point. Now that’s a great use of taxpayer resources.
10. Multicultural doll mandate: The Colorado Department of Human Services is proposing new rules to require all day care centers in the state to have dolls available that represent the three different races. The guideline is part of a 98-page document that sets new rules for child care that include what kids can drink, how long they can watch TV, and mandates for field trips and sunscreen use. One wonders how the state, which has been working on the measure since 2006, will go about enforcing the law.
[HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.]
______________________________________________________
The Regulatory Tsunami - According to a new report by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, the number and scope of federal regulations, along with the costs of those regulations and the number of federal regulators, are all growing. This has occurred despite an executive order from President Obama that was touted as a measure to curb regulation that would "stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive," says the Washington Examiner.
The following data suggests a troubling reality of growing regulation:
The Obama administration has imposed 75 new major regulations costing more than $380 billion over 10 years. There are 219 more economically significant regulations in the works that will cost businesses $100 million or more each year -- for a minimum cost of $21 billion over 10 years. The number of pages in the Federal Register (where such regulations are recorded) regarding final rules rose by 20 percent between 2009 and 2010, and proposed rules have increased from 2,044 in 2009 to 2,439 in 2010. Personal anecdotes from business owners as they confront various regulations demonstrate that the consequences of overregulation are very real and damage the ability of American businesses to compete.
Source>http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama September 16, 2011 [Byron York, "New Report Cites 'Regulatory Tsunami' Under Obama," Washington Examiner, Sept. 13, 2011.]
Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations - by Human Events http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44874 07/16/2011
The government in the United States, both federal and local, has enacted laws and regulations that drag down the economy and restrict individual liberty. Some regulations are so broad that they govern entire segments of the economy, while others tell us what we can and cannot do in our own homes. As President Reagan? once said, “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.” Here are the Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations:
1. ObamaCare overkill: If you think the 2,000-plus-page ObamaCare law is a travesty, wait until you see the regulations it spawned. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is beginning to release regulations based on the health care legislation passed last year. One section on Medicare took up six pages in the original law, yet HHS turned that into 429 pages of new regulations. At that rate, there will be more than a hundred thousand pages of regulations in place for doctors to consider before seeing a patient. [Any reason why we shouldn't expect fewer doctors as many get frustrated by it all.]
2. EPA’s carbon dioxide fixation: Talk about job-killing regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in order to combat “climate change” will raise the cost of energy. Forget about creating jobs. The EPA’s regulations will add a new burden on business, increase the cost of material for the construction industry, and hit consumer in the pocketbook, dampening the outlook for economic growth.
3. Lightbulb ban: Unless Congress overturns a 2007 law, the incandescent lightbulb will be phased out in 2012, and fluorescent bulbs will be the only choice for consumers. Instead of being able to buy a 39-cent bulb, Americans will be forced to pay $6 for the energy-efficient alternative, with its harsh bright light. Do we really need Washington nanny-state legislators to decide what is “best” for us, right down to how we light our own homes?
4. TSA abuse: Whoever is writing the regulations for the Transportation Security Administration needs to lighten up. TSA officials think they are making the skies safe by patting down infants and grandmothers in wheelchairs, while giving travelers the option of being subjected to harmful radiation or on the receiving end of sexual abuse. There are plenty of other ways to ensure safety, like profiling young to middle-age male travelers from the Middle East.
5. Union favors: As payback to his Big Labor support, President Obama? signed an executive order in February 2009 that tells federal agencies to require “Project Labor Agreements” on federal construction projects, meaning higher labor costs as contractors are forced to use union workers. Now the National Labor Relations Board is seeking to prevent Boeing from building a plant in South Carolina because it is a right-to-work state. By “protecting” workers, fewer jobs are created. Is that what we want?
6. Food crackdown: Federal regulators are tightening regulations on food manufacturers in order to combat childhood obesity. But as usual, the regulators are going overboard, cracking down on breakfast cereal, Girl Scout cookies, and all kinds of snack foods, including nuts, bagels and fruit juice. According to HUMAN EVENTS' Audrey Hudson, the food industry says the government is imposing “multibillions of dollars” of changes, with no evidence it will do anything to help kids stay healthy.
7. Outside smoking ban: The city of New York has made it illegal to smoke in all parks, on beaches, and in pedestrian plazas. This includes, you're hearing right, a smoke-free Times Square. That will be 1,700 parks and 14 miles of public beaches that city officials will have to monitor in case someone lights up. Don’t New York's Finest have anything better to do?
8. Trash violations: Beware of what you put in the trash, at least in New York City. The city’s Sanitation Department is enforcing a rule that says trash from households or businesses cannot be thrown in receptacles on the street meant for pedestrians. But do the workers really need to ticket elderly residents and fine them $100 for throwing their used newspapers into the trash cans?
9. Illegal garden: Julie Bass decided to grow some vegetables in her front yard because the price of organic food was on the rise. Now, she has been hit with a misdemeanor charge and is facing three months in jail, because Oak Park, Mich., says her garden violated the city code, which requires that front yards consist of “suitable, live, plant material.” The city says vegetables aren’t “suitable” for a front yard and are going to court to prove their point. Now that’s a great use of taxpayer resources.
10. Multicultural doll mandate: The Colorado Department of Human Services is proposing new rules to require all day care centers in the state to have dolls available that represent the three different races. The guideline is part of a 98-page document that sets new rules for child care that include what kids can drink, how long they can watch TV, and mandates for field trips and sunscreen use. One wonders how the state, which has been working on the measure since 2006, will go about enforcing the law.
[HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.]
______________________________________________________
The Regulatory Tsunami - According to a new report by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, the number and scope of federal regulations, along with the costs of those regulations and the number of federal regulators, are all growing. This has occurred despite an executive order from President Obama that was touted as a measure to curb regulation that would "stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive," says the Washington Examiner.
The following data suggests a troubling reality of growing regulation:
The Obama administration has imposed 75 new major regulations costing more than $380 billion over 10 years. There are 219 more economically significant regulations in the works that will cost businesses $100 million or more each year -- for a minimum cost of $21 billion over 10 years. The number of pages in the Federal Register (where such regulations are recorded) regarding final rules rose by 20 percent between 2009 and 2010, and proposed rules have increased from 2,044 in 2009 to 2,439 in 2010. Personal anecdotes from business owners as they confront various regulations demonstrate that the consequences of overregulation are very real and damage the ability of American businesses to compete.
Source>http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-report-cites-regulatory-tsunami-under-obama September 16, 2011 [Byron York, "New Report Cites 'Regulatory Tsunami' Under Obama," Washington Examiner, Sept. 13, 2011.]
Sunday, October 2, 2011
#130 (10/3) - Solar Energy School Propaganda 101
by Michelle Malkin 09/30/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46537
[This article shares some of what the public schools are teaching our children in an attempt to affect public policy today and for future generations. For a fuller discussion of this subject, check out the newly released book, "Don't Let Your Kids Drink the Kool-Aid."]
The Obama administration's crony green subsidy scandal is erupting like a solar flare in Washington. But do you know what your kids are learning in their environmental education classes about this red-hot taxpayer eco-scam? Chances are: not much. Instead, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Democratic apparatchiks at the National Education Association are disseminating solar power propaganda masquerading as math and science curricula.
Titled "Solar Power and Me: The Inherent Advantages," the lesson plan for middle-school and high-school students directs them to "take note of how solar energy is incorporated into the infrastructure of various cities nationwide and write a short essay about how they would encourage solar energy use in their own town." A worksheet labeled "All About Solar!" makes the blanket assertion that solar technologies are "a sound economical choice as they can reduce or eliminate exposure to rising electricity rates, or even eliminate one's need to pay an electrical bill! In addition, solar panels can be a smart long-term investment, with many solar vendors offering 20-30 year warranties on their products." The only warranties worth anything from bankrupt, half-billion-dollar solar company Solyndra Inc. are the warranties on the Disney whistling robots and saunas that adorned its Taj Mahal headquarters. But I digress.
Another worksheet cheerleads the "financial savings" of "solar power and me" and coaches students to "imagine you live in amazing and sunny Anaheim, CA, where the combination of local and federal rebates covers 74 percent of your total cost of a solar panel system!" The exercise then entices the student to take out a 20-year loan on a new solar panel system to produce even greater illusory savings. Yet another question-and-answer key reads: "How would switching to solar energy affect energy use at your home and school?" Answer: "In general, switching to solar energy would lower your home's electrical costs and reduce your emissions, thus saving money and improving the environment."
But as Brian McGraw of the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute points out: "There might be a small niche market, but solar energy is still largely incapable of producing reliable electricity at rates that are even in the ballpark of cost competitiveness compared to coal or natural gas." Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the force behind billions of dollars' worth of rushed green energy loans overseen by deep-pocketed Obama bundlers, himself acknowledged that solar tech will need to improve five-fold before it even begins to have a cost-competitive shot. After examining decades' worth of failed subsidized solar efforts at home and around the world, the Institute for Energy Research concludes: "Although stand-alone solar power has a certain free-market niche and does not need government favor, using solar power for grid electricity has been and will be an economic loser for ratepayers and a burden to taxpayers."
The DOE/NEA curriculum encourages students to pressure politicians to pour more money into supposedly underfunded green energy schemes. But the House Budget Committee reported last week: "The president's stimulus law alone included tens of billions in new government subsidies for politically favored renewable-energy interests: $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewable energy investments; $17 billion for the Department of Energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy programs; $2 billion for energy-efficient battery manufacturing; and billions more on other 'clean-energy' programs for a total of $80 billion. Two years later, the president's promise of millions of jobs stands in stark contrast with reality."
A more useful homework assignment would be to have these future taxpayers calculate how much their moms and dads are spending to prop up Obama's green jobs industry and its elite Democratic campaign finance donors/investors. The White House projected 65,000 new jobs from nearly $40 billion in green job stimulus spending. Instead, fewer than 3,600 jobs were created. Get out your calculators, kids: That's $4.85 million per job. Investor's Business Daily crunches the numbers further on the taxpayers' return on its DOE green loan guarantee "investments" and finds that the program will cost a whopping $23 million per job.
A separate NEA solar energy lesson plan marketed with Dow Corning teaches 5th- through 8th-graders "how solar panels work." A more apt, real-world lesson would teach them how they don't work. The myth that this alternative energy source "pays for itself" is busted with just a cursory glance at the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. President Obama staged a photo-op on the facility's solar panel roof in 2009 when he signed the green jobs goodie-stuffed stimulus law. The museum refused to disclose electric bills before and after installation of the solar array. But after digging into the lavishly taxpayer-funded project, the Colorado-based Independence Institute discovered that the panels -- which only last 25 years -- wouldn't "pay for themselves" until the year 2118, more than a century from now.
It's elementary. The government shouldn't be in the business of picking any eco-winners or losers. "Too Green To Fail" redistributes wealth from viable private projects to pipe dreams, forces higher taxes and energy costs on everyone, and rewards partisan funders at public expense. Teach your children well. They're inheriting the bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Malkin is author of Unhinged (Regnery) and "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).
[This article shares some of what the public schools are teaching our children in an attempt to affect public policy today and for future generations. For a fuller discussion of this subject, check out the newly released book, "Don't Let Your Kids Drink the Kool-Aid."]
The Obama administration's crony green subsidy scandal is erupting like a solar flare in Washington. But do you know what your kids are learning in their environmental education classes about this red-hot taxpayer eco-scam? Chances are: not much. Instead, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Democratic apparatchiks at the National Education Association are disseminating solar power propaganda masquerading as math and science curricula.
Titled "Solar Power and Me: The Inherent Advantages," the lesson plan for middle-school and high-school students directs them to "take note of how solar energy is incorporated into the infrastructure of various cities nationwide and write a short essay about how they would encourage solar energy use in their own town." A worksheet labeled "All About Solar!" makes the blanket assertion that solar technologies are "a sound economical choice as they can reduce or eliminate exposure to rising electricity rates, or even eliminate one's need to pay an electrical bill! In addition, solar panels can be a smart long-term investment, with many solar vendors offering 20-30 year warranties on their products." The only warranties worth anything from bankrupt, half-billion-dollar solar company Solyndra Inc. are the warranties on the Disney whistling robots and saunas that adorned its Taj Mahal headquarters. But I digress.
Another worksheet cheerleads the "financial savings" of "solar power and me" and coaches students to "imagine you live in amazing and sunny Anaheim, CA, where the combination of local and federal rebates covers 74 percent of your total cost of a solar panel system!" The exercise then entices the student to take out a 20-year loan on a new solar panel system to produce even greater illusory savings. Yet another question-and-answer key reads: "How would switching to solar energy affect energy use at your home and school?" Answer: "In general, switching to solar energy would lower your home's electrical costs and reduce your emissions, thus saving money and improving the environment."
But as Brian McGraw of the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute points out: "There might be a small niche market, but solar energy is still largely incapable of producing reliable electricity at rates that are even in the ballpark of cost competitiveness compared to coal or natural gas." Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the force behind billions of dollars' worth of rushed green energy loans overseen by deep-pocketed Obama bundlers, himself acknowledged that solar tech will need to improve five-fold before it even begins to have a cost-competitive shot. After examining decades' worth of failed subsidized solar efforts at home and around the world, the Institute for Energy Research concludes: "Although stand-alone solar power has a certain free-market niche and does not need government favor, using solar power for grid electricity has been and will be an economic loser for ratepayers and a burden to taxpayers."
The DOE/NEA curriculum encourages students to pressure politicians to pour more money into supposedly underfunded green energy schemes. But the House Budget Committee reported last week: "The president's stimulus law alone included tens of billions in new government subsidies for politically favored renewable-energy interests: $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewable energy investments; $17 billion for the Department of Energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy programs; $2 billion for energy-efficient battery manufacturing; and billions more on other 'clean-energy' programs for a total of $80 billion. Two years later, the president's promise of millions of jobs stands in stark contrast with reality."
A more useful homework assignment would be to have these future taxpayers calculate how much their moms and dads are spending to prop up Obama's green jobs industry and its elite Democratic campaign finance donors/investors. The White House projected 65,000 new jobs from nearly $40 billion in green job stimulus spending. Instead, fewer than 3,600 jobs were created. Get out your calculators, kids: That's $4.85 million per job. Investor's Business Daily crunches the numbers further on the taxpayers' return on its DOE green loan guarantee "investments" and finds that the program will cost a whopping $23 million per job.
A separate NEA solar energy lesson plan marketed with Dow Corning teaches 5th- through 8th-graders "how solar panels work." A more apt, real-world lesson would teach them how they don't work. The myth that this alternative energy source "pays for itself" is busted with just a cursory glance at the Denver Museum of Science and Nature. President Obama staged a photo-op on the facility's solar panel roof in 2009 when he signed the green jobs goodie-stuffed stimulus law. The museum refused to disclose electric bills before and after installation of the solar array. But after digging into the lavishly taxpayer-funded project, the Colorado-based Independence Institute discovered that the panels -- which only last 25 years -- wouldn't "pay for themselves" until the year 2118, more than a century from now.
It's elementary. The government shouldn't be in the business of picking any eco-winners or losers. "Too Green To Fail" redistributes wealth from viable private projects to pipe dreams, forces higher taxes and energy costs on everyone, and rewards partisan funders at public expense. Teach your children well. They're inheriting the bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Malkin is author of Unhinged (Regnery) and "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
#129 - (9/30/2011) When the Cultural Elite Drive the Conversation - (4) "How Obama Gets the Class-Warfare Math Wrong"
[Don't forget: (1) This week's broadcast of "Truth That Trasnforms" (Sunday, 5 pm, ch. 55.1 in Orlando; (2) The editorial cartoons at Worldmag.com; and (3) The upcoming Sunday Special.]
Static Government Means Dynamic Citizens - by John Hayward 09/20/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46298
[Note: If you are like me, the explanation contained below is quite a bit "above my pay grade" to fully understand. I would direct you to the portions I have highlihted throughout that explanation but especially those throughout the rest of the article.]
Since the President has kicked off another round of class warfare tedium by calling for the rich to “pay their fair share,” it’s a good time to review how much “the rich,” at various levels of evil, actually fork over in taxes. From a summary of calendar year 2008 by The Tax Foundation:
*Each year from 2005 to 2007, the top 1 percent's constantly growing share of income earned and taxes paid set a record. That trend reversed in 2008. In fact, the income share for the top 1 percent of tax returns was lower in 2008 than in 2000, largely due to differences in capital gains. Another indicator of this reversal in the income and tax shares of the top 1 percent is that during 2007, the top 1 percent had actually paid more in federal income tax than the bottom 95 percent, a comparison that was much remarked on a year ago. But the diminished income of the top 1 percent in 2008 means that the comparison no longer holds. During 2008, the bottom 95 percent (AGI under $159,619) paid 41.3 percent of the total collected, a larger share than the 38.0 percent paid by the top 1 percent (AGI over $380,354).
The top-earning 5 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $159,619), however, still paid far more than the bottom 95 percent. The top 5 percent earned 34.7 percent of the nation's adjusted gross income, but paid approximately 58.7 percent of federal individual income taxes.
For the past few years, the IRS has also been presenting data on a small subset of the top 1 percent, the top 0.1 percent (the top 10 percent of the top 1 percent). In 2008, this top 0.1 percent filed 140,000 tax returns, reporting nearly 10 percent of all adjusted gross income earned and paying approximately 18.5 percent of the nation's federal individual income taxes. The average income for a tax return in the top 0.1 percent was $6.0 million in 2008, while the average amount of income tax paid was $1.36 million, indicating an average effective individual income tax rate of 22.7 percent. Both the income figures and tax figures for this group in 2008 were down significantly from 2007 levels."
The adjusted gross income for the top 5% is $159,619, while the top 1% begins at $380,354. Since this is adjusted gross income, the top 5% tracks fairly closely with the greedy “millionaires” Obama wants to hit with higher taxes. They earn 34.7% of the nation’s income, and pay 58.7% of income taxes… but they’re not “paying their fair share.” Meanwhile, the bottom 50% of income earners account for 12.75% of the nation’s adjusted gross income, but paid only 2.7% of income taxes.
As always, good luck getting President Obama, or any other socialist, to tell you exactly what the optimum “fair” amount paid should be, or what logical calculation of “fairness” helped them arrive at that number. You won't have any more success getting them to explain why such a large number of people should be exempted from paying income taxes entirely. “ Fairness” is a crowbar used by greedy politicians to bludgeon outnumbered segments of the population. As you can see, it has nothing to do with matching the percentage of income earned to the amount of government “burden” income groups are expected to shoulder.
Not only is our “progressive” tax system grossly unfair, but too much of it has been hidden from taxpayers. This is especially evident in the case of corporate taxes and capital gains taxes. Corporate taxes are paid by consumers, not corporations. The tax amounts are built into the purchase price of goods and services, as companies pass them along to customers. Because the vast majority of Americans never see these taxes, they don’t have the knowledge required to arrive at informed opinions about raising them. If all corporate taxes were instead collected in the manner of sales tax, as a line item on your receipt at the time of purchase, Americans would be much less sanguine about paying the highest corporate tax rates in the world.
Capital gains taxes are also hidden, because they are a double tax. Dollars have to be earned before they can be invested. These dollars are taxed once when earned, then again when investments earn a profit. Yet another layer of taxation is hidden within the effect of inflation upon capital gains. It can take a long time to see profit on an investment, during which time inflation eats away the value of the invested dollars… but the capital gains tax doesn’t take that into account.
This leaves most Americans reacting to class-warfare appeals based only on the portion of the tax system that Big Government acolytes choose to show them. Even then, the language of “fairness” is used to obscure how much each income group is actually paying, while terms like “millionaire” are twisted to distort the true identity of income groups. Stripping away this confusion would lead us to a more static method of collecting government revenue. As it stands, elaborate deduction mazes, alternative minimum tax snake pits, and confiscatory tax rates produce a lot of dynamic behavior. In other words, people with money work very hard to avoid paying those high tax rates, and most of their avoidance strategies result in less of the job-nourishing economic growth we need.
It’s also immoral, and contrary to the spirit of our Constitutionally limited government, to turn the process of taxation into a desperate flight through the murky woods of an incomprehensible, ever-shifting tax code. The process of leveling taxes and granting exceptions should not be a source of power for politicians. It should be a simple, transparent process in which free people decide how much they are prepared to pay, and what they expect their government to accomplish with the funds it is given. The process of paying lower, flatter, simpler taxes becomes static: taxpayers don’t dramatically change their behavior to get around the tax code.
Taxpayers should be the masters of the government they have consented to fund, not the confused and frightened targets of political fox hunts. We should be looking for the most straightforward and painless way to fund the necessary expense of government, not listening to political elites lecture us on how much of our property we should be allowed to keep. Taxation, in other words, should be a means, not an end. If Americans would be a dynamic people, it’s time for them to decisively reject class warfare, and insist on a static government. [as always, bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Hayward is a staff writer for HUMAN EVENTS, and author of the recently published Doctor Zero: Year One. Follow him on Twitter: Doc_0. Contact him by email at jhayward@eaglepub.com.
Static Government Means Dynamic Citizens - by John Hayward 09/20/2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46298
[Note: If you are like me, the explanation contained below is quite a bit "above my pay grade" to fully understand. I would direct you to the portions I have highlihted throughout that explanation but especially those throughout the rest of the article.]
Since the President has kicked off another round of class warfare tedium by calling for the rich to “pay their fair share,” it’s a good time to review how much “the rich,” at various levels of evil, actually fork over in taxes. From a summary of calendar year 2008 by The Tax Foundation:
*Each year from 2005 to 2007, the top 1 percent's constantly growing share of income earned and taxes paid set a record. That trend reversed in 2008. In fact, the income share for the top 1 percent of tax returns was lower in 2008 than in 2000, largely due to differences in capital gains. Another indicator of this reversal in the income and tax shares of the top 1 percent is that during 2007, the top 1 percent had actually paid more in federal income tax than the bottom 95 percent, a comparison that was much remarked on a year ago. But the diminished income of the top 1 percent in 2008 means that the comparison no longer holds. During 2008, the bottom 95 percent (AGI under $159,619) paid 41.3 percent of the total collected, a larger share than the 38.0 percent paid by the top 1 percent (AGI over $380,354).
The top-earning 5 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $159,619), however, still paid far more than the bottom 95 percent. The top 5 percent earned 34.7 percent of the nation's adjusted gross income, but paid approximately 58.7 percent of federal individual income taxes.
For the past few years, the IRS has also been presenting data on a small subset of the top 1 percent, the top 0.1 percent (the top 10 percent of the top 1 percent). In 2008, this top 0.1 percent filed 140,000 tax returns, reporting nearly 10 percent of all adjusted gross income earned and paying approximately 18.5 percent of the nation's federal individual income taxes. The average income for a tax return in the top 0.1 percent was $6.0 million in 2008, while the average amount of income tax paid was $1.36 million, indicating an average effective individual income tax rate of 22.7 percent. Both the income figures and tax figures for this group in 2008 were down significantly from 2007 levels."
The adjusted gross income for the top 5% is $159,619, while the top 1% begins at $380,354. Since this is adjusted gross income, the top 5% tracks fairly closely with the greedy “millionaires” Obama wants to hit with higher taxes. They earn 34.7% of the nation’s income, and pay 58.7% of income taxes… but they’re not “paying their fair share.” Meanwhile, the bottom 50% of income earners account for 12.75% of the nation’s adjusted gross income, but paid only 2.7% of income taxes.
As always, good luck getting President Obama, or any other socialist, to tell you exactly what the optimum “fair” amount paid should be, or what logical calculation of “fairness” helped them arrive at that number. You won't have any more success getting them to explain why such a large number of people should be exempted from paying income taxes entirely. “ Fairness” is a crowbar used by greedy politicians to bludgeon outnumbered segments of the population. As you can see, it has nothing to do with matching the percentage of income earned to the amount of government “burden” income groups are expected to shoulder.
Not only is our “progressive” tax system grossly unfair, but too much of it has been hidden from taxpayers. This is especially evident in the case of corporate taxes and capital gains taxes. Corporate taxes are paid by consumers, not corporations. The tax amounts are built into the purchase price of goods and services, as companies pass them along to customers. Because the vast majority of Americans never see these taxes, they don’t have the knowledge required to arrive at informed opinions about raising them. If all corporate taxes were instead collected in the manner of sales tax, as a line item on your receipt at the time of purchase, Americans would be much less sanguine about paying the highest corporate tax rates in the world.
Capital gains taxes are also hidden, because they are a double tax. Dollars have to be earned before they can be invested. These dollars are taxed once when earned, then again when investments earn a profit. Yet another layer of taxation is hidden within the effect of inflation upon capital gains. It can take a long time to see profit on an investment, during which time inflation eats away the value of the invested dollars… but the capital gains tax doesn’t take that into account.
This leaves most Americans reacting to class-warfare appeals based only on the portion of the tax system that Big Government acolytes choose to show them. Even then, the language of “fairness” is used to obscure how much each income group is actually paying, while terms like “millionaire” are twisted to distort the true identity of income groups. Stripping away this confusion would lead us to a more static method of collecting government revenue. As it stands, elaborate deduction mazes, alternative minimum tax snake pits, and confiscatory tax rates produce a lot of dynamic behavior. In other words, people with money work very hard to avoid paying those high tax rates, and most of their avoidance strategies result in less of the job-nourishing economic growth we need.
It’s also immoral, and contrary to the spirit of our Constitutionally limited government, to turn the process of taxation into a desperate flight through the murky woods of an incomprehensible, ever-shifting tax code. The process of leveling taxes and granting exceptions should not be a source of power for politicians. It should be a simple, transparent process in which free people decide how much they are prepared to pay, and what they expect their government to accomplish with the funds it is given. The process of paying lower, flatter, simpler taxes becomes static: taxpayers don’t dramatically change their behavior to get around the tax code.
Taxpayers should be the masters of the government they have consented to fund, not the confused and frightened targets of political fox hunts. We should be looking for the most straightforward and painless way to fund the necessary expense of government, not listening to political elites lecture us on how much of our property we should be allowed to keep. Taxation, in other words, should be a means, not an end. If Americans would be a dynamic people, it’s time for them to decisively reject class warfare, and insist on a static government. [as always, bold and italics emphasis mine]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Hayward is a staff writer for HUMAN EVENTS, and author of the recently published Doctor Zero: Year One. Follow him on Twitter: Doc_0. Contact him by email at jhayward@eaglepub.com.
#128 -When The Cultural Elite Drive the Conversation - (3) How Harry Reid Manufactured a Crisis Over Disaster Aid
Posted By Rob Bluey On September 27, 2011 > http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/27/morning-bell-how-harry-reid-manufactured-a-crisis-over-disaster-aid/print/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell
Listening to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) or reading The New York Times yesterday gave the impression that disaster relief victims were suffering from a lack of government aid. “Without additional funding,” Reid warned , “thousands of people who have lost literally everything they owned will be forced to go without food and shelter.” The New York Times, reporting from Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, noted , “Uprooted and desolate, hard-working people in this part of the country expec a bit more from their government.”
Yesterday, with Reid on the brink of forcing a government shutdown , the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced that things aren‘t so dire . The agency has $114 million on hand for the remainder of the week, enough to get through the end of the fiscal year on September 30.
So the agenda of the tax-and-spend crowd is now clear. President Obama created the problem by overusing FEMA on disasters a record 222 times so far this year where federal aid was not essential. Then liberals manufactured a crisis and exploited disaster relief victims in order to keep expanding the size of government. What’s worse is that the some members of the media played along with it. Not once in yesterday’s Times story does it mention the role of private charities in and around Tunkhannock. Yet a few phone calls by Heritage revealed that these organizations are doing yeoman’s work for flood victims. They’re playing a vital role that Reid and the Big Government amen corner completely ignored in the funding dispute.
Take the Wyoming County United Way , for example. Its executive director, Connie Pheiff, said she’s been overwhelmed by the community’s generous support. Private citizens have donated food, clothing and furniture — so much that Pheiff is now looking for a warehouse in Scranton to store the items until flood victims are ready to accept the donations. Private industry has also stepped forward to make an incredible difference in the community. Pheiff acknowledged the support of a handful of oil and gas companies, many conducting hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in the area. Those companies suspended work for days to help evacuees at all hours of the day.So far the Wyoming County United Way has received 2,000 disaster-assistance applications. Pheiff expects that number to more than double in the coming weeks. The organization is offering vouchers and providing support for temporary housing. Pheiff said private donations to the group have made it possible.
While the local United Way is helping with housing, other groups have stepped forward to feed families. Ed Shaffer of the Seven Loaves Soup Kitchen in Tunkhannock is supplying goods to food shelters and collecting perishable items from community organizations. He said there’s been no shortage of donations. The Weinberg Regional Food Bank, meanwhile, has fed 6,500 families, the equivalent of 15,000 people. Gene Brady, executive director of the Commission on Economic Opportunity, said the food bank is serving three counties hit hardest by the floods in Pennsylvania. It has received 233,863 pounds of food and disbursed 176,759 pounds. Brady credited private companies such as Procter & Gamble, Nature’s Way, and Wegmans for coming through with large donations of paper products and food. Local retailers have also pitched in to help.
Those are just a few examples we found in Pennsylvania. But these stories aren’t isolated. Communities across America come together after disasters to provide relief to those in need. They also do a better job of it than FEMA or any other government agency. Writing about grassroots disaster response, Heritage’s James Carafano and Jennifer Marshall noted, “The greatest advance that America could make in preparing for catastrophic disasters is to build better individual-based programs, a culture of preparedness, and resilient and self-reliant communities.”That’s because these groups are more personally engaged than a government agency or bureaucrat could ever be. Heritage’s Ryan Messmore has observed :
"Driven by deep convictions and compassion, such organizations can provide loving forms of assistance and care that government programs cannot offer. And they often do so for less money. Smaller and more flexible than most government bureaucracies, local congregations and charities can also spawn creative social innovations that benefit those in need."
In his speech to the Senate yesterday, Reid spoke glowingly of the miracles performed by FEMA while trashing those asking for offsets to pay for the additional spending.“Republicans must not continue to block FEMA from getting the resources it needs to help disaster victims,” Reid said, an assertion even that FEMA has now debunked.Reid failed to acknowledge a single private charity helping with disaster relief. The Times published a 1,000-word article about the same Pennsylvania community we’ve told you about. Upon reading the Times story, you might think private charities don’t exist there.
Liberals in Washington and New York have spent too much time isolated in a bubble. They’ve become too reliant on government to solve all of America’s problems. It’s time to put faith back in our communities.
Listening to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) or reading The New York Times yesterday gave the impression that disaster relief victims were suffering from a lack of government aid. “Without additional funding,” Reid warned , “thousands of people who have lost literally everything they owned will be forced to go without food and shelter.” The New York Times, reporting from Tunkhannock, Pennsylvania, noted , “Uprooted and desolate, hard-working people in this part of the country expec a bit more from their government.”
Yesterday, with Reid on the brink of forcing a government shutdown , the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced that things aren‘t so dire . The agency has $114 million on hand for the remainder of the week, enough to get through the end of the fiscal year on September 30.
So the agenda of the tax-and-spend crowd is now clear. President Obama created the problem by overusing FEMA on disasters a record 222 times so far this year where federal aid was not essential. Then liberals manufactured a crisis and exploited disaster relief victims in order to keep expanding the size of government. What’s worse is that the some members of the media played along with it. Not once in yesterday’s Times story does it mention the role of private charities in and around Tunkhannock. Yet a few phone calls by Heritage revealed that these organizations are doing yeoman’s work for flood victims. They’re playing a vital role that Reid and the Big Government amen corner completely ignored in the funding dispute.
Take the Wyoming County United Way , for example. Its executive director, Connie Pheiff, said she’s been overwhelmed by the community’s generous support. Private citizens have donated food, clothing and furniture — so much that Pheiff is now looking for a warehouse in Scranton to store the items until flood victims are ready to accept the donations. Private industry has also stepped forward to make an incredible difference in the community. Pheiff acknowledged the support of a handful of oil and gas companies, many conducting hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in the area. Those companies suspended work for days to help evacuees at all hours of the day.So far the Wyoming County United Way has received 2,000 disaster-assistance applications. Pheiff expects that number to more than double in the coming weeks. The organization is offering vouchers and providing support for temporary housing. Pheiff said private donations to the group have made it possible.
While the local United Way is helping with housing, other groups have stepped forward to feed families. Ed Shaffer of the Seven Loaves Soup Kitchen in Tunkhannock is supplying goods to food shelters and collecting perishable items from community organizations. He said there’s been no shortage of donations. The Weinberg Regional Food Bank, meanwhile, has fed 6,500 families, the equivalent of 15,000 people. Gene Brady, executive director of the Commission on Economic Opportunity, said the food bank is serving three counties hit hardest by the floods in Pennsylvania. It has received 233,863 pounds of food and disbursed 176,759 pounds. Brady credited private companies such as Procter & Gamble, Nature’s Way, and Wegmans for coming through with large donations of paper products and food. Local retailers have also pitched in to help.
Those are just a few examples we found in Pennsylvania. But these stories aren’t isolated. Communities across America come together after disasters to provide relief to those in need. They also do a better job of it than FEMA or any other government agency. Writing about grassroots disaster response, Heritage’s James Carafano and Jennifer Marshall noted, “The greatest advance that America could make in preparing for catastrophic disasters is to build better individual-based programs, a culture of preparedness, and resilient and self-reliant communities.”That’s because these groups are more personally engaged than a government agency or bureaucrat could ever be. Heritage’s Ryan Messmore has observed :
"Driven by deep convictions and compassion, such organizations can provide loving forms of assistance and care that government programs cannot offer. And they often do so for less money. Smaller and more flexible than most government bureaucracies, local congregations and charities can also spawn creative social innovations that benefit those in need."
In his speech to the Senate yesterday, Reid spoke glowingly of the miracles performed by FEMA while trashing those asking for offsets to pay for the additional spending.“Republicans must not continue to block FEMA from getting the resources it needs to help disaster victims,” Reid said, an assertion even that FEMA has now debunked.Reid failed to acknowledge a single private charity helping with disaster relief. The Times published a 1,000-word article about the same Pennsylvania community we’ve told you about. Upon reading the Times story, you might think private charities don’t exist there.
Liberals in Washington and New York have spent too much time isolated in a bubble. They’ve become too reliant on government to solve all of America’s problems. It’s time to put faith back in our communities.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
# 127 - When The Cultural Elite Drive the Conversation > (2) The Execution of Troy Davis
[Thursday night,the major news networks had stories on the execution discussed below and what was glaring was the absence of any of the points made below, with the emphasis being on what those opposed to the execution had to say. The things ponted out below are a good reminder that we always have to keep in mind that the media - as Chuck Colson pointed out in yesterdays blog posting - always promotes their agenda in what they report and choose not to report.]
There Is No Travesty of Justice in Georgia. by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, September 21st at 10:40PM EDT http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/09/21/there-is-no-travesty-of-justice-in-georgia-executive-troy-davis/
Tonight (9/21) the United States Supreme Court declined to stay Troy Davis’s execution. He will, by the time many of you are reading this, be dead. There were no expressions of dissent or objection from any of the 9 members of the Supreme Court. I like Guy Benson a lot, but his column on Troy Davis got my blood pressure up. I’m hearing a lot from people opposed to Troy Davis’s execution that there is no physical evidence in the case — and a whole lot of other hoo-haa.
First of all, let’s set out that the case has been going on for twenty years.
Second, let’s point out that two witnesses at Davis’s trial testified under oath that Troy Davis admitted to the shooting. Yes, those witnesses have now, twenty years and much badgering by anti-death penalty advocates later, recanted. A federal judge spent two days reviewing the evidence and the testimony last year and issued a 172 page order explaining why the witnesses recanting was “smoke and mirrors.”
In fact, one of the chief nuggets of the case is that there was no physical evidence. Except that is crap. There is the matter of Troy Davis’s bloody clothes that you’ve probably never heard of. There was a .38 caliber gun. Both Troy Davis and the man Davis’s team claims in the real murderer, Sylvester Coles, had a .38 caliber gun. Davis’s gun had been used in another shooting and the gun casing were linked between both shootings. Everyone likes to gloss over that. They point out that the man who claimed Davis fired on him has now recanted — yet again 20 years later.
But here are some additional facts — if we’re going to deal with things that weren’t in contention twenty years ago.
The federal courts and state courts in Georgia have all denied Davis’s appeal. Prior to 2008, Georgia’s Supreme Court was decidedly liberal and even they passed.
For the first time in 50 years the United States Supreme Court ordered a federal court to conduct an entire rehearing of all the evidence. The court did and found all the new stuff was, again, “smoke and mirrors,” including the retracted confessions. And while building the case to claim that Sylvester Coles was the real murderer, the defense would not call Coles in for examination.
But then there is Officer MacPhail himself and what the defense all too conveniently forgets to bring up. Officer MacPhail “testified” at Troy Davis’s murder trial. See, MacPhail, an Army Ranger and police officer was working a second job that night as a security guard. He chased Davis and Sylvester Coles, who were assaulting a homeless man over a beer. MacPhail reported in that he had run passed Sylvester Coles. MacPhail was shot from the front in the chest and face — not from behind where Coles was, but from the front where MacPhail himself located Troy Davis.
And then, if we really want to get into the weeds and talk about facts, consider this fact. Troy Davis immediately became the suspect and fled. Police roped off his house, obtained entry, and searched the home. In the laundry they found Troy Davis’s shorts from that night with evidence on the clothing directly tying him to Officer MacPhail’s murder — Officer MacPhail’s blood. (editorial note: it should be noted that Troy Davis’s shorts were not DNA tested. There were multiple people’s blood on his shorts)
According to Darrell Collins, who is now recanting everything or claiming not to remember anything, Davis admitted to Collins that Davis had shot MacPhail in the chest and then went back to shoot MacPhail in the head at close range because MacPhail had seen his face — hence MacPhail’s blood on Davis’s shorts. Oh, and at the time Collins gave his statement way back in 1989 it was not public knowledge that Officer MacPhail had been shot in the chest and then at close range in the face.
(remember as well that there were 34 witnesses, not the 9 as claimed. The defense claims seven witnesses changed their testimony. That’s actually not true. Only two materially changed their testimony and Davis’s attorneys refused to present those two in federal court in 2010 to be examined in the evidentiary hearing even though they sat outside the courtroom door. Among the eyewitnesses were three airmen in the Air Force in a bus who had prime viewing for the murder and all identified Troy Davis as the wearer of the white Batman t-shirt, which is what the murderer wore)
Of course, this justice system that is supposedly about to carry out a travesty of justice ordered Davis’s shorts excluded as evidence from the trial because the police did not get a search warrant. So anti-death penalty advocates can conveniently say there is no physical evidence by discounting the gun, the casings, and ignoring Officer MacPhail’s blood on Troy Davis’s clothes found in Troy Davis’s laundry all because the very same court system that found him guilty without that physical evidence followed the law and excluded it.
Troy Davis is a cop killer and I’m perfectly fine with his execution.
There Is No Travesty of Justice in Georgia. by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, September 21st at 10:40PM EDT http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/09/21/there-is-no-travesty-of-justice-in-georgia-executive-troy-davis/
Tonight (9/21) the United States Supreme Court declined to stay Troy Davis’s execution. He will, by the time many of you are reading this, be dead. There were no expressions of dissent or objection from any of the 9 members of the Supreme Court. I like Guy Benson a lot, but his column on Troy Davis got my blood pressure up. I’m hearing a lot from people opposed to Troy Davis’s execution that there is no physical evidence in the case — and a whole lot of other hoo-haa.
First of all, let’s set out that the case has been going on for twenty years.
Second, let’s point out that two witnesses at Davis’s trial testified under oath that Troy Davis admitted to the shooting. Yes, those witnesses have now, twenty years and much badgering by anti-death penalty advocates later, recanted. A federal judge spent two days reviewing the evidence and the testimony last year and issued a 172 page order explaining why the witnesses recanting was “smoke and mirrors.”
In fact, one of the chief nuggets of the case is that there was no physical evidence. Except that is crap. There is the matter of Troy Davis’s bloody clothes that you’ve probably never heard of. There was a .38 caliber gun. Both Troy Davis and the man Davis’s team claims in the real murderer, Sylvester Coles, had a .38 caliber gun. Davis’s gun had been used in another shooting and the gun casing were linked between both shootings. Everyone likes to gloss over that. They point out that the man who claimed Davis fired on him has now recanted — yet again 20 years later.
But here are some additional facts — if we’re going to deal with things that weren’t in contention twenty years ago.
The federal courts and state courts in Georgia have all denied Davis’s appeal. Prior to 2008, Georgia’s Supreme Court was decidedly liberal and even they passed.
For the first time in 50 years the United States Supreme Court ordered a federal court to conduct an entire rehearing of all the evidence. The court did and found all the new stuff was, again, “smoke and mirrors,” including the retracted confessions. And while building the case to claim that Sylvester Coles was the real murderer, the defense would not call Coles in for examination.
But then there is Officer MacPhail himself and what the defense all too conveniently forgets to bring up. Officer MacPhail “testified” at Troy Davis’s murder trial. See, MacPhail, an Army Ranger and police officer was working a second job that night as a security guard. He chased Davis and Sylvester Coles, who were assaulting a homeless man over a beer. MacPhail reported in that he had run passed Sylvester Coles. MacPhail was shot from the front in the chest and face — not from behind where Coles was, but from the front where MacPhail himself located Troy Davis.
And then, if we really want to get into the weeds and talk about facts, consider this fact. Troy Davis immediately became the suspect and fled. Police roped off his house, obtained entry, and searched the home. In the laundry they found Troy Davis’s shorts from that night with evidence on the clothing directly tying him to Officer MacPhail’s murder — Officer MacPhail’s blood. (editorial note: it should be noted that Troy Davis’s shorts were not DNA tested. There were multiple people’s blood on his shorts)
According to Darrell Collins, who is now recanting everything or claiming not to remember anything, Davis admitted to Collins that Davis had shot MacPhail in the chest and then went back to shoot MacPhail in the head at close range because MacPhail had seen his face — hence MacPhail’s blood on Davis’s shorts. Oh, and at the time Collins gave his statement way back in 1989 it was not public knowledge that Officer MacPhail had been shot in the chest and then at close range in the face.
(remember as well that there were 34 witnesses, not the 9 as claimed. The defense claims seven witnesses changed their testimony. That’s actually not true. Only two materially changed their testimony and Davis’s attorneys refused to present those two in federal court in 2010 to be examined in the evidentiary hearing even though they sat outside the courtroom door. Among the eyewitnesses were three airmen in the Air Force in a bus who had prime viewing for the murder and all identified Troy Davis as the wearer of the white Batman t-shirt, which is what the murderer wore)
Of course, this justice system that is supposedly about to carry out a travesty of justice ordered Davis’s shorts excluded as evidence from the trial because the police did not get a search warrant. So anti-death penalty advocates can conveniently say there is no physical evidence by discounting the gun, the casings, and ignoring Officer MacPhail’s blood on Troy Davis’s clothes found in Troy Davis’s laundry all because the very same court system that found him guilty without that physical evidence followed the law and excluded it.
Troy Davis is a cop killer and I’m perfectly fine with his execution.
# 126 - When the Cultural Elite Directs the Conversation > (1) Opening the Military to Homosexuals
[This is part one of a two-part pair of postings on how the cultural elite in our country is driving the conversation on critical iswues. Below is the first example of this. The second example will be posted in a special Saturday posting tomorrow.]
Say 'No' to Silence - Building a Movement for Marriageby Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com: September 22, 2011
Why all the media celebration over the end of "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?" You’d almost think there’s another agenda at work here.
You were probably as grossed out as I was the other day when you picked up the newspaper to see a picture of two men kissing. The occasion? They were celebrating the demise of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Everywhere you turned, homosexual and lesbian members of the military “came out” very publicly to celebrate what the media is heralding as a huge victory for human rights.
Why the huge media splash? Most Americans, after all, are either indifferent or opposed to gays openly serving in the military. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” served most Americans well — it kind of fit the prevailing public mood on homosexuality, which is this: “What you do in private is your business, just don’t shove it in my face.”
But that’s not good enough for the gay-rights lobby or the media. Make no mistake: The celebration of the end of “Don’t’ Ask Don’t Tell” is a calculated step on the path to gay “marriage.” This is a battle for the heart and soul of marriage. And it is brought to us complements of the less than 10 percent of Americans who belong to the cultural elite. They are the ones who when they speak, people read about it, hear about it. They control the TV networks, the internet service providers, and the newspapers. And actually, they are more of a governing influence on us today than Congress and the White House, which are in total gridlock. The real centers of cultural power — Hollywood, New York —are disseminating a clear message about homosexual behavior: That it’s normal, here to stay, and you’d better not say anything against it.They are cowing the majority of Americans into what German sociologist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann calls the “spiral of silence.”
It works something like this: The mass media portray a given issue in a certain way with an eye to actually shaping public opinion. Once individuals see the issue as “decided,” they clam up, even if they disagree. That’s because most people don’t like to go against the grain; they don’t want to be socially isolated, they don’t want to seem to be cranks, or be labeled as bigots.
So how do you control America today? You control it by shaping the ideas of the people and silencing the opposition. And we’re letting a small, unelected elite shape those ideas and define what is and what is not permissible to say. Shame on us. Because we should be shaping ideas, proclaiming truth from our pulpits and from every platform we have — from the neighborhood cookout to the school board meeting.
Look at England in the early 19th century. The slave trade was legal and lucrative. The slave traders literally owned Parliament. They seemed invincible. But when the Wesley holiness movement got involved, when Wilberforce began to write and preach, they so infiltrated and shaped public opinion that Wilberforce himself could march into Parliament with nearly 400,000 signatures on a petition demanding the end to the slave trade.
Folks, only this kind of a popular movement can stop the gay-“marriage” crusade. Remember, the people with the real power are the people with the microphones in their hands. And the only way we can break their power — the only way we can save the institution of marriage — is to wake up, reject the spiral of silence, and create and motivate a movement that will speak out. [empasis mine]
Say 'No' to Silence - Building a Movement for Marriageby Chuck Colson|Breakpoint.com: September 22, 2011
Why all the media celebration over the end of "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?" You’d almost think there’s another agenda at work here.
You were probably as grossed out as I was the other day when you picked up the newspaper to see a picture of two men kissing. The occasion? They were celebrating the demise of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Everywhere you turned, homosexual and lesbian members of the military “came out” very publicly to celebrate what the media is heralding as a huge victory for human rights.
Why the huge media splash? Most Americans, after all, are either indifferent or opposed to gays openly serving in the military. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” served most Americans well — it kind of fit the prevailing public mood on homosexuality, which is this: “What you do in private is your business, just don’t shove it in my face.”
But that’s not good enough for the gay-rights lobby or the media. Make no mistake: The celebration of the end of “Don’t’ Ask Don’t Tell” is a calculated step on the path to gay “marriage.” This is a battle for the heart and soul of marriage. And it is brought to us complements of the less than 10 percent of Americans who belong to the cultural elite. They are the ones who when they speak, people read about it, hear about it. They control the TV networks, the internet service providers, and the newspapers. And actually, they are more of a governing influence on us today than Congress and the White House, which are in total gridlock. The real centers of cultural power — Hollywood, New York —are disseminating a clear message about homosexual behavior: That it’s normal, here to stay, and you’d better not say anything against it.They are cowing the majority of Americans into what German sociologist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann calls the “spiral of silence.”
It works something like this: The mass media portray a given issue in a certain way with an eye to actually shaping public opinion. Once individuals see the issue as “decided,” they clam up, even if they disagree. That’s because most people don’t like to go against the grain; they don’t want to be socially isolated, they don’t want to seem to be cranks, or be labeled as bigots.
So how do you control America today? You control it by shaping the ideas of the people and silencing the opposition. And we’re letting a small, unelected elite shape those ideas and define what is and what is not permissible to say. Shame on us. Because we should be shaping ideas, proclaiming truth from our pulpits and from every platform we have — from the neighborhood cookout to the school board meeting.
Look at England in the early 19th century. The slave trade was legal and lucrative. The slave traders literally owned Parliament. They seemed invincible. But when the Wesley holiness movement got involved, when Wilberforce began to write and preach, they so infiltrated and shaped public opinion that Wilberforce himself could march into Parliament with nearly 400,000 signatures on a petition demanding the end to the slave trade.
Folks, only this kind of a popular movement can stop the gay-“marriage” crusade. Remember, the people with the real power are the people with the microphones in their hands. And the only way we can break their power — the only way we can save the institution of marriage — is to wake up, reject the spiral of silence, and create and motivate a movement that will speak out. [empasis mine]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
