Choosing The Right Lane To Travel

In pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual liberty

Information you can use

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

It’s nothing but a power play By Charles Krauthammer

Let’s understand President Obama’s strategy in the “fiscal cliff” negotiations. It has nothing to do with economics or real fiscal reform. This is entirely about politics. It’s Phase 2 of the 2012 campaign. The election returned him to office. The fiscal cliff negotiations are designed to break the Republican opposition and grant him political supremacy, something he thinks he earned with his landslide 2.8-point victory margin on Election Day.

This is why he sent Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to the Republicans to convey not a negotiating offer but a demand for unconditional surrender. House Speaker John Boehner had made a peace offering of $800 billion in new revenue. Geithner pocketed Boehner’s $800 billion, doubled it to $1.6 trillion, offered risible cuts that in 2013 would actually be exceeded by new stimulus spending and then demanded that Congress turn over to the president all power over the debt ceiling.

Boehner was stunned. Mitch McConnell laughed out loud. In nobler days, they’d have offered Geithner a pistol and an early-morning appointment at Weehawken. Alas, Boehner gave again, coming back a week later with spending-cut suggestions — as demanded by Geithner — only to have them dismissed with a wave of the hand. What’s going on here? Having taken Boehner’s sword, and then his shirt, Obama sent Geithner to demand Boehner’s trousers. Perhaps this is what Obama means by a balanced approach.

He pretends that Boehner’s offer to raise revenue by eliminating deductions rather than by raising rates is fiscally impossible.   But on July 22, 2011, Obama had said that “$1.2 trillion in additional revenues . . . could be accomplished without hiking tax rates, but could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes, eliminating some deductions and engaging in a tax reform process.” Which is exactly what the Republicans are offering today. You’ve heard of situational ethics. This is situational mathematics. As for the alleged curative effect on debt of Obama’s tax-rate demand — the full rate hike on the “rich” would have reduced the 2012 deficit from $1.10 trillion to $1.02 trillion. That’s a joke, a rounding error.

Such nonsense abounds because Obama’s objective in these negotiations is not economic but political: not to solve the debt crisis but to fracture the Republican majority in the House. Get Boehner to cave, pass the tax hike with Democratic votes provided by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and let the Republican civil war begin. It doesn’t even matter whether Boehner gets deposed as speaker. Either way, the Republican House would be neutered, giving Obama a free hand to dominate Washington and fashion the entitlement state of his liking.  This is partisan zero-sum politics. Nothing more. Obama has never shown interest in genuine debt reduction. He does nothing for two years, then spends the next two ignoring his own debt-reduction commission. In less than four years, he has increased U.S. public debt by a staggering 83 percent. As a percentage of gross domestic product, the real marker of national solvency, it has spiked from 45 percent to 70 percent.  Obama has never once publicly suggested a structural cut in entitlements. On the contrary, he created an entirely new entitlement — Obamacare — that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, will increase spending by $1.7 trillion over 11 years. What’s he thinking? Doesn’t Obama see looming ahead the real economic cliff — a European-like collapse under the burden of unsustainable debt? Perhaps, but he wants to complete his avowedly transformational social-democratic agenda first and let his successors — likely Republican — act as tax collectors on the middle class (where the real money is) and takers of subsidies from the mouths of babes.

Or possibly Obama will get fiscal religion and undertake tax and entitlement reform in his second term — but only after having destroyed the Republican opposition so that he can carry out the reformation on his own ideological terms.  What should Republicans do? Stop giving stuff away. If Obama remains intransigent, let him be the one to take us over the cliff. And then let the new House, which is sworn in weeks before the president, immediately introduce and pass a full across-the-board restoration of the George W. Bush tax cuts. Obama will counter with the usual all-but-the-rich tax cut — as the markets gyrate and the economy begins to wobble under his feet. Result? We’re back to square one, but with a more level playing field. The risk to Obama will be rising and the debt ceiling will be looming. Most important of all, however, Republicans will still be in possession of their unity, their self-respect — and their trousers.

~~~~~~

Deal or No Deal, ObamaCare Taxes Poised to Hit Next Month

Even if lawmakers somehow stop the Bush-era tax rates from expiring, taxes are still expected to rise on Jan. 1 — thanks to a trio of new fees tied to the federal health care overhaul.

The IRS this past week published rules for some of the first major taxes meant to help pay for President Obama’s massive insurance coverage expansion. Together, they will raise investment and income taxes on top earners and impose a separate — and controversial — tax on medical devices. The bundle of fees has been largely overlooked as lawmakers and the White House bicker over the Bush tax rates, with Republicans demanding they be extended for everyone and Obama insisting rates rise for top earners. But that same group of earners is already in the crosshairs under the ObamaCare tax rules published this week. Starting Jan. 1, investment income for individuals earning over $200,000 and households earning over $250,000 will be subject to a new 3.8 percent tax. Further, regular income above those thresholds will be hit with a .9 percent Medicare surtax. Should the Bush tax rates expire for those workers, those increases will be compounded.

~~~~~~

David Limbaugh: Make Obama Pay For His Bullying Tactics

Something is very wrong in the world when the most dogmatic and inflexible president in recent memory can make unreasonable demands of his GOP budget opponents and yet be confident they’ll be blamed for the impasse. It is past time President Barack Obama be held accountable for his intentionally irresponsible fiscal policies that are guaranteed to take us into national bankruptcy. It is outrageous enough that he is steering us into insolvency, but it is unbearable that he’s fraudulently blaming the Republican Party for it to boot. This is not a close call, and reasonable people, if they understood the facts, would not support Obama. The problem is that so many people who trust him, inexplicably, look no further than his disingenuous  statements and the liberal media’s slanted reporting. Meanwhile the Republican Party leadership simply cannot seem to get its message across. It would help if they evidenced more faith in the wisdom of their own approach.

~~~~~~

The Real Unemployment Rate: 14.4 Percent

In the wake of today’s Labor Department numbers, the Senate Republican Policy Committee said the real unemployment rate is not 7.7 percent, but 14.4 percent for November. The “real” number of unemployed Americans is 22.7 million, Sen. John Barrasso’s (R-Wyo.) committee said in a release. “These are people who are unemployed (12.0 million), want work but have stopped searching for a job (2.5 million), or are working part time because they can’t find full time employment (8.2 million).” “The difference from when President Obama took office is 475,000 more Americans unemployed or underemployed,” the committee continued. “The labor force participation rate is 63.6 percent, a decline of 0.2 percentage points or 350,000 people. If the labor force participation rate were the same as when the President took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.7 percent. …The number of Americans searching for work for more than 27 weeks is 4.8 million, a decrease of 200,000 from October. The average number of weeks a worker is unemployed is 40.0 weeks — double from when President Obama took office.” Still, Democrats in the upper chamber declared the report to be positive news.

~~~~~~

~~~~~~

Press fear Obama private swearing in By: Dylan Byers December 7, 2012 04:01 PM EST

The White House Correspondents Association is strongly urging the Obama administration  to allow press access to the president’s official swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 20,  following indications from inauguration committee officials that the event  could potentially be closed to the press. “Mindful of the historic nature of  this occasion, we expect the White House will continue the long tradition  of opening the President’s official swearing-in to full press access, and we  as an organization are looking forward to working with the administration  to make that happen,” Ed Henry, the Fox News correspondent and president  of the White House Correspondents Association, said in a statement. Because  inauguration day falls on a Sunday in 2013, Chief Justice John Roberts will  officially administer the official oath of office in a private ceremony that day.  The public inauguration on the Capitol Building’s West Front — at which  Roberts will administer a second, symbolic oath of office — will take place  the next day. In early meetings with the inaugural committee, officials privately  indicated to reporters that the Jan. 20 event could be closed to reporters  and cameras, with an official photograph supplied to press by White House  photographer Pete Souza, sources familiar with the meeting told POLITICO.  Fears of such a scenario were reignited this week when the Presidential  Inauguration Committee sent out a press release, referring to a “private”  inauguration. Both the White House and the committee note that “private”  simply means the event is not open to the public and that press  arrangements have not been formalized. ”There is no truth to any rumors that decisions have been made about media  access to this year’s inaugural events,” Rachel Racusen,  a spokesperson for the committee, told POLITICO. “The 2013 Presidential  Inaugural Committee announced its launch yesterday and is  just beginning its planning. Any announcements about media access and  credentials will be made in the coming weeks.” The White House press corps acknowledges that nothing is set in stone.  But even the possibility of a closed-press inauguration has stirred  up immense frustration among the White House press corps, who note that  past Sunday inaugurations were open to press.  “Call me shell-shocked.  I’m stunned that this is even an issue; it boggles  the mind,” NBC News  White House correspondent Chuck Todd told  POLITICO. “This is not  their oath, this is the constitutional oath. It’s not for them. It’s for the  public, the citizens of the United Sates. It just  boggles the mind. How  is this even a debate?”Minutes from this week’s  WHCA meeting noted  “strong sentiment that the entire press pool must  witness the moment.”  “We are urging the White House to reconsider any preliminary plans  they have at the moment to keep this as a closed event,” C-SPAN  political Editor Steve Scully told POLITICO.  “This is a historic event  and it should be chronicled by news  organizations. At a minimum, it  should be a pooled event.” The last time a president was inaugurated on a Sunday was in 1985.  Reagan’s White House allowed complete news coverage of the private  ceremony, including three reporters, three still photographers, and one  network television pool camera, according to a Los Angeles Times report  from the time. ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN carried live broadcasts of the event.  Obama’s “second inauguration” in 2009 was not so public.  Though  Jan. 20 did not fall on a Sunday four years ago, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.  and President Obama stumbled through the public  swearing-in and had  to hold a second, private swearing-in the following day. White House aides  initially told reporters there would be no second swearing-in, but changed  their mind at the last minute. Only four reporters were allowed to attend.  Rather than let photographers or television cameras in, the White House  provided a photo from the White House photographer. Despite promising  to be the most transparent  administration in history, full press  access was not provided at the dawn of Obama’s first term.

~~~~~~

Rand Paul to GOP: Vote “Present” on Dem Tax Hikes, Make Them Own Economy by Chris Graham

I knew I liked Sen. Rand Paul. He has a long-term understanding of our problems. He realizes that with the outcome of this past election, the best thing for America is for Americans to realize that elections have consequences. Voting for a big government by voting for non-conservatives creates chaos. Paul knows that if congressional Republicans compromise on this “fiscal cliff” matter, they will be blamed when the economy falters. So rather than compromising, he suggests, just give the Democrats what they want so that they own the economy entirely. That’s what I’ve said for the past month, it’s what Ann Coulter said two weeks ago, and it’s what Rand Paul said a few days ago on Larry Kudlow’s program on CNBC:

“I have yet another thought on how we can fix this. Why don’t we let the Democrats pass whatever they want? If they are the party of higher taxes, all the Republicans vote present and let the Democrats raise taxes as high as they want to raise them, let Democrats in the Senate raise taxes, let the President sign it, and then make them own the tax increase. And when the economy stalls, when the economy sputters, when people lose their jobs, they know which party to blame, the party of high taxes. Let’s don’t be the party of just almost-as-high taxes.” Then Larry Kudlow asks him if he  would ”vote present for that in the Senate if that came up,” to which Rand replies: “Yes, I don’t think we have to in the Senate. In the House, they have to because the Democrats don’t have the majority. In the Senate, I’m happy not to filibuster it, and I will announce tonight on your show that I will work with Harry Reid to let him pass his big old tax hike with a simple majority if that’s what Harry Reid wants, because then they will become the party of high taxes and they can own it.”

Amen. Such action by Republicans would be the greatest blow they could whomp the Democratic Party with, inflicting more damage to their brand than any other plan could even come close to doing. The Democrats are currently trying to destroy the Republican Party; let the Republicans fight on the same battleground. Though Democrats as a whole were the decided victors of the recent elections, Republicans have much more potential to harm Democrats than Democrats have potential to harm Republicans. In this way, the GOP has the upper hand. Now watch them squander this golden opportunity, as only the Republican Party can do, by not listening to Rand Paul, Ann Coulter, or, well, me.