Quote of the Day
My sun sets to rise again.
Robert Browning
Harry Reid Tries To Play 'Let's Make a Deal'
on Payroll Tax Cut Extension: Thumbs DOWN!
The Senate Democrats are talking "compromise" on the payroll tax cut extension: what's not to love? It reduces somewhat the cost but still relies on paying for it via a class warfare tax hike on millionaires; they'll agree to reduce the amount and let the surcharge expire after 10 years. However, the payroll tax break for individuals still expands to 3.1% (half of OASDI employee contributions) remains, and the matching business payroll tax cut is dropped. What a deal: a repackaged stimulus tax cut that doesn't work, an intentionally discriminatory tax hike that lowers the tax base and adversely affects economic growth by raising the cost of capital, businesses getting thrown under the bus AGAIN.
Yes, Democrats, we conservatives agree that payroll taxes, used to fund mandatory retirement program contributions, are excessive. How hypocritical are the Democrats to realize the burden their own entitlement crown jewels put on most American workers--and these programs are already $46T underfunded, but propose cuts undermining the financial integrity of their entitlement programs? Instead of trying to buy the 2012 election again by shoving cost recovery into the future (business as usual), why don't they agree to fix these long-term bankrupt programs?
Let's not mince words: this whole exercise has been little more than an attempt to have economically successful people and companies bail out middle-class taxpayers from having to pay their own fair share of their future retirement programs?
If there's one thing Dems know, it's symbolism. They are referring to the expiration of an intentionally temporary, unpaid-for payroll tax cut holiday as a "tax hike", but they refer to 8 years of tax policy as unpaid-for tax cuts (but only for the economically successful, of course).
How Does Snail Mail Get Even Slower?
The USPS is hoping to trim $2B from its operational budget as it expects to lose $14B next year. Mail is expected to be slower in that USPS plans to shutter more than half of its mail processing plants, many of which are utilized at only a fraction of the workday. (Of course, when 80% of your costs are from unsustainable union contracts...) But slow mail service? I recently mailed my folks in Texas an anniversary card that took 6 full days to deliver--they got it 3 days after their anniversary. I shudder to think what their view of slower delivery is. Isn't it time we joined the rest of the developed world and privatize our postal system?
Sunday Talk Soup
What I found fascinating with Democratic Party hack David Axelrod appearing on Meet the Press, among others, was the amount of attention Romney was getting. Given the amount of attention the Democrats are giving Romney, it's clear they don't expect Gingrich to be the nominee.
I'm a little concerned about the seriously misguided activist conservatives whom seem intent on putting anyone other than Romney at the head of the ticket. In yesterday's post, I outlined some steps I would take if I was handling Romney's campaign. First, let us remember the name of the game is beating Obama, and Gingrich comes with a lot of baggage and high unfavorables, especially with the moderates and independents needed to win next fall. Second, ideological rigidity is not a virtue; even if you snipe a party nomination like in last year's Senate primaries in Alaska and Delaware, you can lose the general election, even to a write-in candidate. Mitt Romney is significantly more conservative than any Democrat, and he was known to use the power of the veto in Massachusetts. Let us not forget that the Democrats so distrusted Romney, they stripped the governor's power to appoint a Senate successor, fearing Romney's ability to name a replacement for Kerry after the 2004 election. We would not have Scott Brown as the US Senator from Massachusetts today except for Mitt Romney, because Governor Patrick would have nominated a far more liberal Democrat to succeed Kennedy.
The media conservatives (Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, Coulter, Ingraham, etc.) are all hypocrites; they know that the Ronald Reagan who signed a therapeutic abortion bill in California and the last immigration reform bill as President and ran up huge deficits, agreed to a spending cut-for-tax hike measure like GHW Bush also did, resulting in the loss of the Presidency to Clinton in 1992, would probably never get nominated today. We are electing an executive--someone whom knows how to negotiate, has operated in the public sector before. Gingrich may be articulate, but he lacks Romney's executive experience, business skills and knowledge, and personal integrity. I heard Senator Coburn, one of the most reliably conservative Senators whom also served with Gingrich in the House, flatly say that he does not support Gingrich's bid for the Presidency. Almost no one who served with Gingrich when he was Speaker, is willing to publicly back him. If I'm a conservative voter whom knows that Obama has regularly beaten Gingrich in head to head polls by double-digits for months now, is aware that Gingrich has had more than his fair share of policy flip-flops, and is troubled by Gingrich's milking lobbyist dollars after leaving Congress (including the failed GSE Freddie Mac), I would think very carefully.
Romney has to go negative on Gingrich very soon. McCain in 2008 was able to divide-and-conquer the activist conservative vote splitting between Huckabee and Romney. Romney could be in trouble going into Super Tuesday if he suffered consecutive blowout losses in South Carolina and Florida, which at the current date seems highly likely.
I do feel the need to respond to Axelrod's ridiculous hyperbolic defense of Obama's record. First, job losses accelerated AFTER Obama won the 2008 election. So the Dems need to stop the propaganda of how bad a hand Obama was dealt, because Bush was not responsible for the job losses in November through January: businesses were weighing the near-future impact of the new President's and Democratic strongly-controlled Congress' anti-business policies, which any reasonable person would readily concede: he was a lame duck President with a Congress controlled by the other party. Second, Romney was proposing a managed auto bankruptcy only without Obama's infusion of taxpayer cash. The Dems are deliberately misleading folks. Apparently Obama-managed bankruptcies are "more equal than" GOP-managed bankruptcies. Third, there was NOTHING Obama did that kept the recession from turning into the Depression--although a politically irresponsible Obama continually talked down the economy throughout early 2009, which is a matter of incontrovertible fact. The key elements to keep liquidity in the marketplace had to do with Fed policy and TARP legislation, months before Obama took office. All Obama did was enact a $862B stimulus bill, nearly universally conceded to have been ineffectual.
Political Humor
"The Senate is doing its first-ever Secret Santa gift exchange this year. Yeah, there’s a $10 spending limit, but they plan to go $14 trillion over budget." - Jimmy Fallon
[To be honest, the Democrats tried to raise the spending limit from $10, but the GOP Senators filibustered the move. It's bad enough when a bipartisan group of senators go to lunch at McDonald's, the Democrats always say, "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."]
"One of the holiday decorations at the White House is a 400-pound gingerbread house. Isn't that nice? And if front of that is a 400-pound ginger bread 'foreclosed' sign." - Conan O'Brien
[Sara Lee couldn't keep up with the payments on the mortgage note held by her cousin, Fannie Mae. Hansel and Gretel are now eating more nutritious meals under the direction of the First Lady. ]
Musical Interlude: Nostalgic/Instrumental Christmas
Bach/Gounod, "Ave Maria"
Instrumental
Schubert/Violin
Vocal: The Priests
An Alternative Version of "Ave Maria": Andrea Bocelli
