Archive for the ‘Politicians’ Category

 

“This government—our government—is worse than the apartheid government.”—Archbishop Desmond Tutu, winner of the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize.

South African voters are headed to the polls this week for the fourth national election since 1994, when Nelson Mandela was elected president after the end of the apartheid regime.

Their country represents epic history in our lifetimes. After a decades-long struggle against brutal, state-run racial segregation, the black liberation movement emerged victorious in the early 1990s. Led by the transcendent figure of Mandela, South Africa swiftly dismantled the apartheid apparatus and, defying dour predictions of a bloody race war, peacefully transitioned to majority rule. Mandela’s government ushered in pluralistic democracy on a continent long-defined by colonialism and autocracy. State officials established remarkably robust constitutional protections for individual rights.

Black South Africans would finally be afforded the economic and social opportunities they’d been denied for so long.

Or so everyone had hoped.

Two decades later, Mandela’s promise of renewal has largely gone unfulfilled as Mandela’s party, the African National Congress (ANC) has maintained its huge electoral majority. The beautiful dream animating the South African experiment is crumbling amidst ongoing corruption, violence, and failed economic policies. As Nobel Peace Prize recipient Desmond Tutu has said of the current regime, “This government—our government—is worse than the apartheid government.”

“Life After Liberation,” directed and hosted by Rob Montz, details the role played by political monopoly in South Africa’s post-apartheid decline. The documentary shows how the ANC has grown corrupt and complacent—and how widespread resentment of the ruling political class is now fueling the rise of a populist demagogue, Julius Malema of the Economic Freedom Fighters, who is pushing precisely the sort of Mugabeist socialist policies that have ruined so many other African countries.

via Life After Liberation: Triumph and Tragedy in South Africa – YouTube.

The environmental agenda has been infected by extremism—it’s become an economic suicide pact. And we’re here to challenge it. On Earth Day, visit http://www.freemarketamerica.org.

We all know why the Watermelons (Green outside, red inside) want America to fail. A failed state is ripe for totalitarian takeover. Just ask the Germans, the Russians, the Chinese, the Cubans, the Venezuelans, the Vietnamese, the Rhodesians (if you can find any), soon the Argentinians. and on and on and on.

 

And to remind you of how long the Watermelon totalitarians and their media accomplices have been working on this:
From Newsweak (sic) April, 28, 1975


Click here for your full size pdf.

Who knew H&R Block had joined the TEA Party?

The least known provision is that every household receives a monthly prebate (prepayment) that covers all the taxes that will be collected on the poverty level of the household.

The worst part is that it doesn’t demand that the sales receipt display how much of your money the porcine pols have plundered from your purse to pay their pals and pander to the polls.

via Get Your Billion Back, America : Stadium H&R Block || AdSick – YouTube.

“The climate is changing, but it’s not changing the way the climate change crowd predicted it would. Nature has made a mockery of global warming, so who are the real climate deniers?”

“The ice is not only growing in the Southg Pole, but also in the North Pole. And the coldest temperatures in decades have descended on North America.”

Global Cooling: Is an Ice Age Coming? – YouTube.

If you don’t may I suggest you make her acquaintance? This poised young lady, who speaks well in front of a crowd, in a high stress appearance, is a Texan. She is Amanda Thatcher, Lady Maggie’s granddaughter and it appears to me that backbone can be inherited. I don’t know her politics yet, but if I were you I’d be finding out.

Amanda Thatcher reading at Margaret Thatchers funeral ceremony – YouTube.

From: Maxine Waters Appointed Top Democrat on House Financial Service Committee

On Tuesday, House Democrats unanimously selected Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) to be the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee.

Waters will be the ranking member on the committee that deals with banking issues. Last year, the House Ethics Committee investigated Waters, one of the most partisan members of the Congressional Black Caucus, for allegedly using her position in Congress to bail out a bank in which her husband owned $350,000 worth of stock.

The Ethics Committee cleared Waters of any wrongdoing, because it could not find “clear and convincing evidence” that Waters used her influence and position to directly help OneUnited Bank secure a $14 million federal bailout from the TARP program. Six members actually recused themselves from the investigation.

The Ethics Committee did send Waters’ grandson and chief of staff, Mikael Moore, a letter of reproval for his role in taking “certain actions on behalf of OneUnited when he knew or should have known” of his family’s financial interest.” Waters’ office aggressively lobbied the Treasury Department in 2008 to secure bailout funds for OneUnited Bank.

Moore told the committee he had no idea his grandfather owned stock in OneUnited Bank and said it was an “impossible standard” for him to have to find out whether his family members potentially owned stock in banks for which his office was trying to secure bailout funds.

Melanie Sloan, head of the left-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW), said then that Moore’s employment in his grandmother’s office “set the stage for potential problems.”

“In light of this case, perhaps now the Administration Committee will add grandchildren to the list of relatives members may not employ,” she said.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) will chair the House Financial Services Committee, and Waters said she hoped to “reconcile our visions” in the next Congress. The two do not agree on much. Hensarling wants to reform Dodd-Frank, while Waters wants to strengthen the legislation that is crippling small banks with regulation.

Waters also said she intends top push for “housing finance reform” and a financial system that “facilitates economic opportunity and wealth creation for all.”

“Housing finance reform, in particular, will be crucial to ensuring the long-term success and stability of our economy,” Waters said. “I believe we need a financial system that facilitates economic opportunity and wealth creation for all, and I stand ready to work with my colleagues towards that goal.”

I don’t often reference the New york Times, but you need to read this first:

Bleak Portrait of Poverty Is Off the Mark, Experts Say

Sounds like a more accurate and truthful way to do the measuring, right?
Now read this from the census Bureau:

Update on the Supplemental Poverty Measure

Now answer the question:

Who benefits by quoting overstated poverty numbers?

Generally I have not liked Senator Graham, but as they say in the South, “Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.”

Senator Lindsey Graham, during an interview with Fox News, discussed the devastating impact sequestration would have on the military and the news the Obama Administration has asked Defense contractors not to warn workers about layoffs. Graham called sequestration the dumbest idea Congress has come on with, and urged both parties and the President to step up to the plate and prevent these cuts from destroying the finest military in the world.

via Sequestration Will Destroy our Defense Capabilities – YouTube.

Where have I heard this political platform before?

All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.

The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class,

We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements

We stand against those who work to the injury of the common welfare.

We will make it possible for every resident to obtain higher education

The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing healthcare.

We demand the abolition of the regular (volunteer) army and the creation of a national (draft) army.

We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the media.

We demand freedom from all religious faiths in the state

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

I usually observe Godwin’s law, but “When the shoe fits”, throw it.

These platform planks were lifted (with very minor alteration, such as substituting “healthcare” for “maternity care”) from the official platform of the National Socialist German Workers Party. (Nazi Party for those with recent educations)

Do you see any similarities between the Occutard movement and Kristallnacht? I’m afraid I do.

Prompted by:
The Laffer Curve Wreaks Havoc in the United Kingdom
in which was written:

I’m more mystified by the behavior of economists. Let’s look at a couple of examples. Justin Wolfers and Mark Thoma recently cited some survey data to claim that the Laffer Curve was universally rejected by the profession.

But as James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute explained, the survey actually showed just the opposite, with economists by a margin of nearly 5-1 agreeing that lower tax rates could boost GDP (and therefore taxable income).

Those economists did say that a reduction in tax rates, based on current levels, would not cause taxable income to jump by a large enough amount to fully offset the revenue-losing impact of the lower tax rate. But the Laffer Curve says that only happens in extreme circumstances, so there’s zero contradiction.

So why did Wolfers and Thoma create a straw man in an attempt to discredit the Laffer Curve?

OK. First Let’s review what the Laffer Curve is:

I have a couple of quibbles with that video, but nothing important and it’s short and clear.

Now probable reasons for economists disdain:

1. Lowers demand for “erudite economic opinion” involving tax policy
2. Adoption of a “Flat” or better* still a”Fair Tax” would make optimizing the balance between growth and revenue so simple that the institutionalized obfuscation of who pays what by 80,000 pages of political favours in the laughingly referred Tax Code would be tossed out, robbing the politcrats of much of their power to reward or punish selected groups for political advantage (also #1 again).
3. No one can state they “know” where the optimum rate is except by simplification of the code and experimentation with the rate to observe where market forces place it. That takes us back to #1. Theory is much more fun (and lucrative) than experimenting with “messy” market forces and simply observing results to influence rate changes.

* The “Fair tax”, because it is collected at point of sale is more responsive, thus we wouldn’t have to wait very long for the market forces to show us where we were on the curve and whether we could safely raise tax percentages or should lower them. It would also build in a guage of whether we are encouraging or stifling growth by our tax rate. A Twofor!