I knew I was going to be whacked hard, but I didn’t know when.

On Thursday, July 15th, I warned NAACP president Ben Jealous to stop the race-baiting. I directed my ire at Jealous on the Scott Hennen radio show:

“I have tapes, a tape, of racism, and it’s an NAACP dinner. You want to play with fire? I have evidence of racism, and it’s coming from the NAACP.”

This was part of an ongoing defense of the Tea Party, and in particular, a volley back against the NAACP for creating a week-long mainstream media-enabled attack built upon the provably false premise that a “mob” of the Tea Partiers hurled racial epithets at Congressmen Andre Carson (D-In) and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga).

“You are manufacturing this in a summer in which the economy is the No. 1 issue affecting blacks and whites in this country,” I said on Hennen’s show. “This country can ill-afford the schism of race to be exploited the way you are, based upon the false premise of the Tea Party being racist… This is absolutely manufactured for political gain.”

My warning to Jealous was received with modest coverage in the conservative blogosphere.

I strongly believed, and still believe, that I had irrefutable evidence that showed the NAACP caught in an act of racism far worse than anything the media and the Democrat Party had attempted to manufacture in a year and a half of relentlessly trying to destroy the Tea Party. (more…)

President Obama is expected to sign legislation authorizing the taxpayer-funded Pigford II Settlement. In the 1990s, a group of black farmers were compensated for past discrimination from the USDA. Pigford II will compensate individuals, who may or may not have been farmers, who came forward with claims after the initial settlement had closed. It is more than a bit suspicious.

On a recent pilgrimage to Gettysburg I ventured into the Evergreen cemetery, the scene of chaotic and bloody fighting throughout the engagement. Like Abraham Lincoln on a cold November day in 1863, I pondered the meaning of it all.  With the post-Tea Party wave of libertarianism sweeping the nation, Lincoln’s reputation has received a serious pillorying. He has even been labeled a tyrant, who used the issue of slavery as a mendacious faux excuse to pummel the South into submitting to the will of the growing federal power in Washington D.C. In fact, some insist, the labeling of slavery as the casus belli of the Civil War is simply a great lie perpetrated by our educational system.

First of all, was Lincoln in fact a tyrant?  For me the root of such a characterization centers on the man’s motivations. A man of international vision that belied his homespun image, Lincoln saw the growing power of an industrialized Europe and realized that a divided America would be a vulnerable one. “The central idea of secession,” he argued, “is anarchy.” Hence, maintaining the Union was his prime motivation, not the amassing of self-serving power.

It is true that Lincoln unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus. From a Constitutional standpoint, the power of the federal government to suspend habeas corpus “in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety” is clearly spelled out in Article 1, Section IX. And an insurrection of eleven states would certainly qualify as such. Whether or not Lincoln had the authority (Article I pertains to Congress) most significant to me is that the Constitution does allow for the suspension of habeas corpus in times of severe crisis. So, doesn’t the question distill down to a more wonkish matter of legal procedure, rather than the sublime notion of denying the rights of man?

Constitutional minutia aside, the question remains whether or not Lincoln’s actions made him a tyrant. Consider the country in 1861-1862, the years in which the writ was suspended, re-instituted and then suspended again until war’s end.  The war was not going well for the North, and Southern sympathies were strong in the border states and the lower Midwestern counties. The federal city was surrounded by an openly hostile Virginia on one side and a strongly secessionist Maryland on the other. “Copperhead” politicians actively sought office and could only sow further seeds of discord if elected. Considering these factors, one wonders what other course of action Lincoln could have taken to stabilize the situation in order to successfully prosecute the war. “Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts,” he asked, “while I may not touch a hair on the head of the wily agitator who induces him to desert?”

It seems that one’s appreciation for Lincoln’s place in history is largely an off-shoot of one’s position on the rebellion itself.

(more…)

Can the 20-year old head of the Maryland College Republicans become the Chairman of the State’s GOP?  Inspired by the success of young politicians like Marco Rubio and Eric Cantor, Loyola University sophomore, Mike Estéve, has decided to put himself up for the job. Estéve is just one of the many candidates vying for the Chair on December 11^th.   If elected, he would be the youngest person to lead the party. Who said there were no Republicans under the age of 30?

The November elections saw Republican successes nationally, but in a few states, things were rather different. Democrats retained control of governor’s mansions in Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, Washington State, Oregon, Arkansas, and Maryland while regaining control of Vermont and California. Proving that California’s politics are officially insane, voters opted to reelect Governor Brown who admitted to lying in order to get elected. Believing that Obamacare does not go far enough, Vermont Governor-Elect Peter Shumlin wants to enact a single-payer system. In Maryland, O’Malley was reelected even after he raised taxes early on, lost revenue for his state, and falsified job reports just this year.

While Republicans fared worse in the Free State than in nearly any other, a Republican Party leadership contest due to happen in a few weeks could reverse Maryland’s fortunes. Just as many of the new Republican leaders in Congress are younger than in recent history, the situation in Maryland could benefit from Estéve’s younger leadership to inspire potential donors and build up party resources.

As a co-founder of the Baltimore Tea Party coalition, Mike Estéve knows the importance of grassroots activism.

(more…)

Glenn Reynolds in today’s Washington Examiner:

But I have a different character in mind. The more I watch this administration at work, the more I think we’re seeing the first Nigel Tufnel presidency.

Nigel Tufnel, many will remember, was the fictitious heavy metal guitarist in the fictional “rockumentary” “This Is Spinal Tap.” In a classic scene, he displays his guitar collection and his special amplifier that — unlike all other amplifiers in existence — has knobs that go all the way up to 11, instead of just 10.

And that’s what Obama has done: In his first two years as president, he’s taken us to 11 in so many ways.

Under Bush and the Republican Congress from 2000-2006 federal spending was bad, and many people groused. But Obama has turned it up to 11, running up trillion-dollar-plus deficits that dwarf the worst we saw under Bush and the congressional Republicans, and producing open revolt from Tea Partiers and others.

(more…)

We have written on numerous occasions that the Obama Administration is controlled by union bosses. Throughout the administration, union bosses have planted their people in order to do their bidding to help unionize America.

After you read this post, it will be hard for you to disagree with the following statement:

The Obama Administration is the most anti-business administration
in the last 70 years—if not ever—in the United States of America.

For years, American unions have engaged in a tactic known as “corporate campaigns.” Corporate campaigns have a very basic strategy known as “A Death by A Thousand Cuts” to bring the targeted employer to its knees.  The way unions have historically engaged in corporate campaigns is through the use of every means at their disposal, be it negative publicity, using (union-funded) ‘grassroots’ groups for demonstrations, shareholder actions, as well as heavy use of governmental agencies like the EEOC, OSHA, NLRB and the Department of Labor’s Division of Wage & Hour.

The purpose of a union’s corporate campaign is simple: To bring the targeted employer to its knees in order to unionize it, to agree to a contract favorable to the union, or to settle a labor dispute. The most common purpose of a union’s corporate campaign, however, is to unionize an employer. Whether it is through shaming an employer through negative publicity, or costing it huge sums of money defending itself from an onslaught of litigation (or both), the goal of the corporate campaign is to bring a ‘death by a thousand cuts’ upon the employer until it gives in.

Now, imagine if you will, the federal government (at the behest of union bosses) terrorizing American businesses with the same ‘death by a thousand cuts’ strategies that unions use during corporate campaigns. However, instead of unions engaging in all of the tactics at the union’s expense, your tax dollars will be helping to fund the union’s corporate campaign.
(more…)

Much to my surprise, Senate Republicans held firm yesterday and blocked President Obama’s soak-the-rich proposal to raise tax rates next year on investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners.

I fully expected that GOPers would fold on this issue several months ago because Democrats were using the class-warfare argument that Republicans were holding the middle class hostage in order to protect “millionaires and billionaires.” Republicans usually have a hard time fighting back against such demagoguery, and I was especially pessimistic since Republican Senators had to stay united to block Senate Democrats from pushing through Obama’s plan for higher tax rates on the so-called rich.

But the GOP surprised me earlier this year with their united opposition to higher taxes, and they stayed strong again yesterday in blocking a bill that would raise tax rates on upper-income taxpayers. Here’s an excerpt from the New York Times.

Republicans voted unanimously against the House-passed bill, and they were joined by four Democrats — Senators Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and Jim Webb of Virginia — as well as by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut. “You don’t raise taxes if your ultimate goal, if the main thing is to create jobs,” said Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, echoing an argument made repeatedly by his colleagues during the floor debate. The Senate on Saturday also rejected an alternative proposal, championed by Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, to raise the threshold at which the tax breaks would expire to $1 million. Some Democrats said that the Republicans’ opposition to that plan showed them to be siding with “millionaires and billionaires” over the middle class.

Not only did GOPers stand firm, but they were joined by five other Senators (including four that have to face the voters in 2012). This presumably means Democrats will now have to compromise and agree to a plan to extend all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

At the risk of being a Pollyanna, I wonder if the politics of hate and envy is falling out of fashion.

(more…)

When a bad plumber or electrician comes to your house you might pay a lot of money for an incomplete and potentially dangerous fix of the problem.

But a band aide on a bad pipe just means that a potentially disastrous leak is still very much in your future and that the money you just paid has been wasted. That’s what the debate about the Bush tax cuts sounds like to me.

Of course it’s a bad idea to raise taxes when the economy is still struggling and while almost ten percent of the workforce can’t find a job. Of course it’s a bad idea to further punish our citizens when so many have seen their home values plummet beneath the loan amount.

But underneath this debate is this leaky and destructive pipe: the income tax system is a monstrosity that only continues because Washington insiders make so much money off it and because Congress—both parties—love the power over the citizenry that comes with plum assignments to the tax committees.

There is a huge lucrative culture in Washingtonthat has grown up around the income tax code that turns a blind eye to the destructive effects and almost comical complexity of the 68,000 pages of regulations in the tax code. They love the system and we hate it.

(more…)

The latest revelations from the WikiLeaks cable-dump provide a revealing look into the world of climate alarmists. Surprise! It isn’t really about the climate, but crippling developed economies. Interesting that most of the revelations from WikiLeaks have simply confirmed what conservatives have been saying for years.

Imagine a fine autumn day on the great plains of Illinois.  The sun smiles down through the azure dome of the Midwestern sky upon 75,000 fans crowded into the University of Illinois Memorial Stadium.  A sea of orange and blue shimmers in the stands and the roar “I-L-L!…I-N-I! echoes over the field while pennants swirl and snap in the breeze above the crowd.

It’s halftime during another glorious Big Ten football Saturday in Urbana-Champaign and a celebrated ritual dating back to 1926 begins again.    The Marching Illini band parts with military precision, clearing a path for a lone figure who emerges and struts proudly to the center of the field.  He is barefoot, clad in buckskin and leather tassels, his face painted bright orange and blue, and his head is topped by an impressive mien of eagle feathers.

Chief Illiniwek bows to the throng of admirers then he dances to Native American music.  He skims across the field as he twists and turns. He suddenly leaps in the air, touches his toes in an aerial split and then lands feet together on the turf.  He stands, arms folded in front of him in an ancient pose, as the band belts out the Illinois Fight song “Oske-wow-wow.” There is no mocking here.  No disrespect for the Native Americans whose namesake we at the U of I adopted as our own.

But that scene is just a fading memory now for the Chief is no more.  In fact this college football season marks the sixth year of his banishment from our campus by the NCAA for being a mascot “hostile and abusive” to Native American sensibilities.  (Although his last official performance would not take place until February 2007 at a home basketball game).

How did this come to pass?

(more…)

While President Obama’s eyes are set on a Christmas vacation in Hawaii, the American people’s minds are fixed on the largest tax increases in American history that are looming on the horizon.  Every American taxpayer will be hit hard by the Obama tax hikes.  At a time of economic strife, and today’s reports of unemployment rising to 9.8 percent, President Obama’s thoughts should be on creating jobs for the American people but raising taxes will only hurt small businesses and job creation.

On the first of the new year, personal income taxes will be hiked, and the marriage penalty tax will rear its ugly head again.  In fact, even the child tax credit will be cut by $500 for every child.  With the economy still struggling, American families will have to make even tougher decisions in 2011 if Congress does not halt these tax increases.

President Obama knew almost two years ago when he was sworn into office that these tax hikes would go into effect on January 1, 2011.  It is a failure of leadership that he has waited until the 11^th hour to act.  I hope as President Obama dreams of his Hawaiian Christmas vacation, he reflects on those American families that will soon suffer under his historic tax increases.

(more…)

Unemployment jumped to 9.8 percent in a very disappointing November jobs report. Nonfarm payrolls increased by only 39,000 and private jobs expanded by just 50,000. This is way below what the economy needs. Most discouraging, the smaller-business household employment number fell for the second time in a row, down 173,000 in November after a 330,000 drop in October. This is the nineteenth straight month with unemployment above 9 percent.

Now, after the severe financial panic of two years ago, it seems clear that too many tax and regulatory obstacles are blocking satisfactory job creation. And it also seems clear that a number of fresh new incentives will be necessary to spur the kind of prosperity that Americans desire. Following the deep recession, we need shock-therapy, pro-growth, tax-cut and deregulatory incentives.

Post-election, is the Washington war on business really over? Has the war on successful earners and investors truly ended? Is the class war against capital still being waged by the White House?

Will Obama bring senior business people into his inner circle? Are we going to get pro-growth tax reform for individuals and corporations? Are we truly going to limit government spending in order to reduce the onerous budget deficit? Is King Dollar currency stability on the table?

These are all key questions for the economy’s future and the murky unemployment outlook.

Perhaps the only saving grace from the poor jobs report is that it will spur a quick resolution to extend all the Bush tax cuts.

Democrats keep shilly-shallying with all these silly class-warfare amendments, like a $250,000 limit, or a $1 million limit. This has everything to do with left-wing redistributionist social policy and nothing to do with economic growth. The fact is, passing the bill to freeze the tax rates will help business confidence. Why don’t Democrats understand this?

But there’s more.

(more…)

Today, the Senate will vote to increase taxes on American job creators.  Ironically, the November unemployment numbers came out yesterday and unemployment has risen to 9.8%.  Only in Washington would politicians think that this is the time to punish job creators by raising taxes.

This is not the time to raise taxes on job creators, yet the Senate will vote on the Obama tax plan today that imposes tax increases on families making over $250,000/yr and individuals making over $200,000/yr.  If the Obama plan is signed into law, get ready for 10% unemployment numbers again.

The Heritage Foundation has put together a comprehensive analysis concluding that tax increases on “the rich,” will keep unemployment numbers high and punish the poor.

This analysis shows that the economic harm of raising taxes on investment, small businesses, and upper-income filers affects households of all types. An economy with fewer employment opportunities results in lower wages and lost consumption and savings. Households across the income spectrum are left with lower disposable income. The attempt to raise additional revenues by raising taxes on the productive sectors of the economy, particularly dur­ing a period of recovery, harms the very citizens the revenue would be used to aid with social welfare programs.

On Thursday, the House passed what House Speaker-designate John Boehner (R-OH) called a “chicken crap” proposal to raise taxes with no opportunity for amendments. The House package, the Obama tax increase plan, has almost no chance of passing the Senate today.  The House vote was 234-188 and was a vote to increase taxes on job creators.

(more…)

Today, in 1783, George Washington bid farewell to his officers from the Revolutionary War.

On the day of the biggest breach of national security in American history, when war, in effect, was declared on the United States, the President of the United States held a press conference to announce a pay freeze on federal employees, and took no follow-up questions.

Of course, it is insulting in itself how Obama condescends to make so small and largely symbolic a gesture towards acknowledging the fiscal rout he has inflicted on this country. Mind you, the Republicans tried numerous times over the past year or so to enact such a freeze, with the Democrats voting no each time.

But the larger point is how he ignored the whole WikiLeaks issue. The President has attempted to distance himself from the WikiLeaks attack. He could only accomplish this with the tacit support and silence of the media. He is the President. He is responsible.

But instead of taking responsibility, Obama had Hillary handle the entire WikiLeak fall-out, despite the fact that it is Obama’s failure and just the latest manifestation of his continuing failure.

It could not have escaped any lucid American that it was Hillary who was targeted in this WikiLeaks dump. Make no mistake. Hillary was the target. Julian Assange should be tried before a military tribunal. Instead, he is talking to Time Magazine, demanding that Hillary be fired.

Got that? Once again the criminal media is providing aid and comfort to our enemies. It had to strike you as ironic that the New York Times would not publish the 13,000 Climategate emails because they were “private emails,” but they had no problem with the treason of WikiLeaks.

(more…)

The news to be culled from this latest Federal Communications Commission (FCC) attempt to usurp Internet regulatory authority and impose Network Neutrality is – there really is no news.  At least in the broadest – and most important – sense.

What was true before FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s Tuesday midnight run to grab power over the Web remains true today – the FCC does not have the authority to do what they have just announced they will do on December 21^st.

Unless and until the Congress enacts law making it so, the FCC doesn’t have the authority to do anything.  December’s vote to commandeer control of the Internet is no more legitimate than – and just as capricious as – if they were to vote themselves masters of all the nation’s pizza joints.

The FCC – no government agency – can just decide they want to regulate an industry – and then vote themselves power over it.  That’s not constitutional, representative, limited government – that’s Hugo Chavez-style expropriative despotism.

And it’s not as if The Chairman has been suffering from a dearth of people pointing out his lack of authority.  We have repeatedly pointed it out.  And it hasn’t just been us.

(more…)