Barney vs. Reaganomics and Sean Bielat

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

It's no secret that I live in Massachusetts. Even worse, I live in Barney Franks district. Let me apologize first for the fact that my district has repeatedly voted for Barney even when he was so obviously wrong on just about every issue.

Now, I know firsthand what Barney Frank's policies have led to. Higher crime, higher poverty, higher government dependency, and a housing crisis he helped cause through government intrusion into the housing market.

"We've got to restore the American dream. No one in the house has done more for that American Dream than Barney Frank." - Bill Clinton

Here's some info on Barney Frank's career history. There's plenty of things I could point out from here but let's just tackle a few.

"However, in 1982, redistricting forced him to run against Republican Margaret Heckler, who represented a district centered on the South Coast, including Fall River and New Bedford. Although the newly configured district retained Frank's district number — the 4th — it was geographically more Heckler's district. Frank focused on Heckler's initial support for President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts, and won by twenty percentage points. He has not faced credible opposition since, and has been reelected thirteen times."

That's right everybody, he was elected opposing the Reagan tax cuts which led to a boom in the economy. Some liberal Reagan critics say that Reagan actually raised taxes, that is partly true but in typical liberal fashion they leave out many facts.

For example, it's true that Ronald Reagan raised the gasoline tax by 5 cents a gallon in the early 80's. The extra money raised with the gas tax was supposed to go only to rebuilding roads etc.

Another fact the Liberals ignore is that the tax was only supposed to be in effect for 1 year, which is why Reagan supported it. After a year Reagan kept his word and proposed repealing the 5 cent gas tax as agreed to the Democrat controlled congress. The Democrats didn't keep their word and refused to repeal the tax. This has helped fuel the misguided liberal attacks on Reagan as a supporter of tax increases.

Liberal propagandists at media matters paint Reagan as a tax increaser in stories like this in an effort to paint conservatives like me as liars.

Historian Larry Schweikart describes the spending and tax cuts during this period in A Patriots History:

"The tax cuts started to have their effect. Production, employment, job creation, and entrepreneurship all surged, soon achieving near-record levels. And, true to the supply-side promise, government revenues soared, increasing by more than one third during Reagan's eight years.

Yet despite ocean's of new money and Reagan's constant foot on the brake, government continued to spend more than it took in, increasing outlays by 40% in the same period. To restrain spending, Reagan cut a deal with Congress in which the Democrats agreed to hold spending down in return for closing tax loopholes (which really involved raising taxes again, but only in specific industries, such as yachts and pleasure boats). No sooner had Congress closed the deal than it passed new higher spending, generating sizable, but not record, deficits."

Notice the bold print as the left will cleverly leave all of those pesky little details out. Now back to Barney and Bielat.

MoveOn.org is helping Barney Frank by sending out this message from him:

Dear Friends,

Thank you for your past support and for fighting for the values we share.

As you may know, I am under attack by a well-financed, right-wing effort to defeat me in November because of my positions on progressive issues. I voted against the war in Iraq; I support bringing the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; I am leading efforts to fight for the civil rights of LGBT Americans; I strongly supported a public option in the health care bill; I am a leader in the fight to cut excessive and wasteful military spending and subsidies for the defense of wealthy allies; and I am opposed to extending tax cuts for multi-millionaires.

The extreme right has focused its anger on me in part because I have dared to stand up to them. Last year, when Senators and Congressmen supporting the health care bill were publicly vilified by anti-health care activists, I stood up for what is right and denounced the particularly outrageous claim that President Obama is in some ways a modern-day Adolf Hitler. My willingness to fight back - in what is now known as the 'dining room table incident' -- inspired others and began to turn the tide.

I take the right-wing attacks very seriously, and I fully expect to see a heavily-financed media blitz in coming weeks that will demonize me just as they have demonized the President. Let us not underestimate the power of these lies - we have learned in the past, from the Willie Horton ads, from the 'swift-boating' of John Kerry, and many other examples that inherently implausible attacks are not self-refuting. When the right tells its lies, we must actively oppose them.

Many of you have already volunteered for or generously donated to my campaign. I deeply appreciate your support. If you have not yet joined the campaign, I welcome both the donation of your financial resources and your time. There is strength in numbers.

If you would like to join me in battling the right-wing and its deep-pocketed supporters, please sign up to help at my web site: www.barney2010.com.

Thank you for joining me in this fight.


This points out that many of Barney's progressive views are on the opposite side of most Americans. Even my hometown voted overwhelmingly for Scott Brown over Martha Coakley in order to oppose Obamacare. However, Barney Frank still supports it, going even further by claiming, "I strongly supported a public option in the health care bill". This puts him against a majority even here in Mass, (do you remember why Scott Brown won? Obamacare).

Sean Bielat is an ex-Democrat gone Republican, just like Reagan. He's also a Marine. Take a few minutes to see his views for yourself here. His official website is here. I believe this is the best chance we've ever had to finally retire Barney Frank for good.

The key is an informed public though. November will be very telling in my district. One of two things will happen, either the people here will wake up and realize that this is one congressman who deserves to be defeated more than most others...or we'll fall for the Liberal charm of Bill Clinton and stick to the bleeding heart lies about how much Barney Frank cares about the poor and the children.

I for one will continue to speak out, refusing to speak out because of political correctness or fear of critics guarantees that they win. I'll stand up to a tidal wave of liberal opposition, I'm used to it. These issues and both our own and our children's future is too important to stay quiet. I'll be taking on Deval Patrick full force very soon but for now bye bye Barney will have to do.


Economics You Can Relate To

Saturday, September 18, 2010

I'm going to explain something about tax policy that liberals like Obama don't seem to get. I'm going to use some examples that each of us deal with on a regular basis. Now, liberal Obama supporters may want to read this slowly or at least take notes because it's extremely complicated. Let's begin.

First, keep these complicated math problems in mind because they will make economic sense soon enough.

70 x 1,000 = 70,000

25 x 10,000 = 250,000

Now, everyone should be able to agree that those 2 multiplication problems are correct. I'm sure we all know that 250,000 > 70,000. Keep that in mind as we continue.

Ok, most of us don't work for congress so we don't have the ability to just vote ourselves a pay raise the way they do. When times get tough for most of us there are basically only 2 options. Get a second job, (which many of us can't do, or find for that matter), or cut back our own spending on non-essentials. Our government obviously doesn't even think of the less spending option. In fact many of them think the answer lies in more spending.

Let's use a scenario we all face regularly, like grocery shopping. When you go food shopping there are decisions we have to make regarding our purchases based on the money we have to spend. If you're like most of us you have to stay within a certain budget in order to get the most food for the least money.

How do you do it? Sale items and other specials, coupons, store brand instead of national brand, etc. You have to plan shopping in a way that gives you the most bang for your buck. This can apply to pretty much anything you buy.

This can apply to many other things as well, like back to school shopping. Younger kids will be getting the "hand me downs" from older siblings to limit how much you have to buy. In order to relate these situations to economics the question to be thought of is: What makes more money for a business and at the same time saves the consumer money for the purchase?

Let's use the back to school scenario again for a second. Remember the math problems above from earlier? I will continue to use the numbers 70 and 25 to keep those numbers in the front of your mind for when we tie all of this together.

You go clothes shopping for back to school. You need a new pair of shoes for your child. There is a $70 pair and a $25 pair. There may be a picture of Spongebob or Dora The Explorer on the $70 pair but which one are you most likely to buy?

Let's say the ratio of sales is that for every 1 pair of $70 shoes sold you sell 4 pairs of the $25 shoes, considering the current economic climate I think I'm actually being generous toward the $70 pair but it doesn't matter because the point remains the same.

You sell 1 pair of $70 shoes in the same time frame that sells you 4 pairs of the $25 shoes. That means for every $70 you make with the more expensive shoes you make $100 off the cheaper shoes. Even though each consumer spends less individually, you make more money in the end off the cheaper shoes.

Now let's take the supermarket as I'll bet most of us have to buy food pretty often. Those of us with kids and larger families, have to be even wiser about our shopping than most others.

Well, what do you look for? Sale items, generic brands (as opposed to the national ones), items with coupons etc. Most of us are in there looking for the best deal for our money and that requires paying a little bit of attention to what we are buying.

Supermarket's know this as well. They know that they will sell far more sale and generic items than the other stuff. How do they make any money? The answer again lies in volume. For example (again using the numbers 70 and 25 as a base to make a point): you're buying yogurt, there's a .70 yogurt and a .25 yogurt, which are you going to most likely buy?

The .25 product is going to sell 10 times as much as the .70, it's the entire logic behind having sales in the first place. So the store will make $2.50 with the cheaper for every .70 made with the other products.

Why do you think WalMart is the #1 retailer in the world? How can they make the most money when they tend to have the lower prices? Well, now you understand how. Now for the fun part. Here's where we tie this into tax policy and destroy the logic of the high tax progressive liberals.

Taxes, politicians don't like paying them, but they love raising them. Business owners, especially small business owners, pay the tax rate at the personal income rate the same way you do. For a small business owner to make $200,000 + is really not all that much. If you are too anti-business and go after the businesses they'll just pass the increased costs down in other ways, (like lay-offs). It's that business owners profits that are used to expand the business and keep all of us collecting paychecks when we work for them.

Lower taxes boost revenues and make more money for the government for the same reason that the lower priced items make more money for the retailers. Lower taxes boost revenues because it gives more money to businesses for investment in jobs. Private job growth leads to more tax revenue.

It costs money to create jobs, just look at how much money all of these government jobs from stimulus are costing us. Google "stimulus jobs cost" and you'll see plenty of stories related to what I mean.

25% tax rate causes business revenues to rise, this leads to more expansion and investment and therefore more jobs. A 70% tax rate cuts business revenues to the point where there is far less money left in a business to invest and expand, the result, less jobs.

Less jobs means more people taking money from the government, (unemployment, food stamps, welfare, etc.) Less jobs means less revenue for the government, (less people paying taxes from their paychecks). This makes the unemployed a double dip against the revenues of the government.

Government jobs, (which every single stimulus job is), are also a drain on the revenues of the government. The government pays you with money it has to take from the private sector, (or print which in excess just leads to inflation down the road). The private sector keeps shrinking and the government bogus jobs keep growing, why do you think the debt is exploding?

Politicians, who in many cases make as much or more than the business leaders they love to bash, generate no revenue for the government. Workers in this country have to lose money out of every paycheck to create the paychecks for politicians. Also, unlike them, none of us can vote for a pay increase to ourselves. Increased pay is usually a reward for good work, can you think of many in Washington D.C. currently who qualify? Yet they do vote themselves raises while they have the audacity to vote against a social security increase for our seniors.

The increased taxes of Deval Patrick haven't worked out so well for Massachusetts. He inherited a surplus from Mitt Romney and after raising taxes and spending we are now in deep deficit with less jobs. A millionaires tax hasn't worked out so well either.

"The number of millionaire tax returns fell sharply to 5,529 from 7,898 in 2007, a 30% tumble. The taxes paid by rich filers fell by 22%, and instead of their payments increasing by $106 million, they fell by some $257 million" - WSJ

Now, at the state level, it's as simple as millionaires moving out of state to avoid a particular states soak the rich tax policies. The left may try to counter by saying that at the federal level every state's millionaires tax will hit regardless of state. There's more to it than that.

A state millionaires tax affects millionaires as individuals. At the federal level it will affect wealthy business leaders. The end result, no private sector job growth and therefore reduced federal revenues as opposed to increased revenues.

Without job creation you can take 70% away from the wealthy but there won't be enough of them. Lower taxes will spurn more private job growth and less people will have to be paid by the government. Non-government job creation sparked by lower tax rates creates more of a taxpayer base and therefore far more people to tax at the lower rate.

The end result is higher revenues with lower taxes, that is the results of the Laffer Curve. The other aspect is cutting spending, you have to do it during a recession, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO IT AT ALL TIMES, recession or not. Sometimes the key to making more money is simply spending less. If you can't vote yourself a raise and you want to save money the only thing you can do is spend less.

Taking $1.00 from a thousand people makes $1,000. Taking .25 from 10,000 people is $2,500. Therefore, when it comes to tax policy and spending it's true that bigger isn't better. Just as this country's government was founded on the same principle. When it comes to government's role in our lives, bigger isn't better. Don't expect progressive liberals like Obama to understand that though.


Extending That Which Does Not Exist

Friday, September 17, 2010

You can't help but laugh as you see Liberals falling all over themselves over the extension of the Bush tax cuts, especially for the middle class. The funniest part of all of this is that these are the same people who spent 8 years trying to convince us that the Bush tax cuts were only for the rich. Even some Republicans bought into that here in Mass.

How many times did we hear that only the rich got tax cuts? By pushing to extend the tax cuts for people making under $250,000 they are admitting that for 8 years during the Bush administration they lied to us, (big surprise), about the fact that we even got a tax cut in the first place. In more and more cases Democrats are pushing for an extension of all Bush tax cuts including the "tax cuts for the rich".

That's quite a turnaround from the rhetoric we're usually hearing from Liberals. Obama is blaming the Republicans despite the fact that he can't even get enough Democrats to jump on board of his sinking ship.

"Democrats, though, have sought to expropriate Republican concerns about the deficit in their defense of allowing the tax cuts for wealthier Americans to expire. They say an extension would add $700 billion to the federal tab over the next decade."

We'll get into why that's not true in a minute but let's first imagine that to be true. $700 billion over 10 years is only $70 billion a year. That's nothing considering our current deficits and debt. Think about it. Bush's failed stimulus cost about $787 billion. Obama's cost even more, including billions in earmarks, "pork" as it's sometimes called. 50 billion here, 20 billion there, we talk about billions now as if it's nothing and that alone is scary.

Isn't it funny how president's often use timetables that go beyond their presidency. If Obama was to win a second term, (I'll pause while you finish laughing............), if Obama wins a second term he would only be president until Jan. of 2017. Yet he's talking about revenues 10 years in the future. If there's one thing we can see when comparing 2000 to today it's that a lot can change in 10 years. This is the same president who said the stimulus would work and whose economic team said unemployment wouldn't rise over 8% with that stimulus package. They were wrong then and they're wrong now.

Have you heard Obama's clever catchphrase someone else probably came up with for him?

"You want to go forward, what do you do? You put it in 'D.' When you go backward, what do you do? You put it in 'R.'" - President Obama

Well Mr. President it all depends on where you're parked. Your policies have now parked our country on the edge of a cliff. When you're on the edge of a cliff you don't shift into drive and head over the side. To be fair a quick little move in reverse won't necessarily make you safe either. Progressive Republicans can be just as dangerous to our country as progressive Liberals.

I was talking about politics the other day with someone and I was explaining tax policy like the Laffer Curve. I wanted to find a way to describe it that was so simple to understand even a progressive liberal would understand it. I'm going to use something we pretty much all do regularly. You engage in supply side economics and the philosophy of the Laffer Curve far more than you realize. I'll show you how very soon in my next post and it will explain why the government will make far less money than they are expecting. Until then keep enjoying the debate over letting you keep something they said you never had.


Remembering 9/11 Nine Years Later

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Here we are once again remembering that tragic day 9 years ago. I can't help but think about how much has changed. Not just in terms of what our country is going through but in terms of myself. I was 19 on 9/11/01 and I'll never forget that morning.

I was working the overnight shift at the time and had worked all night on 9/10. I went out to breakfast that morning and had just started to fall asleep when I was awoken by my mother. "A plane just crashed into the World Trade Center!".

I wasn't sure what to make of it at first so I just closed my eyes and tried to fall asleep. A few minutes later my mother burst into the room again, "another plane just crashed again America is under attack!". Needless to say that was the end of my trying to get any sleep that day.

As the tragedy continued to unfold I spent most of the rest of that day just like most everybody else, glued to the news. I remember the mix of emotions racing through me that day. Sadness, anger, helplessness, etc. Yet there are other things I remember from 9/11 that are inspiring.

I remember seeing the firefighters, police, and everyday average people doing all they could to help anyone they could. I remember that American heroes on United 93 made the decision to fight back and denied the terrorists another successful attack.

Then there's perhaps the thing that mattered most about that day. On that day and in the weeks and even months ahead we saw true unity in America. Left and right politics didn't matter. Liberal, Conservative, whatever the case, there was that brief moment where politics was pushed aside as we saw each other only as Americans.

The united attitude of the country was on a level I hadn't seen before 9/11 and haven't seen since. It was telling of the generosity and compassion that you see in America. Between the millions and millions of dollars raised to help the families of victims, to the surge in people enrolling in our military.

Those who didn't directly lose family members or friends in the attacks felt as if they had. The 9/11 victims families became our families, their sorrow was felt in each of our hearts. That is the America our soldiers fight to protect.

As Americans we often take much of what we have for granted. The lifestyle we have for so long known tends to make us forget that we are not in fact invincible. As we take this time to remember the victims and heroes of 9/11 we must also take a moment to think of our soldiers who continue to be heroes and victims in the ongoing struggle we've come to call "The War On Terror".

The years seem to go by faster and faster. It's hard to believe that next year will be a full decade since the attacks. I've grown and learned so much since then, I suspect we all have. Yet as life goes on, we must never forget why we take time to remember this day. We will never forget why we take a minute and pause when we notice the time on the clock reads 9:11. I had to pause a minute before I posted this because I was a little spooked.

By complete chance I finished this post at 9:11.


The Aftermath Of The 8/28 Rallies, Racial Politics Once Again

Friday, September 3, 2010

The 8/28 rallies of Glenn Beck and Al Sharpton have now come and gone. I didn't bother to get into the debate before the events as I figured I'd first watch both rallies start to finish. I didn't want to get into the debate based on other people's opinions. I have now watched both of them and offer my thoughts.

If you haven't seen both rallies then I think you should before you finish this post. It's no small task but it's the only way to see for yourself firsthand what the rallies were actually like. Watching the rallies is no small task as combined they cover 6 hours and 8 minutes. Ignore the critics and make a judgement for yourselves.

Here's Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor rally.

Here's Al Sharpton's Reclaim The Dream rally.

I told myself when I started watching the rallies, especially Sharpton's, that I was going to keep an open mind. There were parts of Sharpton's rally that weren't that bad. I originally planned to provide you with the links to the rallies and pretty much just let you be the judge. You should definitely watch the rallies before you continue but it's up to you.

After 24 minutes of Sharpton's speech I saw something that I just couldn't ignore and it wasn't the campaign signs for some candidates for congress. I began to take some notes as I listened. There are some things that need to be addressed though and it begins to take off when TJ Williams starts talking at the 24 minute mark. In truth I felt bad for this man as well as many others who were there.

Ronald Reagan said it best:

"The problem with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."

"When I was at Liberty University I remember being told by the staff of that institution and the staff of the Jessie Helms campaign that the Conservative Party worked against gay rights, is amiss with keeping the African American community distracted with gay marriage and hate crimes so that they can complete their real commission, which is to roll back the civil rights act of 1963. And this is precisely what they mean when they talk about limited government. This 21 century push for an expansion of states rights is a hope to resurrect Jim Crow laws." - TJ Williams

The saddest part of that quote full of lies is the fact that he learned that from a staff of teachers at Liberty University. Teachers should know better, (I suspect they know the truth but it stands against the agenda of the left wing so they choose to promote lies in order to maintain a Liberal base of misinformed students). Read the Reagan quote again.

Here's the voting breakdown for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was the Democrats that stood more unified against the Civil Rights Act, not the Republicans. I'm not going to go too much into the details of this issue since I already took care of it with the blog post I did about history and the black panthers. If you haven't already read that one then you need to.

Before I move on I'd like to point something else out. Have you noticed that throughout the Sharpton rally they seem to talk mostly about uniting blacks? That's not the message of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr:

"The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone." - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I thought of something else regarding the Reclaim the Dream rally, the name. To "reclaim the dream" suggests that it's been stolen. That is no doubt the belief of the speakers at the Sharpton rally. You can't steal Martin Luther King's dream. His dream was about equality for ALL people. It is for that reason that it's impossible for the dream to belong exclusively to blacks. It is a message for all of us.

Then we have John Boyd, President of the National Black Farmers Association who said this:

"Dr. King gave us a miracle in 2008, he gave us the first African American president in history and we outta let that be known today, we support our president." - John Boyd

Not much wrong with that quote but there's a question to be asked. When black Americans say we support our president is it because of his policies or simply because he is black? Let me ask you another question.

During the 2008 presidential campaign I heard from some people that if you didn't vote for Obama then you were a racist. It's scary that some people were foolish enough to believe that. If you only voted FOR Obama because he's black is that not also a racist vote?

Launching the racism charges against Republicans and Conservatives is nothing new. Let me share a few things with you once again using one of my favorites, Ronald Reagan. I'm going to show you 2 letters written by Ronald Reagan. Think of what's happening today with racial politics and you tell me what's changed. This is from Reagan: A Life In Letters.

Letter 1 - A response to Leonard Kirk, a black, unemployed Vietnam veteran. He supported Reagan's defense policy but called him "a worse president than tricky Dick Nixon" and "a closet racist and friend of the rich."

March 23, 1983
Dear Mr. Kirk:

I appreciate very much your support of my defense policy. I believe I also can understand why you think me a "closet racist". Certainly there has been a constant drumbeat of propaganda to that effect ever since I took office. Some leaders of black organizations have joined in this whether to enhance their own stature by arousing the membership to anger or not I don't know.

You of course would have no way of knowing the truth about me. May I point out a few things in my own behalf?

I was raised from childhood by my parents who believed bigotry and prejudice were the worst things a person could be guilty of. My father once slept in his car during an Illinois blizzard rather than stay in a hotel that wouldn't allow Jews. He was Irish Catholic.

As a sports announcer broadcasting Big League baseball in the middle '30's I campaigned against the rule that prohibited blacks from playing in organized ball. As governor of California I appointed more blacks to executive and policy making positions than all the previous Governors of California put together. I too have a dream, a dream that one day whatever is done to or for someone will be done neither because of or in spite of their race. We are all equal in the sight of God-we should be equal in the sight of man. By the way I was raised in poverty.

Ronald Reagan

I guess some things truly haven't changed, like Republicans and Conservatives being labeled racist through Liberal propaganda. Here's another.

November 23, 1983 - a letter to a man named Freddie Washington

Dear Mr. Washington:

I'm sorry to be so late in answering your letter but it takes a while for mail to get sorted and letters to arrive at my desk. I can't tell you how much your letter means to me. I've been frustrated and angered by the attempts to paint me as a racist and as lacking compassion for the poor. On the one subject I was raised by a mother and father who instilled in me and my brother a hatred for bigotry and prejudice long before there was such a thing as a civil rights movement. As for the poor, we were poor in an era when there were no government programs to turn to. I'm well aware of how lucky I've been since and how good the Lord has been to me.

Forgive me for telling you all this but I want you to know and understand how very moved I was by your kind letter. Again my heartfelt thanks.

Ronald Reagan

It's a well known fact that the economic boom caused by the Reagan economic plan, often called "Reaganomics", lifted ALL income levels, vastly reduced poverty, and created millions of jobs. Unlike Obama, who so far has had the opposite effect. Just think, his tax increases don't really start to effect the economy until next year, I can't wait, how about you?

Obama's tanking poll numbers have nothing to do with his race, they have to do with things like this.

I could go on an on about problems with some of Sharpton's rally but I don't think it was all bad so don't get me wrong. There was a lot of talk about the necessity for education within the black community. However, there's one thing I can't seem to understand about the liberal philosophy.

They claim to support the education of the children etc. They claim to want to help the black communities. Why then is it that when a successful black conservative dares to disagree with the liberals they instantly turn to personal insults like "uncle tom", or "sell out"? The black conservatives are in the meantime thinking: Hey, I'm successful, have strong family values, am pretty well educated, and work hard, isn't that what all of you liberals wanted me to do?

Take this story and these amazing videos from the 8/28 rallies. The left is panicking because America is finally getting curious about it's own history. The Liberals fear that the black community will learn the truth about Liberal history through videos like this.

The problem with the progressive liberal ideology is that it's based on emotions rather than logic. For example, the average liberal, (not the politicians mind you), but the average liberal. The kind you run into at the supermarket etc. honestly believes in helping the poor and the children etc. They just don't seem to realize that the very programs they support keep more people down and in poverty.

The entire debate over illegal immigration, which I've covered in previous posts, is an attempt by the left to hijack and increase the Hispanic vote. Imagine if the left were to lose the 95% vote of the black American community. What if it was 95% for the conservatives, (notice I said conservatives, not republicans, there is a difference in many cases, like John McCain). The liberal left would never win an election again. That is why they use the education system and the teachers unions to teach revisionist history.

Take for example the issue of the death penalty. Liberals typically stand against the death penalty, yet they support abortion. That makes no sense to me. A criminal whose committed a very serious crime, been given a fair trial, and sentenced to the death penalty is given all the compassion and excuses in the world by the left. However, an unborn and unarguably innocent baby who through no fault of their own has been conceived isn't even given half of a thought by the pro-abortion left. That baby deserves a chance, even if that is an inconvenience to the parents, the right to a chance at life should supersede the right for your own convenience.

The pro-abortion, anti-death penalty mentality is just one example of the kind of thinking that Phil Valentine calls, "liberal logic" in his book, The Conservative's Handbook. He has created this music video that speaks to our founding principles and like the rise up video is about the truth behind the purpose of the tea party movement, global warming, and the emotions gripping a majority of concerned Americans at the present time. He describes liberalism and "liberal logic" as this:

"Another reason liberalism is doomed to failure is because it's based largely on emotion instead of facts. It's what I refer to as liberal logic."

"Liberal logic is a purely emotional approach to solving a problem. Liberal logic is, in essence, and oxymoron because it is completely devoid of logic." - Phil Valentine

Racial politics used by the left is a good example of liberal logic. The facts of history don't matter if you can convince enough black Americans that all Conservatives and Republicans are and always were the racists. If enough black Americans believe that then their emotions will lead them to vote for the Democratic party. To the Democrats that's all that matters. They are currently trying to use the immigration debate to stir up the same kinds of emotions with the Hispanics in order to lock in those votes for Democrats.

In closing you have to ask yourself, which movement do you most align with? Which rally would you have attended? Which rally do you believe truly embraced the message of Martin Luther King Jr?

One last little fact about charity. The Restoring Honor rally raised over $5 million for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. While Al Sharpton's National Action Network is giving six, that's 6, $500 scholarships out for a total of $3,000 that you have to win an essay contest in order to get. The SOWF grants full scholarships to the children of our heroes, Al Sharpton might cover your books. That's shameful for the National Action Network, but that's liberal logic.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP