Blogs

In case you're one of the 5 people left that haven't seen this:

There are lots more where this came from, all with the same result:

Imagine a different scenario. There is an evangelical candidate. He is the best evangelical candidate ever. A Rhodes Scholar, a distinguished lawyer who has argued before the Supreme Court, astoundingly eloquent, you get the idea. This candidate is a conservative, but answers all questions in such a way as to avoid making anyone uncomfortable. He hits all the right chords.

Further imagine that the record shows this man was once heavily involved with Christian reconstructionists who believe stoning should be re-instituted for adultery. He went to a church for two decades where a Christian reconstructionist preached each Sunday. One of his mentors was part of a group that bombed abortion clinics.

The common belief is that the GOP favors the rich and the Democrats favor the middle class and poor. In reality, the GOP favors small business and entreprenours while the Dems favor big business and big unions. The Dems are favored by the very rich (> $30M). If you've been around a while, you know why:

The history of Europe since WWII has shown that it really pays to be a big company in a socialist country. Socialists like stasis. Socialist politicians like to guarantee jobs. They like predictable tax revenue. To this end they select a handful of major companies and in return for heavy regulation, protect them internal and external competition. The largest companies in Europe are much larger compared to the size of their national economies than are the largest companies in America. The largest companies in Europe also keep their top positions while a great deal of turnover by comparison occurs in American companies.

America saw the same thing happen between 1945-1980. At the zenith of the Left’s influence in America the tax code grew so riddled with loopholes and shelters that the wealthiest paid little taxes. For three years in the 1970s, Malcomb Forbs, then the world’s richest man, paid zero income tax. After the Reagan tax reforms, such a thing would be unthinkable today.

The Democrats want to put us on a road back to the 1970s when the rich got off scot free, corporations grew fat and lazy behind trade barriers and high taxes, and inflation and deteriorating government services slammed the middle class. It will happen again. The perverse outcomes are guaranteed by the incentive structure built into our political system.

Why do we have to go through all that again?

The Inaccurate Peanut Butter Analogy:

Senator Barack Obama recently told an adorable story about how she shared his peanut butter sandwich with a friend when he was in fourth grade. His adoring fans then laughed on cue when he said, “I guess that’s why they call me a re-distributionist!”

The problem with his amusing childhood tale is that it is not at all an accurate analogy for what he wants to impose on our country. Let’s try this instead:

When I was in fourth grade, I walked up to a kid at the next lunch table and demanded his peanut butter sandwich. He agreed, because I threatened him, and then I gave that sandwich to my friend.

I think it’s wonderful to share your own peanut butter sandwich with a friend … or even a stranger! I am teaching my daughter to share every day. However, I am not teaching her to reach into a friend’s toy box and take a truck home in order to give it to another friend who she thinks needs it more.

Francis Beckwith:

On an issue such as this--prop 8--where reasonable citizens disagree, it is not wise for Apple, or any company, to take a stand. It is especially the case with this issue, where the defeat of prop 8 will likely result in the coercion of groups and individuals who believe that there is no such thing as same-sex marriage, as there is no such thing as square circles or married bachelors. Many of these groups use Apple computers including iPods and your other outstanding products.

I am proud to have supported him in '96 and '00. What if Steve Forbes Had Won the Election?:

There would not have been a flood of excess money supply in 2003 either. The tax cuts would have made that kind of hyper stimulation through the printing press unthinkable. Even if Greenspan would have been tempted to flood the globe with dollars, Forbes would have put rhetorical (which is perfectly legitimate; the Fed is independent, but not quarantined) pressure on them to do the right thing. No cash flood means no housing bubble.

It also means no collapsing dollar, and no oil price bubble, which means no recession now.

I remember really liking this, long ago, back when MTV played music:

Don Luskin got a rare forwarded-to-everyone-in-the-world email that's worth forwarding:

Dear Fellow Business Owners

As a business owner who employs 30 people, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barack Obama will be our next president, and that my taxes and fees will go up in a BIG way.

To compensate for these increases, I figure that the Customer will have to see an increase in my fees to them of about 8-10%. I will also have to lay off six of my employees.

This really bothered me as I believe we are family here and didn't know how to choose who will have to go.

So, this is what I did. I strolled thru the parking lot and found eight Obama bumper stickers on my employees cars. I have decided these folks will be the first to be laid off. I can't think of another fair way to approach this problem.