liberals are the enemy of Freedom, Not Conservatives!

Conventional wisdom might suggest that Rush Limbaugh’s radio show and the Fox News Channel are probably on the same side of the media wars. But after Thursday night’s debate, Limbaugh is having doubts.

On his Friday radio show, Limbaugh took issue with the moderators of the Republican presidential debate in Ames, Iowa, hosted by Fox News and the Washington Examiner. According to Limbaugh, back-and-forth attacks among the candidates were part of an orchestrated effort that showed the hosts’ desire to win approval from their counterparts in the mainstream media.

“[I] missed the first 40 minutes live,” Limbaugh explained. “And that didn’t help either by the way. And when I started watching I said, ‘My gosh — does nobody on this panel remember that we’re running against Obama? What is this business of these guys trying to tear each other up?

“Then I figured out that’s what Fox wants. Fox wants these people to tear each other up. I said, ‘Why does Fox want these people to tear each other up?’ They want approval from the mainstream media because that’s what the mainstream media would do — is tear these people up, or try to get them to.”

Read more here.

London Olympic Ambassador Arrested For Rioting

A teenage girl accused of trashing a police car during the ongoing London riots has been arrested — after her parents allegedly spotted her doing it on TV and called the police.

Adrienne Ives told the Sun she has no regrets about turning her daughter, Chelsea, over to the police. She said she and her husband were watching television coverage of the riots Sunday when they recognized their daughter attacking the car.

“We were watching the riots. It was sickening. Then we saw her. To say we were shocked…” Adrienne said. “I love her. But look at what she’s done. These riots have cost people their jobs and even lives. We are going through hell.”

Chelsea, described as smart and athletic and among a group of Londoners picked to serve as “ambassadors” for the 2012 Olympics, cried when her parents confronted her, her father Roger said.

“There were a lot of tears. She did not try to stop us phoning the police, she knew there was no point,” he said. “The policeman said we had been brave. It was devastating when she was led away. I don’t want my daughter to prison. But we would do the same thing again.”

Prosecutors say she threw a rock through a store before yelling to her friend, “This is the best day ever!” Then, along with a group of a dozen rioters, she is alleged to have started attacking a squad car, throwing a brick and hitting it with a plastic road barrier.

Court of Appeals finds ObamaCare individual mandate unconstitutional

A second federal circuit court of appeals has spoken in the ObamaCare case, the one brought by 26 states. A split three judge panel for the Atlanta-based 11th Citcuit has found the individual mandate unconstitutional, but leaves the rest of the law intact, though crippled and financially not viable.

Jennifer Harberkorn of Politico:

The 2-1 ruling marks the first time a judge appointed by a Democrat has voted to strike down the mandate. Judge Frank Hull, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, joined Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was appointed by George H.W. Bush, to strike down the mandate.

Judge Stanley Marcus, in a dissenting opinion, said the mandate is constitutional. He was also appointed by Clinton. (snip)

The 2-1 ruling marks the first time a judge appointed by a Democrat has voted to strike down the mandate. Judge Frank Hull, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, joined Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was appointed by George H.W. Bush, to strike down the mandate.

Judge Stanley Marcus, in a dissenting opinion, said the mandate is constitutional. He was also appointed by Clinton. (snip)

The 2-1 ruling marks the first time a judge appointed by a Democrat has voted to strike down the mandate. Judge Frank Hull, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, joined Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was appointed by George H.W. Bush, to strike down the mandate.

This ruling all but guarantees that the Supreme Court will review the case, as the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the mandate in a similar suit six weeks ago.

Did media cover up Sen. Durbin’s confrontation with reporter?

This week U.S. Senator Dick Durbin held a press conference with members of the mainstream media to talk about the downgrade crisis. But the Senator’s scripted storyline veered off-course when a conservative reporter – me – showed up to ask an embarrassing question. Namely, “Senator, you’ve blamed the tea party…but do you bear any responsibility for this downgrade crisis?”

What, you didn’t hear about this incident in the media? For those of you that need more proof that journalism is dead, read on.

Monday was another beautiful day for a mainstream media cover-up in Chicago. But it would not have been complete without a picnic-basket full of hypocrisy from our very own U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois.

You may remember Dick.

He’s the Senator that hysterically compared the treatment of the Gitmo detainees to Nazis, Soviet gulags, and Pol Pot. While calling for an end to “hateful” rhetoric, he’s the one who wrongfully pointed his crooked finger at the Tea Party Movement and Gov. Sarah Palin, blaming them for the Tucson massacre and the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Recently, he’s the one that, hypocritically, accused the Tea Party Republicans of “political extortion” in the debt ceiling debate.

While the markets were tanking – Durbin took some time out to have a press conference and dish to his friends in the Chicago media about the S&P downgrade of our nation’s sterling credit rating.

Read more here.

Romney and “corporations are people”

It seems that Mitt Romney ran into a heckler at an Iowa campaign rally yesterday … a heckler that could think of nothing more to yell at Romney than the word “corporations.”

Now you realize, of course, that “corporation” is one of those words that the left has worked to demonize for quite some time. Take Obama’s drive to raise taxes on those evil rich people who fly around in “corporate jets.” Most Americans don’t realize that business jets get the same tax treatments that locomotives get, or that large farm implements or printing presses get — or any other piece of business equipment, for that matter. BUT … rich people fly around in them (or so the Democrats would have you believe). The rich railroad barons aren’t driving the locomotives and wealthy corporate farmers don’t drive the tractors.

Up until now these aircraft have been called “business jets.” The organization that supports and promotes business aircraft use is the NBAA – the National Business Aircraft Association. Not the NCBA. Obama’s advisors, however, told him that if he was going to use these jets as a tool in his class warfare/wealth envy game he would have to call them “corporate jets,” not “business jets.” The Democrats, after all, haven’t spent years demonizing business — it’s the word “corporation” they’ve been working on.

So last night Mitt Romney certainly showed himself to be smarter than the room when he told this heckler that “corporations are people.” The Progs immediately jumped on this as an utterance of such cataclysmic outrage that it should immediately disqualify Romney from any further participation in American life.

If corporations aren’t people, what are they? Minerals? Vegetation? Vishnu Schist? Guess what? Corporations ARE people. Corporations are people who have joined together in a business enterprise. Corporation are managers, employees and shareholders — people all. And those corporate shareholders? The last time I checked the largest corporate shareholder in AT&T was a teacher’s retirement pension fund in New England. Teacher …. People.

Obama doesn’t have a clue

Our Dear Ruler gave a little speech yesterday at an advanced battery plant in Michigan. The man had some really innovative ideas on how to turn this economy around. Are you ready for them?

* Extend the payroll tax holiday
* More infrastructure spending on roads
* Pass trade deals
* Patent reform
* Jobs for returning veterans

Sound familiar? It should. These are the exact yak squeeze that Obama has been touting for months, some of them for years. But don’t worry .. he says that in the coming weeks, he is going to roll out some more proposals. I wonder if those proposals will come before, after or during his 10 day vacation to Martha’s Vineyard? At any rate … along with these stale economic ideas we also got some stale wealth envy soundbites from Dear Ruler. For example, he actually said in this speech yesterday, “We can’t ask the middle class to bear the entire burden … Everybody’s got to chip in. That’s fair. We learn that in kindergarten.”

Fair?

* The top 1% of taxpayers earn about 20% of the income and yet they pay 40% of all income taxes collected.
* The top 5% of taxpayers (those earning at least $159,610) pay more in taxes than the remaining 95% of taxpayers combined.
* More than half of Americans, 51%, don’t even pay income taxes!

Middle class Americans are not in the top 5% of taxpayers earning $159,610. Yet that 5% pays more in taxes than the other 95% … and Barack Obama is worried that middle class Americans are going to “bear the entire burden”? You can’t reason with this type of logic.

I tweeted my disgust over this “middle class bearing the entire burden” nonsense and a followers asked me: “IF you were in congress and we could get REAL&immediate cuts to the federal budget would you agree to taxes?” The answer is not only no but hell no. And the reason is simple; tax increases are not going to generate more revenue. How hard is this for libs and progs to understand? Taxes affect behavior. I will now brilliantly provide you with, not one, but two examples.

* From the Center for Individual Freedom: In 1980, the top income tax rate was 70%. The top rate is now half that, at 35%, yet the portion of the nation’s income taxes paid by the top 1% has more than doubled from 19% to 38%.

* Walter Williams explains the economic effects of the luxury tax imposed on the early 1990s: Back then, Congress told us that the luxury tax on boats, aircraft and jewelry would raise $31 million in revenue a year. Instead, the tax destroyed 330 jobs in jewelry manufacturing and 1,470 in the aircraft industry, in addition to the thousands destroyed in the yacht industry. Those job losses cost the government a total of $24.2 million in unemployment benefits and lost income tax revenues. The net effect of the luxury tax was a loss of $7.6 million in fiscal 1991, which means Congress’ projection was off by $38.6 million. The Joint Economic Committee concluded that the value of jobs lost in just the first six months of the luxury tax was $159.6 million.

It’s simple … increasing taxes on the filthy rich isn’t going to turn the tide of our economy, considering our enormous spending habits. If Obama gets his way and the Bush tax cuts expire for the evil rich and their tax rates rise, this will generate $750 billion over the next ten years. These are static figures, meaning that you can’t account for the fact that people will change their behavior because of their tax increases, therefore decreases the projected amount collected. Anyway, so this $750 billion breaks down to $75 billion a year. Our government currently spends $3.7 trillion a year, which breaks down to about $10 billion PER DAY .. and this doesn’t consider the fact that spending WILL increase over the next decade. So we’ve got this $75 billion per year from these evil rich people, and we’ve got the government spending money at a rate of $10 billion a day. It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out that we could only pay for one week of government spending with an increase of taxes on the evil rich.

But back to this speech … Barack Obama wasn’t done. He couldn’t get through a speech without talking about those evil corporations and the need for them to pay their fair share! He said in his speech yesterday: “It means making sure that the biggest corporations pay their fair share in taxes.” Corporations already pay $300 billion a year in income taxes at the highest corporate income tax rate in the world of 35%. In fact, did you know that even though we have the highest rate among OECD nations, we collect less revenue than the average OECD nation? Could it have anything to do with high tax rates punishing behavior? But what Barack Obama and the progs always forget is that corporations don’t actually pay taxes, individuals do. In fact, domestic labor bears slightly more than 70 percent of the burden of the corporate income tax. So any call for raising taxes on corporations is a call to raise taxes on the very Americans who consumer their products. Not exactly good for our economy. Here’s another point to consider … raising corporate tax rates also has a negative impact on the very middle class Americans that Obama is worried will “bear the burden.” Don’t take it from me. Take it from some experts who did the research.

For instance, this December 2010 paper by economists Aparna Mathur and Kevin Hassett shows the link between corporate tax rates and the average manufacturing wage (in U.S. dollars) for 65 countries over a period spanning 1981–2005. They find that there is a clear negative link between the two, suggesting that higher corporate tax rates lead to lower worker wages. They test this theory using regressions controlling for a bunch of other factors, and find that a 1 percent increase in the corporate income tax leads to an almost 0.5–0.6 percent decrease in hourly wages.

The bottom line is that Barack Obama doesn’t have a clue as to how to get this economy going. He believes that the more government is involved, the better. He believes that the more he can punish the achievers, the more votes he can win in 2012. He believes that his government knows better than the free market capitalists who drive this economy.