Some charities and nonprofit experts are worried that President Obama’s proposal to impose new limits on charitable tax deductions for wealthy people would dampen giving at a time when charities are under severe strain because of the recession.
So let me get this right. The government will tax the charitable contributions of “the rich”, likely reducing the amount of their contributions, and then it to various “non-profit” non-governmental organizations (NGOs) organizations that are committed to social and economic justice (think ACORN).
It sure sounds to me that the Obama administration doesn’t trust me to direct my charitable contributions to the right places.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
CHANGING COURSE
Obama promised to change direction from the Bush presidency.
Did he?
Or did he just push down on the accelerator?
Did he?
Or did he just push down on the accelerator?
A NATION OF COWARDS
Even though it happened last month, this still rankles. In his official capacity as Attorney General, Eric Holder spoke to Justice Department employees, saying:
Al Barger at Blogcritics responds:
The Examiner responds as well:
And responds again:
John Derbyshire at National Review responds to the cowardice accusation:
If Holder wants to have “have frank conversations about the racial matters” then it’s time to have the racists on the Democrat side of the partisan divide to shut up, sit down, and listen.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards. ...
We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race. ...
It is an issue we have never been at ease with and, given our nation's history, this is in some ways understandable. If we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us."
Al Barger at Blogcritics responds:
“This is an exceptionally stupid, wrong and dishonest thing to say. on every level, though it's a common refrain of left wingers such as Mr. Holder.” ... “What left wingers generally mean by saying that we haven't talked enough about race is not that we should have an open, honest discussion of our observations and perspectives on racial issues. It's that Whitey should feel more guilty and seek penance of being lectured to by self-righteous liberals — and of course giving over yet more of our money.”
The Examiner responds as well:
"Actually, what 'we' don’t talk about concerning racial issues is how Democrats are guilty of prejudice. 'We' talk plenty when a Republican is involved.
Ironically, it is this very double standard that is cowardly, for if the Left really want to end racism they must be willing to confront it within their own ranks and not just when their political opponents transgress."
And responds again:
"Not only were Holder’s comments morally bankrupt, demonstrably untrue, and compelling proof of his own outlandish hubris; they also carried distinctly chilling undertones of government coercion. It is not the province of law enforcement chiefs to be judges and chief scolds of what their countrymen discuss. ...The glaring hubris of a man who would deem himself fit to pronounce such moral judgments on his fellow citizens is astonishing."
John Derbyshire at National Review responds to the cowardice accusation:
“If we are afraid to talk about race, it’s with good reason. For white people, at least, talking openly about race is a sure way to get yourself in trouble. ... For an ordinary white middle-class Joe, with a family to feed and a job to hold on to, by far the wisest strategy is just to keep his mouth shut, parrot a few multi-culti catch-phrases if the topic comes up, rent a couple of good action movies to see him through the Martin Luther King holiday, and take a crossword puzzle along to keep himself awake through those Diversity Awareness seminars his company makes him attend once a year in hopes of insulating the firm against nuisance “discrimination” lawsuits.”
If Holder wants to have “have frank conversations about the racial matters” then it’s time to have the racists on the Democrat side of the partisan divide to shut up, sit down, and listen.
AND THE REST OF CONGRESS TOO
Isn't this stimulating? Barney Frank and I (almost) agree on something.
Yes, Barney Frank should go.
I’ve got no brief for AIG, but the real anger should be directed toward the clowns in the White House and Congress who are busily throwing our hard-earned money down every toilet in the nation.
Echoing outrage expressed on both sides of the political aisle in the wake of revelations that American International Group will pay roughly $165 million in bonuses, Frank said he believes it's time to shake up the company.
"These people may have a right to their bonuses. They don't have a right to their jobs forever," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
Yes, Barney Frank should go.
I’ve got no brief for AIG, but the real anger should be directed toward the clowns in the White House and Congress who are busily throwing our hard-earned money down every toilet in the nation.
WHAT’S NEXT? OPRAH?
From Fox News: President Obama is heading back to the late-night circuit, with an appearance on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno" set for this week.
Jeez. I thought we had a President, not a late-night show comedian.
Jeez. I thought we had a President, not a late-night show comedian.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
OBAMA? CARTER?
I’m not the first to consider a comparison between Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter - a quick Google search with the phrase “Obama Carter comparison” will generate over 17 million hits – and I certainly won’t be the last.
With less than two months into the Obama administration, two things strike me as obvious. Both men are clearly incompetent and both are self-righteous, close-minded, dogmatics.
But there is one striking difference. Carter believed in the American dream but was convinced that Americans had lost the will to achieve it.
Obama is actively hostile to that dream.
President Obama is on track to becoming the worst American president of the 21st century.
With less than two months into the Obama administration, two things strike me as obvious. Both men are clearly incompetent and both are self-righteous, close-minded, dogmatics.
But there is one striking difference. Carter believed in the American dream but was convinced that Americans had lost the will to achieve it.
Obama is actively hostile to that dream.
President Obama is on track to becoming the worst American president of the 21st century.
MULTI-FRONT MANDATE
Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson is convinced that “Obama is right to pile his plate high.” Robinson argues
And
Robinson continues by bemoaning the “multitrillion-dollar bailout for the banks,” a “wasteful and ruinously expensive” health care system, and “dependen[cy] on foreign oil.”
He continues: “The ‘overload’ criticism makes sense, until you think about it.” And “I would argue that a laserlike focus on the financial crisis, to the exclusion of everything else, is unlikely to improve the situation and may actually make things worse.”
Robinson shouldn't have thought about it; he was correct to begin with.
I can attest to the fact that the “overload” criticism does make sense.
Been there, done that, learned from the mistake.
As a systems engineer with considerable experience in the design and development of large systems, it’s taken as gospel that you don’t tackle big problems all at once. You break them into smaller, more manageable systems and work them one at a time. It used to be called “build a little, test a little;” the current phrase du jour is “spiral development.”
Today, a “laserlike focus on the financial crisis, to the exclusion of everything else” is exactly the right approach. Why? Here’s an analogy: one doesn’t build a high-rise by constructing and occupying the 17th floor first -- without a foundation, keeping it airborne is tricky.
And the foundation for today’s problems is the financial and banking system. Fix it, and the rest of America’s problems become manageable. Don’t and, well, that 17th floor isn’t going to stay hanging in the sky for very long.
Robinson again:
Ignoring the ad hominem attack on “Wall Street’s irresponsibility and greed,” here’s the real question: Do we continue to put our children and grandchildren deeper and deeper in debt in a vain hope that Government irresponsibility will compensate for our own? Or do we step up, act responsibly and individually to fix what ails and move on?
Advice to "fix" the financial system before even thinking about health care, energy or education is either misguided or disingenuous.
And
This isn't about Rahm Emanuel's too-cute admonition not to "waste" a good crisis. It's about honoring a clear mandate.
Robinson continues by bemoaning the “multitrillion-dollar bailout for the banks,” a “wasteful and ruinously expensive” health care system, and “dependen[cy] on foreign oil.”
He continues: “The ‘overload’ criticism makes sense, until you think about it.” And “I would argue that a laserlike focus on the financial crisis, to the exclusion of everything else, is unlikely to improve the situation and may actually make things worse.”
Robinson shouldn't have thought about it; he was correct to begin with.
I can attest to the fact that the “overload” criticism does make sense.
Been there, done that, learned from the mistake.
As a systems engineer with considerable experience in the design and development of large systems, it’s taken as gospel that you don’t tackle big problems all at once. You break them into smaller, more manageable systems and work them one at a time. It used to be called “build a little, test a little;” the current phrase du jour is “spiral development.”
Today, a “laserlike focus on the financial crisis, to the exclusion of everything else” is exactly the right approach. Why? Here’s an analogy: one doesn’t build a high-rise by constructing and occupying the 17th floor first -- without a foundation, keeping it airborne is tricky.
And the foundation for today’s problems is the financial and banking system. Fix it, and the rest of America’s problems become manageable. Don’t and, well, that 17th floor isn’t going to stay hanging in the sky for very long.
Robinson again:
Here's the real question: Do we throw all that money into the apparently bottomless pit of Wall Street's irresponsibility and greed? Or do we spend some of it on initiatives that will make the American people healthier, better educated and less dependent on foreign oil -- and that, in the long run, should make us all more prosperous?
Ignoring the ad hominem attack on “Wall Street’s irresponsibility and greed,” here’s the real question: Do we continue to put our children and grandchildren deeper and deeper in debt in a vain hope that Government irresponsibility will compensate for our own? Or do we step up, act responsibly and individually to fix what ails and move on?
CAN’T WE ALL AGREE?
Victor Davis Hanson on some “hopenchange” measures that could get bipartisan support. I’ve paraphrased, so please read it all.
1) Recently the UN Secretary-General termed the US a “deadbeat” donor ... cannot we hope and change this organization out of New York? A UN headquarters in Nairobi or Lagos would save millions in transportation costs, and allow UN employees a feel for problems in a way New York does not.
2) We had a 9/11 Commission; a Baker-Hamilton Commission on Iraq. So why not a Meltdown Commission. Collate all the campaign contributions from the failed banks, Madoff, the entire open sewer of politics and high finance, and then let the commission issue a white paper on when, why, and how it all went down.
3) Farm subsidies. I never understood why a plum or grape grower got nothing and survived, and much wealthier cotton growers got lots, thrived, and said they would go broke without federal largess.
4) Our Ambassadors. Can we stop appointing the wealthy and well-connected to ambassadorships? Iimagine majors and colonels never making generals, who were instead appointed on the basis of campaign contributions.
5) When will the public simply ridicule the practice of naming buildings, highways, bridges, schools after living representatives and senators? If we must name infrastructure after our congressional grandees, cannot we at least wait until they are dead?
6) Do no harm. Yes, do nothing for a few months. Why not relax for 100 days and let the markets correct?
1) Recently the UN Secretary-General termed the US a “deadbeat” donor ... cannot we hope and change this organization out of New York? A UN headquarters in Nairobi or Lagos would save millions in transportation costs, and allow UN employees a feel for problems in a way New York does not.
2) We had a 9/11 Commission; a Baker-Hamilton Commission on Iraq. So why not a Meltdown Commission. Collate all the campaign contributions from the failed banks, Madoff, the entire open sewer of politics and high finance, and then let the commission issue a white paper on when, why, and how it all went down.
3) Farm subsidies. I never understood why a plum or grape grower got nothing and survived, and much wealthier cotton growers got lots, thrived, and said they would go broke without federal largess.
4) Our Ambassadors. Can we stop appointing the wealthy and well-connected to ambassadorships? Iimagine majors and colonels never making generals, who were instead appointed on the basis of campaign contributions.
5) When will the public simply ridicule the practice of naming buildings, highways, bridges, schools after living representatives and senators? If we must name infrastructure after our congressional grandees, cannot we at least wait until they are dead?
6) Do no harm. Yes, do nothing for a few months. Why not relax for 100 days and let the markets correct?
TAX THE RICH? IT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY
I originally posted on this subject when my daughter was laid off. Now it’s time for a little bit of the history of taxing the rich. First, the prediction, taken from a letter to the editor of the New York Times published on January 3, 1991:
And the result (taken from the transcript of a PBS News Hour program broadcast on January 1, 1996):
And now the Democrats want to do it again? Don’t I remember from somewhere something about those refusing to read history being condemned to repeat it? And something to the effect that history repeats itself, first as a tragedy, then as a farce?
Jeez. This administration makes Robin Hood look like a piker.
I have been in the boat business since 1972. The luxury tax that came into effect this year is in general unfair, but as it pertains to boats, grossly so. My industry was singled out and is being crushed by this tax. This will translate into lost jobs for about 600,000 people if something is not done quickly.
JOE MEGLEN
Dana Point, Calif.
Dec. 27, 1990
And the result (taken from the transcript of a PBS News Hour program broadcast on January 1, 1996):
KWAME HOLMAN: According to David MacFarlane, president of Alden Yachts, Dockery's order brought the company back from the brink of collapse. MacFarlane thinks back to November 1990, when President Bush and the Democratic majority in Congress agreed to levy the luxury tax. He says he still can't believe they did it.
DAVE MacFARLANE, Alden Yachts: I don't know anybody in the Marine industry that didn't know that there was a total disaster to start, and it's still amazing to think how somebody could come up with an idea that would shut off a business, and everybody that was in the business knew this would happen, and yet it floated right through.
KWAME HOLMAN: The theory behind the luxury tax sounded simple enough. Congress believed anyone willing to spend $100,000 or more on a new boat surely would be willing to pay an additional 10 percent to the federal government. But that didn't happen. Rather than pay the tax, many people in the market to buy a boat either didn't buy one, or bought one overseas. As a result, the luxury tax didn't bring in much money at all, and the customers' reluctance to buy put the boat-building business, particularly here in Rhode Island, out of business. We first visited Rhode Island in June of 1992. The luxury tax had been in effect for 18 months. Tens of thousands of jobs had been lost across the country, thousands in Rhode Island alone.
And now the Democrats want to do it again? Don’t I remember from somewhere something about those refusing to read history being condemned to repeat it? And something to the effect that history repeats itself, first as a tragedy, then as a farce?
Jeez. This administration makes Robin Hood look like a piker.
IS THE ERA OF BIG GOVERNMENT OVER?
The stock market has gone up for four straight days.
Wall Street appears to have decided that it can’t afford the Government’s dithering with a “recovery stimulus” and it’s now time to “do it itself.”
“Tea Parties” are continuing throughout the nation. They haven’t gotten much national attention (yet), but at the grassroots level, the tea parties seem to be getting traction. Taxpayers are saying loudly and clearly that they are disgusted with Congress and the Obama administration.
Congressional overreach and chaos at Obama’s Treasury Department may be a blessing in disguise.
So I ask: “Is the era of Big Government over?”
Wall Street appears to have decided that it can’t afford the Government’s dithering with a “recovery stimulus” and it’s now time to “do it itself.”
“Tea Parties” are continuing throughout the nation. They haven’t gotten much national attention (yet), but at the grassroots level, the tea parties seem to be getting traction. Taxpayers are saying loudly and clearly that they are disgusted with Congress and the Obama administration.
Congressional overreach and chaos at Obama’s Treasury Department may be a blessing in disguise.
So I ask: “Is the era of Big Government over?”
THE DIVIDER IN CHIEF
Victor Davis Hanson scores again with good advice for President Obama. The Obama administration responds.
Hanson: Forget talk radio.
Obama Administration: We are. Rush won.
Hanson:Forget about George Bush.
Obama Administration: Rush won. Back to Bush.
Hanson: Drop the messianic style.
Obama Administration: The teleprompter made him do it.
Hanson: Enough of the evil “rich.”
Obama Administration: It distracts the people from the likes of William (“Cold Cash”) Jefferson, Charley Rangel, and John Murtha.
Hanson: Stop the dissimulation.
Obama Administration: What’s dissimulation?
Read VDH's post; it's worth the time.
Hanson: Forget talk radio.
Obama Administration: We are. Rush won.
Hanson:Forget about George Bush.
Obama Administration: Rush won. Back to Bush.
Hanson: Drop the messianic style.
Obama Administration: The teleprompter made him do it.
Hanson: Enough of the evil “rich.”
Obama Administration: It distracts the people from the likes of William (“Cold Cash”) Jefferson, Charley Rangel, and John Murtha.
Hanson: Stop the dissimulation.
Obama Administration: What’s dissimulation?
Read VDH's post; it's worth the time.
RICH DEMOCRATS
Gary Andres asks why the “rich” support Democrats.
My guess is that they simply consider high taxes a cost of doing business; an investment in future earnings from access.
Those without access, the “almost rich” – those with incomes in the $200-$500 thousand range - are "going John Galt” because the marginal tax burden is so high that it’s hardly worth working to earn that next dollar.
My guess is that they simply consider high taxes a cost of doing business; an investment in future earnings from access.
Those without access, the “almost rich” – those with incomes in the $200-$500 thousand range - are "going John Galt” because the marginal tax burden is so high that it’s hardly worth working to earn that next dollar.
OH, THE DEBTS WE WILL SEE!
More from Victor Davis Hanson.
A trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there ... pretty soon you're talking real money.
Read it all.
These numbers are so fantastic, so absolutely crazed, that the thought of ever paying them off boggles the mathematical senses.
A trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there ... pretty soon you're talking real money.
Read it all.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
REASON TV AT THE DC "TEA PARTY"
Reason TV was at the Washington DC "tea party" I posted on earlier.
Here's their take on the protest.
Here's their take on the protest.
RUSH TO FAILURE
Barack Obama was inaugurated as President on January 20, 2009. Twenty-four days later, on February 13, the Economic Stimulus Act was passed. It was signed into law on February 17. It seems to me that the Democrats were in somewhat of a rush to spend roughly $1 trillion (Ed: that’s 12 zeros following the number 1).
After Rush Limbaugh declared that he wanted "the President to fail” – meaning, of course that he wanted the President’s programs to fail, the Democrats attacked with this billboard.
Ouestion: Are the Democrats so stupid as to not realize that that very slogan applies as much -- if not more -- to them as it does to Rush Limbaugh’s comment?
Answer: Why, yes. Yes they are.
[Update] From Hot Air, a very perceptive commenter:
[Update 2] Yosimite Sam and Porky Pig keep coming to mind ....
After Rush Limbaugh declared that he wanted "the President to fail” – meaning, of course that he wanted the President’s programs to fail, the Democrats attacked with this billboard.
Ouestion: Are the Democrats so stupid as to not realize that that very slogan applies as much -- if not more -- to them as it does to Rush Limbaugh’s comment?
Answer: Why, yes. Yes they are.
[Update] From Hot Air, a very perceptive commenter:
Hmmm….guess they pulled the pin and forgot to throw.
ElectricPhase on March 14, 2009 at 8:04 PM
[Update 2] Yosimite Sam and Porky Pig keep coming to mind ....
Friday, March 13, 2009
JUST FOR FUN
Spotted a bright apple green Honda Element on the road to work today.
License plate - GRNPEA
License plate - GRNPEA
DEBT STAR? OR DEATH STAR?
Shamelessly stolen from Glenn Reynolds.
Frankly, I’m not sure that “Death Star” isn’t a better descriptor. It does seem that the Obama administration is calling for the death of that shining city on a hill, death of capitalism, death of American exceptionalism – simply put, the death of the American dream.
Frankly, I’m not sure that “Death Star” isn’t a better descriptor. It does seem that the Obama administration is calling for the death of that shining city on a hill, death of capitalism, death of American exceptionalism – simply put, the death of the American dream.
AWED BY HIS BRILLIANCE
Could Obama Be Just Too Awesome?
Read the whole post.
“[We] need to know that if Obama’s actions seem stupid or insulting, it’s only because [we] are not yet able to understand his splendor. We must remember that while Obama’s brilliant radiance may fill us with awe, it could actually hurt the eyes of those unused to such light.”
Read the whole post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)