The Bush-Kennedy amnesty has been defeated in the Senate.
Commentary on the defeat of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Joe Guzzardi: Joe On Immigration Vote--“We Had Them All The Way!”
Ericka Anderson: Immigration Victory and Hope
Gun Owners of America: Immigration Bill Dead For Now
Michelle Malkin: Kill the Bill: Shamnesty showdown
Michelle Malkin: Shamnesty on the Senate Floor, Take 2
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Mac Johnson: Bush’s Amnesty: Bad for America, But at Least it’s Political Suicide
Jed Babbin: Never Give In
General Commentary
Michelle Malkin: Clear the Damn Backlogs First
Steve Sailer: The Axis Of Amnesty’s Ideology Of Cheap Labor
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Conservative Victories
Thursday was a great day for conservatives.
An outpouring of opposition from conservatives defeated the amnesty bill, again. The vote was 46-53.
The Supreme Court overruled racial discrimination in deciding where students go to school.
A Senate committee defeated the efforts of Michael Bloomberg and the anti-gunners to reject the "Tiahrt amendment".
An outpouring of opposition from conservatives defeated the amnesty bill, again. The vote was 46-53.
The Supreme Court overruled racial discrimination in deciding where students go to school.
A Senate committee defeated the efforts of Michael Bloomberg and the anti-gunners to reject the "Tiahrt amendment".
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Social spending does not yield greater prosperity
Hat tip to The Economist:
No, The Economist is not. This graph shows a clear trend of greater GDP per capita inversely proportional to the level of social spending.
Why is this? Conventional wisdom says that citizens with "safety nets" and other social programs to help them out would have greater prosperity than those who do not. Isn't it, after all, the liberal maxim that social programs lead to greater prosperity?
Clearly, we are forgetting the unintended consequences of how these social programs are funded. When you punish prosperity and productivity by enacting crippling taxes on individuals and businesses, the net result is exactly what you'd expect: less productivity, less prosperity. By punishing the productive individuals in society we destroy incentives for them to create more wealth. Furthermore, the drain of deadweight loss, bureaucratic overhead, and inefficient allocation of monies all but guarantees that the tax revenue collected will be significantly under-maximized. The combination of disincentives to productive members of society and wasteful misallocation of taxes creates a significant drain on an economy.
This explains the chart above in that the consequences of a massive tax burden are a less prosperous society. And what of the outlier, Norway? Because the majority of their social programs are not funded through tax, but rather natural resources (read: oil), they do not suffer the same unintended consequences that the tax-supported countries have. Despite this, one wonders that if the oil revenue were held solely in private hands, where it would be used more efficiently, how much additional GDP per capita Norwegians would have.
The conclusion is clear: tax hikes reduce prosperity. Despite this, we have Democrats in the Michigan and US legislature trying to raise them up further. You cannot tax your way into prosperity. While countries around the world (especially, surprisingly, in Europe) are slashing tax rates, all we hear from our government is that they need to be raised.
It is time for the Democrats to wake up.
"Mark Thoma showcases this image with this commentary:These are countries whose per-capita incomes are greater than the OECD average. The point here is that there's no trade-off between high levels of national income and high levels of social spending.
Why, no, there isn't. You could also choose to have enormous deposits of oil and natural gas!
Seriously, I don't understand how anyone is making that argument from that graph. Throwing out Norway, where high GDP is due to fossil fuel reserves that cannot be achieved through any policy decision, there seems to be a downward sloping, although noisy, curve running from America and Ireland through Canada and the higher-spending European countries. Even if you throw out America--even if you throw out Ireland--the relationship is pretty clear.
Am I missing something?"
No, The Economist is not. This graph shows a clear trend of greater GDP per capita inversely proportional to the level of social spending.
Why is this? Conventional wisdom says that citizens with "safety nets" and other social programs to help them out would have greater prosperity than those who do not. Isn't it, after all, the liberal maxim that social programs lead to greater prosperity?
Clearly, we are forgetting the unintended consequences of how these social programs are funded. When you punish prosperity and productivity by enacting crippling taxes on individuals and businesses, the net result is exactly what you'd expect: less productivity, less prosperity. By punishing the productive individuals in society we destroy incentives for them to create more wealth. Furthermore, the drain of deadweight loss, bureaucratic overhead, and inefficient allocation of monies all but guarantees that the tax revenue collected will be significantly under-maximized. The combination of disincentives to productive members of society and wasteful misallocation of taxes creates a significant drain on an economy.
This explains the chart above in that the consequences of a massive tax burden are a less prosperous society. And what of the outlier, Norway? Because the majority of their social programs are not funded through tax, but rather natural resources (read: oil), they do not suffer the same unintended consequences that the tax-supported countries have. Despite this, one wonders that if the oil revenue were held solely in private hands, where it would be used more efficiently, how much additional GDP per capita Norwegians would have.
The conclusion is clear: tax hikes reduce prosperity. Despite this, we have Democrats in the Michigan and US legislature trying to raise them up further. You cannot tax your way into prosperity. While countries around the world (especially, surprisingly, in Europe) are slashing tax rates, all we hear from our government is that they need to be raised.
It is time for the Democrats to wake up.
Immigration Update
The Senate voted to reopen debate on the amnesty bill Tuesday by a vote of 64-35. On Wednesday, they debated parts of a "clay-pigeon" amendment. On Thursday morning, they will vote on cloture to limit debate on the bill. The vote is expected to be close.
Follow the latest developments at Michelle Malkin's amnesty archive.
Follow the latest developments at Michelle Malkin's amnesty archive.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Anti-Illegal Immigration Rally
From MI-FIRE:
---------------
The Michigan Federation for Immigration Reform & Enforcement is organizing an:
Anti - Illegal Immigration Rally
Tuesday June 26, 2007 at 12 noon
Senator Debbie Stabenow’s
Lansing Office
221 W Lake Lansing Road
East Lansing, MI 48823
Debbie Stabenow has lost touch with her electorate. We the citizens of Michigan will not stand for further obstruction of our laws and will not accept any Senate immigration bill (McCain/Kennedy Amnesty bill).
Opponents of illegal immigration have been working tirelessly to defeat the McCain/Kennedy bill. Allied Senators have worked hard to add amendments that would weaken the bill and create fractures in the coalition that is working to pass it.
To prevent these amendments, the Senate leadership has tried various tactics. Among these was the cloture plan. On June 7 at 11:41AM, Senate Majority Leader Reid called for a cloture vote – with full knowledge that he would later call a second cloture vote at 8:24PM. Reid and his allies voted against cloture in the first vote ( Roll Call Vote 203) and for cloture in the second vote (Roll Call Vote 206). By doing this, he – and other senators (like Stabenow) - could claim that they voted against cloture.
Stabenow also voted (Roll Call Vote 180) to defeat Vitter amendment 1157. This would have removed the Z Visa which is Amnesty.
Anti - Illegal Immigration Rally
Tuesday June 26, 2007 at 12 noon
Senator Debbie Stabenow’s
Lansing Office
221 W Lake Lansing Road
East Lansing, MI 48823
Debbie Stabenow has lost touch with her electorate. We the citizens of Michigan will not stand for further obstruction of our laws and will not accept any Senate immigration bill (McCain/Kennedy Amnesty bill).
Opponents of illegal immigration have been working tirelessly to defeat the McCain/Kennedy bill. Allied Senators have worked hard to add amendments that would weaken the bill and create fractures in the coalition that is working to pass it.
To prevent these amendments, the Senate leadership has tried various tactics. Among these was the cloture plan. On June 7 at 11:41AM, Senate Majority Leader Reid called for a cloture vote – with full knowledge that he would later call a second cloture vote at 8:24PM. Reid and his allies voted against cloture in the first vote ( Roll Call Vote 203) and for cloture in the second vote (Roll Call Vote 206). By doing this, he – and other senators (like Stabenow) - could claim that they voted against cloture.
Stabenow also voted (Roll Call Vote 180) to defeat Vitter amendment 1157. This would have removed the Z Visa which is Amnesty.
Immigration News
The Bush-Kennedy amnesty will return to the Senate next week.
Commentary on the status of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Gun Owners of America: Immigration Bill Update
Michelle Malkin: Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill will oppose shamnesty
James Edwards: Are Rational Immigration Laws a ‘Job American Politicians Won’t Do’?
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
John Fonte: Raindrops Keep Falling
WorldNetDaily: Revived illegals bill 'security nightmare'
Phyllis Schlafly: Americans Want English As Our Official Language
General Commentary
Phil Kent: How We Got Here: Foundations Fund Open Borders Agenda
Allan Wall: Mexican Government Vs. Those “Absurd” American Gun Rights
Deroy Murdock: As Immigration Bill Stalls, U.S. Border Invites Terrorists
Previous
Against Amnesty
The Bush-Kennedy Amnesty
The Bush-Kennedy Amnesty
Immigration News
Commentary on the status of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Gun Owners of America: Immigration Bill Update
Michelle Malkin: Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill will oppose shamnesty
James Edwards: Are Rational Immigration Laws a ‘Job American Politicians Won’t Do’?
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
John Fonte: Raindrops Keep Falling
WorldNetDaily: Revived illegals bill 'security nightmare'
Phyllis Schlafly: Americans Want English As Our Official Language
General Commentary
Phil Kent: How We Got Here: Foundations Fund Open Borders Agenda
Allan Wall: Mexican Government Vs. Those “Absurd” American Gun Rights
Deroy Murdock: As Immigration Bill Stalls, U.S. Border Invites Terrorists
Previous
Against Amnesty
The Bush-Kennedy Amnesty
The Bush-Kennedy Amnesty
Immigration News
Spending Fight Pending?
Robert Novak reports that President Bush is planning to veto most of the spending bills that fund the federal government. If true, this is good news. Democrats in Congress are planning big spending increases, above the increases proposed by the Bush administration.
It's high time for some vetoes.
Spending has increased faster under Bush than it did under Clinton. The same is true for non-defense spending.
Big spenders in Congress can be expected to try to override any vetoes. Fiscal conservatives need at least one third of the members in one body to sustain a veto. That's why the Republican Study Committee circulated a petition to members of the House pledging to sustain a spending veto. The pledge has been signed by 147 Congressmen.
Of Michigan's Republicans, Pete Hoekstra, Thaddeus McCotter, Mike Rogers, and Tim Walberg signed the letter.
Dave Camp, Vernon Ehlers, Joe Knollenberg, Candice Miller, and Fred Upton did not. Why?
It's high time for some vetoes.
Spending has increased faster under Bush than it did under Clinton. The same is true for non-defense spending.
Big spenders in Congress can be expected to try to override any vetoes. Fiscal conservatives need at least one third of the members in one body to sustain a veto. That's why the Republican Study Committee circulated a petition to members of the House pledging to sustain a spending veto. The pledge has been signed by 147 Congressmen.
Of Michigan's Republicans, Pete Hoekstra, Thaddeus McCotter, Mike Rogers, and Tim Walberg signed the letter.
Dave Camp, Vernon Ehlers, Joe Knollenberg, Candice Miller, and Fred Upton did not. Why?
POLITICAL UPDATE--Trade
This update focuses on trade. Trade can benefit nations, but government regulations and "free trade agreements" cause job losses. Government policies can make trade have negative consequences.
William Jasper: Behind the Job Loss
William Jasper: The Trouble With Our Trade Treaties
Dennis Behreandt: Losing Our Way
Phyllis Schlafly: Prepare for the Big Issue in 2008
Phyllis Schlafly: The Price Of Imported Food Is Too High
Dennis Behreandt: High Toll on U. S. Business & Industry
Mac Johnson: Outsourcing the Arsenal of Democracy?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
William Jasper: Behind the Job Loss
William Jasper: The Trouble With Our Trade Treaties
Dennis Behreandt: Losing Our Way
Phyllis Schlafly: Prepare for the Big Issue in 2008
Phyllis Schlafly: The Price Of Imported Food Is Too High
Dennis Behreandt: High Toll on U. S. Business & Industry
Mac Johnson: Outsourcing the Arsenal of Democracy?
POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Michigan Politics
1. MCRGO has a letter from Rep. Daniel Acciavatti on a bill to eliminate "gun-free" zones.
4. The bus routes that had been threatened with cuts have been saved.
5. The Kalamazoo County Taxpayers Association applauds the rejection of the proposed 9% tuition hike.
Office buildings, hospitals, convenience stores, Post Office buildings, day care centers, schools, universities and chain restaurants have all been targets of shootings with the intent on killing multiple victims. A striking paradox is associated with these incidents because they are much more likely to occur in areas that have been designated as gun free zones.2. The Gazette has an editorial criticizing the MCRI. John Miller explains the truth about minority admissions.
Schools became a popular target for shootings in the mid 1990’s, around the time that the Gun Free School Zones act of 1994 was enacted. In 1999, John Lott and William Landes published an extensive statistical study of multiple shootings incidents. They showed that mass shootings occur less often in areas where responsible citizens are allowed permits to carry concealed weapons. Have you ever heard of a mass shooting in a police station, a pistol range, or a gun show? Criminals always select a softer target for their acts of violence where they know citizens are unarmed, vulnerable, and where they know people cannot shoot back at them.
What gives? A massive effort on the part of the university to admit students using racial preferences before MCRI took effect:3. John Beacon, in charge of increasing Western's enrollment, has quit.
The University of Michigan Law School admitted six times as many underrepresented minority students before the ban on government affirmative action took place compared with after it took effect, according to admissions data released Thursday.
4. The bus routes that had been threatened with cuts have been saved.
The private contract with Indian Trails resulted from a multi-party bid and the company provided the best offer.So a private business can provide the same service for less money than a government program. Maybe there's a lesson there.
"Indian Trails gave us an excellent bid for the on-campus routes and Metro gave us good pricing for the pieces we left with them," Rinker said. "The only real negotiations involved hammering out who does what.
"The result is a contract that reduces costs by about 25 percent from last year's, despite increased route traffic, and saves nearly $900,000 over previously projected costs.
5. The Kalamazoo County Taxpayers Association applauds the rejection of the proposed 9% tuition hike.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Tom Tancredo
Tom Tancredo
Occupations
US Congressman (1998-present)
President of the Independence Institute
US Department of Education (1981-1992)
Colorado House of Representatives (1976-1980)
Websites
House of Representatives: http://tancredo.house.gov/
Campaign: http://www.teamtancredo.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo
Abortion
Rated 100% pro-life by Right to Life
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Hawkish realist
Voted to authorize war with Iraq
Opposed war in Kosovo
Gun Rights
Opposes gun control
Rated A by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Founder of Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus
Rated A+ by Americans for Better Immigration
Supports securing the border, interior enforcement
Opposes amnesty, chain migration, birthright citizenship
Marriage
Supports Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Marriage Protection Act
Regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Voted for legislation to withdraw from the United Nations
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization
Voted against CAFTA
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Regularly votes against government spending and programs
Voted against creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted against No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Character
Married since 1977.
Occupations
US Congressman (1998-present)
President of the Independence Institute
US Department of Education (1981-1992)
Colorado House of Representatives (1976-1980)
Websites
House of Representatives: http://tancredo.house.gov/
Campaign: http://www.teamtancredo.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo
Abortion
Rated 100% pro-life by Right to Life
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Hawkish realist
Voted to authorize war with Iraq
Opposed war in Kosovo
Gun Rights
Opposes gun control
Rated A by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Founder of Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus
Rated A+ by Americans for Better Immigration
Supports securing the border, interior enforcement
Opposes amnesty, chain migration, birthright citizenship
Marriage
Supports Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Marriage Protection Act
Regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Voted for legislation to withdraw from the United Nations
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization
Voted against CAFTA
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Regularly votes against government spending and programs
Voted against creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted against No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Character
Married since 1977.
Ron Paul
Ron Paul
Occupations
US Congressman (1976, 1978-1984, 1996-present)
Medical doctor (obstetrician/gynecologist)
United States Air Force (1963-1965)
Websites
House of Representatives: http://www.house.gov/paul/
Campaign: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
LewRockwell.com archive: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
Abortion
Pro-life federalist
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Strict non-interventionist
Voted against authorizing Iraq war, Kosovo war
Opposes foreign aid
Author of A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship
Gun Rights
Opposes all gun control
Rated A+ by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Supports securing border
Opposes amnesty, guest worker program
Sponsored legislation to end birthright citizenship
Marriage
Opposes "gay marriage"
Opposes Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Federal Marrage Act to deny federal courts jurisdiction over marriage
Regulation
Opposes all unconstitutional government regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Sponsored legislation to withdraw from the United Nations
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization, NAFTA
Voted against CAFTA
Opposes "free trade agreements" that regulate trade
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Opposes all unconstitutional government spending and programs
Voted against creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted against No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports abolition of the income tax
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Opposes existence of Federal Reserve, and inflation of money supply
Character
Married for 45 years
Occupations
US Congressman (1976, 1978-1984, 1996-present)
Medical doctor (obstetrician/gynecologist)
United States Air Force (1963-1965)
Websites
House of Representatives: http://www.house.gov/paul/
Campaign: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
LewRockwell.com archive: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
Abortion
Pro-life federalist
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Strict non-interventionist
Voted against authorizing Iraq war, Kosovo war
Opposes foreign aid
Author of A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship
Gun Rights
Opposes all gun control
Rated A+ by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Supports securing border
Opposes amnesty, guest worker program
Sponsored legislation to end birthright citizenship
Marriage
Opposes "gay marriage"
Opposes Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Federal Marrage Act to deny federal courts jurisdiction over marriage
Regulation
Opposes all unconstitutional government regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Sponsored legislation to withdraw from the United Nations
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization, NAFTA
Voted against CAFTA
Opposes "free trade agreements" that regulate trade
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Opposes all unconstitutional government spending and programs
Voted against creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted against No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports abolition of the income tax
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Opposes existence of Federal Reserve, and inflation of money supply
Character
Married for 45 years
Duncan Hunter
Duncan Hunter
Occupations
US Congressman (1980-present)
United States Army
Websites
House of Representatives: http://www.house.gov/hunter/
Campaign: http://www.gohunter08.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Hunter
Abortion
Rated 100% pro-life by Right to Life
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Hawkish realist
Voted to authorize war with Iraq
Supported war against Kosovo
Gun Rights
Consistently pro-gun
Rated A by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Wrote bill creating border fence in San Diego
Rated A+ by Americans for Better Immigration
Supports securing the border, interior enforcement
Opposes amnesty, chain migration, birthright citizenship
Marriage
Supports Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Marriage Protection Act
Regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Voted for United Nations funding
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization
Voted against NAFTA and CAFTA
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Generally votes for funding existing government programs
Voted for creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted for No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Character
Married since 1973.
Occupations
US Congressman (1980-present)
United States Army
Websites
House of Representatives: http://www.house.gov/hunter/
Campaign: http://www.gohunter08.com/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Hunter
Abortion
Rated 100% pro-life by Right to Life
Opposes Roe v. Wade
Foreign Policy
Hawkish realist
Voted to authorize war with Iraq
Supported war against Kosovo
Gun Rights
Consistently pro-gun
Rated A by Gun Owners of America
Immigration
Wrote bill creating border fence in San Diego
Rated A+ by Americans for Better Immigration
Supports securing the border, interior enforcement
Opposes amnesty, chain migration, birthright citizenship
Marriage
Supports Federal Marriage Amendment
Supports Marriage Protection Act
Regulation
Opposes McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" restrictions on free speech
Supports drilling for oil in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Sovereignty
Voted for United Nations funding
Supports withdrawing from World Trade Organization
Voted against NAFTA and CAFTA
Cosponsored resolution opposed to North American Union, Trans-Texas Corridor
Spending
Generally votes for funding existing government programs
Voted for creation of Medicare prescription drug program
Voted for No Child Left Behind education spending
Taxes
Supports tax cuts
Pledged not to raise taxes
Character
Married since 1973.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Immigration News
The discussion of immigration continues across America. The Bush-Kennedy amnesty may soon return to the Senate.
Commentary on the status of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Joe Guzzardi: Amnesty Bill Climbing Out Of Coffin—But We Can Slam The Lid
Steve Sailer: The Axis of Amnesty Can Be Defeated For Good
Pat Buchanan: The Regime Against the Nation
Jed Babbin: We Made it a “Miers Moment”
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
James Edwards: No Bill Beats the Bad Senate Bill
Ron Paul: Amnesty Opponents Are Not Un-American
Michelle Malkin: Kill the Bill: Exposing the dirty deal
General commentary
Ann Coulter: 'No Drug Smuggler Left Behind!'
Michelle Malkin: It Ain't Over 'Til the Alien Wins
Phyllis Schlafly: Advice For Education Secretary Spellings
Thomas Sowell: A Home Invader Program?
Thomas Sowell: Bipartisan Betrayal
National Review: Re: The Company You Keep
Commentary on the status of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
Joe Guzzardi: Amnesty Bill Climbing Out Of Coffin—But We Can Slam The Lid
Steve Sailer: The Axis of Amnesty Can Be Defeated For Good
Pat Buchanan: The Regime Against the Nation
Jed Babbin: We Made it a “Miers Moment”
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty
James Edwards: No Bill Beats the Bad Senate Bill
Ron Paul: Amnesty Opponents Are Not Un-American
Michelle Malkin: Kill the Bill: Exposing the dirty deal
General commentary
Ann Coulter: 'No Drug Smuggler Left Behind!'
Michelle Malkin: It Ain't Over 'Til the Alien Wins
Phyllis Schlafly: Advice For Education Secretary Spellings
Thomas Sowell: A Home Invader Program?
Thomas Sowell: Bipartisan Betrayal
National Review: Re: The Company You Keep
POLITICAL UPDATE--Education
This update focuses on education. Liberalism and government regulations lead to ignorance and indoctrination in government schools and colleges.
Walter Williams says that competition is better than monopoly.
Phyllis Schlafly exposes Virginia Tech's leftist English Department.
Phyllis Schlafly surveys ignorance and liberalism in college.
Walter Williams explains how FERPA relates to the VPI shootings.
Walter Williams writes that schools promote ignorance.
Michelle Malkin gives examples of schools villainizing Christians.
Walter Williams chronicles college liberalism.
Walter Williams shows that William and Mary is run by liberals.
Phyllis Schlafly explains how schools trample parents' rights.
Learn more about education issues in Education Reporter.
Walter Williams says that competition is better than monopoly.
Phyllis Schlafly exposes Virginia Tech's leftist English Department.
Phyllis Schlafly surveys ignorance and liberalism in college.
Walter Williams explains how FERPA relates to the VPI shootings.
Walter Williams writes that schools promote ignorance.
Michelle Malkin gives examples of schools villainizing Christians.
Walter Williams chronicles college liberalism.
Walter Williams shows that William and Mary is run by liberals.
Phyllis Schlafly explains how schools trample parents' rights.
Learn more about education issues in Education Reporter.
Friday, June 15, 2007
McCain in Trouble
From the Evans-Novak Political Report:
--------------
GOP Field: While Sen. John McCain claims that everything is "fine" in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, events strongly suggest otherwise. The former frontrunner is now in deep trouble. With respect to the positive signs a presidential campaign can point to at this early stage -- fundraising, national polls, state polls, endorsements -- McCain finds himself almost empty-handed.
For this and other reasons, the nascent campaign of former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson poses a challenge for McCain in particular. Thompson has reportedly raised millions in just days after filing an exploratory committee, and a new national Bloomberg poll puts him at 21 percent, in a strong second place against former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. McCain has plunged to 12 percent, just ahead of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, but at least Romney has some bright points in his favor: his lead in fundraising and his lead in Iowa and New Hampshire polls.
McCain has no such good news. If Thompson is the charging bear, McCain is the slowest of the three campers fleeing him -- the most likely to be devoured.
First, McCain has fallen out of favor in the important state polls. Romney, who has saturated the Iowa and New Hampshire airwaves with campaign advertisements in recent weeks, has leap-frogged over both McCain and Rudy Giuliani to lead in both states. Romney leads McCain only narrowly in Iowa but has pushed his lead in New Hampshire to 8 percent. In South Carolina, Giuliani and McCain trade a narrow lead. In Florida, Giuliani dominates.
McCain's recent withdrawal from the August straw poll in Ames, Iowa, seemed to come with a sigh of relief. With Giuliani exiting the straw poll first, McCain had an excellent excuse to drop out of an expensive and early symbolic contest that he probably can't win against the moneyed Romney. Especially troubling for McCain in Iowa are his past stances on ethanol, immigration and guns, to say nothing of his campaign finance reform bill.
With respect to fundraising, McCain had a dismal first quarter at $12.5 million, widely considered a disappointment. Now his campaign is setting extremely low expectations by saying simply that he will raise more than that amount in the current quarter (results will be available in mid-July). Such a take would be woefully insufficient for him to continue in earnest, perhaps leaving him with one fourth (or less) of the cash on hand of his top competitors. His campaign is still recovering from its earlier spendthrift ways, even though his staff has now been pared down by more than one third.
More striking are the stories of many high-profile Bush supporters -- so-called Rangers and Pioneers -- from previous campaigns. They are currently keeping their powder dry in spite of McCain's aggressive courtship. The uncommitted heavy-hitters see Thompson looming in the background, prompting many to hold off in consideration of backing the newcomer. McCain is also soliciting help from unusual quarters, giving rise to stories that hardly inspire confidence in his operation.
Third is the recently reported defection of McCain staff and a high-profile supporter, which is more symptomatic than causal of McCain's problems. Fourth is the national poll mentioned above. With non-candidate Thompson 10 points ahead of McCain nationwide, the "electability" rationale for backing McCain begins to fade for many Republicans.
More significant are the negative motivations for supporting the top three candidates, and McCain in particular. As we have argued previously, much Republican support for the top three stands on three pillars, or the Three D's: disagreement with Giuliani, distrust of Romney and dislike for McCain. For example, a conservative Republican who feels overwhelmed by antipathy toward Romney and Giuliani will reluctantly back McCain on these or similar grounds: "McCain may be too liberal on taxes and guns, but at least he is very conservative on earmarks and spending, he's tough on terrorism, and he has a pro-life voting record on abortion." The same sort of thinking applies, in varying degree, to all three candidates.
But with the entry of Thompson into the race, many conservatives will feel -- rightly or wrongly -- that they may have a conservative alternative and need not settle for someone they merely distrust or dislike less than the others. This is the key to Thompson's effortless success so far, his climb from nowhere to 21 percent nationally. (It is also a reason Thompson could suddenly implode once he is defined.)
With Thompson's candidacy all but declared, the outlook becomes even more bleak for McCain. The big money that McCain has been courting could instead flow to the newcomer. Romney, who will never be without money, is sprinting ahead in the early states. Giuliani remains the overall frontrunner. Thompson is luring McCain supporters into his camp.
McCain may be able to overcome any one of these setbacks, but can he survive them all simultaneously? The futures markets are already counting him out, putting his contract at $12 to the $29 price on Thompson.
--------------
GOP Field: While Sen. John McCain claims that everything is "fine" in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, events strongly suggest otherwise. The former frontrunner is now in deep trouble. With respect to the positive signs a presidential campaign can point to at this early stage -- fundraising, national polls, state polls, endorsements -- McCain finds himself almost empty-handed.
For this and other reasons, the nascent campaign of former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson poses a challenge for McCain in particular. Thompson has reportedly raised millions in just days after filing an exploratory committee, and a new national Bloomberg poll puts him at 21 percent, in a strong second place against former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. McCain has plunged to 12 percent, just ahead of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, but at least Romney has some bright points in his favor: his lead in fundraising and his lead in Iowa and New Hampshire polls.
McCain has no such good news. If Thompson is the charging bear, McCain is the slowest of the three campers fleeing him -- the most likely to be devoured.
First, McCain has fallen out of favor in the important state polls. Romney, who has saturated the Iowa and New Hampshire airwaves with campaign advertisements in recent weeks, has leap-frogged over both McCain and Rudy Giuliani to lead in both states. Romney leads McCain only narrowly in Iowa but has pushed his lead in New Hampshire to 8 percent. In South Carolina, Giuliani and McCain trade a narrow lead. In Florida, Giuliani dominates.
McCain's recent withdrawal from the August straw poll in Ames, Iowa, seemed to come with a sigh of relief. With Giuliani exiting the straw poll first, McCain had an excellent excuse to drop out of an expensive and early symbolic contest that he probably can't win against the moneyed Romney. Especially troubling for McCain in Iowa are his past stances on ethanol, immigration and guns, to say nothing of his campaign finance reform bill.
With respect to fundraising, McCain had a dismal first quarter at $12.5 million, widely considered a disappointment. Now his campaign is setting extremely low expectations by saying simply that he will raise more than that amount in the current quarter (results will be available in mid-July). Such a take would be woefully insufficient for him to continue in earnest, perhaps leaving him with one fourth (or less) of the cash on hand of his top competitors. His campaign is still recovering from its earlier spendthrift ways, even though his staff has now been pared down by more than one third.
More striking are the stories of many high-profile Bush supporters -- so-called Rangers and Pioneers -- from previous campaigns. They are currently keeping their powder dry in spite of McCain's aggressive courtship. The uncommitted heavy-hitters see Thompson looming in the background, prompting many to hold off in consideration of backing the newcomer. McCain is also soliciting help from unusual quarters, giving rise to stories that hardly inspire confidence in his operation.
Third is the recently reported defection of McCain staff and a high-profile supporter, which is more symptomatic than causal of McCain's problems. Fourth is the national poll mentioned above. With non-candidate Thompson 10 points ahead of McCain nationwide, the "electability" rationale for backing McCain begins to fade for many Republicans.
More significant are the negative motivations for supporting the top three candidates, and McCain in particular. As we have argued previously, much Republican support for the top three stands on three pillars, or the Three D's: disagreement with Giuliani, distrust of Romney and dislike for McCain. For example, a conservative Republican who feels overwhelmed by antipathy toward Romney and Giuliani will reluctantly back McCain on these or similar grounds: "McCain may be too liberal on taxes and guns, but at least he is very conservative on earmarks and spending, he's tough on terrorism, and he has a pro-life voting record on abortion." The same sort of thinking applies, in varying degree, to all three candidates.
But with the entry of Thompson into the race, many conservatives will feel -- rightly or wrongly -- that they may have a conservative alternative and need not settle for someone they merely distrust or dislike less than the others. This is the key to Thompson's effortless success so far, his climb from nowhere to 21 percent nationally. (It is also a reason Thompson could suddenly implode once he is defined.)
With Thompson's candidacy all but declared, the outlook becomes even more bleak for McCain. The big money that McCain has been courting could instead flow to the newcomer. Romney, who will never be without money, is sprinting ahead in the early states. Giuliani remains the overall frontrunner. Thompson is luring McCain supporters into his camp.
McCain may be able to overcome any one of these setbacks, but can he survive them all simultaneously? The futures markets are already counting him out, putting his contract at $12 to the $29 price on Thompson.
Portage elections
The 2007 elections in Portage are beginning to take shape.
Moderate Republican mayor Peter Strazdas plans to run for reelection.
Longtime moderate-conservative city councilman Ted Vliek has announced that he plans to retire.
Conservative Margaret O'Brien and moderate Larry DeShazor have not yet announced whether they plan to run for reelection. Both may be interested in running for the seat of State Representative Jack Hoogendyk, who will be term-limited in 2008. DeShazor was defeated in a primary challenge to Jack in 2006.
Moderate Republican mayor Peter Strazdas plans to run for reelection.
Longtime moderate-conservative city councilman Ted Vliek has announced that he plans to retire.
Conservative Margaret O'Brien and moderate Larry DeShazor have not yet announced whether they plan to run for reelection. Both may be interested in running for the seat of State Representative Jack Hoogendyk, who will be term-limited in 2008. DeShazor was defeated in a primary challenge to Jack in 2006.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Tuition hike rejected
The WMU Board of Trustees rejected a proposed 9% hike in tuition because they believe it is too large. This is a good decision, but it leaves open the possibility of a smaller increase. The Kalamazoo Gazette lists the size of tuition hikes in previous years.
Tuition has increased by 68% in the last six years.
When will all the people who attack oil companies accuse universities of "price gouging"?
Tuition has increased by 68% in the last six years.
When will all the people who attack oil companies accuse universities of "price gouging"?
Gun debate continues
Professor James Gregory has a devastating response to Paul Pancella's recent letter to the editor criticizing guns on campus.
He provides a valuable reminder of the history of the debate over concealed weapons. Anti-gun forces made the same arguments in 2000, when Michigan's concealed carry law was passed. None of their predictions came true; in fact, crime declined.
The whole idea of science is to develop a hypothesis, test it, and reject it if the data contradict its predictions. But anti-gun forces never seem to learn from experience. Dr. Pancella should apply his knowledge of the principles of science to this issue.
-------------------
Gun-free policies don't prevent violence
James Gregory
In response to Derek Getman's criticism of Western Michigan University's gun-free campus policy, professor Paul Pancella maintained that allowing legally armed students and faculty members to carry concealed firearms on campus would more or less ensure an increase in gun violence here at WMU.
By Dr. Pancella's logic, an increase in the number of cars on the road would, by default, more or less guarantee an increase in the number of drunk driving offenses on record. Simply because individuals are given a right does not mean that they will all abuse it. Dr. Pancella has essentially expressed the same unrealistic concern that opponents of Michigan's concealed carry law voiced prior to its passage in 2001, only on a smaller scale. Those who stood against making Michigan a "shall-issue" carrying concealed weapon state maintained that an increase in the number of lawfully trained, registered and concerned citizens carrying firearms could only result in a dramatic increase in violent shootings throughout the state.
No such condition of general chaos and disorder has descended upon our pleasant peninsula. In addition to basic education and awareness on the subject of school shootings, the only way to prevent an incident like that which recently occurred at Virginia Tech is, frankly, to make the school less attractive as a target. Either increase the number of armed police officers on campus who are trained to deal with and quickly react to shooter scenarios or allow lawfully armed individuals to carry on university grounds.
The fact is that those who intend to do harm against others, people like Seung-Hui Cho, will disregard as many laws and policies as can be put in front of them. Criminals, by definition, break laws and regulations that others follow. Having decided to commit murder, especially on a large scale, makes it quite easy to ignore rules against possessing guns on a campus - or anywhere else for that matter. In the face of a deranged individual who cares little for following such rules, the average law abiding and policy conscious students or faculty members would find themselves at a serious, and perhaps deadly, disadvantage.
James Gregory
WMU foreign languages department
He provides a valuable reminder of the history of the debate over concealed weapons. Anti-gun forces made the same arguments in 2000, when Michigan's concealed carry law was passed. None of their predictions came true; in fact, crime declined.
The whole idea of science is to develop a hypothesis, test it, and reject it if the data contradict its predictions. But anti-gun forces never seem to learn from experience. Dr. Pancella should apply his knowledge of the principles of science to this issue.
-------------------
Gun-free policies don't prevent violence
James Gregory
In response to Derek Getman's criticism of Western Michigan University's gun-free campus policy, professor Paul Pancella maintained that allowing legally armed students and faculty members to carry concealed firearms on campus would more or less ensure an increase in gun violence here at WMU.
By Dr. Pancella's logic, an increase in the number of cars on the road would, by default, more or less guarantee an increase in the number of drunk driving offenses on record. Simply because individuals are given a right does not mean that they will all abuse it. Dr. Pancella has essentially expressed the same unrealistic concern that opponents of Michigan's concealed carry law voiced prior to its passage in 2001, only on a smaller scale. Those who stood against making Michigan a "shall-issue" carrying concealed weapon state maintained that an increase in the number of lawfully trained, registered and concerned citizens carrying firearms could only result in a dramatic increase in violent shootings throughout the state.
No such condition of general chaos and disorder has descended upon our pleasant peninsula. In addition to basic education and awareness on the subject of school shootings, the only way to prevent an incident like that which recently occurred at Virginia Tech is, frankly, to make the school less attractive as a target. Either increase the number of armed police officers on campus who are trained to deal with and quickly react to shooter scenarios or allow lawfully armed individuals to carry on university grounds.
The fact is that those who intend to do harm against others, people like Seung-Hui Cho, will disregard as many laws and policies as can be put in front of them. Criminals, by definition, break laws and regulations that others follow. Having decided to commit murder, especially on a large scale, makes it quite easy to ignore rules against possessing guns on a campus - or anywhere else for that matter. In the face of a deranged individual who cares little for following such rules, the average law abiding and policy conscious students or faculty members would find themselves at a serious, and perhaps deadly, disadvantage.
James Gregory
WMU foreign languages department
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Victory for now
The magical compromise from heaven, aka the Bush-Kennedy amnesty, has been defeated for now. The bill failed a cloture vote in the Senate on Thursday. Of course, it could reappear at any time. Still, its backers seem to have lost their best chance to pass a bill in this session of Congress.
Michelle Malkin chronicles the debate in the Senate and lists how Senators voted.
The heroes here are the conservatives (and more) who rose up to defeat this bill.
The Senate's three conservatives, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, and Jeff Sessions deserve great credit for their work to defeat this bill. Another hero is Democrat Byron Dorgan, who proved that at least one Democrat sincerely cares about American workers.
As for the other side, see the last section of this article.
Next up: defeating the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Michelle Malkin chronicles the debate in the Senate and lists how Senators voted.
The heroes here are the conservatives (and more) who rose up to defeat this bill.
The Senate's three conservatives, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, and Jeff Sessions deserve great credit for their work to defeat this bill. Another hero is Democrat Byron Dorgan, who proved that at least one Democrat sincerely cares about American workers.
As for the other side, see the last section of this article.
Next up: defeating the Law of the Sea Treaty.
The Bush-Kennedy Amnesty
The Bush-Kennedy amnesty appears to have been defeated for now.
Commentary on the defeat of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty.
Michelle Malkin: Kill The Bill...
Mark Krikorian: Amnesty, R.I.P.
Joe Guzzardi: Ding, Dong, The Bill Is Dead! (Probably)
WorldNetDaily: Bush wants Reid to resurrect bill
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty.
VDARE: Ten Reasons The Amnesty/Immigration Surge Bill Is Appalling
Byron Dorgan: Unlabor Day
Mike Franc: American Support For Amnesty Fades
Human Events: Pro-Illegal-Immigrant Crowd Gets Nasty
Tom Tancredo: Senator Kyl’s Stockholm Syndrome
R Cort Kirkwood: Will Congress Turn Its Back on You When It Comes to Immigration?
Phyllis Schlafly: Immigration Sellout, Not Reform
Ron Paul: Immigration ‘Compromise’ Sells Out Our Sovereignty
Mike Franc: Amnesty's Heavy Fiscal Impact
Ericka Andersen: Amnesty for Honest Gang Bangers
Deroy Murdock: Immigration Bill Subverts Americanization, English Language
James Edwards: Amnesty Spin Zone
General commentary.
Don Feder: Ten Myths Used to Sell Amnesty to Americans
Ann Coulter: Bush's America: Roach Motel
Heather MacDonald: Illegal Immigration's Family Breakdown
Marcus Epstein: Attrition—Alternative To "Mass Deportation?"
Ann Coulter: A Green Card in Every Pot
Aryeh Spero: The Biblical Green Card?
R Cort Kirkwood: Social Security for Immigrants
William Jasper: Immigration "Reform"?
Commentary on the defeat of the Bush-Kennedy amnesty.
Michelle Malkin: Kill The Bill...
Mark Krikorian: Amnesty, R.I.P.
Joe Guzzardi: Ding, Dong, The Bill Is Dead! (Probably)
WorldNetDaily: Bush wants Reid to resurrect bill
Commentary on the Bush-Kennedy amnesty.
VDARE: Ten Reasons The Amnesty/Immigration Surge Bill Is Appalling
Byron Dorgan: Unlabor Day
Mike Franc: American Support For Amnesty Fades
Human Events: Pro-Illegal-Immigrant Crowd Gets Nasty
Tom Tancredo: Senator Kyl’s Stockholm Syndrome
R Cort Kirkwood: Will Congress Turn Its Back on You When It Comes to Immigration?
Phyllis Schlafly: Immigration Sellout, Not Reform
Ron Paul: Immigration ‘Compromise’ Sells Out Our Sovereignty
Mike Franc: Amnesty's Heavy Fiscal Impact
Ericka Andersen: Amnesty for Honest Gang Bangers
Deroy Murdock: Immigration Bill Subverts Americanization, English Language
James Edwards: Amnesty Spin Zone
General commentary.
Don Feder: Ten Myths Used to Sell Amnesty to Americans
Ann Coulter: Bush's America: Roach Motel
Heather MacDonald: Illegal Immigration's Family Breakdown
Marcus Epstein: Attrition—Alternative To "Mass Deportation?"
Ann Coulter: A Green Card in Every Pot
Aryeh Spero: The Biblical Green Card?
R Cort Kirkwood: Social Security for Immigrants
William Jasper: Immigration "Reform"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)