When Vice President George H.W. Bush accepted the GOP nomination for president in New Orleans in 1988, he memorably said: "Read my lips, no new taxes." Too memorably, as things turned out. He won that election handily, carrying forty states against the hapless Michael Dukakis and 53 percent of the vote. It was the last comfortable victory the Republicans have seen.
By 1990, however, President Bush was in a bind. He had an army in Saudi Arabia as part of Operation Desert Shield and he had a solidly Democratic Congress determined to force him to break his tax pledge. His OMB Director, the late Dick Darman, urged him to make a deal with the Hill and get on with the business of governing. When more savvy political advisers protested, citing the "Read my Lips, no new taxes" pledge to the American people, Darman reportedly replied that those were just words some speechwriter put in front of the president.
That may be. But the president's lips pronounced those words. And his breaking of his over-the-top promise to Americans doomed the Bush presidency. Arguably, the Bush fracturing splintered Ronald Reagan's winning coalition, a solid majority that Republicans have not been able to reassemble since. Despite a stratospheric 91 percent approval rating following his lightning victory over Saddam Hussein's forces in the first Gulf War, Bush's standing sagged for two years. His broken promise fueled grassroots rage and the Perot challenge. Bush 41 fell to Bill Clinton in the 1992 election, gaining an abysmal 37 percent of the popular vote. Columnist George Will said he had made a sow's ear of the Reagan silk purse. Even Barbara Bush piled on. Commenting on his retirement sport of skydiving, she puckishly said she hadn't seen her George take such a plunge since the `92 campaign. more >>
WASHINGTON – A leader in the largest Protestant denomination in the United States has stated at a conservative event Tuesday that drew over 600 leaders to lobby for immigration reform that their effort is "really close" to coming to fruition.
Dr. Barrett Duke, vice president for Public Policy and Research at the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told The Christian Post at the event titled "Americans for Reform: Immigration Reform for our Economy, Faith and Security", which was held at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Hall of Flags room, that reform was near. "They passed five bills out of committee already. They still need floor votes on those. Leadership, House leadership, has already said they want to get this done; they're working on a couple more bills in the House," said Duke.
"So they've done most of the really heavy lifting on this already. It wouldn't take much more than simply scheduling a floor vote." more >>
"Obamacare isn't a political abstraction any longer. Its success doesn't depend on spin or solidarity. What matters for the law -- and for the people who are depending on it -- is how well it actually works. So far, it's not working well at all."
So concludes Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein (no Obama antagonist) in a piece outlining the substantive and broad-ranging problems with Obamacare – problems that extend beyond website "glitches." In four simple sentences, Klein strikes at the heart of the political fallacy encapsulated by the President's signature legislative achievement: When you allow ideology to drive the development of policy with no attention to reality or practicality, the results are catastrophic. For the President and his supporters, Obamacare was conceived not as a policy solution for America's growing healthcare challenges but as a symbol of the President's progressive worldview. If the pre-Obamacare health care system represented the disenfranchisement of the poor, sick, and elderly at the hands of unscrupulous insurance companies, miserly employers, and complicit physicians, then the post-Obamacare health care system would be one in which all of these inequities were eliminated. College graduates entering the workforce would no longer have to fret about whether or not their first job offered affordable and comprehensive coverage – they could simply stay on their parent's plan. Desperate families struggling to secure coverage despite preexisting medical conditions would now have equal access to quality coverage. The very poor would have expanded access to Medicaid. In every scenario and for every demographic (with the exception, of course, of those fortunate one-percenters), health insurance would be easier to get, more affordable, and more comprehensive.
Of course, the question of how exactly the federal government would accomplish the Herculean task of overhauling approximately 1/6 of the U.S. economy was never fully addressed in all the months of debate that led up to the controversial passage of the Affordable Care Act. Again and again, the legislation was defended and promoted not based on its merits as policy, but based purely on its value as a ideological symbol of Progressivism in action. In response to naysaying Republicans and their incessant focus on the constitutional implications of the law and the challenges of deciphering its labyrinthine volumes, Nancy Pelosi replied: more >>
A conservative advocacy group concerned about inflation has suggested a new game plan for the GOP that could revive social issues as an asset for the party. The group, American Principles in Action (APIA), challenges the GOP's fear of losing on social issues, restating the importance of issues like abortion as part of an economic vision focused on restoring the middle class family.
A new AIPA analysis released late last week also encourages the GOP to stop framing issues from an employer's viewpoint in favor of speaking to issues that affect employees, such as cost of living and wages.
"The consultant-driven conventional wisdom is that social issues are distracting voters from the GOP's winning economic message; therefore candidates are encouraged to mute the social issues," Frank Cannon, president of APIA, said in a press release for the report. more >>
The country of Greece is in catastrophic economic chaos due to a history of irresponsible spending. This is where the U.S. will be in few years unless drastic changes are made. The question is no longer if, but when. At some point, there will no longer be any low-interest credit available to continue letting Santa Claus run the U.S.; the interest owed on existing debt will exceed tax revenues.
We can get a feel for what will happen to us by looking at Greece. When Greece reached that point six years ago, the Greek government was forced to impose painful austerity measures, with little success, in order to try and rein in the spending.
Living conditions in Greece have become shocking. Greece's universal coverage health insurance, which no doubt was a significant contributing factor to the overspending, is now utterly unaffordable, so the country is relying on volunteer doctors and medical personnel to work for free. It is estimated that 100,000 children are working – illegally – just to help their families get by. It is reported that 70,000 children dropped out of school in 2012 to do so. more >>
Big names in big businesses are lobbying for immigration reform in Washington, D.C., including Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, and Rupert Murdoch. But political strategists disagree about the motivation behind the money.
"Backing the push for comprehensive reform is an array of deep-pocketed special interests from an ostensibly diverse range of ideological perspectives, including the Chamber of Commerce, Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, Mark Zuckerberg, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, the AFL-CIO, the National Council of La Raza, and others," writes National Review's Andrew Stiles. Stiles added that Facebook Founder Zuckerberg announced plans to spend $50 million.
Dan Holler, communications director for Heritage Action for America, told The Christian Post in an interview on Friday that, "All the money is on the pro-amnesty side and certainly big business is behind bankrolling that." Holler did not speculate as to why these interests are supporting what he deems "amnesty," but at a Heritage Foundation briefing on Wednesday, a conservative pundit said big businesses want "amnesty" in order to get Democrats – the party of big business and big government – elected. more >>