prodoggle.org

By Thomas Sowell
Washington gridlock may turn out to be the salvation of the Obama administration.

Not only does gridlock allow the president to blame Republicans for not solving the financial crisis that his own runaway spending created, the inability to carry out as much government intervention in the economy as when the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress means that the market can now recover on its own to some visible extent before the next election.

Such a recovery would of course be credited as a success of the Obama administration’s policies. With this theme being echoed throughout the pro-Obama media, enough voters might be sufficiently impressed to give the president a second term.

Brief for Monday
“So what do the Republicans leave out in their rebuttal to the grim Democrats? They leave out that they have an economic model that is proven. It’s called supply-side economics. According to the model, one does not raise taxes on anyone, certainly not in times of economic unease. The very rich might be slobs or they might be living saints, but like everyone else, their taxes are not to be raised because they spend their money or invest their money in economic growth. They cannot help themselves. The way they spend or invest is always more efficient than the government. Money spent by the rich (and the middle class) leads to growth. Money spent by the government rarely leads to growth, and the following year the government has to come up with more money again. … Government is not a reliable source of funds. Ask a citizen of Greece or of Italy.” –columnist R. Emmett Tyrrell

NWPATRIOTSCOMM

“Vitually everything is under federal control nowadays except the federal budget.” ~ H. E, Talmadge

Get your family tree figured out for FREE

DEAR ABBY:

‘I have always wanted to have my family history traced, but I can’t afford to spend a lot of money to do it. Any suggestions?’
Sam in California.

DEAR SAM:

‘Register as a Republican, and run for public office.’ Abby

By Ben Shapiro
Last week in Boston, a seven-year-old boy named Mark got into a fight with a bully. The bully put his hands around the boy’s throat and began to squeeze. That’s when Mark fought back; he kicked his aggressor right in the family jewels. In a normal society, we’d celebrate Mark. Throw him a ticker tape parade or something. Bullies need a sharp kick to the testicles. That’s how you convince them that bullying is wrong.

But in Boston, Mark was charged with sexual assault.

By Bernard Goldberg
I know it sounds crazy, but liberal journalists (a lot of them anyway) don’t see themselves as liberal. Trust me, I worked at CBS News for 28 years. I know what I’m talking about. If just about everybody in the newsroom thinks the way they do and shares the same political views as they do, then their views aren’t really liberal, are they? Of course not. They’re moderate … middle of the road … and yes, reasonable.

Right. And fish don’t know they’re wet. They don’t have any other frame of reference either.

By Victor Davis Hanson
For the American poor and unemployed, how liberal is it, really, to keep energy prices high while stalling millions of high-paying private-sector jobs that would both lower government costs in entitlements and empower the working classes?

In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency and high unemployment. Development of America’s vast new gas and oil finds addresses all three at once.

The idea of vastly expanding American gas and oil production in the 21st century is almost as unbelievable as the present administration’s apparent reluctance to capitalize on its windfall.

By Arnold Ahlert
Americans, whether they know or not, are in for the fight of their lives. It’s been one week since the biggest story of the last three years was published by Bloomberg News, and maybe the only thing more fascinating than the story itself is the level of indifference it’s gotten from our so-called mainstream media. Remember the $700 billion in TARP funds used to bail out the banks? Chump change. Or more to the point, collateral for the $7.77 trillion made available by the Federal Reserve to bail out financial institutions all over the world.

You won’t see too much about any of this in the news. But you can bet your life this is the essence of what the 2012 election is all about. Either we’re going to have a Constitutional republic run by the people we elect to run it, or we’ll continue to be subjected to the whims of an international cartel which privatizes profits and socialize losses, even as they threaten the autonomy of every democracy in the world in the process.

Those are the stakes. And it behooves Americans to demand that every candidate for president, including the current One Worlder occupying the White House, to say where they stand on the issue.

By Mona Charen
I’m for the rich because they create the dynamism and energy of a growing economy. The rich create businesses and hire people. A wealthy person gave me my first job. And I’ll bet the same is true of you.

I’m for the rich and for all the people who simply want an opportunity to become rich — opportunities that are becoming scarcer with every passing day of Obama’s presidency.
Front Page

“Certainly part of the solution to our American ‘malaise’ is political. A change in the Presidency will reboot the economy and replace failed economic policies with pro-growth incentives and leadership. But that’s down the road. What about today? What can we do to preserve the American dream in our own families and communities, even in the face of personal and societal challenges? To hear the Wall Street Occupiers tell it, the solution is for others to do more. They whine, complain, and demand. Sitting in tents, waiting to be fed, they entertain themselves with self-important conversations, sex, music, and drugs. They can’t even keep the peace or wipe up their own messes. They expect the government to do it — funded by other people’s (taxpayers’) money. That’s not the American spirit that made this country great. Nor will it generate growth and prosperity. Consider another group: our veterans. Even though nearly one in five return from Iraq and Afghanistan with PTSD or other traumatic injuries that hinder their return to work, they’re not out trashing their country, bemoaning their fates, or telling the government to do more. Instead, they live the American spirit of gratitude, resilience, and hard work.” –columnist Rebecca Hagelin

Michael Barone
Supercommittee members Sen. Pat Toomey and Rep. Jeb Hensarling are taking flak from some conservatives for proposing a deal including increases in “revenues,” and a Washington Post reporter had some fun insinuating that they were backing a tax-rate increase.

As this is written, no one knows what the supercommittee will do (or not do), but it’s worth taking a look at what Toomey and Hensarling actually were talking about. It may not matter now, but could after 2012.