SUPPORT THIS CONSERVATIVE VOICE

SUPPORT THIS CONSERVATIVE VOICE

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

"If Orwell Had Written ‘1984’ With @SarahPalinUSA In Mind": The Camp of The Saints


From the outstanding site of noted writer Bob Belvedere "The Camp of The Saints LINK



If Orwell Had Written ‘1984’ With @SarahPalinUSA In Mind

28 OCTOBER 2014 @ 21:33
Special guest post by M. Joseph Sheppard.

Introduction:

The left has gone crazy, lashing out in their portends of defeat at their “2 minute hate figure-Sarah Palin. Really, it is astounding, dumbfounding actually, that the closer the election gets, the greater the number of near hysterical anti-Palin tweets from “progressives.” It seems the Liberals have gone collectively mad. Palin is not running for anything, they deem her “irrelevant and “a diminished figure”. But, Palin makes a statements-on climate change/Ebola for example and Liberal’s Tweets explode. 
She controls their minds — in a manner unseen in political life previously. Their portends of coming electoral defeat, the final end of the “hopey changey” stuff drenches their Tweets with bitter salt tears and in their hapless hopeless fury they lash out at their hate figure. George Orwell summed up the heart of the “progressive” left in his ‘1984″ satire. Were he alive today he very much could have substituted his ‘Emmanuel Goldstein” hate figure for Sarah Palin with total validity-as per this rewrite (with utter deference to the master)

If Orwell Had Written ‘1984’ With Palin In Mind

It was nearly eleven hundred, and in the Records Department, where Winston worked, they were dragging the chairs out of the cubicles and grouping them in the center of the hall opposite the big telescreen, in preparation for the Two Minutes Hate.
The next moment a hideous, grinding speech, as of some monstrous machine running without oil, burst from the big telescreen at the end of the room. It was a noise that set one’s teeth on edge and bristled the hair at the back of one’s neck. The Hate had started.
As usual, the face of Sarah Palin, the Enemy of the Democratic Party and the Main Stream Media and especially leftist bloggers, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. A little red-haired woman journalist gave a squeak of mingled fear and disgust. Palin was the renegade, one of the leading figures of the Republican Party, almost on a level with the near mythological figure “Reagan”, and had engaged in counter-liberal activities, had been condemned to irrelevancy, but had mysteriously escaped from liberal media attacks and gained a mass following. The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Palin was not the principal figure. She was the primal enemy, the defiler of the Party’s plans including the Death Panels. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of her teaching. She was still active and hatching her conspiracies: perhaps under the protection of secret paymasters, perhaps even — so it was occasionally rumoured, the mysterious Koch brothers and the equally mysterious Fox Murdoch.
The diaphragms of all liberals in the room, especially Winston’s were constricted. He could never see the face of Palin without a painful mixture of emotions. It was a lean face, with a great mass of raven hair — a clever face, and yet somehow, to the now maddened Dem’s somehow despicable, with a kind of beauty in the pert nose, on top of which a pair of designer spectacles was perched. Palin was delivering her usual venomous attack upon the doctrines of the Party enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling. She was abusing Big Obama, She was denouncing the big government policies of the Party, She was advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought, She was crying that the principles of the revolution had been betrayed.
1984-Two-Minutes-Hate-02-500Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room. The face on the screen, and the terrifying power of the Tea Party army behind it, were too much to be borne: besides, the sight or even the thought of Palin produced fear and anger automatically. She was an object of hatred more constant than either Bush or Cheney. But what was strange was that although Palin was hated and despised by everybody on the left, although every day and a thousand times a day, on platforms, on the telescreen, in newspapers, in books, her theories were refuted, smashed, ridiculed, in spite of all this, her influence never seemed to grow less.
In its second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices in an effort to drown the maddening voice that came from the screen. The little red-haired woman had turned bright pink, and her mouth was opening and shutting like that of a landed fish.  A dark-haired girl behind Winston had begun crying out ‘Swine! Swine! Swine!’ and suddenly she picked up a heavy Democratic Party talking points memo book and flung it at the screen. It struck Palin’s nose and bounced off; the voice continued inexorably. In a lucid moment Winston found that he was shouting with the others and kicking his heel violently against the rung of his chair.
The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.
Thus, at one moment Winston’s hatred was not turned against Palin at all, but, on the contrary, against Big Obama, the Democratic Party, and the Spin Doctors; and at such moments his heart went out to the lonely, derided heretic on the screen, sole guardian of truth and sanity in a world of lies
Then the face of Sarah Palin faded away again, and instead the slogan of the liberal elite stood out in bold capitals:
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Mr. Sheppard is the proprietor of the blogs Point Of View and Palin4President 2016.  He also writes occasionally for American Thinker and is a man of refined taste.  Follow him on Twitter: @MJosephSheppard.

Sunday, October 26, 2014

Significant Post:An Orman Win In Kansas Could Give Dem’s TWO Senate Votes

From the outstanding site of noted writer Bob Belvedere "The Camp of The Saints LINK


An Orman Win In Kansas Could Give Dem’s TWO Senate Votes

26 OCTOBER 2014 @ 20:32
Special guest post by M. Joseph Sheppard.
Those Republican voters in Kansas, especially the Tea Party supporters, who are considering voting for “Independent” Greg Orman for senator rather than current senator Pat Roberts might give pause when they realize Orman is potentially two senate votes for the Democratic party.
The math is simple and irrefutable. If the election result  turns out to be Dem’s 50 senate seats and the GOP 49 with Orman winning as an “Independent” then, as per his advice, he will “caucus with the party that has the most seats” that being, under these circumstances, the Dem’s who will have a two vote 51/49 majority with Harry Reid triumphant
But, if the result is, as seem highly possible on current polling, Republicans 50 Democrat’s 49 Independent 1 what then?
There is absolutely no guarantee that Orman, a Democrat in previous incarnations, might not find a plum committee post or some other bauble so enticing that he would not find “the national interest via the balance of the GOP having the house and the Democratic party the senate” or some other such wiggle room specious reasoning, to caucus with the Dem’s.
For all his running as a new broom etc he is a politician, and such have been known to do anything when it suits (see Specter, Arlen for example).
Orman himself confirms this obvious concept:
Orman: I Could ‘Absolutely’ Switch Parties After Picking Senate Side
Then the result would be Democrat’s and allies 50 Republicans 50. At which point Vice-President Biden becomes the casting vote and gives Reid and co. control of the senate.That such a result would make a mockery of  Kansas true political leanings, not having had a Democratic party senator for 80 years, is beyond doubt-which mockery counts for nothing with the Beltway machination machine.
Thus Orman goes from being the Republicans 51st potential vote to, in actuality via the Biden co-joined vote seeing the Dem’s go from 49 to 51 votes. The reality is that an Orman win can be worth two votes and a working majority for the Dem’s. Latest polling has Orman up by 5 points-the danger, not just for Roberts, but for the entire GOP is clear.
This possibility should be driven home to the wavering Kansas Tea Party (to whom Governor Palin surely made it clear where their support should go with her visit to Kansas to visibly and vocally stand by Roberts) and to the regular Kansas Republicans. A vote for Roberts shores up the possibility of getting rid of Reid, and of ensuring President Obama is the lamest of lame ducks.
A vote for Orman, or  staying home on election day can very much mean an Obama and Reid triumph and give bad portends for 2016. It also gives the Dem’s a mechanism, via “independents” to pull of this game in other red states-what difference does it make to them if, as in Alaska and now Kansas, they don’t run a regular Democrat if they can sneak one in to caucus with them under the Indie label? Electoral-Vote.com the noted polling analysis site has a commentary up which clearly states the danger for republicans:
Vox has a story on Kansas Senate candidate Greg Orman and what he might do if he wins. The article says he is cynical because he says he might caucus with either party but his platform fits much better with the Democrats.
Mr. Sheppard is the proprietor of the blogs Point Of View and Palin4President 2016.  He also writes occasionally for American Thinker and is a man of refined taste.  Follow him on Twitter: @MJosephSheppard.

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

From The Camp Of the Saints:"Palin Versus Warren 2016 – Would Be A Choice Not An Echo"

From the outstanding site of noted writer Bob Belvedere "The Camp of The Saints LINK

I suggest reading it in conjunction with:":"Goldwater-Palin Path To Electoral College Victory In 2016"
"
***************************************************************************

Palin Versus Warren 2016 – Would Be A Choice Not An Echo

22 OCTOBER 2014 
Special guest post by M. Joseph Sheppard.
The Punditocracy has Hillary Clinton as not only the odds on favorite for the 2016 Democratic party nomination but as the certain winner against whichever hapless Republic is thrown to the wolves as a sacrificial lamb.
That scenario is of course highly possible, especially the nomination part, under current circumstances. The qualifier is of course “current circumstances” as who knows what the political, social and perhaps most importantly, economic picture will look like in six months much less two years from now.
In early 2008 I recall seeing an “Electoral college map” which  illustrated what states, in what was obviously a cynical portrayal of a hopeless case, then Senator Barack Obama would win if he were the Democrat’s nominee. The entire country, except Illinois, was a mass of gleaming red-such are the vagaries of auguries.
But to even get to that Mondalian position Obama would have to win the nomination by breaking down the walls and crossing the moat of the seemingly impenetrable fortress of Senator Clinton-all of which came to pass against nearly all expectations.
What might cause a similar collapse of Clinton’s hopes, if such they are, for 2016?  Again, in opposition to the pundits certainties, they are legion.
Nobody of goodwill wishes Secretary Clinton ill health but health, especially for in elder who has had problems, perhaps serious ones, and who is, by her own admission not in the best shape may be a deciding factor especially where a long and grueling campaign may be on offer. Thus for that, significant factor alone she may choose not to run and who could blame her.
The social picture as a defining factor is a bit harder to quantify or pin down. America will have had eight years of liberal, progressive, social policies including same-sex marriage imposed by judicial fiat. It may be the social pendulum will cause a desire to see the pendulum swing to a more conservative, states rights based attitude.
Such social attitudes can play a significant role as they most certainly did during the 2004 campaign. Whether they are of such a significant factor by themselves as to give Mrs. Clinton pause is moot but, taken with other factors they may provide a tipping point.
“The “other factor” of major significance could well be the economy. If, after 7-8 years of economic stagnation which has produced a surly mood in the public, (63% feeling the country is on “the wrong track” at present) there is a significant stock market crash then it would be a brave person, Clinton or any other, who would wish to campaign with the albatross of having to defend the Obama administration around their neck.
There need be no further example of what such a scenario can do than the abrupt end of John McCain’s 2008 campaign after he, with the obvious assistance of Governor Palin, jumped into the lead after the GOP convention only to fall permanently behind two week later as the share market collapsed.
And of course the political environment may be so toxic for the Dem’s that the nomination would appear quixotic at best. A clearer picture of this will emerge after the November mid-terms and if there is anything like the 2010 swing  to the GOP with an increase in House seats, governorship’s and most especially capture of the senate with up to 54 seats then that too may dissuade Clinton from running.
The thought of having to defend a seriously out of favor Obama administration without the ability to cast herself as a new broom not associated with it, as McCain was able to do with the Bush administration would be a serious handicap.
If any of the preceding scenario’s eventuate and persuaded or handicapped Mrs.Clinton from running then the stage would be set for a similar run by the only Democrat who could do “a McCain” and that would be Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Warren has indicated, time and again, that she would not run, regardless of the fact that “Ready for Warren” groups have been set up around the country, if Hillary Clinton ran This  is sensible as the chances of Clinton being outflanked on the left for a second time would appear to be negligible.
But if Clinton does not run Warren would be assured of the “progressive” grass roots activist support which was a mainstay of Obama’s insurgency. A financial downturn or continuation of the sub-optimal economic environment would actually be a strong point for her as she is seen as the enemy of the banking class and a battler for the economically disadvantaged in the traditional state-ist leftist manner.
It would be a campaign of appeal to the traditional Democratic party roots whilst showing a clean pair of heels to the, by then, debunked, dispirited and condemned Beltway establishment wing. That Warren can, with credibility, distance herself from President Obama has been made strikingly clear with her Salon interview which headlined
“Elizabeth Warren on Barack Obama: “They protected Wall Street. Not families who were losing their homes. Not people who lost their jobs. And it happened over and over and over”
As with McCain, only a “rogue” campaign could be run with any credibility and Warren, also having the “it’s time for a woman” theme to hand, would be the only Democrat who could, with any credibility, mount such a campaign. It would be farcical to envisage Joe Biden running and winning under such circumstances, and a complete unknown such as Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley making any headway.
The Republicans might well take note of how successful the “rogue” effort was for John McCain. That he could take a significant lead in the polls whilst running as the nominee of a party whose president was at rock bottom in his approval rating was a tribute to the power of the idea.
That a female nominee might be important to counter not only  the Democrat of that gender but also the certain to be used “war on women” meme is a matter of serious consideration. That a nominee is needed that can appeal to the conservative grass roots who have voted in sufferance for establishment candidates or stayed at home in their millions is obvious.
There is only one high profile, tested, scrutinized to the nth degree female potential GOP presidential candidate who has not only an appeal to the grass roots but their admiration and love, and that is of course Sarah Palin.
A Palin candidacy would negate the “war on women” meme, the radical reformer against the special interest meme (Palin basically invented the “crony capitalism” attack concept) and there is nothing Warren could say in that respect which would make her superior to Palin in that populist messaging.
But above all Palin versus Warren would be a campaign of ideas and America would, finally, be given a stark choice between a states rights, small government, low taxes, individualism, pro-business, anti-amnesty, emphasis on right to life candidacy of the conservatives choice and its diametric opposite on the progressive left.
The Goldwater versus Johnson election had such a clear choice but the waters were muddied in that Johnson ran as the substitute for the martyred Kennedy and no Republican could have won. 2016 could see the choice starkly clear and epoch making for the body politic.
It would also be a joy to behold for psephologists, commentators and give political scientists years of analytically work post election. It would in the final analysis determine what sort of America would be in place for perhaps generations as did the Roosevelt election of 1932.
In what may turn out to be a highly significant event the Palin Vs.Warren campaign has had a preview of what it might look like already. The two prospective candidates positions could not be more stark in there opposition and a campaign of two such ideological heavyweights might stand America on its ear in a campaign the likes which have not been seen since Kennedy versus Nixon.
Race, gender, mudslinging ‘family values”and all the other ephemera, nonsense, distractions, red meat throwing, baiting and special interest patting would have to be tossed overboard in a genuine and absorbing campaign of ideas and ideals.
Governor Palin presented a  rebuttal to Senator Warren’s “11 Progressive Commandments” delivered to the progressive “Netroots” convent ion in July on her new “Palin TV” channel.
These were set out in a step by step reply to Senator Warren’s points.  Of course they are not the totality of Palin’s core positions as they are limited to the responses to a “progressives” positions, but they are extremely significant as an indication of strongly held conservative thinking and, of course, as examples of Governor Palin’s main beliefs.
It is important, I believe, to set these out as if or when Governor Palin runs for high office they will serve as a touchstone for supporters and a rebuttal to opponents-most significantly of course if that opponent was Senator Warren.
Mr. Sheppard is the proprietor of the blogs Point Of View and Palin4President 2016.  He also writes occasionally for American Thinker and is a man of refined taste.  Follow him on Twitter: @MJosephSheppard.

Monday, October 6, 2014

An Orman Win In Kansas Would Give Dem's Two Extra Senate Votes Not One



Those Republican voters in Kansas, especially the Tea Party supporters, who are considering voting of "Independent" Greg Orman for senator rather than current senator Pat Roberts might give pause when they realize Orman is potentially two senate votes for the Democratic party.

The math is simple and irrefutable. If the election result  turns out to be Dem's 50 senate seats and the GOP 49 with Orman winning as an "Independent" then, as per his advice, he will "caucus with the party that has the most seats" that being, under these circumstances, the Dem's who will have a two vote 51/49 majority with Harry Reid triumphant

But, if the result is, as seem highly possible on current polling, Republicans 50 Democrat's 49 Independent 1 what then?

There is absolutely no guarantee that Orman, a Democrat in previous incarnations, might not find a plum committee post or some other bauble so enticing that he would not find "the national interest via the balance of the GOP having the house and the Democratic party the senate" or some other such wiggle room specious reasoning, to caucus with the Dem's. For all his running as a new broom etc he is a politician, and such have been known to do anything when it suits (see Specter, Arlen for example).
Orman himself confirms this obvious concept "

Orman: I Could 'Absolutely' Switch Parties After Picking Senate Side


Then the result would be Democrat's and allies 50 Republicans 50. At which point Vice-President Biden becomes the casting vote and gives Reid and co. control of the senate.That such a result would make a mockery of  Kansas true political leanings, not having had a Democratic party senator for 80 years, is beyond doubt-which mockery counts for nothing with the Beltway machination machine.

Thus Orman goes from being the Republicans 51st potential vote to, in actuality via the Biden co-joined vote seeing the Dem's go from 49 to 51 votes. The reality is that an Orman win can be worth two votes and a working majority for the Dem's.

This possibility should be driven home to the wavering Kansas Tea Party 
( to whom Governor Palin surely made it clear where their support should go with her visit to Kansas to visibly and vocally stand by Roberts) and to the regular Kansas Republicans. A vote for Roberts shores up the possibility of getting rid of Reid, and of ensuring President Obama is the lamest of lame ducks.

 A vote for Orman, or  staying home on election day can very much mean an Obama and Reid triumph and give bad portends for 2016. It also gives the Dem's a mechanism, via "independents" to pull of this game in other red states-what difference does it make to them if, as in Alaska and now Kansas, they don't run a regular Democrat if they can sneak one in to caucus with them under the Indie label? Electoral-Vote.com the noted polling analysis site has a commentary up which clearly states the danger for republicans "Vox has a story on Kansas Senate candidate Greg Orman and what he might do if he wins. The article says he is cynical because he says he might caucus with either party but his platform fits much better with the Democrats"

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Lock Away Your Children;Communist Imagery At Youth Site "Wonkette"


The far left site "Wonkette" that poses as a "satire" site is in fact an insidious poisoner of young minds.
Apart from its usual helping of cursing, scatological references and imagery there is a none to subtle attempt to enslave young minds int the realm of outright communism.

That leftism is a psychological disease beyond doubt, usually the result of  youthful sexual frustration in its inception and the natural urge to 'rebel' against authority. Traditional outlets have been comics like "Mad Magazine" with its lampooning of society and as youth matures "progressive" blogs like 'Daily Kos" or Firedoglake" and the like.

For most they are a passing phase of young adulthood and once mortgages, children and entry into society as an adult takes place they are discarded and the traditional path from radicalism to conservatism is set out on. 

Unfortunately for some who are in perhaps of a sensitive and trusting nature or come from an unfortunate family background the possibility of being permanently radicalized is open through genuinely distorted outlets like Wonkette.

Wonkette uses its come on of the usual ranting against religion (especially) conservatism and all aspects of traditional society that rebellious youth find so attractive-especially when laced with generous helping of lampooning cartoons and voyeurism. 

It then adds the spice of outright communist imagery from the old Soviet Union drawing on the same appeal to unworldly youth.The message is the same as under Stalin but, presented on a "satire" site, the underlying message is that it's all just fun. That may be the case for some, but for the vulnerable the damage may be permanent.

The site's editor makes no attempt to hide her own background,  An admitted "socialist" from a family steeped in communism  And who knows what shadowy demons drive the Wonkette staff, all of whom are radicalized. 

Here is a shocking photo, proudly posted by Wonkette's editor, of a meeting of Democrat's in Oklahoma who live near the family and have been touched with the disease of leftism. These were once healthy, slim people and now look at them. PARENTS-DO YOU WANT THIS TO HAPPEN TO YOUR CHILDREN?


That there may be tortured psyches among the Wonkette cabal is a matter for such an individual so afflicted to seek assistance. What is not right is that such propaganda be allowed to go unremarked upon whilst youth in development-perhaps your sons or daughters-might be dragged into the shadowy world of ultra-leftist activity.

Below are some of the images which are seen regularly on Wonkette. Taken in sum, and out of the modifying "satire" sections, a moments glance shows the invidious and insidious nature of what is being conveyed and attempted. Any adult who finds their children perusing the site would be well warned to ensure it is blocked at all costs




  







Monday, September 15, 2014

Senate Polls Portend Bad News For GOP's 2016 Presidential Run

ALSO AT "AMERICAN THINKER" LINK

Electoral-Vote.com the site that gives an analysis of political races based on the "poll of the day" (or an aggregate of polls if more than one for a particular race comes out on the same day) has good news for the GOP. Its current map for the senate has the Republicans up 51 to the Dem's 48, with Kansas "tied" (which is how they get around having an independent in the lead there at the moment.) FIGURE 1


Clearly the good news for the GOP is that even with, the probably unlikely, loss of Kansas they still would win the senate with 51 seats (they need 51 as a tie would see VP Biden give the casting vote for the administration. The site map shows that on current polling the southern states of Georgia, Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina would be won by Republican challengers. With Alaska returning to its tradition conservative fold, and Kansas back where it has been since the 1920's, the GOP can afford to lose one of the southern states, North Carolina for instance and still have the majority.

That southern states and Alaska, all of which,except NC, were won by McCain and Romney with substantial margins, should swing back to the Republicans in these second term mid-terms when the sitting president is unpopular to say the least is hardly a mystery. That the current polling shows the GOP candidates leads as very slim, and in some instances disappearing now and then, under the substantially propitious political environment is a cause for concern no doubt, but the picture for 2016 can be considered as very bleak.

Electoral-Vote.com's senate seat apportionment based on up to the minute polling sees Michigan, Virginia, New Hampshire and Minnesota as solidly blue. These states had good to large margins for President Obama in 2008 and 2012 and they could be considered as long shots regardless of the political climate.

That being said, there must be a degree of disappointment that, at present, the GOP candidates aren't making much of a fight of it in these states. Of course anything is possible, and if the pollsters have got their calculations for Republican turnout and enthusiasm and Democratic stay at home and disillusion wrong, or if there is some October surprise of a negative nature then any of these states, except for Virginia, might tip into the GOP's hands-but they are not needed at the moment.

The problem for the GOP going forward is the polling in Iowa and Colorado. Electoral-Vote.com and Real Clear Politics has them both in the blue column-Colorado is also in the Dem's column in the governors race. Not by much but, given the current climate it might well be expected they too would be marginally Republican.

Looking at the Electoral College map for 2016 if Virginia, which has gone Democratic twice in a row, quite comfortably actually, Colorado and Iowa vote blue then there appears no path to 270 electoral votes needed for a GOP win even if they regain Florida and Ohio. In fact, even if the Republicans win Virginia they would still need either Iowa or Colorado to get to 270 as the map at  270ToWin shows. Being behind in these three states at present portends disaster frankly and running another "Establishment" candidate, when three of such out of the last four have lost, doesn't seem a remedy. FIGURE 2

Perhaps it is time for the Republicans to run a grass roots candidate who can rouse the millions of conservatives who have stayed home, especially if Hillary runs. In what manner another centrist candidate can motivate the base and overturn the trends to the Dem's in these three crucial states is not easy to fathom. 


If however the establishment persist in running such candidates the only remedy, apart for an economic collapse which nobody wants, is to wait until the next census. At that point the drift to the south which gave the GOP extra electoral votes in 2012 would see them get past 270 (if they win Florida/Virginia/Ohio of course) without Iowa and Colorado. 

If Virginia is solidly in the Dem's column it may take many such mathematical and population drift arrangements by which time the GOP may have folded their tents. The choice is up to the Establishment or, a consummation devoutly to be wished, the rank and file in the primary season.

                                                        FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2



Monday, September 8, 2014

Tax Cuts Ended Depression-Created Decade Long Expansion

This extract from Wikipedia on the economic policy under the Harding administration, in respect of the stimulus effects of tax cuts, speaks for itself. There were brief recessions within the subsequent boom period but all that means is the business cycle is an inherent aspect of capitalism. 

That tax cuts are better than deficit spending seems beyond discussion. Even if deficit spending does eventually stimulate the economy, and look how much deficit spending has been done under Obama with limited effect so far, the end result is inflation and debt. Tax cuts increase government revenue over time,cut unemployment and any inflationary effects are easily managed through traditional mechanisms.


On March 4, President Harding assumed office while the nation was in the midst of a postwar economic decline, known as the Depression of 1920–21. By summer of his first year in office, an economic recovery began.
President Harding convened the Conference of Unemployment in 1921, headed by Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, that proactively advocated stimulating the economy with local public work projects and encouraged businesses to apply shared work programs.[118]
Harding's Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon, ordered a study that claimed to demonstrate that as income tax rates were increased, money was driven underground or abroad. Mellon concluded that lower rates would increase tax revenues. Based on this advice, Harding cut taxes, starting in 1922. The top marginal rate was reduced annually in four stages from 73% in 1921 to 25% in 1925. Taxes were cut for lower incomes starting in 1923.[119]
Revenues to the treasury increased substantially. Unemployment also continued to fall. Libertarianhistorian Thomas Woods contends that the tax cuts ended the Depression of 1920–21—even though economic growth had begun before the cuts—and were responsible for creating a decade-long expansion.[120] Historians Schweikart and Allen attribute these changes to the tax cuts.[121]Schweikart and Allen also argue that Harding's tax and economic policies in part "...produced the most vibrant eight year burst of manufacturing and innovation in the nation's history."[122] The combined declines in unemployment and inflation (later known as the Misery Index) were among the sharpest in U.S. history. Wages, profits, and productivity all made substantial gains during the 1920s.
Daniel Kuehn attributes the improvement to the earlier monetary policy of the Federal Reserve, and notes that the changes in marginal tax rates were accompanied by an expansion in the tax base that could account for the increase in revenue.[123] However:
Robert Gordon, a Keynesian, admits, “government policy to moderate the depression and speed recovery was minimal. The Federal Reserve authorities were largely passive. … Despite the absence of a stimulative government policy, however, recovery was not long delayed.” Kenneth Weiher, an economic historian, notes, “despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction.” He then briskly concedes that “the economy rebounded quickly from the 1920-1921 depression and entered a period of quite vigorous growth.”[115]


Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Three Historic Convention Speeches that Changed History;Bryan 1896 Reagan 1976 Palin 2008



Governor Sarah Palin's vice-presidential nomination speech at the Republican convention 2008







 The climactic portion of William Jennings Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech at the Democratic convention of 1896.The applause went on for thirty minutes and propelled the barely known ex-congressman from Nebraska to the nomination



  Governor Ronald Reagan's impromptu address to the 1976 Republican convention after he had,narrowly, lost the nomination to president Ford "Reagan's Impromptu Speech at 1976 GOP Convention" http://youtu.be/fy57g5ptpSs