The Hate that Dare Not Speak Its Name

I've posted this graphic from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) before, but given the predictable outrage over the failure of the Ferguson grand jury to indict police officer Darren Wilson, it's worth another look. For if the injustice known as interracial crime is to be protested, why then Al Sharpton & Co. shouldn't be the only ones taking to the streets. Perhaps the reason no one raises the issue when the victims are not part of a 'protected class' is due to the fact that the grieving supporters don't burn their own town down after such a 'tragedy' (see more on the use of that word on my latest podcast). Regardless, the numbers in this 'race war' speak for themselves (as chronicled in the book "White Girl Bleed A Lot"), that is, when it comes to casualties it's fairly clear who's being victimized the most.

The Emperor Still Has No Clothes

The Imperial President's latest usurpation of Congressional prerogative, granting amnesty to as many as 5.5 million undocumented aliens, has set the stage for the first post-midterm showdown.  In mid-December legislation will have to be passed by the lame duck Congress to keep the government's doors open.

For years, Congress has failed to pass routine appropriations bills for Washington's fiscal year, which begins in September. Last year was no exception with  short term funding extended only through next month. Now, there's talk within the victorious Republican caucus to attach a rider to any funding bill that would repeal Obama's unconstitutional executive order bypassing immigration law. The President has already pledged a veto so the battle lines have been drawn.  

Or have they?  Rather than risk another public relations battle with the White House and its media allies, here's what the GOP should do until they have control of Congress next session.  Pass a short-term continuing resolution without any immigration rider that funds federal operations--but only until January or February, not September. Then, with the power to possibly override any veto, the GOP can then force the issue.  

The President's action is a clear indication of a tin ear as apparently the Nov. elections had no political effect on his unwillingness to offend the most extreme elements of his party. Yet, there is risk for Republicans in attaching an unrelated item to funding legislature. Succinctly, shutting down the government would not repeal the executive order.  However, maybe George Washington University professor Jonathan Turley can. He's just been hired by the House Caucus to lead a lawsuit against the White House overstepping its authority.

Bring it on. 

Who's really not paying their fair share

Well, you gotta love this.

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is doing what liberals do best: punishing the productive.  HIs latest 'rules changes' are meant to impede those nasty corporations from doing what they do best: seeking the highest return they can for inverstors. You see, Lew and his boss, President Obama, are outraged over the mass corporate exodus via 'tax inversions,' but unfortunately for the administration, shareholders are following the law passed in 2004 to the letter.  So Washington tinkners with a few rules and pummels big bad business in the press while refusing to change our outdated corporate tax structure.

But what's really galling about it all is that Lew, according to the Wall St. Journal, took in $800,000 from a non-profit university then grabbed a nifty serverance package to boot.  And he's lecturing for-profit companies about excess?  How about this: no one working for a non-profit should be allowed to make more than, say, $50,000 per year.  After all, if the entity can afford it pay it's help more than that, why they can afford to pay taxes just like every other for profit company.  

In fact., while our 'community organizer' lectures America on the evils of selfishness and the need for 'shared responsibility' by closing corporate loopholes, he and his liberal allies conveniently forget the biggest of them all: the tax-exempt organization. You see, tax-exempt entities raise massive amounts of capital, and what others might refer to as "profits,' they merely call "expenses."

Consider the self-described "social purpose capitalism" of Minnesota Public Radio, which has resulted in a massive radio empire competing with its taxable broadcast brethren.

Oh, yes, I'm well aware of all the work these wonderful groups perform for the downtrodden, so spare me the outrage over questioning the status of so-called "nonprofits." But someone has to create wealth before it can be redistributed.

Dare I say, the most beneficial social organization in society remains the profitable business. Indeed, the evil entrepreneur, far from begging for donations, is the one providing the goods and services for which people are actually willing to pay.

On the other hand, imagine a 501(c)3 tax-exempt outfit whose mission is to ensure that "resources accrue to all local citizens" within the "creation of ecologically sound and economically equitable communities." Uh? Well, try the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

Or how about a collection of smart growth groupies at Transit for Livable Communities, dedicated to increasing government funding for "bus and rail transit, bicycling, walking and transit-oriented development."

And don't forget to take that "charitable" tax deduction for contributing to the gang at Growth & Justice, a merry band of collectivists who think Minnesota state government isn't big enough.

Of course, for sheer audacity you can't ignore ClearWay Minnesota, granted tax favored status under section 509(a)3 of the IRS code for living off the largesse of the state's tobacco lawsuit. Private shareholders may not benefit, but the six-figure salary management team isn't fairing too poorly.

But, hey, how do you put a price on lobbying for smoking bans and funding vital programs that "build capacity in the African/African American, Asian American and Pacific Islander, Chicano Latino, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered and American Indian Communities to develop and implement effective tobacco prevention and control programs and policies"?

The irony here is that far from relieving the government's (taxpayer's) social burden, most of these "public charities" seek to expand it.

Regardless, my favorite "tax expenditure" is a fledgling little project known as MinnPost. Here you'll find a group of scribes still smarting over a market devaluation of their services. Hence, MinnPost's creed is that high-quality journalism "can no longer depend only on the private sector." Maybe that's why they're propped up by grants from yet another tax-exempt entity, the mega-McKnight Foundation.

In fact, these private foundations alone, says Virginia business attorney Ross C. Reeves, control $650 billion in wealth and, depending on the year, have investment income of around $60 billion -- none of which is subject to income taxes.

This has proved to be a convenient tool for the Warren Buffets of the world to claim an immediate write-off, reduce their estate tax, and promote such charitable causes as reproductive rights, saving the planet, and world peace. All the while clamoring for higher taxes on someone else.

Regulation as taxes and tyranny

I've often said that liberalism (the post-modern version) always ends at the butt of a gun. That is, the essence of trying to get people to do that which is not in their best interest requires force. This is why, short of a tyannical state, liberalism usually fails.  Two news items this week make the point nicely.

First, as the employer penalties for the Affordable Care Act kick in next year, business is already finding a way to work around them. Because Obamacare waives the penalites for employees who qualify for Medicaid, employers are off-loading workers into the bankrupt federal-state helath care program.  Problem is, when you add 3 million patients to an already strapped program which reimburses physicians below market rates (this is how the left aims to lower health care costs) you get fewer doctors. The net result of this market pervision is skyrocketing costs to the taxpayer coupled with dangerously long wait times for care. Hope and change, eh?

The other newsie is McDonald's dismal earnings report for the thrid quarter and what they plan on doing about it. It's easy to joke that the massive burger chain once known for fast and cheap food now sells neiher.  But corporare strategy aside, when government at the behest of big labor forces $15 an hour wage hikes on franchisees who are essentially mom and pop entities employing teens and secondary bread winners...well, sometihng's got to give. So, as the WSJ notes, buried in the report was the company's plan to move to automation (i.e., touch screens for ordering, etc.) as soon as feasible.  Again, the net result of state interference, this time in labor markets, is palpably negative for those workers replaced with machines.

Regulatory taxation, and that is bascially what we're talking about, works only so long as those in the cxrosshairs continue to play along. As the above examples suggest, that's usually not very long. Consequently, there are only two choices.  Let the markets clear naturally through the price mechanism that best reflects consumer preferences or wait for the jackboots to arrive.

The peasants grab the pitchforks...

As Gerald Ford once said, "America's long, national nightmare is over."

Well, maybe. Clearly the Republican rout last night stopped the bleeding (save for the country's most incorrigible states such as CA, OR & MN) from America's deep liberal wound of the past 6 years--but what remains is whether the GOP has the unity and courage to repair it.

America wants real change--why else would voters move so decisively not only on Senate races, but at nearly all levels of government. Indeed, Republicans hold more statehouses and have more U.S. House seats than at any time since Harry Truman.So now is the time to act.

No doubt, they won't get many bills signed by President Obama, but forcing him to veto popular measures is a sure way to set things up for 2016. What the GOP cannot afford to do is let big-government conservatives, such as Lindsey Graham & Peter King, horse trade with President Obama by agreeing to more domestic spending in exchange for more overseas entanglements. That's exactly how the GOP capitulated on the budget sequester.

And speaking of budgets, in all the talk over helath care, immigration, and energy, let's not lose focus on America's number one crisis: federal spending. Our $4 trillion annual budget has set deficit records totaling an accumulated $18 trillion in public debt the Federal Reserve has been busy monetizing. Congress has the power of the purse and there is no excuse for not sending the President responsible budgets for the next two years that rein in entitlements by forcing the Democrats hands on discretionary spending.

The point is, in all of the above, the GOP must stand for something if it wants this victory to be more than fleeting. The whole country knows what it doesn't like--now should be the time for someone to boldly show the nation what there is to like with a new governing majority. Historically, campaign consultants loathe proposing bold initiatives that can become targets, better to run against the other guy's record. But in order for this momentum to stay on track you better start giving the voters something to be for, and not just against. 

No, the science isn't settled...

Yet another early winter for North America.  Is it the 3rd or 4th in a row...hard to say? But as sure as the snow flies, climate deniers will be out in force quoting NOAA and NASA as the final authorities on the reality of global warming. The inconvenient truth, however, is better reflected in the actual temperature data from the Historical Climatological Network (HCN) as shown above.

In fact, about half the so-called warming in the USA has been due to 'adjustments' to surface temperature records done by NOAA & NASA thus allowing for the rather arbitrary claims of climate catastrophe. This helps explain how the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change can claim the sky is falling while observational data show that our most recent (there have been many) warming trend ended about 15 years ago.

Apparently, the IPCC's 55 different computer 'models' (pick the one that you like) are no match for natural variability in the earth's atmosphere as they all failed to account for the slowing in temperature increases, the growth in Antarctic sea ice, or the fact that the sea levels were 'rising' just as fast some 70 years ago. So the next time Paul Douglas (our local chicken-little here in Minnesota's frozen tundra) tells you the 'science is settled,' tell him when the day comes that he can accurately predict next week's weather, you might listen to his hysteria on the next century's climate.