I Endorse Barack Obama for President

Keywords: , , , , , , , , , ,

I take an unusual step today, I realize. A number of my friends, family, and closest associates will no doubt disown me. Rush Limbaugh will probably never mention RedState again. But I have to endorse Barack Obama for President.

I owe Barack Obama an endorsement. The campaign Barack Obama has run this far has earned him my admiration. While I’ve criticized people like Doug Kmiec for supporting Obama, I have seen the light.

I, Erick-Woods Erickson, do this day endorse Barack Obama for President. He has done all I have asked and now I should do at least one thing he asks and give him my support.

Please do read on . . .

When I beat up Obama for failing to repudiate Rev. Wright, Obama threw him under the bus.

When I punched Obama for telling the Teamsters he’d let them out of federal supervision, he backed down on that through a statement “clarification.”

After I questioned Obama’s patriotism because of his lack of a flag lapel pin, he put one on.

After harassing Obama for saying Iran was no threat, he willingly changed his mind and decided Iran is, in fact, a serious threat.

When Obama opened his mouth and lied about his family connection to the holocaust, he clarified again. Never mind that he’s told several different groups several different variations — he still attempted to do what I thought he needed to do.

When I bullied Obama over not going to Iraq with John McCain, his campaign decided he might just go.

Heck, I even picked on Barry for his “unilateral meetings with rogue nations” and Barry graciously nuanced his way out of it.

Then there’s the other stuff like his fully transparent campaign. He harassed John McCain for being secretive like the Bushies, I punched back, and Obama released just one page on his medical history so we couldn’t see that he actually has health problems due to his continued smoking. Likewise, he won’t even release his birth certificate to prove he really is an American citizen. I love that he’s willing to let this story and the whole “closet Muslim” story fester rather than be transparent like he claims he is. That just helps me out! And it signals that he really is just like the other guys; never mind the marketing.

Oh, and now after I demanded he throw Jim Johnson under the bus, Barry Obama does just that.

I love this guy. Everything I ask him to do, he does. Sure, sometimes I have to bop him on the nose, but just cause he’s into S&M doesn’t mean he’s not my type of guy.

Hell, look at John McCain. People attack him over supporting the surge and he does not cave. Those of us on the right beat him up over believing in that global warming crap and he will not yield to us. We wanted him to support the Bush tax cuts and he refused. And he does not apologize for it! The nerve of that guy.

Some people call that leadership. I call it stubbornness. Contrast John McCain’s stubborn refusal to do as I say when I say with Barry’s willingness to cave faster than a Taliban member with an F/A-18 over head.*

I have to endorse Barry Obama. Thus far he’s done nothing but signal his willingness to be my gimp. And me likey that!

*Note to the libs: this is a play on the word “cave” not a play on the word “Hussein”.

I take an unusual step today, I realize. A number of my friends, family, and closest associates will no doubt disown me. Rush Limbaugh will probably never mention RedState again. But I have to endorse Barack Obama for President. I owe Barack Obama an endorsement. The campaign Barack Obama has run this far has earned him my admiration. While I've criticized people like Doug ... Read More

Who’s “Rich” These Days?

Keywords: , , , , , ,

Raising taxes is an unpopular enterprise, so in order to pull it off, one has to engage in more than a bit of class warfare. One has to talk about “raising taxes just for the rich” or some other such nonsense in order to sell the tax hike–this despite the fact that the rich actually pay a huge share of the taxes in this country and that the more such class envy we see in efforts to sell tax hikes, the more Atlas may shrug.

All of this is a prelude to a discussion of Barack Obama’s tax policy, which as Stephen Moore points out, should induce more than a little consternation on the part of readers and voters:

Barack Obama has been on a class-warfare tirade since he locked up the nomination, accusing John McCain of defending Bush tax cuts for “the rich.” “For eight long years,” he said Monday in a speech laying out his economic agenda, “our president sacrificed investments in health care, and education, and energy, and infrastructure on the altar of tax breaks for big corporations and wealthy CEOs.”

Hmmm. Anybody even dimly acquainted with the record, especially President Bush’s vast expansion of Medicare, might doubt the factual basis of such a statement. Never mind. Mr. Obama and the Congressional Democrats promise to sock it to “rich” taxpayers next year to pay for “middle class tax cuts” as well as some $300 billion in new spending. But there’s a problem: They won’t tell us exactly who the rich are.

In various tax proposals Mr. Obama has set the definition of rich at levels of $100,000, $200,000 and $250,000 in annual income. He has vowed, for example, to erase the Bush tax cuts not only for those who make more than $250,000, but to end the cap on Social Security taxes, which amounts to a tax hike on anyone who makes more than $100,000 in income. More recently, Austan Goolsbee, an Obama economic adviser, told me the new cap might be set at $200,000.

All of this has caused some heartburn among certain Democrats in high cost-of-living states. New York Rep. Joseph Crowley says a couple with earnings of $100,000 could be “a police officer and nurse.” “In New York City,” he adds, “they’d be struggling.”

You know, at some point, someone should really call the Obama campaign on all of this. They have no idea what “rich” means. The standards keep shifting and the Obama tax plan will hit “rich” people who don’t qualify as being wealthy under any meaningful definition of the term. The economic damage this scattershot policy will do will be massive, of course.

But fear not! There are certain “rich” people who actually are rich in every sense of the term and who will do quite well in an Obama Administration. Read the rest of the Moore article to find out who they are. And here’s a hint: There shall be no “windfall profits tax” on them.

Raising taxes is an unpopular enterprise, so in order to pull it off, one has to engage in more than a bit of class warfare. One has to talk about "raising taxes just for the rich" or some other such nonsense in order to sell the tax hike--this despite the fact that the rich actually pay a huge share of the taxes in this country and that the ... Read More

Obvious Story Of The Day

Keywords: , , ,

Did they really, really need to conduct this survey?

BALTIMORE, June 10 (UPI) — Mothers of twins seldom get the recommended full night’s sleep and often suffer from depression, U.S. researchers said.

A U.S. researcher found the mothers of twins sleep an average of 5.4 hours in a 24-hour period, rather than the recommended 7-8 hours. Almost half of the mothers reported mild to severe symptoms of depression.

“As primary caregivers for families, mothers caring for twins experience enormous workload, extreme exhaustion and limited time to meet their own needs,” study author Dr. Elizabeth Damato of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland said in a statement.

“Additionally, mothers of twins are likely to be caring for babies that are premature … Meeting the increased demands of two premature infants places mothers at risk for sleep deprivation.”

They’re depressed because they’re not getting any sleep. I’m sure you could get the same findings if you studied mothers (or fathers) of colicky babies as well.

I’ll give the survey authors another idea; mothers of twins who have a third child find that having a single baby after twins is much easier than having twins…

Did they really, really need to conduct this survey? BALTIMORE, June 10 (UPI) -- Mothers of twins seldom get the recommended full night's sleep and often suffer from depression, U.S. researchers said. A U.S. researcher found the mothers of twins sleep an average of 5.4 hours in a 24-hour period, rather than the recommended 7-8 hours. Almost half of the mothers reported mild to severe symptoms of depression. "As primary caregivers for families, mothers caring for twins experience enormous workload, extreme exhaustion and ... Read More

Congressional Democrats Forget Key Part of Obama’s Relief Package

Keywords: , , , , , , ,

CQ Politics is reporting that some key pieces of the fiscal relief package that Obama proposed have already been dropped from the plans of Congressional leadership:

Democrats have been contemplating a second effort to inject money this year into the faltering economy. The idea appears to have gained traction, particularly among congressional leaders, since Monday when presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois outlined a $50 billion stimulus proposal that will serve as the centerpiece of a two-week economic tour of battleground states.

Though the prospects for a second stimulus package are slim, the debate gives congressional Democrats an opportunity to rally around Obama.

The massive economic stimulus package enacted in February focused on tax breaks for businesses and rebates for individuals and families.

Obama has proposed a second round of rebate checks, an extension of unemployment insurance, aid to state governments and a new $10 billion fund to help stem the tide of home foreclosures.

He also proposed increasing investment in infrastructure such as roads, schools and bridges.

“There’s a need for additional targeted stimulus,” said Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad , D-N.D.

Schumer said infrastructure investment and a second round of rebate checks could be part of the new package, which Democrats are likely to unveil after the July Fourth recess.

Schumer is apparently unconcerned or unaware that state government spending is a key prop holding up the economy during a recession. As the NYT pointed out earlier this week:

At $1.8 trillion annually in a $14 trillion economy, the states and municipalities spend almost twice as much as the federal government, including the cost of the Iraq war. When librarians, lifeguards, teachers, transit workers, road repair crews and health care workers disappear, or airport and school construction is halted, the economy trembles.

Tags: barack obama, recession, state budgets, Chuck Schumer (all tags)

CQ Politics is reporting that some key pieces of the fiscal relief package that Obama proposed have already been dropped from the plans of Congressional leadership: Democrats have been contemplating a second effort to inject money this year into the faltering economy. The idea appears to have gained traction, particularly among congressional leaders, since Monday when presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois outlined a $50 billion stimulus proposal that will serve as the centerpiece of a two-week economic tour ... Read More

Conservatives Complain GOP’s Earmark Plan Doesn’t Go Far Enough

Keywords: , , , , , , ,

As House Republicans unveiled their economic agenda today, conservatives expressed disappointment that it does nothing to address earmark reform now and instead calls for an “immediate moratorium” in the future. The document was drafted to lay out the GOP’s agenda in January 2009 if Republicans reclaim control of the House.

Earmark critics, however, say that view is completely unrealistic. They think a total ban on earmarks must be instituted today because the chances of Republicans taking back the House are slim. “We need to lead by example and differentiate ourselves,” a conservative staffer told me. “The economic agenda today will allow earmarks this year and the next if Republicans do not win the House. No fundamental change from the status quo.”

The struggle over earmarks is reflected in the differing views of two GOP leaders: Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) and Policy Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.). The Hill reported the conflict earlier this week with Hensarling demanding action now and McCotter opposed to a “one-size-fits-all ban.” In a memo released this afternoon, Hensarling reiterated his support for a ban. He could press the issue by bringing it to a conference-wide vote.

As I reported on RedState last night, the GOP’s economic agenda includes many conservative proposals, including a flat tax, free-market health care, entitlement reform, balanced budget and energy production. Yet earmarks remain a sticking point despite Minority Leader John Boehner’s attempt to reach a consensus.

Conservatives don’t dispute the laudable policy goals included as part of the economic agenda — many developed by the Republican Study Committee. But that’s no excuse to take a pass on earmark reform today. Although it remains a divisive issue for Republicans, Hensarling should keep fighting for a ban on pork-barrel projects. Boehner faces no easy task bringing the GOP together, but he should view this as an opportunity for the GOP to distinguish itself from Democrats in advance of November’s elections.

Hensarling’s memo to Republican Study Committee members is below.

Dear RSC Colleague—

Conference Leadership has just unveiled its Economic Reform Agenda. Incorporated within that agenda are all of the relevant points of the RSC’s 8-point Action Plan save one. For those who worked so hard on the RSC plan, I congratulate you. I believe it was an important contribution and catalyst to the Conference’s plan, and I ask that you thank Leader Boehner for incorporating most of our Action Plan.

The portion of the plan not included, as of now, is the call for an immediate and unilateral earmark moratorium to be enacted today. As you have heard me state before, without action today, I fear the American people will never learn our party has called for a moratorium, while the Democrats stand for business as usual on pork-barrel spending. I know there are a number of legitimate issues to be resolved, and I hope we can resolve them soon.

For your information, some press reports concerning the RSC’s role in this situation are misleading. To make it clear, most of our membership believe it will probably prove necessary to discuss and resolve this issue at a special conference to be scheduled soon. What is accurate, as described by CQ Today, is that, “Boehner and Hensarling were working to find ways to persuade more Republicans, to join them in taking a ‘no earmarks’ pledge.”

We will speak more of this at today’s meeting, and I again thank you for your help in this effort.

Yours respectfully,

JEB HENSARLING

Chairman of the Republican Study Committee

As House Republicans unveiled their economic agenda today, conservatives expressed disappointment that it does nothing to address earmark reform now and instead calls for an "immediate moratorium" in the future. The document was drafted to lay out the GOP's agenda in January 2009 if Republicans reclaim control of the House. Earmark critics, however, say that view is completely unrealistic. They think a total ban on earmarks must be instituted ... Read More

Coburn Places A Hold On HIV/AIDS Prevention Bill

Keywords: , , , , , ,

The Senate has introduced a bipartisan bill tripling funding for President Bush’s program to fight HIV/AIDS. The $50 billion budget over five years would go toward the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which is set to expire in September.
The legislation, however, is being held up by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and […]

The Senate has introduced a bipartisan bill tripling funding for President Bush’s program to fight HIV/AIDS. The $50 billion budget over five years would go toward the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which is set to expire in September. The legislation, however, is being held up by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and six other conservative senators who object to the fact that the program would direct most of the spending on the “prevention” of HIV/AIDS, rather than just “treatment.” ... Read More

Midweek Diary Rescue

Keywords: , , , , , ,

Big week so far in the diaries, both in eclectic topics and the effort put into so many diaries.  It is often hard to choose myself, so thanks again to those who are sending recommends.  Enjoy the rescue.

And what have you been reading?

Tags: Diary Rescue, Open Thread (all tags)

Big week so far in the diaries, both in eclectic topics and the effort put into so many diaries.  It is often hard to choose myself, so thanks again to those who are sending recommends.  Enjoy the rescue. Snolan has a call to action for an often overlooked volunteer opportunity in Civic Duty: Be an Election Official at Least Once in Your Life. Netroots Nation reminds you to join them in Austin with The Doctor is In.  How About You? McCain to ... Read More

With a Rebel Yell: Jim Webb hearts the Confederate States of America.

Keywords: , , , , , , , ,

In 1861, the United States of America went to war after being attacked at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, in April 12 of that year. The war drained the nation’s blood until the Confederate States of America surrendered to the U.S.A. in Virginia, at the Appomattox Court House, on April 9, 1865. Those were painful years followed by additional painful years of reconstruction and humiliation. When all is said and done, the war ultimately ended the institution of African slavery in the Confederate States of America and drew them back into the United States, for that we should all be thankful.

Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) is not. If he had his druthers, the CSA would have won that war and the several States would have retained the right to allow their citizens to hold slaves. Politico.com writer David Mark does not put it that way in his his article on Webb at that web site yesterday, but it is how it reads.

He [Jim Webb] has suggested many times that while the Confederacy is a symbol to many of the racist legacy of slavery and segregation, for others it simply reflects Southern pride. In a June 1990 speech in front of the Confederate Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery, posted on his personal website, he lauded the rebels’ “gallantry,” which he said “is still misunderstood by most Americans.”

Webb, a descendant of Confederate officers, also voiced sympathy for the notion of state sovereignty as it was understood in the early 1860s, and seemed to suggest that states were justified in trying to secede.

“Most Southern soldiers viewed the driving issue to be sovereignty rather than slavery,” he said. “Love of the Union was palpably stronger in the South than in the North before the war — just as overt patriotism is today — but it was tempered by a strong belief that state sovereignty existed prior to the Constitution and that it had never been surrendered.”

The sovereignty was the power to enslave human beings if the State so chose. Love of the Union was palpably weaker in the South than in the north as the war started, and that is self-evident. The South split. And, Webb argues, the war was in part fought over the right of the Slave States to split from the United States of America if they so opted. But I do not mean this or any subsequent discussion to continue that war. We’re here to look at Jim Webb.

Jim Webb has been a rather dunderheaded spokesperson for Barack Obama, and he is considered a short-lister in Barry’s veep musings.

Read On….

Jim Webb argues that the Confederacy “simply reflects Southern pride.” It’s not that simple, Jim. The Confederacy does represent the splitting of the United States of America, the split families, the casualties and the dead, and yes, ultimately it represents the institution of African slavery. If a southerner waves that Stars and Bars thing because he is proud to be from and to live in the southern States in America, that is one thing, inoffensive to me. It does not necessarily carry the baggage. Jim Webb, however, goes much further than that. He has a lengthy paper-trail including his own revisionist musings on this matter.

There’s trouble for Jim Webb:

Edward H. Sebesta, co-author of the forthcoming “Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction” (University of Texas Press), said Webb’s views express an unhealthy regard for a political system that propped up and defended slavery.

His book, in fact, will cite Webb as an example of the mainstreaming of neo-Confederacy ideas into politics, said Sebesta, a widely cited independent historical researcher and author of the Anti-Neo-Confederate blog.

“I don’t think people have thought through the implications of how his ideas have racial overtones, even if they are inadvertent,” Sebesta said.

Jim Webb is too thick-skulled to consider the implications of much of anything he recites, but he does take himself seriously.

I have heard it asked if this is Webb’s “Macaca Moment,” trashing his chances to be Obama’s veep selection like then-Senator George Allen’s comments regarding a Dem hecklers haircut set up his loss to Webb in 2006. This is not the proper question. Allen made a mistake, while Jim Webb has spent a lifetime preaching basically that the Confederate States of America were right to split with the United States when their “right” to hold humans as slaves became imperiled by the election of Republican Abraham Lincoln. That is what the Confederacy means to him, not merely a harmless means to show geographic pride.

I neither know nor care if Barack Obama tabs Jim Webb as the bottom of his ticket, although if he does and the media does its job, Webb will eventually have to withdraw his name. Perhaps it would be best for the Dems if Webb were to do that now, not that I care a whit. (But it would be entertaining to here Obama repeat: “This is not the Jim Webb I knew and campaigned with for the past year.”)

Beyond this election cycle, I think you’ll find that Webb will be one-term-and-out. Allen did not challenge Webb’s support for the more unsavory aspects of the Confederacy, as the media created some problems for him, but the next Republican ought to be ready.

Jim Webb has ancestors who were Confederate officers. I carry the blood of a man who was tortured, starved to death at Camp Sumter in Andersonville, Georgia.

(The text of Webb’s 1990 speech at the Confederate Memorial at Arlington has been removed from his web site: http://www.jameswebb.com/speeches/confedmemorial.htm.)

In 1861, the United States of America went to war after being attacked at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, in April 12 of that year. The war drained the nation's blood until the Confederate States of America surrendered to the U.S.A. in Virginia, at the Appomattox Court House, on April 9, 1865. Those were painful years followed by additional painful years of reconstruction and humiliation. When ... Read More

O’Reilly Uses Heavily Edited Ambush Segment To Attack Moyers As ‘Rude,’ ‘A Fanatic,’ ‘A Crazy Guy,’ ‘Scary’

Keywords: , , , , , , , ,

Deploying one of his favorite tactics, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly sent out a “reporter” last week to ambush PBS journalist Bill Moyers, at a journalism conference. The reporter, Porter Barry, accused Moyers of not “having the courage” to come on the O’Reilly Factor. Moyers replied, “I will come on Bill O’Reilly’s show after he […]

Deploying one of his favorite tactics, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly sent out a “reporter” last week to ambush PBS journalist Bill Moyers, at a journalism conference. The reporter, Porter Barry, accused Moyers of not “having the courage” to come on the O’Reilly Factor. Moyers replied, “I will come on Bill O’Reilly’s show after he accepts my invitation to come on my show, unedited, a whole hour. I’ll give him a whole hour.” He added, “But let’s see if that message gets ... Read More

House GOP’s Bold Economic Agenda

Keywords: , , , , , , , , , , ,

House Republicans will unveil their economic agenda tomorrow with proposals to end earmarks, simplify the tax code and increase energy production. The GOP’s agenda should excite conservatives, who will recognize many of the policy goals as long-sought objectives.

For the past 18 months in the minority, Republicans have struggled to unify around a specific set of policy goals. Their economic agenda comes one month after they promoted an “American Families Agenda.” Two other policy plans will be unveiled in the coming months.

The centerpiece of the economic agenda is spending and tax reform. The proposal calls for an “immediate moratorium on congressional earmarks,” which constitutes remarkable progress for House Republicans. The GOP was unable to arrive at that goal earlier this year following its retreat. But after pressure from Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), conservatives apparently won over Boehner, who has long opposed pork-barrel projects.

On tax reform, Republicans are proposing a “two-tier flat tax system that can be filed on one page,” a bold move that moves beyond tinkering with the existing tax code. While it certainly won’t satisfy FairTax supporters, it differs drastically from anything Democrats have proposed. Americans will be dealt the largest tax increase in history if liberals have their way in Congress.

Other goals that are noteworthy include:

• Passing entitlement reform that addresses the problems facing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
• Balancing the federal budget by 2012 without raising taxes.
• Prohibiting federal spending from growing faster than the economy.
• Extending the current welfare work requirements to food stamps and housing.
• Making portability a central component of health care reform.

Here are complete details of the economic agenda:

1. A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WILL LOWER GAS PRICES

  • We’ll lower gas prices by increasing supply, expanding environmentally sound production of American energy, promoting new technologies to deliver new, cleaner energy and provide incentives to increase our energy efficiency – implementing energy reforms long delayed at America’s expense by short-sighted Democratic politicians.

2. A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WILL CUT THE PORK

  • We will restore fiscal responsibility in Washington by reining in spending, passing meaningful entitlement reform and balancing the federal budget by 2012 without raising taxes.
  • We will enact an immediate moratorium on congressional earmarks and establish a bipartisan panel to fundamentally reform how Washington spends taxpayer dollars.
  • We will reduce the size of government, make it more efficient and transparent while eliminating eliminate duplicative or wasteful programs.
  • We will limit the growth of federal spending to a level families can afford by adopting a spending limit that would prohibit federal spending from growing faster than the economy except in time of war or national emergency.
  • We will eliminate the exclusive tax breaks Democrats have given rich trial lawyers, and enact reforms to stop lawsuit abuse and prevent American jobs from being destroyed by abuse of the legal system.

3. A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WILL STOP THE DEMOCRATIC TAX HIKE

  • We will stop the largest tax increase in American history on workers, parents, married couples, small businesses, and those saving for retirement. We will offer new tax breaks for Americans – including eliminating the unfair Alternative Minimum Tax and making the Internet permanently tax-free.
  • We will end a tax code that is too long, too complex and too unfair by providing individuals an alternative, two-tier flat tax system that can be filed on one page. Taxpayers can choose the new, simplified system or stay with the current tax code—whichever option suits them.
  • We will make the tax code more family-friendly by reforming the child tax credit and lowering taxes on retirement benefits.

4. A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WILL FIX A BROKEN WASHINGTON TO SUPPORT LONG-TERM ECONOMIC GROWTH

  • To encourage a welfare safety net that fosters marriage and work, we will extend many of the current welfare work requirements to other programs – namely food stamps and housing – so that those who are not old, young, or disabled are either working in the private sector or serving in their community.
  • We will strengthen education by supporting increased state and local control and flexibility, increasing parental options through school choice, and encouraging states to provide extra support for good teachers through teacher performance pay initiatives.
  • We will tear down barriers that prevent U.S. products from being sold abroad. We will reject policies that retreat from world trade and segregate America from the rest of the world, in favor of policies that level the playing field for American employees and employers and give our workers the ability to go toe-to-toe with workers overseas.
  • We will level the playing field for American workers and start importing jobs here by cutting taxes on American industry.
  • We will strengthen homeownership in America through a series of reforms that encourage home purchases and help needy homeowners who are truly victims.
  • We will reform and improve our current health care system. The House GOP health care reform agenda, to be unveiled in detail in the coming weeks, will include reforms that will help small businesses deal with skyrocketing health care costs and help patients by broadening the array of health insurance choices available to them by allowing them to purchase health plans available in other states.

House Republicans will unveil their economic agenda tomorrow with proposals to end earmarks, simplify the tax code and increase energy production. The GOP's agenda should excite conservatives, who will recognize many of the policy goals as long-sought objectives. For the past 18 months in the minority, Republicans have struggled to unify around a specific set of policy goals. Their economic agenda comes one month after they promoted an "American ... Read More