by Tom Donelson on March 14, 2012 at 3:50 AM
This is a piece of random thoughts where conventional wisdom is turned upside down and corrected. Here is a thought, how many times does the left tells us how much of a failure those Bush tax cuts were? Of course, the job growth that has occurred in the Obama administration arose after the GOP won the House, which thwarted any attempts to raise Bush tax rates. When you add the short term and somewhat inadequate stimulus provided by the payroll tax cuts, along with Fed’s easy money, you can actually make the case that failure to raise the marginal tax rates among the rich have had a marginal benefit to the economy. It certainly hasn’t hurt.
Speaking of payroll tax cuts, can the Democrats really run on the premise that the Republicans want to wreck Social Security when Obama is defunding the Medicare and Social Security funds? Maybe after Obama is sent home early to begin his third memoir, we can actually have a serious debate on entitlement reform. Have you noticed how the left's idea of free speech, or for that matter, fair and balanced media essentially means no conservatives on the air? The recent attack on Rush Limbaugh and even the suggestion that the FCC takes him off the air only goes to demonstrate that the left is not really into free speech as much as a monopoly over speech. Let’s face it, folks like Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, and Ed Schultz have said far worse things about women, in particular conservative women, than Rush ever did. A few years ago, there was big push from many lefties to keep their fellow liberals from appearing on Fox including NPR Mara Liasson. (Ms. Liasson ignored the pressure for the simple reason, more people see her on Fox than on NPR and if anything, NPR gets a boost to have a responsible liberal appear on their behalf.) Fox News is the bogeyman of the left but if these folks actually listen to what actually goes on the network, they will find a network in which their pundits don’t always sing from the same hymnal. O’Reilly's recent attack on oil companies and speculators could easily been mouthed by a Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz and not far behind him on this issue is Lou Dobbs. If anything, the only solid conservative night in and night out is Sean Hannity, whereas Bill O’ Reilly may be right of center, he is not above playing the populist card at times. It is not like MSNBC, where every evening, the hosts simply repeats what the previous host stated and there really isn’t much difference between Chris Matthews, Lawrence O’ Donnell, Ed Schultz ,and Rachel Maddow.
Speaking of news, when does MSNBC do real news? Unlike Fox or CNN, there is no real evening news program on MSNBC. The only attempt for straight news broadcast is practiced by Brian Williams and that is on the main Network. Beyond that, the only serious journalism practiced on NBC cable is performed on CNBC business network, but if you are looking for any aspect of a news program without much overt punditry, you have to turn into ether Fox or CNN. Between 5 and 7, Fox has news and MSNBC has pundits handing out the latest Democratic or leftist talking point. MSNBC is everything the left accuses Fox of being, a biased broadcast network doing the will of a specific political party. MSNBC is nothing more than appendages of the Democratic Party and the left, leaving the real news to their competitors.
This is one of those dog bite man stories in which Peter Gleick was invited by the Heartland Institute to debate climate change science. Instead, Gleick stole documents from Heartland and then allegedly forged other documents in an effort to discredit the Midwest Institute instead of engaging in a debate. Another black eye for "the world is going to end gang" that seems too insecure of its own data that it has to resort to forging documents to eliminate opponents from the public square. We are told repeatedly that the science is settled and aren’t there 900 referenced studies proving this blah, blah, blah? You would figure that it would be an easy matter to simply embarrass this upstart think tank out of the Midwest, or can we conclude that many within the climatology community are not so certain of their data? If nothing else, like the attempt to silence Rush, there is an attempt to silence one side of this debate.
The big story in all of this was how little money Heartland received from evil energy producers and how much money many of these evil energy producers contributed to many of the Green organizations like the Sierra Club. As for the Koch Brothers' contribution to Heartland Institute it was to further Heartland Institute free market ideas on health care! The conventional wisdom is that Heartland and others are massively funded by big business but the reality is the complete opposite, it is the green movement getting all the dough. Sierra Club collected more money from the Natural gas business than what Heartland budget for all of their projects over a four year period!
Eric Holder squashing Texas Voter ID law is not about helping minorities, but for Obama and the Democrats, having an issue to use in the minority communities with the tag line, “evil Republicans want to take your voting rights away.” Meanwhile, evil Democrats in Rhode Island are obviously denying legitimate voters in their state their rights with their voter ID law. Oh well, I can’t wait for Holder to investigate Rhode Island Democrats who voted for voter ID’s in their state, but then Hell will be freezing over before that actually happens.
One last point, Warren G. Harding is considered one of the dumbest Presidents, but he inherited as bad an economic situation as Reagan did in 1980 or Obama in 2008. Within two years, Harding’s policies had the economy growing stronger, but Obama’s recovery is still sputtering at best and has produced the slowest economy revival in the post-World War II era. So can we conclude that maybe Harding wasn’t as dumb as we thought and maybe Obama is not as smart as we thought?