GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

Non-binding resolution blues

The non-binding resolution to voice displeasure against the troop buildup in Iraq gained momentum in the Senate this week when Republican Sen. John Warner signed on board. Majority Leader Harry Reid drew Warner in by toning down the bring-the-troops-home-now rhetoric that was written by Carl Levin, Joe Biden and Chuck Hagel. He hopes that more Republicans will follow Warner’s lead and keep the resolution from being hamstrung by a filibuster.

Senators John McCain, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham are looking to some of their more level-headed colleagues to draw votes away from the Demo resolution. Their version of the resolution would not criticize the buildup, but it would establish benchmarks that the Iraqi government must make in order to earn continued U.S. military support. In the House, San Fran Nan Pelosi and John Murtha are mustering their cut-and-run comrades for a similar resolution and are looking to tone down the language to give at least the appearance that they care about our national security.

It’s worth noting that the fervent deal-making that is taking place to craft a carefully worded statement of destructive criticism that holds no legal authority is the height of political posturing at a time when we need quite the opposite from our elected leaders. President Bush has been accused time and again by Democrats of playing politics with the war—but no one can out-politicize the Left when it comes to issues of national security. Our troops in Iraq know where their support truly lies and, unfortunately, so do our enemies.

Somebody’s been sniffing ethanol

Presidential candidates always fawn over Iowa voters in advance of primary season, but this time around they are playing up the state’s affinity for ethanol. Who can blame them? Ethanol production is worth $2.5 billion to the Hawkeye state, and with politicians far and wide embracing alternative fuel technologies, no one wants to be outdone in singing the praises of the magic corn juice. For instance, Hillary Clinton said in a recent visit that ethanol is “a perfect example” of how we can wean ourselves from foreign oil. Of course, she has voted against measures promoting ethanol production not once, not twice, but 17 times during her six years in the Senate.

Why the change of heart? Environmental issues will loom large in the next presidential contest, and the President’s call to seek alternative fuel technologies has been interpreted by tree huggers to mean that we can power our millions of automobiles on corn by the end of the next decade. If it sounds like a dream, that’s because it is. If we are to cut gasoline consumption by 20 percent over the next ten years, we would have to increase ethanol production by 35 billion gallons each year to meet demand. If all the corn grown in the United States were converted to ethanol, we still wouldn’t have enough to meet this figure. What’s more, where will the billions of dollars come from to convert the fuel delivery infrastructure—refineries, pipelines, fueling stations—over to ethanol delivery? Taxes, taxes, taxes.

One more SCOTUS nominee for Bush?

Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, believes the President has one more Supreme Court nomination coming. He stated at a conference last week that the opportunity is there to put at least one more strict constructionist on the Supreme Court before President Bush leaves office, provided he has the moxie for the fight. Justice John Paul Stevens turns 87 in April, and if he decides to retire before Bush’s term ends, Republicans need to be ready to fight to replace him with someone who has respect for the Constitution. Bush let down conservatives recently by withdrawing several federal nominees, but perhaps he will be motivated to improve his legacy should Stevens decide to retire.

The candidate parade rolls on

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has decided to form a presidential exploratory committee, adding to the growing Republican field. Huckabee, once a Southern Baptist minister, sees himself as a conservative, but he raised taxes several times as governor and supported providing state services for illegal aliens. However, he was the first governor of Arkansas ever to lower taxes, and he explains the tax hikes as a necessity due to a Supreme Court order to raise revenue for public schools. “We did it,” Huckabee explained, “but with the insistence that we wouldn’t just raise money, we would raise standards and expectations, and we did.”

One southern Republican drawing considerably more interest than Mike Huckabee in the presidential stakes is Newt Gingrich. Although Gingrich vows not to make a decision until after Labor Day, a “Draft Newt” campaign is already under way. Gingrich frowns upon the idea of running for president so many months out from the primaries, but his view that a nationwide conservative groundswell is needed to bring real reform could put him at the front of the Republican pack very quickly if he decides to enter the race later.

Joseph Biden has also announced that he is running for president, and he had just as much vitriol for his fellow Democrats as he does for Republicans. On John Edwards: “I don’t think [he] knows what the heck he is talking about.” On Hillary Clinton’s proposal to cap U.S. troops in Iraq: “a very bad idea” and the result would be “nothing but disaster.” On Barack Obama: “I don’t recall hearing a word from Barack about a plan or a tactic.” We can’t help but agree with Biden here. Maybe he could get work as a Republican campaign consultant. Or maybe not. Biden also said this about Obama: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” Nothing like the soft bigotry of low expectations. Would the “storybook” be an African-American who is articulate, or clean, Joe?

New and notable legislation

The Senate voted 94-3 to increase the federal minimum wage and give $8 billion worth of tax breaks to small businesses to help fund the hike.

The House passed a $463-billion spending package to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year. The bill, approved 286-140, continues funding most federal agencies at 2006 levels and holding numerous earmarks at bay.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) introduced the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act (HR 636), which would allow for 100-percent tax deductibility for individuals’ medical expenses, including non-employer-provided expenses.

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) is seeking co-sponsors for the Tax Relief for Families Act (HR 411), which would make permanent some of the most popular Bush tax cuts, including marriage-penalty relief and the college tuition deduction.

NATIONAL SECURITY

Iran, interrupted

Over the last two weeks, the Administration has finally decided to address the principal cause of trouble in the Middle East—Iran. This more than three years after Iranian weapons and advisors began pouring into Iraq, Iranian IED technology began killing American troops and Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army began receiving support from Tehran; three wasted years in which Iran was not punished for direct support to the murderers and thugs in Iraq. All we can say is, we hope it’s not too late.

Iran has shown no signs of bending to the preferred approach of the Europeans and their lefty cousins in Congress. Almost four years of multi-lateral negotiation led by wise, nuanced European diplomats achieved sanctions so toothless that Iran’s president laughed them off—literally. Now our preferred approach—the explicit threat of force—is finally going to get a chance. As noted by most news-watchers over the past week, it is now formal U.S. policy to kill or capture Iranian military or intelligence operatives in Iraq. Opportunities to do so should abound as Iranians outnumber the CIA in Iraq.

Further, President Bush has ordered a second aircraft-carrier task force to the Persian Gulf. Speaking of the deployment, Vice President Dick Cheney explains, “That sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.”

We would prefer to have seen these tougher policies enacted in October 2003, when the first Iranian weapons began showing up in Iraq—but better late than never, we hope.

NRC rules on nuclear-plant protection

In a 5-0 ruling this week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that the nation’s 103 nuclear-power plants do not need to protect themselves from attacks by terrorists using airplanes. The ruling was in response to a 2004 petition by a Los Angeles based non-profit group, the Committee to Bridge the Gap, that called for nuclear plants to build I-beam or cable shielding against incoming aircraft, or to take other preventive steps against release of radiation in an air attack. Eight state attorneys general backed the petition. The group cited the 9/11 Commission Report, which stated that al-Qa’ida had considered targeting nuclear power plants in addition to the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Ultimately, the NRC regulators found that current nuclear-plant designs are robust enough to withstand an air attack, even one from a commercial airliner, although future plant design may require additional safeguards. This could affect the nuclear-power revival that appears to be under way, with some 31 new plants currently on various drawing boards. Indeed, with energy independence and global warming—real or hoax—on everybody’s minds, nuclear plants are an increasingly attractive option.

146 levees could fail nationwide

Due to Hurricane Katrina, The Army Corps of Engineers is looking closely at levees throughout the U.S. The Corps stiffened inspection standards and found that 146 levees around the nation may fail during a flood. Poor maintenance is the culprit in most cases, and millions of dollars will be spent on repairs in the coming months. If these levees are not repaired, aside from possible catastrophe, FEMA would declare them inadequate flood controls, meaning homes in surrounding areas would be forced to purchase flood insurance (not a bad idea, anyway). Since Katrina, the Corps has inspected more than 2,000 levees, and even though the sum of 146 is not bad statistically, it’s still 146 too many.

BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Farm subsidies and other economic nonsense

The Bush administration is pushing for an end to some farm subsidies, which we applaud, though it is only a modest step in the right direction. The reductions would be for subsidies targeting particular crops, moving instead to assuring a certain level of revenue for farmers, regardless of poor yield or low prices. This is a treatment of a symptom rather than the disease. Farmers are not guaranteed anything by the Constitution, except the right to operate in the free market. However, subsidies have become the rule, not the exception, in Washington. So has ignoring the Constitution.

Speaking of ignorance, President Bush has opted to pick up the Demo line on “income inequality.” “The fact is that income inequality is real—it’s been rising for more than 25 years,” he said. “The reason is clear: We have an economy that increasingly rewards education and skills because of that education.” What is more, he views this as a bad thing. Democrats would love to gain “equality” by bringing the poor up a peg, knocking the “rich” down ten and hoarding more money for the government. The President should know better. Just because some people get richer faster than others in a growing economy, a singular fact remains—everybody is still getting richer!

Of course, the good news is just that—the economy continues to grow at a healthy pace (3.4 percent in 2006). Last year’s newly released numbers show that wages and salaries rose, while unemployment and inflation fell. The Federal Reserve has since decided to hold interest rates at 5.25 percent, leaving them unchanged since June. Memo to Washington: Stay out of the way.

The Bush healthcare plan deserves a chance

The usual assortment of uninformed liberal critics is making predictable accusations about how tax incentives to buy health insurance help only the rich. Contrary to the administration’s estimates, these critics claim that tax incentives will not affect the number of uninsured Americans as the administration claims. However, little-publicized government research reveals that fully one third of the nation’s 47-million uninsured can afford individual insurance but choose not to obtain it. Given this fact, the Bush administration’s estimate of an additional five million choosing to purchase insurance because of tax incentives may have been underestimated by ten million or more.

Channeling additional federal money to state healthcare programs through the other prong of the President’s proposal is already encountering the cruel inefficiencies of government-run healthcare: There will simply never be enough money. California’s and Massachusetts’ much-ballyhooed universal-coverage schemes depend upon siphoning billions of Medicaid dollars away from smaller states, and highlighting dysfunctional incompatibilities among government-run healthcare, federalism and budgetary restraints.

Contrary to the “solutions” bandied about by self-anointed experts, only President Bush’s tax-incentive proposal promises to decrease dramatically the ranks of the uninsured without ballooning the government deficit. If Democrats and weak-kneed Republicans allow it to move forward, the President’s plan will prove to be a pivotal piece in solving the healthcare puzzle.

Flat, but fat

Steve Forbes, eat your heart out. Your flat tax is a reality. So says Dallas Morning News economic columnist Scott Burns. Citing a National Bureau of Economic Research study, Burns places the all-in marginal tax rate, or “what most workers will pay on each additional dollar of income when all taxes—federal income, employment, state income, sales tax and major benefit programs—are considered,” at a whopping 40 percent.

Skeptical? Just count the numbers.

Self-employed and in the 25-percent tax bracket? Factor in the 12.4-percent Social Security tax and you’re at 37 percent. Young couple making $20,000 annually? Your marginal tax rate is 42.5 percent. Any income level from $20,000 to $500,000? Your number averages to 40.3 percent.

To Burns, this constitutes “a de facto flat tax, with bumps and potholes.” To the average taxpayer, it means something more: Keep working. Forty cents of your next dollar will be lost in government bureaucracy’s deep collection bucket. That kind of taxation may be flat, but somehow we’re inclined to say it’s not quite flat enough.

Democrats fight Bush on trade

President Bush has done a fine job of keeping free trade alive by negotiating a number of bilateral trade deals with countries around the globe. The very useful trade-promotion-authority provision allows him to deal directly with other nations, then submit trade pacts to Congress for an up-or-down vote. That power expires in June, and Democrats are not interested in renewing it unless trade deals hinge on provisions that enforce labor and environmental protections in other countries. Such provisions will lead to a reduction in free trade and a rise in consumer costs here at home. Democrats claim that President Bush’s trade deals have led to a significant loss of jobs in the manufacturing sector here at home, but their actions will not bring lost jobs back. In fact, the tariffs and trade restrictions that liberals so freely embrace are the best way to halt economic growth.

CULTURE

Hippie days are here again

Last Saturday, a large crowd of aging hippies descended on the nation’s capital for what the Associated Press lovingly labeled a “spirited call to get out of Iraq.” Among the new faces were old and familiar ones: The “Reverend” Je$$e Jack$on, actor Sean Penn and everyone’s favorite traitor, Hanoi Jane Fonda. The message was all too clear: Democrats now in control of Congress aren’t doing enough to stop the evil George Bush from killing more American troops, who apparently are helpless while stuck in Iraq. Declared Penn, “If they don’t stand up and make a resolution as binding as the death toll, we’re not going to be behind those politicians.” A severe threat indeed. Rep. John Conyers, for one, took it seriously. “The founders of our country gave our Congress the power of the purse because they envisioned a scenario exactly like we find ourselves in today. Not only is it in our power, it is our obligation to stop Bush,” he said.

Hanoi Jane spoke about her persecution and long-suffering silence, whining, “I haven’t spoken at an anti-war rally in 34 years because I’ve been afraid that because of the lies that have been, and continue to be spread about me in that [Vietnam] war—that they would be used to hurt this new anti-war movement. But silence is no longer an option…” Jane, we’re moved… really.

Hippie peaceniks can get awfully violent and destructive when they’re advocating peace, though, and this time they were spray-painting graffiti on the Capitol stairs. The U.S. Capitol Police were ordered to break ranks to allow access. USCP Chief Phillip Morse said in response to criticism that “…it is the USCP’s duty and responsibility to protect the Capitol complex, staff and public while allowing the public to exercise their First Amendment rights… [A]t the end of the day, both occurred without injury to protestors or officers.” Memo to Morse: The First Amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to vandalism. Yet, at the end of the day, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid control the USCP and we suspect they were perfectly happy to see their minions doing that of which they can only dream.

Kerry’s memory ‘seared’ on global warming

John Kerry, whose brain is “seared” with the memory of Christmas ‘68 in Cambodia, is having trouble remembering another event in his more recent past: Voting with the Senate 95-0 on a resolution to pre-reject the Kyoto Protocol. To Kerry, this fits (along with everything else) in the blame Bush category, despite the fact that the Senate vote was in 1997, four years before Bush became president. Bashing the U.S. in Davos, Switzerland, the Senator pontificated, “When we walk away from global warming, Kyoto… when we don’t advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards, we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy.” Look who’s talking.

Let’s look at what the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization recently found regarding global warming. The number-one cause isn’t growing herds of SUVs; it is growing herds of cattle. That’s right: Bovine methane does more to warm the planet than your Hummer H2. The world’s 1.5 billion cows are found to be the culprits in 18 percent of the gases that cause warming—more than trains, planes and automobiles combined. Not only that, but livestock (including fertilizer and other things necessary for their care) are blamed for everything from acid rain to poisoning rivers and destroying coral reefs. As for Kerry, while he’s certainly all hat and no cattle, he’s still full of, er, cattle waste.

Weather Channel on the fritz

Everyday, millions of Americans tune in to the Weather Channel, and many depend on the accuracy of these reports. Indeed, TWC promotes itself as the “pre-eminent provider of weather information.” Interestingly, the network’s premier climatologist, Heidi Cullen, who broadcasts hour-long “educational” segments, is determined to kill debate on global warming—at least among weather broadcasters.

She proposes that all broadcast meteorologists with the gall to challenge the global-warming cult should lose their scientific certification—which amounts to career capital punishment for these middle-aged, highly specialized scientists. “Meteorologists,” insists Cullen, “are among the few people trained in the sciences who are permitted regular access to our living rooms. [T]hey owe it to their audience to distinguish between… science and junk political controversy. If a meteorologist can’t speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn’t give them a Seal of Approval.”

Cullen’s 17 December episode of “The Climate Code,” featured Grist magazine’s Dave Roberts as an “eco-expert,” openly calling for Nuremberg-style trials for climate skeptics. Repression of this sort no doubt makes Uncle Joe Stalin spin merrily in his tomb.

When critical reports slip past the MSM’s censors, they’re instantly attacked for being funded by corporations. But with the Left’s steel grip on most sources of funding, scientists unwilling to bend to the party line have difficulty raising money, let alone ever finding positions. The inequality in funding is enormous. Compare the 2004 annual budgets of the following: the Sierra Club at $91 million and the Natural Resources Defense Council at $57 million, versus the Left’s favorite conservative punching bag on environmental issues, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, at $3.6 million. Clearly, the Left’s out to win this one, despite the massive damage it will inflict on our lives.

Poor liberal media

Cue the violins: Al Franken is leaving Air America. On 14 February, the hero of lefty squawk radio will broadcast his final show for Air America, and he is likely to take what’s left of the failing network’s audience with him. His departure comes at a time when Air America, which once touted itself as a worthy competitor to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and other highly successful talk-radio personalities, is being bought by New York real estate developer Stephen Green. Green made his offer just three months after the company filed for bankruptcy, and the deal, whose terms remain secret, is subject to approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

Air America failed largely because it misjudged the size of the audience that was willing to listen to the liberal claptrap it broadcast far and wide. Never willing to admit that a vast majority of Americans just won’t buy what they’re selling, liberals will blame the “stranglehold” that conservatives have on talk radio. They don’t respect free markets, so they don’t understand that Rush, Sean, Laura and the gang are simply creating a better product.

Liberals are having trouble in TV, too. See Katie Couric’s slumping ratings as anchor of the CBS Evening News, which are being blamed on gender bias. Both CBS News President Sean McManus and Larry King have trumpeted this malarkey as an excuse for why viewers are tuning out the misguided program that Couric hosts. Could it really be true that viewers don’t want to see women anchoring the evening news? Unlikely, considering that 57 percent of all local news anchors are women. Women also hold 55 percent of all executive producer positions in the news business. Perhaps the fault lies with Katie for leaving that plum “Today” show gig.

And last…

Embarking on her new chit-chat tour, Hillary-in-’08 Clinton has come up with the exit strategy that has so eluded Democrats ever since they changed their minds about fighting for America’s national security interests. President Bush should “extricate our country” from Iraq before leaving office. After all, she says, leaving that job for the next commander in chief (i.e. her) would be “the height of irresponsibility.”

Oddly enough, one questioner at her town-hall-style meeting asked if she could stand up to “evil men” around the world. She repeated for effect, “The question is, we face a lot of dangers in the world and, in the gentleman’s words, we face a lot of evil men and what in my background equips me to deal with evil and bad men.” The audience caught the reference, laughing while she gave a knowing smirk and nod, obviously pleased at the implication of hubby Bill, though she denied it later. “Oh, come on. I don’t think anybody in there thought [it was a reference to Bill]. I thought I was funny. You know, you guys keep telling me, ‘Lighten up. Be funny.’ You know, I get a little funny and now I’m being psychoanalyzed.” In Hillary’s defense, we think she’s eminently qualified to deal with evil men in at least one critical way: It takes one to know one.

Lex et Libertas—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for the editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan.)