|
Patriot Headlines | Grassroots Commentary Daily Digest
July 28, 2015
THE FOUNDATION"In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened." —George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796TOP RIGHT HOOKSRevealing Evil, Take 3The Center for Medical Progress had a good strategy: Capture and release undercover film of Planned Parenthood's depravity, wait for the inevitable craven defense and denial, and then turn up the heat with subsequent video releases that show even more offensive material. The group's third video release (with more to follow in the "Human Capital" series) is very graphic. It depicts, as feared, the dissected parts of an aborted baby, so viewers beware. A technician working with an 11-week-old aborted baby talks (and laughs) about getting $200-$300 per baby by charging more per organ or part specimen. Dr. Savita Ginde, vice president and medical director of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, agrees: “I think a per-item thing works a little better," she says, "just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” That's hardly just a way to "break even," as the Planned Parenthood doctor insisted in the first video. Never mind the abortion itself already costs a bundle. Clearly, money is the driving factor.The video primarily features an interview with Holly O'Donnell, a former “procurement technician” at a fetal tissue company. She recounts how she fainted on the first day at work when she was instructed to dissect a newly aborted baby. “I thought I was going to be just drawing blood," she said, "not procuring tissue from aborted fetuses.” She explained the profit motive: “The harder and more valuable the tissue, the more money you can get. If you can somehow procure a brain or a heart, you’re going to get more money. ... I guess that’s an incentive to try and get the hard stuff — because they get more money.” She concludes, "It's basically a huge trafficking of fetal tissues. ... It's a pretty sick company." And the despicable people at Planned Parenthood have the gall to insist the only evil here is the "heavily edited" videos. Comment | Share Boy Scout Board Decrees Homosexual Leaders OkayThe National Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America voted 45-12 to allow openly homosexual adults to be troop leaders. While Monday's decision leaves an exception for troops sponsored by religious organizations, homosexual activists are already saying they will challenge, erode and destroy the exception designed to respect religious conscience. Boy Scouts President (and former Defense Secretary) Robert Gates said, "For far too long this issue has divided and distracted us. Now it's time to unite behind our shared belief in the extraordinary power of Scouting to be a force for good." Since Gates took the helm of the BSA in May 2014, he's personally supported rolling back the ban. In May, he called for changing the policy. Despite Gates' assurances of unity, this top-down decree to the groups meeting in church basements and communities nationwide threatens to rend the organization. The Mormon Church said it's consider splitting from BSA to create its own scouting organization. And Rev. Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention said this decision will probably "freeze" the relationship between Southern Baptists and the BSA. Gates brought his political agenda to the BSA, and, as a result, religious liberty is being threatened and the BSA is cheapened. Furthermore, the change is the net effect of having a bunch of wealthy corporate guys fighting for advertising dollars leading the board of a national grassroots organization. There's clearly a huge disconnect between the political agenda of the board and the culture of Boy Scout troops.Comment | Share Dems' Economic Policies Will Hurt Those They Claim to HelpDemocrats are bickering over how high to raise the minimum wage, even though doing so would hurt constituencies the party claims to represent. Democrats all agree the minimum wage must be raised. The party's establishment politicians — Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi — propose a minimum wage hike to $12. Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is calling for a $15 minimum wage, even though the socialist only pays his interns $12 an hour. Is that all he can afford to pay them? A study published by the American Action Forum and the Manhattan Institute for Policy found both proposed minimum wage policies would decimate the jobs held by low-skilled workers who often vote Democrat. If the minimum wage rose to $12 an hour, the economy would lose 3.8 million jobs. If the minimum wage rose to $15 an hour, 6.6 million jobs would disappear. Besides putting the jobs of fast-food workers at risk, the Democrats' plan would hurt their supposed darling constituency: illegal immigrants. Of the 11.3 million illegals in this country, 8.1 million hold jobs. At the same time, there are 9.6 million unemployed Americans — a number that would very well rise if Democrats take a top down, emotional approach to the economy.Comment | Share Don't Miss Patriot HumorCheck out Dating.If you'd like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here. FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSISHillarynomics: Higher Tax Rates and More Solar PanelsBy Paul Albaugh
Earlier this month, Hillary made a few economic pronouncements, including bashing Republicans for "trickle-down economics" (a.k.a. capitalism). She also blamed GOP presidents for creating messes for Democrats to clean up, yet she never once mentioned the mess she and her own party created. Hillary’s initial prescription to solve our nation’s economic woes is to raise the minimum wage, spend more tax dollars on infrastructure and put more women into the workforce. Surely her comments perked up the ears of progressives, but anyone who understands basic economics knows her proposals do nothing to create jobs in a struggling economy. Now she's proposed two more facets of her economic agenda, and let’s just say that they are equally terrible. First, The Wall Street Journal reports Hillary proposes to “nearly double the top tax rate on long term capital gains to 43.4% from 23.8%.” She “wants to overthrow ‘quarterly capitalism,’ the supposed tendency of companies to be preoccupied with earnings reports and stock prices at the expense of investment that pays off over time.” She wants to apply the normal top income tax rate of 39.6% plus the 3.8% ObamaCare surtax to investments sold in less than two years. Sounds terrible, right? Well, it gets worse. The Journal also notes Hillary's proposed tax rate on capital gains would be higher than the rate in the 1970s or even during FDR’s New Deal: “She wants to create a sliding scale of higher tax rates that gradually decline depending on how long investors wait to realize a capital gain. For two years, the rate would rise to 43.4%, falling to 39.8% for year three and 35.8% in year four. Investments would have to be held for more than six years to qualify for the 23.8% rate.” Hillary argues a higher tax on capital means more revenue for the government without torching the economy. But what she and other leftist proponents refuse to acknowledge is that higher taxes imposed on capital gains leave less capital for individuals or private companies to invest in technology, equipment, facilities and, more importantly, jobs. If she were to be elected as the next president and succeed at implementing her plan, economic growth would slow even more, incomes would stagnate and people would essentially have to wait to cash in on their investment(s) — or be punished. In her twisted view, there is something wrong with individuals and corporations turning a profit. It’s as if because the individual or business was successful it isn’t fair to everyone else. Yet somehow it’s perfectly fair for her to haul in several hundred thousand dollars per speech? And not everyone can make a 10,000% profit on cattle futures. The second facet of her economic proposal is — you guessed it — climate change. Let’s just say that her proposal is much like Obama's, but on steroids. On Sunday, she promised two national goals if elected president. First, she would “set the United States on a path toward producing enough clean renewable energy to power every home in America within a decade.” Second, she would “initiate a process that would bring the total number of solar panels installed nationwide to more than half a billion before the end of her first term.” We truly hope she never sees that first term, because all that proposal will do is line the pockets of cronies in the solar-power industry. But hey, she's got to repay a favor — the two largest solar contractors in America gave generously to the Clinton Foundation. Meanwhile, Hillary couldn’t resist the opportunity to blast the GOP on the climate. She claims Republicans answer questions about climate change by deflecting, “I’m not a scientist.” But she did no better, saying, “Well, I’m not a scientist either, I’m just a grandmother with two eyes and a brain.” She forgot to mention she stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Of course, the “science” behind climate change isn’t science at all; it’s an agenda. Hillary and her fellow climate alarmists need to take the blinders off of their eyes and use what’s left of their brains. Additionally, she promises to fight back against the Republicans' attempt to dismantle the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, though she says she'll try to help those in the coal industry who have or will lose their jobs due to leftist environmental policies. Gee, that’s terrific. Who in their right mind would believe she will “try to help those in the coal industry"? Remember Benghazi? The last thing most Americans want to hear from Hillary is that she is here to help. Especially since her economic policy proposals for higher tax rates and a landscape plastered with solar panels do nothing but hurt Americans and their prosperity rather than helping them. Comment | Share
TODAY AT PATRIOTPOST.US
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
OPINION IN BRIEFThomas Sowell: "It is a painful sign of the deterioration of respect for law that a new law has to be passed to prevent a 'sanctuary city' from obstructing justice, which is already a crime. The larger issue is control of our own borders. We can debate forever whether building a fence is the best way to do that. But too much time has been wasted already. One thing is certain. Building a fence won’t hurt. If other things can be done to secure the border, then do those things as well. The American people deserve some concrete reassurance that Congress is finally getting serious. ... Instead of holding extensive Congressional hearings, airing all the arguments pro and con on immigration issues, and bringing out all the available facts, some politicians seek to rush through 'comprehensive immigration reform' — meaning some sweeping legislation that neither the public nor the Congress has had time to consider. Congress did that when it passed ObamaCare. Do we want to let immigration laws become something else that we learn about only after the fact, when it is too late?"Comment | Share SHORT CUTSInsight: "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." —Poet John Milton (1608-1674)Upright: "There are actions that can be taken immediately to reclaim the decency we are all worthy of, and that includes ... cutting off the $500 million dollar a year taxpayer subsidy of Planned Parenthood. They report a $1 billion profit every year. Let them suffer with a paltry $500M profit by making them pay for the non-abortion services they contend they provide. The left is always complaining about massive corporate profits, and ending 'corporate welfare.' Let’s start with Planned Parenthood." —columnist Tammy Bruce Belly laugh of the week: "[W]e're creating a culture that is not conducive to good policy or good politics. The American people deserve better. Certainly, presidential debates deserve better. In 18 months, I'm turning over the keys — I want to make sure I'm turning over the keys to somebody who is serious about the serious problems the country faces and the world faces." —Barack Obama Alpha Jackass: "I actually think I’m a pretty good president. I think if I ran [for a third term], I could win. But I can’t. So there’s a lot that I’d like to do to keep America moving, but the law is the law.” —Barack Obama Cognitive dissonance: "There’s a lot of merit to the [Iranian nuclear] deal, but there’s also a legitimate cause for concern and I think this is a decision that no member of Congress should make lightly." —Debbie Wasserman Schultz And last... "Do you know that in the restaurants of New York, they have an inspection system? You can surprise any restaurant without notice — you can walk in and inspect them. ... We're not protected from [an Iranian] bomb, but we're protected from a bad quality tuna fish." —comedian Jackie Mason Comment | Share Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis! Managing Editor Nate Jackson Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm's way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. |
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
THE PATRIOT POST 07/28/2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment