Study: Red States Far More Charitable Than Blue States

August 20, 2012 at 6:07 pm (Barack Obama, Blue States, Charity, Democrats, Donating, Donations, John McCain, Philanthropy, Red States, Republicans)

I remember a liberal friend of mine once saying to me that they couldn’t understand how I could be a Republican, ‘because they just seem so mean’.

And listening to Democrats rail about how Republicans are greedy, that they want to cut Grandma’s Medicare benefits, how they have to force the rich to pay more in taxes because it’s the patriotic thing to do so, and so on, you just might believe it.

But make no mistake, Democrats aren’t a kinder bunch.  They don’t want to spread their wealth around, they want to spread yours.

A new study from the Chronicle of Philanthropy shows that the most charitable states in the US are all red, while the least charitable are all blue.

Red states give more money to charity than blue states, according to a new study on Monday.

The eight states with residents who gave the highest share of their income to charity supported Sen. John McCain in 2008, while the seven states with the least generous residents went for President Barack Obama, the Chronicle of Philanthropy found in its new survey of tax data from the IRS for 2008.

The eight states whose residents gave the highest share of their income — Utah, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, Idaho, Arkansas and Georgia — all backed McCain in 2008. Utah leads charitable giving, with 10.6 percent of income given.

And the least generous states — Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire — were Obama supporters in the last presidential race. New Hampshire residents gave the least share of their income, the Chronicle stated, with 2.5 percent.

“The reasons for the discrepancies among states, cities, neighborhoods are rooted in part in each area’s political philosophy about the role of government versus charity,” the study’s authors noted.

Democrats however will continue to portray the Republican party as the party of rich, greedy, old men who make their money off the backs of the 99%.

The difference though is clear – Republicans want the choice to give their money to charity, while Democrats want to legislate charity by forcing others to hand over their hard-earned money.  Isn’t that a fundamental difference of both parties – choice vs. government?

Permalink Leave a Comment

DCCC’s Dishonest Medi-Scare Campaign Won’t Fool New Yorkers

August 16, 2012 at 3:25 pm (Bill Owens, Bob Turner, DCCC, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Democrats, Louise Slaughter, Medi-Scare, Medicare, New York, Paul Tonko, President Obama, Republican Party, Steve Israel, Tim Bishop)

Today the New York State Republican Party responded to DCCC Chairman Steve Israel’s new television ad campaign:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, led by New York’s own Steve Israel, is out with their first campaign ad of the 2012 season, in which they falsely accuse a Republican Congressman of voting to “end Medicare.”

Democrats tried these “Medi-scare” tactics last year, and they failed:

In New York’s 9th Congressional District, Republican Bob Turner won in a three-to-one Democratic district not held by a Republican since 1923 and in a swing Nevada district, the Republican won by twenty-two points.

Neither Barack Obama nor Congressional Democrats have a plan to save Medicare from bankruptcy.

In fact, only one bill in history signed by an American President actually removed funds from Medicare.

It was Obamacare, written by Democrats, signed into law by Barack Obama and passed with the votes of Steve Israel, Dan Maffei, Bill Owens, Paul Tonko, Louise Slaughter, Nita Lowey and Tim Bishop.

Team Obama’s doubling down on a failed attack line speaks volumes about their lack of confidence in their own record.

And Americans know why Democrats don’t want to discuss that:

Obama promised hope and change, but the legacy of his domestic legislative and regulatory agenda is high unemployment, the worst economic recovery in
70 years, four years of trillion-dollar deficits and the most federal government spending since World War II.

Come January, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will put America back on the path to fiscal sanity and economic prosperity.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Watch: Wolf Blitzer Destroys DNC Chair Over Medicare Lies

August 14, 2012 at 9:00 am (CNN, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrats, DNC, Lying, Medicare, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Seniors, Wolf Blitzer)

Debbie Wasserman Schultz has had a long history of struggling with the truth.  But you know it’s bad when Wolf Blitzer of CNN has to thoroughly destroy her in an interview in which she tries to continue pushing those lies.

Schultz took to pushing an already well-documented lie on Medicare and the Republicans so-called efforts to end it, and trying to scare people into thinking Romney and Ryan’s plan would effect current seniors.  Wolf Blitzer to his credit, wouldn’t stand for the lies, and hilarity ensues…

Via Townhall:

Let me say this right up front: Congratulations to Wolf Blitzer for being a relentless, responsible journalist. If you value the truth, this interview is a pleasure to watch.  If you have even an ounce of human compassion for the in-over-her-head target of Blitzer’s inquisition, it’s positively brutal:

Poor Debbie.  She’s totally out-gunned and has nowhere to hide.  Her talking points are pitifully hollow and cannot withstand even basic questioning.  She stubbornly rejects the (correct) premise that the Romney/Ryan Medicare reform plan exempts everyone over the age of 54, and plays fast and loose with numbers — conflating 55 and 65 on several occasions.  When she is brow-beaten into finally acknowledging — if not admitting — the truth around the 3:45 mark, she quickly realizes her “mistake” and reverts back into denialism.  When Blitzer asks her to specify exactly how current or soon-to-be seniors would be impacted by the GOP plan, she cannot.  Because they’re not.  The Left is intellectually bankrupt on the very subject they claim will allow them to crush Mitt Romney in November.  They despise the bipartisan solution Republicans have offered, but they have no alternative of their own.

Watch the video here…

Permalink Leave a Comment

Flashback: Dems Claims That Ryan Would End Medicare Named "Lie of the Year"

August 12, 2012 at 10:03 am (Bill Nelson, David Axelrod, Democrats, End Medicare, Harry Reid, Julian Schreibman, Lie of the Year, Lying, Medicare, Paul Ryan, Paul Tonko, Politifact)

The question is, how do they sort through all of the lies coming out of the Democrat party during the course of an entire year?

The first line of attack against Paul Ryan out of the Democrat party has clearly been the claim that he wants to end Medicare.

Paul Tonko (D-NY):

Governor Romney’s pick of Congressman Paul Ryan confirms his commitment to the radical Republican budget. As the lead author of this extreme thinking, Paul Ryan proposed and Tea Party House Republicans passed a budget that would end the Medicare guarantee as we know it and shift costs onto the backs of seniors….

Julian Schreibman (running against Chris Gibson):

Congressman Chris Gibson’s embrace of that agenda – including supporting Ryan’s budget plan to end Medicare as we know it …

Bill Nelson (D-FL):

Romney VP pick bad for seniors. Signals an end to Medicare as we know it.

David Axelrod (Obama adviser on lying):

President Barack Obama’s senior campaign adviser David Axelrod says the Medicare changes supported by Rep. Paul Ryan, the likely Republican vice presidential candidate, would put the popular health-care plan for the elderly in “a death spiral.”

Harry Reid (Senate Majority Leader on lying):

By picking Rep. Paul Ryan, Gov. Romney has doubled down on his commitment to gut Social Security & end Medicare as we know it. 

The problem with these claims is that they’re simply untrue.  Left-leaning Politifact even had to squash the Democrat claims back in 2011, naming it the biggest “lie of the year” (h/t Weasel Zippers).

Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.

Democrats pounced. Just four days after the party-line vote, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a Web ad that said seniors will have to pay $12,500 more for health care “because Republicans voted to end Medicare.”

Rep. Steve Israel of New York, head of the DCCC, appeared on cable news shows and declared that Republicans voted to “terminate Medicare.” A Web video from the Agenda Project, a liberal group, said the plan would leave the country “without Medicare” and showed a Ryan look-alike pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff. And just last month, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sent a fundraising appeal that said: “House Republicans’ vote to end Medicare is a shameful act of betrayal.”

After two years of being pounded by Republicans with often false charges about the 2010 health care law, the Democrats were turning the tables.

PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.

Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year.

In fact, if you click on the Poltifact article you’ll see nine different ways the Democrats have made the same claim laid out on the right side of the page.  Each claim that Ryan’s plan would “end Medicare” has been labeled as false, or with the more subtle “pants on fire”.

Here’s video of Paul Ryan actually explaining his plan for Medicare (h/t Twitchy):

Permalink Leave a Comment

Democrats Forced to Apologize to Ann Romney For Offensive Horse Videos

July 19, 2012 at 7:00 am (Ann Romney, Brad Woodhouse, Democrats, DNC, Dressage, Horse, Lawrence O'Donnell, Mitt Romney, MS, MSNBC, Multiple Sclerosis, Therapy)

The Democratic National Committee has had to apologize for stooping to the level of lowly MSNBC hosts, producing a series of mocking ads featuring the Romneys’ expensive sport-horse.  The horse is used by Ann Romney as a form of therapy for her multiple sclerosis.

Even as late as last night, the DNC was defending the ads as an attack on Mitt Romney and not his wife.  One spokeswoman for the Democrats said:

“One of Mitt Romney’s hobbies and investments is his dressage horse. And, like his horse, Mitt Romney continues to dance around the issues, from answering why he’s invested in known foreign tax havens or trying to rewrite his position on letting Detroit go bankrupt.”

It’s not like they lacked the knowledge that the horse has been used by Ann Romney as a form of therapy for MS, since MSNBC host Lawrence O”Donnell embarrassed himself last month by mocking Mrs. Romney for the very same thing.  Is the DNC now getting their talking points from one of the most biased and fact-challenged networks in the history of mainstream media?

Perhaps, but for now the Democrats have been forced to apologize.

Via ABC News:

It seemed like a good idea at the time, but now the Democratic National Committee is offering an apology of sorts to Ann Romney.

At issue is a DNC video featuring footage of Ann Romney’s dancing show horse. The DNC used the horse in mocking way to attack Mitt Romney for not releasing his tax returns (and dancing around the issue).

The DNC introduced the video as the first in a series of videos featuring the horse, which is owned jointly by Ann and Mitt Romney.

Ann Romney, who trains with show horses as part of her therapy for multiple sclerosis, took offense in an interview with Robin Roberts on “Good Morning America,” and now the DNC is saying it will put out no more horse videos, and is expressing regret for offending Ann Romney.

“Our use of the Romneys’ dressage horse was not meant to offend Mrs. Romney in any way, and we regret it if it did,” DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse told ABC News. “We were simply making a point about Governor Romney’s failure to give straight answers on a variety of issues in this race. We have no plans to invoke the horse any further to avoid misinterpretation.”

This is already a brutal campaign, but the Obamas have long said families are off limits. Apparently somebody high up reminded the DNC of that.

Doubtful.  While the Obamas have claimed families are off limits, they have relentlessly invoked images and stories of their daughters to push their agenda throughout the campaign.  More likely, just as MSNBC had done, the DNC didn’t properly do a background check on the Romney’s use of the dressage horse, jumping at a chance to mock Mitt as being a rich horse owner.

Any chance to gin up a little class warfare, even if it involves mocking people for their chosen method of therapy for a dreaded disease.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Breaking: Michael LoPorto Found Not Guilty in Ballot Fraud Trial

July 18, 2012 at 3:45 pm (Ballot Fraud, Bob Mirch, Democrats, John Brown, Michael LoPorto, New York, Rensselaer County, Sara Couch, Trey Smith, Troy, Voter Fraud, WFP, Working Families Party)

Former City Councilman Michael Loporto, has been acquitted on all 22 counts of second-degree criminal possession of a forged instrument, in the upstate New York ballot fraud scandal.  In May, we predicted that this would be the outcome:

“LoPorto was wise in having his trial separated from his colleague (Ed McDonough).  The hard evidence against LoPorto’s knowledge of the scam is limited, and even witness testimony on his side of things was inconsistent.”

When the re-trial got underway, testimony was again inconsistent.  While several people had placed LoPorto at the scene of the ballot forgery, witnesses who testified could not agree on his exact placement.  One witness had placed him in close proximity, about an arm’s length, while another had him a good 20 feet away.

JJFWFPER7HR6

But the real break for LoPorto came in May, when Working Families Party operative Sara Couch, requested to change her original testimony.  The Troy Record reported:

A key witness in the original trial of Democrats Ed McDonough and Michael LoPorto for their suspected roles in the 2009 Working Families Party ballot fraud scandal seeks to add to her original testimony.

Couch plans to add one statement that wasn’t contained in her initial testimony as well as adding some words LoPorto had said to her after she left a meeting with former City Councilman John Brown which took place at LoPorto’s restaurant. Brown, who was later convicted of a felony charge in connection to the case, tried convincing WFP members present at that meeting to put a press release out blaming the scandal on former city DPW Commissioner Bob Mirch. LoPorto was said to have been in the back cooking and not part of the meeting.

The contrasting statements gave two very different impressions.  In her previous testimony, Couch said that LoPorto had told her, ““I never gave you those ballots”, suggesting a cover-up.  In her revised statements, Couch said LoPorto followed her to her car, gave her a hug and said, “Had I known, I would have never handed you those ballots.”

LoPorto had maintained his innocence throughout the scandal.  His legal team has made a good point throughout, which is this – The prosecutor Trey Smith, seems to have given very favorable deals to Democrats in the scandal who stood to be most readily convicted for their part in the fraud, while actively pursuing those who played a minor or unwitting (in this case) role.

The question is, why?

Permalink Leave a Comment

Chuck Schumer: There Ought to be Limits on the First Amendment

July 18, 2012 at 7:00 am (Chuck Schumer, Citizens United, Democrats, DISCLOSE Act, First Amendment, Free Speech, Nancy Pelosi, New York)

Despite more pressing and urgent business at hand for the Senate, Democrats have placed the DISCLOSE Act – a bill which requires disclosure of political activity by restricting the First Amendment – on the front burner.

The Act is sponsored by New York Senator Chuck Shumer, who recently blatantly admitted the need to curb freedoms assured by the First Amendment.

Schumer:

I believe there ought to be limits because the First Amendment is not absolute. No amendment is absolute. You can’t scream ‘fire’ falsely in a crowded theater. We have libel laws. We have anti-pornography laws. All of those are limits on the First Amendment. Well, what could be more important than the wellspring of our democracy? And certain limits on First Amendment rights that if left unfettered, destroy the equality — any semblance of equality in our democracy — of course would be allowed by the Constitution. And the new theorists on the Supreme Court who don’t believe that, I am not sure where their motivation comes from, but they are just so wrong. They are just so wrong.

Shumer isn’t the only Democrat who wants to re-write the First Amendment.  Nancy Pelosi previously stated her desire to amend the First Amendment using the same DISCLOSE Act.

Pelosi said the Democrats’ effort to amend the Constitution is part of a three-pronged strategy that also includes promoting the DISCLOSE Act, which would increase disclosure requirements for organizations running political ads, and “reducing the roll of money in campaigns” (which some Democrats have said can be done through taxpayer funding of campaigns).

The constitutional amendment the Democrats seek would reverse the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In that decision the court said that the First Amendment protects a right of free speech for corporations as well as for individuals, and that corporations (including those that produce newspapers, films and books) have a right to speak about politicians and their records just as individuals do.

If you’re wondering how this would lead to censorship of everyday things like books, papers, or the internet, Chief Justice Roberts can explain…

The case in question led to this opinion written by Roberts:

“The government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech,” wrote Roberts. “It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concerns.”

JJFWFPER7HR6

Permalink Leave a Comment

Is Barack Obama the Most Racially Polarizing President of Our Time?

July 17, 2012 at 8:40 pm (2012 Election, Barack Obama, Communist, Democrats, Frank Marshall Davis, Hate, President Obama, Race, Racism)

A new report from Accuracy in Media, authored by myself and Cliff Kincaid, explores the question of whether or not President Obama, his campaign, and his staff, are the most racially divisive administration in recent memory.

Here is a very brief excerpt from the 5,000+ word report:

The morning after Election Day, 2008, The New York Times proclaimed that Barack Obama’s victory had swept “away the last racial barrier in American politics.” However, as the President’s first term draws to a close, a case can be made that the historic election was anything but post-racial; rather, it has been the most racially polarizing presidency in modern times.

This article is meant to examine in-depth, the racial, if not racist, agenda of the Obama administration. The new evidence about the racist influence that Frank Marshall Davis had over Barack Obama puts these matters in a new and frightening perspective. Seemingly spontaneous comments Obama has made on racial matters take on a new significance in view of the Kengor book and his revelations about Davis and Obama.

The upcoming election will likely see an escalation of racial tactics on Obama’s part…

The investigative report, titled Reason to Hate:  Barack Obama’s Racist Roots, explores the relationship a young Barack Obama had with Communist Frank Marshall Davis, points out specific instances where the President has governed along racial lines, examines how the ever-friendly media has portrayed race in America and this administration, and outlines how Democrats are actively using ‘race training’ as a way to win elections and push their agenda.

Please read more here…

Permalink Leave a Comment

Democrats Willing to Play Chicken With the American Economy

July 16, 2012 at 4:12 pm (Bush Tax Cuts, Democrats, Economy, Fiscal Cliff, Jobs, Obamacare, Obamatax, Patty Murray, Recession, Republicans, Small Business, Tax the Rich)

Democrats have laid down the gauntlet, claiming they are willing to drive the American economy off the “fiscal cliff” if Republicans don’t agree to their demands to raise taxes on individuals and businesses making over $250,000 annually.

The Washington Post reports:

Democrats are making increasingly explicit threats about their willingness to let nearly $600 billion worth of tax hikes and spending cuts take effect in January unless Republicans drop their opposition to higher taxes for the nation’s wealthiest households.

Emboldened by signs that GOP resistance to new taxes may be weakening, senior Democrats say they are prepared to weather a fiscal event that could plunge the nation back into recession if the new year arrives without an acceptable compromise.

In a speech Monday, Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), the Senate’s No. 4 Democrat and the leader of the caucus’s campaign arm, plans to make the clearest case yet for going over what some have called the “fiscal cliff.”

In other words, they are threatening to allow the economy to plunge into another recession if they can’t demand small businesses and job creators pay for their reckless entitlement spending during the Obama years.

Four straight years with a trillion dollar deficit, with Obama and the Democrats adding nearly $6 trillion to the national debt in the last three years, and now they are threatening to drive you over a cliff if they can’t collect more in taxes.

This from the PJ Tatler:

This is big, and it is outrageous: The fundamental difference between the two major parties is exposed for all to see. The Democrats want to punish job creators with higher taxes and are willing to hold middle class tax rates hostage to get what they want. The Democrats are lurching hard left on a pretty fundamental thing in an election year: the state of the economy. This is Jim Jones, drink-the-Koolaid stuff the Democrats are doing. They are threatening to hurt millions of Americans if the GOP doesn’t agree to raise taxes, taxes which may help bring the weak economy down if they are enacted. But if the GOP agrees to raise them it disappoints and dispirits its own base, and will share the blame for the consequences.

 Bear in mind, this threat comes on the heels of one of the biggest tax hikes in American history – the Obamacare Tax.

With businesses having to deal with the cost of the Obama Tax, and now having to worry about the Bush Tax cuts expiring, a double dip recession seems likely, while unemployment will most certainly remain stagnant or grow even higher.

Obama of course, was the man who said, “you don’t raise taxes on anyone during a recession”.

Now they’re going to demand taxes be raised and intentionally attempt to wreck the economy?

Politics.  Politics first, at the expense of sound fiscal policy.

Are you ready for the plunge?

Permalink Leave a Comment

Pre-Filled Voter Registration Cards Going Out to Dogs and Dead People, Voter ID Laws Still Racist

July 14, 2012 at 3:52 pm (Dead Dogs, Dead People, Democrats, Dogs, Fraud, Liberals, Racism, Voter Fraud, Voter ID, Voter Participation Center)

Recently, a liberal group known as the Voter Participation Center has been mailing out voter registration forms to Democrat-leaning groups.  The forms have key information already filled in, but the recipients aren’t exactly the type of individual you’d expect to find at the ballot.

Via the AP (h/t Weasel Zippers):

The voter registration form arrived in the mail last month with some key information already filled in: Rosie Charlston’s name was complete, as was her Seattle address.

Problem is, Rosie was a black lab who died in 1998.

A group called the Voter Participation Center has touted the distribution of some 5 million registration forms in recent weeks, targeting Democratic-leaning voting blocs such as unmarried women, blacks, Latinos and young adults.

But residents and election administrators around the country also have reported a series of bizarre and questionable mailings addressed to animals, dead people, noncitizens and people already registered to vote.

So a liberal organization is trying to get certain voting blocs out to the polls – dogs, dead people, dead dogs, illegal aliens, etc.  Or, more accurately, staunch Democrats.

Here’s the unintentionally funny gem in the story.  Liberals have long been opposed to voter ID laws, citing them as racist.  But election officials in this story aren’t worried about the pre-filled registration cards being submitted illegally, and here’s why…

Several election officials said they believed the voter registration systems were secure enough to catch people who might improperly submit the misdirected documents, since registrants typically have to furnish ID and election managers use databases – such as death records – to see if someone should be disallowed.

If liberals are correct in saying that requesting voter ID is considered racist, but the only way to prevent fraudulent voting activity is through voter ID, then there is only one conclusion to be drawn here.

Liberals believe that only blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities would break the law by voting illegally.

Now that is truly racist…

Permalink Leave a Comment

« Previous page · Next page »