Bizarre ideas on the left do nothing to straighten out the country

Harry Belafonte is an African-American entertainer best known for the 1956 Calypso hit "The Banana Boat Song"; who in more recent years has been known for his civil rights activism, left-wing activism and his admiration of Third World dictators; and who has now voiced his opinion on gun control, claiming that “white Americans” who support the 2nd Amendment's protection of gun rights are ignoring the black “river of blood that washes the streets of our nation.”

"America has the largest prison population in the world," he noted. "And of the over 2 million men, women and children who make up the incarcerated, the overwhelming majority is black. We are the most unemployed, the most caught in the unjust systems of justice, and in the gun game, we are the most hunted.”

He continued: “The river of blood that washes the streets of our nation flows mostly from the bodies of our black children. Yet, as the great debate emerges on the question of the gun, white America discusses the constitutional issue of ownership, while no one speaks of the consequences of our racial carnage.”

Columnist Walter Williams notes that, "though blacks are 13 percent of the nation’s population, they account for more than 50 percent of homicide victims. Nationally, the black homicide victimization rate is six times that of whites, and in some cities, it’s 22 times that of whites. Each year, roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered. Ninety-four percent of the time, the murderer is another black person."

Mr. Belafonte tries to hang the responsibility for black-on-black murder around the necks of white America because they want to honor the U.S. Constitution, an argument that wildly misses the mark. Black youths dying in the streets is indeed a tragedy, but it is not because white people defend the Constitution.

Mr. Belafonte is also confused about the results of the 2012 election, believing that President Obama's thin victory in the popular vote constitutes a mandate from the people to do whatever he wants. But the margin of victory was only 3.84 percent. That constitutes a win, but it’s far from a mandate. This win was just over half the margin in 2008, which means that American voters are less in love with Mr. Obama and his agenda after seeing it in action for four years.

He also does not understand the American system of government, which in his mind enables President Obama to jail those that disagree with him. “The only thing left for Barack Obama to do is to work like a Third World dictator and just put all of these [white] guys in jail. You’re violating the American desire,” he said on the Al Sharpton TV program.

Perhaps Mr. Belafonte should review the founding principles of the country that was so good to him before he fell into the irrelevance that mediocrity brings. Maybe a better idea is for him to move on from what he believes is a horrible country to one of the paradises he so admires, like Cuba or Venezuela.

Harry Belafonte's racist and communist ideas are grossly un-American and are blessedly shared by only a small minority.  Others on the left, however, are also confused about what is going on.

Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader from California, also harbors some nutty ideas. Despite consistent budget deficits exceeding a trillion dollars a year throughout Barack Obama's tenure and a $16 trillion national debt that has increased by about 50 percent over that same period, Ms. Pelosi not only says with a straight face that we don't have a spending problem, but she is miffed that the pay raise proposed for all federal employees seems destined for the trash heap.

"I think we should respect the work we do,” Ms. Pelosi told reporters. “I think it’s necessary for us to have the dignity of the job....” Just because the nation is drowning in red ink is no reason to fail to show due deference to our employees in the Congress, right?

Congressional Democrats twist themselves into knots trying to convince us that it's okay to spend 40 percent more than the revenue we collect every year. Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin commented that “We are now the richest nation in the world. We have the highest per capita income of any major nation. That kind of begs the question, doesn’t it? If we’re so rich, why are we so broke? Is it a spending problem? No.”

Sen. Harkin and Congresswoman Pelosi, and a whole gaggle of others see salvation in taking even more hard-earned money from the citizens, or at least some of them. However, a new poll shows 83 percent of Americans disagree. They have had it with fiscal irresponsibility and piling debt on future generations.

Here's a lesson in good government for public servants from someone who actually understood the concept: “A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” — Thomas Jefferson

Tax-and-spend policies have not and cannot solve America’s problems

British millionaires are looking for greener pastures. As reported in The Telegraph of London, “In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs,” but that “number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50 [percent] top rate of income tax shortly before the last general election.” The story goes on to say that it “is believed that rich Britons moved abroad or took steps to avoid paying the new levy by reducing their taxable incomes.” Consequently, the increase in tax revenues Prime Minister Brown had anticipated turned into a nearly £7 billion loss.

This should serve as a cautionary tale for America’s tax-and-spenders in the White House and Congress, who want to raise taxes on “the wealthy,” but it likely will float past them un-heeded. When you consider the details of the first post-election offer from the White House, it is clear that the administration does not comprehend such economic realities. The proposal: $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over 10 years, $180 billion in new spending and vague promises to cut only the growth of entitlement spending at an indeterminate future date, all while giving the president the power to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling.

The proposal calls for double the pre-election tax amount, additional spending and no specific amount of spending cuts or dates certain for them to take effect. And, there’s that last item, which gets immediately crossed-off: it’s unconstitutional.

As idiotic as that proposal is, understand that President Barack Obama appears serious about it.

Big government liberals live on entitlement spending, and many would die without it. The president’s proposal includes allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for those making $250,000 a year or more, raising the top rate to nearly 40 percent, which he supposes will raise $80 billion annually. That’s enough to run the federal government for only 8.5 days. If America’s high earners follow the lead of the Brits and reduce taxable income or shift it into 2012, it will be even less than that relatively small amount.

But what is worse, when you understand that half of those affected by this rate increase are small businesses, it makes no sense to raise taxes on them with unemployment still more than 50 percent above normal levels nearly 42 months after the recession ended.

The tax-and-spenders need to get past their resentment of high earners and their appetite for their earnings, and get serious about fiscal reform. Out-of-control spending for entitlements, a bloated and inefficient government, a tax code that plays favorites, and other factors combine to produce huge annual deficits and 16 trillion in crushing debt, and it’s time to fix that.

Americans for Tax Reform has focused for years on getting newly elected U.S. Representatives and Senators to take a pledge against raising taxes, understanding that our problem is that we spend far too much, not that anyone needs higher tax rates. Grover Norquist, its president, is now a target of the tax-and-spenders for his organization’s efforts at controlling taxation. However, those Senators and Representatives didn’t make the pledge to Mr. Norquist, they pledged to their constituents they would vote against tax increases.

The problem we have today is not a new one. A Cary Orr political cartoon from 1934, in the midst of The Great Depression, shows a wagon filled with drunken people drinking from a “Power” bottle and shoveling bags of money out onto the road. On the back of the wagon is a sign reading, “Depleting the resources of the soundest government in the world.” And there’s a man on the side of the road painting a sign which says:

Plan of Action for U.S.

Spend! Spend! Spend!

Under the guise of recovery

Bust the government

Blame the capitalists for the failure

Junk the Constitution and declare a dictatorship

Other comments jotted around the scene say, “How red the sunrise is getting” near an ominous looking man labeled “Stalin,” and, “It worked in Russia.”

That is how Cary Orr saw what the government was doing then. And what is unsettling about this cartoon is the striking similarity to what is happening now.

He believed government’s actions were communistic. What our government is doing today may not be socialistic or communistic under the strict definition of those terms But an interesting coincidence is that the Communist Party USA is now organizing teleconferences and rallies supporting the plans to raise taxes and encouraging continued over-spending on entitlement programs.

We should recognize that no nation on Earth has ever achieved success that even approaches the level of success the United States of America achieved before it began changing from the capitalistic model that built it to a model that has produced mediocrity and fiscal peril worldwide.

We should heed the lessons of wrong-headed government policies that extended the Great Depression for years longer than it should have lasted, and try something different, like the economic principles of capitalism that built America.

What’s Up in Russia?

Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened to retaliate against a proposed missile defense system the U.S. wants to install by aiming Russian missiles at Europe.

It seems the Russians have returned to their Cold War mentality, when they objected to nearly everything enemy nations wanted to do, however innocuous it may have been. What threat, after all, does a system to destroy missiles that have been launched at the U.S. and/or European nations pose to Russia?

Here’s what the United States wants to build: a system that will knock out incoming ballistic missiles potentially coming from North Korea and Iran by stationing radars in Alaska and California in the U.S., one in the U.K., and one in Greenland, and a series of interceptor missiles based in Alaska (40 of them) and California (4), and 10 of them in Poland with a radar facility to fire them located in the Czech Republic. There would also be 130 interceptors based on ships. The interceptors would physically hit the ballistic missile in mid-flight. There would also be missiles to try to destroy incoming rockets in the final stages.

So, this plan generates threats from Russia? One wonders exactly what the Russians are planning that they are so adamantly opposed to a system designed to protect us and our friends from potential nuclear attack from North Korea or Iran? The Russian threat is somewhat like saying “If I take a swing at your nose, you had better not try to block it.”

Weird? Uh-huh. Suspicious? You betcha.

Technorati Tags: Common Sense, Communism, National Security, America

Sharing the Wealth

I came across an interesting theory the other day in a passage quoted from a column by Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Harris Green, who wrote:

“Whatever the rich receive, it is not due entirely to their own talent and effort, as many would have us believe. They owe their parents. They owe the teachers and counselors and clergy who taught them and civilized them. They owe the farmers and truckers and grocery store workers who put food on their tables, and the firefighters and police officers and emergency medical technicians who protected them from harm and further harm. The list of people they owe is endless. Therefore, whatever success they achieve in life is due mostly to the talents and efforts of a legion of people.”

There is a long list of reactions to that passage, among which are:

• All of us—not just the rich—owe “who we are” to some degree to the people who influenced us along the way, and that includes parents, teachers, counselors, clergy and others who motivated us.
• Some of the “legion” of people Mr. Green cites have had nothing whatsoever, or very little, to do with whether or not people succeed, including farmers, truckers, grocery store workers, police, fire fighters, and EMTs.
• If we aren’t rich, some of the responsibility for that is ours.
• Mr. Green appears to have a broad streak of envy/jealousy for people who have money.
• Mr. Green is pushing a communist/socialist agenda that proposes to take from wealthy people and give to less wealthy people.

What Mr. Green is suggesting is that despite to whatever degree Jane Doe took advantage of the opportunities to learn, used her brain and worked hard, she really isn’t entitled to the wealth she has, and because some farmer grew the vegetables she ate, and some grocery store employees sold that to her family, and because the town her family lived in had police and fire departments, all those people and their families are entitled to her wealth.

There is a sizeable faction on the Left in this country that would do exactly what Mr. Green implies ought to be done, if they could. They haven’t learned the lesson from the economic and social failure of, China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea and the former Soviet Union: Socialism and communism just don’t work, and history bears that out. Americans ought to understand that lesson implicitly.

Technorati Tags: Capitalism, Socialism, Liberalism, Communism, The Rich