E!! The True Conservative Story™

Leslie Carbone, on tomorrow’s Stimulus anti-Stimulus vote in the House, that is.

As an alternative to drinking yourself into a stupor and sobbing dejectedly as the D.C. Democrats embark on a major spendfest, how about this:

The Republican Study Committee has introduced the Economic Recovery and Middle-Class Relief Act of 2009 as an alternative to the Democrats’ big-spending stimulus plan.  Click through for either the full text or highlights as well as letters of support from Americans for Tax Reform and the National Taxpayers Union.  It includes:

- A 5% across the board income tax cut (all six federal rates would be cut)

- An increase in the child tax credit from $1,000 to $5,000

- Permanently lowering capital gains tax to 15% (the rate cuts from 2003 expire in 2010)

- Repeal of the Alternate Minimium Tax on individuals

- Permanently repeal required distributions on retirement accounts (suspended for 2009, but goes back into effect in 2010)

- Making all withdrawals from IRAs tax and penalty free in 2009

- Increasing by 50% the tax deduction on student loans and qualified higher education costs

- Full, immediate expensing for businesses all costs of assets (uncaps and accelerates exepensing which will encourage capital spending)

- Reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25% (for all you contintental types, that would align our rate with the average rate in the EU)

- End capital gains tax on inflation and simplify the capital gains rate structure

- Make the R&D tax credit permanent (originally enacted as part of Reagan’s Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981)

- Extend the carryback period for net operating losses to seven years

This bill contains NO NEW SPENDING, unlike the “stimulus” bill the Dems are pushing which will put us at an unprecedented peacetime deficit (about 8.3% of the GDP).  The bill also contains a one percent reduction to Fiscal Year 2009 discretionary spending, excepting Defense and Military Construction, which is a step toward further spending restraint.

All fiscal conservatives should contact their congressman and support this bill.  It is a no-brainer.

of what the Senate is up to. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                      Contact: Andrew Stoddard
January 5, 2009                                                         Phone: 202-225-3252

Congresswoman-elect Titus Named to Transportation

and Infrastructure Committee

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman-elect Dina Titus of Nevada’s Third District announced today that she has been appointed to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for the 111th Congress.  The appointment was recommended by the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee and approved by the Democratic Caucus.

 “I look forward to working with Chairman Oberstar and the rest of the members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to reinvest and rebuild America,” Congresswoman-elect Titus said.  “With record growth that has put an increasing strain on Nevada’s aging infrastructure, it is more important than ever to modernize and strengthen our roads, highways, and energy grid while spurring job creation in Southern Nevada.”

 “I am pleased to welcome Congresswoman Titus to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,” said Chairman Jim Oberstar of Minnesota.  “As the Representative of one of the nation’s fastest growing regions, she brings an understanding and knowledge of the transportation challenges our nation faces and will be a valuable addition to the Committee.”

(zzzzZZZ)

 Just received a press release (statement) from the Titus campaign.  Here are some excerpts:

Titus: Bailout Package Is One More Example of How Washington Is Broken

1.  Titus fails to mention that the government policies which birthed the Fannie/Freddie financial crisis were enacted in the Carter and Clinton administrations with the approval of both Ds and Rs in Congress, so she’s either uninformed or being deliberately dishonest.

2.  Titus says Bush and Porter are to blame for the lack of oversight when nearly everyone including the present Democratic leadership was complicit in looking the other way, so she’s either uninformed or being deliberately partisan.

3.  Titus rips Porter for being in favor of the imperfect bailout bill, but then says “with so many critical tax breaks” for Nevada she would have “reluctantly” voted for the inadequate bill also, so she’s either very confused…or being hypocritical.

Porter voted for the bill.  Titus bloviates at length – and then says she would have voted for the bill.  When all the ranting and raving is done, what in Sam Hill is the difference?!

Neither the guy who’s in, nor the gal who wants to BE in, has the gumption to stand on principle and fight for good policy when there are special tax credits to be had.  Of course:  how else could they ingratiate themselves to the voters?  Just look at all they’ve done for you!!

That’s a REAL example of how Washington is broken – and Nevada, too. 

E!! sends enthusiastic kudos to Nevada Congressman Dean Heller.  He voted against the bailout bill earlier this week AND voted against the dressed-up version again today. 

Two thumbs down to Nevada Congresswoman Shelley Berkley who switched her earlier “no” to a “yes.”  Ditto downers to NV Senator Ensign and Rep. Porter who also voted “yes.”

See this post at Politico for a list of vote switchers in other states.  The vote was 263-171.

It sickens me to think this bill was the best Congress could manage to give us after working on nothing else for over a week.

Economic expert John Lewis (D-GA) said about his ‘yes’ vote, “I have decided that the cost of doing nothing is greater than the cost of doing something.”

So comforting to know we have geniuses like Lewis looking out for us in Washington.

“I understand the impulse to obsess over the pain and potential catastrophe staring us in the face, but what if the wages of drastically altering the capitalist system that has been our engine of freedom are decidedly worse?” — Andy McCarthy

NOTE:  There is nearly NO commentary about this on conservative/libertarian blogs yet.  I surmise everyone has logged off and is headed to their favorite bar to drown their sorrow (and disgust).

Double Ketel One and cran, please.

Well, we now have proof positive that hanging out at the New York Times will muddle up anyone’s brain.  David Brooks, once a semi reliable conservative thinker, has penned a lamentation (”Revolt of the Nihilists”) so full of hand-wringing angst that, as Laura Ingraham quipped this morning, “it makes my hair hurt.”

Brooks says the failure of the “rescue package” (that’s an Obama-ism, BTW, and does nothing to endear me to the concept since I abhor victim mentalities of all kinds) means our political leaders have ”failed utterly and catastrophically to project any sense of authority, to give the world any reason to believe that this country is being governed.”

Apparently for Brooks, defeat of this bill equals de facto anarchy in America.

Brooks then makes a few apt remarks (ok, so he has not completely lost it), but quickly disappoints again:

And let us recognize above all the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.

No:  they showed the world that they were willing to listen to the people who elected them, the constituents in their own districts, who bombarded their offices with variations of “vote no” via email and telephone because they (we) don’t trust the “leaders,” and the “experts” at the Treasury and the Fed.  And why the heck should we, after a colossal failure of social engineering the likes of which this nation has never seen…?!

House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.

Good freaking grief, Mr. Brooks!  These House Republicans (and the 95 Democrats who voted with them) are the ONLY people standing up for proper conservative principles, including taking a careful, pragmatic approach to complex problems rather than giving people like Paulson a blank check. 

And nobody on the right led an “anti-immigration crusade”:  they just asked the U.S. government to enforce its own laws (what nerve, ay?!)  As for your take on the ”complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds,” stick with the op-eds because a gifted psychoanalyst you’re not.  The only anxiety we’re having is over whether this bill will really fix what’s wrong, and whether anyone in D.C. is willing to do the hard work of making sure it does.

Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century.

So now we’re all just mindless sheep who totter zombie-like after Rush and Laura who are themselves out of touch with real life?  Do you have any idea how elitist and left wing that sounds?  Perhaps you’d like to come out in favor of the Fairness Doctrine also so we can get a dose of “reality” and not be hypnotized by the likes of the evil Limbaugh?

I can’t quote the rest of your op-ed, because frankly, my hair hurts.  My advice to you is stop wringing your pretty little hands and give it some time.  A bill will be passed; the markets will not collapse; and all will be well, if a little dicey for a time. 

And please stop calling it a “rescue” because that’s one of the words that is turning us off out here in Sheepville.

I’m borrowing my post header from P.J. O’Rourke.  (VERY funny book if you have never enjoyed it.)

I do wish names would be Named, no matter the party affiliation:  who started and voted for all of the federal legislation, who harassed the lenders to conform, which lenders not only conformed but went above and beyond the call, and who made big bucks.

It won’t happen, of course, because they are all in bed together to some degree.

As Anne of Idaho quipped, “Someone needs to go to Washington and Wall Street and close down the whorehouses.”

Roll Call is reporting that the House “voted 228-205 to reject the financial sector bailout bill crafted over the weekend by a bipartisan group of House and Senate negotiators. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) all had urged Members to support the bill. But House Republicans rejected it by a 2-1 margin, and more than 90 Democrats voted no.”

K-Lo just posted this, from Jim DeMint’s office:

We’ve just been alerted that despite House Democrats relenting on extending bans on offshore drilling and oil shale in the continuing resolution (CR) appropriations bill, Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid has decided to sneak an extension of the oil shale ban through as Congress fights over the financial bailout. Oil shale in America’s West is estimated to hold be between 800 billion and 2 trillion barrels of oil — that is more than three times the proven oil reserves in Saudi Arabia alone.

Here is the text of Reid’s proposed new ban on oil shale, that he is trying to add as an amendment to the CR or move seperately as a “stimulus” package, or we should say an anti-stimulus package if this is included.

Sec 1602 continues ban on oil shale. The language follows:

SEC. 1602. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 152 of division A of H.R. 2638 (110th Congress), the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, the terms and conditions contained in section 433 of division F of Public Law 110–161 shall remain in effect for the 19 fiscal year ending September 30, 2009.

It would be an insult to all Americans if Senate Democrats worked to bailout Wall Street while damaging our future prosperity by banning development of vast energy reserves in oil shale.

One of my NV business owner pals just forwarded me her recent email exchange with Nevada State Senator Dennis Nolan.  It’s worth sharing especially since Nolan’s advice to her (and anyone who agrees with her) was to leave the state.  Way to persuade your critics and strengthen Nevada, Senator Nolan!

P:  The reason people don’t get Nevada plates is that they are the highest in the country. Hey, Earth to Nolan! You can CHOOSE your state of residency. You can set up an LLC or company in another state. All of these are perfectly legal ways to have plates from other states. Want people to register here? Cut the fees down and they will register!!! DUH!

Senator Nolan:  If they like paying to register in another state and let the rest of us pay for roads and highways, then they should live in the other state! DUH!

P:  Because people can have more than one house or an RV which is deductible as a house! DUH! Last time I looked half of it went to the overbloated worthless school system stuffed with illegals that you refuse to do anything about! DUH! WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE ROADS? WITH THE WAY THIS STATE IS GETTING CALIFORNICATED THERE WILL BE LOTS OF PEOPLE LEAVING!  READ IT AND WEEP! http://wyomingcompany.com/ 

$500 to set up a Wyoming LLC, cheap plates, no business tax and no Nevada stigma! and no Rhinos! That single move alone would save me $3,800 a year in plates for a 1999 car ($500), a 2001 car ($650), and a 2003 motor home ($1,800) which is never there! And when it is, it’s parked!!!! Tell me, why should I keep paying license plate fees in Nevada?????? It’s a NO BRAINER!

Senator Nolan:  Your Right! and in your case I think the move would be a prudent and in the State’s best interest!

(E!! Note:  The word “your” is not the same as the contraction “you’re” meaning you are.  Dare I speculate that Nolan attended public school in Nevada?)

P:  I’m sure there are plenty more people that would rather see you go. Shall we make a list???

Senator Nolan:  You’re probably right! No, don’t worry,  I’ve already started a list.  Hey, I really do appreciate your concern and  involvement despite our differences.  Have a good week.

(Having calmed down, Nolan realizes that shouting “DUH!” and advising unhappy citizens to leave the state is probably not a good strategy…or very Senatorial, either.)

P:  Truce, for now. If you really want to do something to help the economy, support cutting the school fees out of the budget and allowing for licensing your cars based on what they are actually worth, not some inflated retail price.  We pay $1,800 a year for license plates for a 5 year old motorhome. We RV outside of Nevada 10 months a year. When it’s in Las Vegas it’s parked. Now tell me why I should pay that kind of money to the state?

I can license in Wyoming or Montana (no sales tax either) by purchasing an LLC. I haven’t yet, but I’m going to. You can be a citizen of anywhere now by buying an LLC or Corp. Why is Nevada driving business and fees out of Nevada? Wyoming is actively seeking what would be Nevada businesses. I would love to see some numbers on how much the LLC business has dropped in Nevada since 2003, and the big tax and fee hikes.

The threat of a business tax being espoused by Rogers and Buckley are forcing people to look elsewhere. It is perfectly legal and smart to lower your taxes legally. It would be in Nevada’s best interest to change these 2 anti-business, anti-consumer things that are patently unfair. It would cut the cost of plates in half, and I bet alot more people would buy their plates here.

By the way, I am also a small business owner, Internet. It would be very easy for me to move my business to Wyoming. In fact I’m setting up a second LLC in Wyoming this next week as a precaution against a potential business tax. How many other businesses are doing or will do the same thing?

It’s a world economy now. State governments should realize that. Make it attractive for small businesses to be here or they will stop coming. Have a nice evening.

Asked on CBN about his past opposition to an Illinois bill protecting babies born after surviving botched abortions, Obama replied, “I hate to say that people are lying, but here’s a situation where folks are lying.”

Someone IS lying, but is it “folks” or is it Obama?  Here are the facts:

In 2000, when Congress took up legislation clarifying that infants born alive after abortions are Persons under the law, the bill passed the House 380 to 15…yet in 2001, when Obama was in the Illinois state Senate, he verbally opposed and then voted “present” – effectively a ”no” – on a similar bill. 

(Under the rules of the Illinois legislature, a present vote effectively functions as a “no” vote because only “yes” votes count toward the passage of a bill. Legislators vote “present” rather than “no” for a variety of reasons, including making it harder for political opponents to use their votes against them in campaign advertisements.)

In 2002, Congress considered the legislation again, this time adding a “neutrality clause” saying it didn’t affect Roe one way or another. The bill unanimously passed the House and Senate and was signed into law…yet in 2003, back in Illinois, Obama still opposed the state version of the law.

Obama has been saying he voted against that bill because it didn’t include the same “neutrality clause” as the federal form – but the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) has now found documents showing that the Illinois bill was amended to include such a clause, and Obama voted against it anyway.

Confronted about this, Obama said the NRLC was lying…but his campaign has since admitted Obama is “mistaken.”  Once again, Obama either doesn’t know his own record or is so comfortable lying that falsehoods roll off his tongue with ease.

When asked by Pastor Rick Warren @ Saddelback when a baby has rights, Obama said, “I’m absolutely convinced that there is a moral and ethical element to this issue.”  Apparently Obama’s predictable equivocating is exceeded only by his ability to state the obvious with all the seriousness of a self-styled Socrates. 

In that same forum at Saddleback, Obama said that deciding when a baby gets the rights of Personhood is “above his pay grade.”  But shouldn’t our chief executive have an opinion about the legal definition of a Person…especially if he says he is willing to permit abortions in ANY circumstance? 

Put another way, what kind of morally bankrupt and moronic person says he realizes there is a serious ethical aspect to an issue, and then says it is beyond the scope of his capabilities to decide the matter, but then goes ahead and makes a choice anyway?  I mean, doesn’t any sane and reasonable person stay neutral on issues of which he is unsure?

One would think so, but in 2007, Obama told the Planned Parenthood Action Fund that the Freedom of Choice Act would be the first piece of legislation he’d sign into law as our president. The act would end ALL current federal, state and local restrictions on abortion, including the Hyde Amendment prohibiting the federal funding of abortions.

I usually avoid name-calling here on E!! but today I make an exception.

Barack Obama is either an Idiot or Pathological Liar or Both.  I cannot think of any candidate in recent times who was/is less deserving of the presidency.

The Las Vegas Sun says Jon Porter’s (R-NV) recent energy petition is less about his tightly contested race with Democratic challenger Dina Titus and more about an overall Republican strategy to insert GOP-backed energy proposals into the House floor schedule over the past 7 weeks. 

Not sure the Sun has it quite right.  It’s a political axiom that the more birds you can kill with one stone, the better.  

The Sun quotes a Republican strategist stating that “making energy No. 1 was a no-brainer.”  So was having Porter push forward one of the petitions.  It achieved the GOP’s agenda in D.C. and sent a message to Nevada voters that Porter is on the right side of the issue.  Hope it’s enough to save Porter’s butt because – although he’s not as conservative as some of us would like – Dina Titus is an incurable taxaholic.  Nevada does not need her in Washington.

Some House Republicans are still carrying on their protest on the floor of the House.  The White House says they will not answer the call for a Special Session because the majority leadership still sets the agenda and no one can force them to do an up-down vote on energy/offshore drilling.

Call, email or write to your House Democrat(s) now and demand that they return to D.C. and put offshore drilling (and other sound energy policy) to a vote.

Here’s some video footage from the press conference that followed the Republicans’ attempt to reconvene the House on Friday.  At one point it was stated that the Republicans are not going home until the Dems agree to re-adjourn and vote on energy – or until W. orders a Special Session.  I hope they stick with it.  Nobody in Congress has any business taking a vacation until the People’s business is done.