Drudge Report readers woke up this morning to the news that GOP senatorial candidate Sharron Angle won the Republican primary last night in Nevada. Associated Press writer Michael R. Blood’s linked piece on Drudge represents the MSM’s template in its upcoming biased reporting against Angle, and other conservative GOP candidates. It’s all in the language.

Blood’s piece begins:
Nevada Republicans Tuesday picked tea party insurgent Sharron Angle to take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid…
“Tea party insurgent.” Blood’s lede links a broad citizen movement with a word that connotes roadside bombs and civilian casualties. Angle is a…
…conservative renegade who wants to turn Washington on end.
Not just a “conservative,” but a “conservative renegade.” When John McCain was a “maverick” – a label first given him by the New York Times – he was the GOP favorite of much of the MSM. When Barack Obama promised to turn Washington end, he was a “transformational candidate.” Sharron Angle, though, is a “renegade.” The spin is in the chosen language.
While in the Legislature, Angle wanted inmates to enter a drug rehabilitation program devised by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, an idea she still defends.
Angle once promoted the drug rehab program noted above. Blood doesn’t say, though, that Angle worked for seven years as a tutor and community service supervisor for Nye County Juvenile Probation, with obvious first-hand knowledge of teen alcoholism. If, perchance, Hubbard’s program works, what’s the beef from Blood? Tea Party – insurgent – Angle – Scientology. Smear by implied association.
In a May 28 article, Blood wrote this:
Sharron Angle wants to wipe out Social Security, shutter the Education Department and return to the days almost a century ago when the federal income tax was unconstitutional…Angle also says cutting taxes isn’t sufficient. She wants to repeal the 16th Amendment, which created the federal income tax, a move that would make it impossible for the government to operate. Angle says the federal income tax — and the entire Internal Revenue Service code — could be replaced with a flat-tax-type system.
The government plans to collect about $935.8 billion in individual income taxes and about $156.7 billion in corporate income taxes, according to the Obama administration’s estimates for the current budget year, which ends on Sept. 30. The two taxes together make up about half of the total revenues the government estimates it will take.
So, Angle’s support for a flat tax – if we take Blood’s word for it – would translate into the federal government’s having no money to spend and the country regressing one hundred years. Do you get the idea that maybe Blood is anti-flat tax?
To substantiate his spin concerning Angle’s candidacy, Blood even cited one of her opponents in the primary election:
In an ominous warning for Republicans, a U.S. Senate candidate in Nevada said Thursday that the party’s chances of ousting Majority Leader Harry Reid are slipping away and his leading GOP rivals would be unlikely to beat him in November. “Republicans could very well snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the case of Harry Reid,” said banker John Chachas, one of 12 candidates seeking the GOP nomination in the June 8 primary. In an interview, Chachas said Reid is being underestimated and leading Republicans Sue Lowden, Sharron Angle and Danny Tarkanian each have “impediments” that give the senator an advantage, including questions about their ability to raise money nationally and “intellectual gravitas.” “I think none of the three that are there present a particularly formidable candidate to beat Reid,” Chachas told The Associated Press.”
This “ominous warning” comes from a candidate who yesterday received 6,925 votes, or 4% of the total GOP vote. Now there’s a credible and impartial source.
Blood’s piece is just the first round – albeit low-caliber – fired in what will be a focused effort by the MSM to link conservative candidates like Angle with the Tea Party movement using words like anger, insurgent, renegade, etc…and not in a positive way.
Let the MSM spin begin.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
111 Comments
If she really does want to replace income tax with a flat tax, "mainstream" conservatives and independents will be uncomfortable with her.
If I lived in Nevada I would vote for her just to get Reid out, as those ideas of hers are not going to get adopted.
But I had hoped that the Tea Party would produce Reaganites like Marco Rubio, not Paulites.
Here is a list of the Marxist, Socialist, Communists who MUST be voted out: http://www.sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm
This nation needs a Flat Tax or a Fair Tax. The system of taxation we have now allows the government to pick too many winners and losers, and it allows them a means of confiscating ever more of our hard-earned dollars. Make it illegal for them to steal any more of our money than they already do, and it might force them to tighten their fiscal belts rather than spending money as if it grows on trees.
I also think a national Flat or Fair Tax system would remove the current problem of a most of the population not paying a penny in taxes which encourages them to vote for the politician who promises the most government cheese.
I would have to define myself as a "mainstream conservative independent" there turtleneck,( ha! sorry ) Not only do i not feel uncomfortable with a candidate that understands our tax system is broken, said candidate would probably get my vote.
Mark my words, Jerry Moonbat–what's his name in CA– gave away the Democrats game plan in his supposed speech from the heart yesterday. The catch phrase is going to be "we can fix it".
Yes We Can Fix It.
That will be their tact.
Nothing wrong with a flat tax…
Or other cutting edge tax theories. A consumption tax- with a carbon tax as well- would be fair, and also urge folks to conserve on petroleum products- with the revenue going to renewable energy rsources. See how simple it is? Cut spending, reduce the size of government, make those who consume more pay more, and reward non-polluting (zero point energy, anyone?) forms of energy production while drilling for FAR more easily obtainable sources for oil.
You don't have to subscribe to esatblished economic- and taxation- theories to be a true conservative. Ron Paul, despite his failings, is all over this. Steve Forbes, hardly a radical, is an advocate of a flat tax, which also could work very nicely.
Why does one have to vote for the status quo to be a conservative? Perhaps because the Progressive movement has infiltrated BOTH parties?
The AP and DeadStream Media can "spin" like a top – it ain't gonna stop the Tea Party Revolution….
Chachas thinks a Reid opponent needs, "intellectual gravitas"? Seriously? Intellectual gravitas to take on the Senate Mortician?
That made me LOL.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by mikepfs, Susan Rector. Susan Rector said: Let the Spin Begin: AP’s Michael Blood Sets MSM’s Anti-Angle Template http://bit.ly/bj6vQW #teaparty #conservative #libertarian [...]
wrong, a flat tax would save this country and most of the country would support it if explained properly
One can always tell who the Left/DimsProgs fear the most…even while saying the opposite….
They know Angle is a force to be reckoned with and will say and do anything to discredit her…
The changes she wants to make sound pretty mainstream and logical, and I hope they are only the beginning of the "BG shearing" process, necessary to ge US back on track…
Can they fix it? Well, they broke it, so at least they have a head start as to what caused the problems.
Astronomers have detected perturbations in the rotation of the earth caused by high speed spinning at MSM headquarters.
As a California Democrat, I wanted to point out one statistic that seems missed with the focus on the Republican side of the aisle:
20% of Voting CA Democrats said — HELL NO TO BOXER!
headline should read (angle takes on parasite reid in general election).
Yeah, flat tax, good idea. No exemptions, no deductions. About twenty percent of your gross, no excuses, no questions asked, plus another eight if you're self employed for Social Security. How would you do?
Boy, "journalists" sure do love the word insurgent. Odd that for the enthusiasm for the word, they can't seem to use it correctly.
The maggots who launch attacks from mosques and schools, who cobble together roadside bombs to kill our servicemen, who are delivering food, medicine, and self-determination, are not insurgents…they're terrorists.
The citizens who are attempting renew the American republic, who are wresting control of the national government from a self-perpetuated elite, who represent a choice of big, or bigger, government, are not insurgents…they're patriots!
Want to see some insurgents, MSM journalists? Look in the mirror.
Yo Mikey, the only blood your will be seeing is your own, you POS. Im sure the mooselimbs will let you live up to your family name, when they take your name and spread it all over your ugly ., useless commie a##.
Why do you say that "mainstream" conservatives and indendents would be uncomfortable with a flat tax. I think you are dead wrong. Most on the right would welcome abolishing the IRS and instituting a flat tax
By the way Mikey-are you going to be shooting out of your eyes when Sharon Angle crushes disgusting Harry?
a carbon tax is no different than a progressive income tax–you are punishing behavior with which you disagree / disapprove.
Fuel tax should be solely devoted to the construction and maintenance of roads, not like the present system which funnels money to the mass transit account, thus charging drivers for a product / service (light rail, bike trails, etc) that they do not use. Let the light rail riders and bike path users pay for their own indulgences.
renewable energy resources should raise their funds the same way that any other business does–by making their case to investors who are willing to put their own money at risk. There is no shortage of conventional energy, thus there is no compelling reason to find alternatives. Alternatives generally imply that you are searching for something superior or something to replace a diminishing product.
'make those who consume more pay more.' I agree. Make the poor–who consume the most government–pay for their consumption rather than subsidizing their consumption. This would serve as a good economics 101 lesson for them; they would learn that by using less government, ie by getting a job, they would be charged less.
Dick Armey suggested a 17% rate. That would be a good place to start, the direction after that should be to ratchet that down to as low a rate as possible. The original income tax was 1%, I believe though I stand to be corrected; government did very little, that is the direction that any tax reform should be aimed at.
Combined with the flat tax, Armey proposed the abolition of tax withholding. This 1 – 2 punch would end the welfare state in about 15 minutes. If there was a flat tax that EVERYONE had to pay, and they had to actually PAY IT, as opposed to having it taken from them via withholding, there would quickly be a tax revolt.
It would be child's play to reduce that 17% downward if everyone realized that the less they had to give to the government, the more they could spend or save or invest in themselves.
I don't think there would be any threat of people voting all taxes out of existence, as most Americans realize that there are a few legitimate functions of government–military, courts, police, roads perhaps–that they would be willing to pay for, as they would discover it is less expensive to have everyone put in a little bit for something they all benefit from instead of, for example, paying for a neighborhood private police or fire dept.
I think she has the correct idea on this. The income tax is ,and always has been, a progressive tool to social engineer their ideas and theories. Let's get rid of income tax, which penalizes the American ideal of success and initiative. The income tax was a Karl Marx idea.
My favorite piece of spin today comes, from all places, The New York Times. They had a big headline today, "Anti-Incumbent Rage Bypasses Arkansas," crowing that this whole "anti-incumbancy" movement in America was baseless because Blanche Lincoln was able to hold on by her fingernails to defeat her challenger in a PRIMARY. The Times went on to say, "Virtually written off as a likely victim of voter outrage at veteran politicians, Mrs. Lincoln, a two-term Arkansas Democrat, showed that an experienced office-holder with money, message and determination still had a chance to prevail even in a toxic environment." The Times makes it sound like she won the general election and not a primary. For a two-term Senator to have to fight this hard in a primary, with her own liberal base fighting so hard against her, is pathetic. The Times doesn't seem to think it's worth noting that, in the GENERAL election, Lincoln's prospects look terrible. But, hey, why should facts stand in the way of good spin, right?
Could not agree more. Get rid of the Marxist/Progressive tax on initiative and hard work. It was put in to finance the T. Roosevelt and Wilson progressive social projects. It has become a stone around the neck of the American people.
What is a carbon tax? Carbon is an element. How about an oxygen tax? There is more nitrogen in the atmosphere, how about a nitrogen tax?
one can make a principled argument for a 50 cent a gallon 'carbon tax' on gasoline, and devote the funds to the establishment of an alternative bio-fuels project like Bush was talking about- using switchgrass and the like- so at some level it does make sense…
Very misleading. Where are you getting these figures? You are no where near the actual numbers. Reliable economists estimate we could run the govt on 11% without running up any debt. That includes FICA.
Quick note for Mrs. Angle: "Welcome to the big show, kid."
The national Democrat machine and the state-run media will bring out the big guns to hit you from all sides. Good luck, you're gonna need it.
That sounds about right, especially considering the near-half of the population paying no taxes currently would have to start paying.
WRONG!
The very fact that bio fuels need help to get "established" proves that they are economically worthless (though quite attractive politically, especially given Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucus and the fact that Iowa is ethanol central…), that is, when they aren't being economically destructive.
There is NO principle in stealing money from one industry and handing to another, no matter what the "good intentions" are.
There is no such thing as man made global climate change warming, thus there is no need to reduce CO2 emissions in order to prevent or reverse omething that isn't happening, thus there is no reason to utilze ethanol to reduce that CO2 output which is having no impact on the planet's temperature or long term prospects.
At NO level does it make ANY sense. Bush was a disaster in pretty much every respect save for his tax cuts and his bullhorn speech at ground zero. "Compassionate Conservatism"?! "Addicted to oil'?!?!
I will agree with you if we can stipulate that the funds handed over to the alternative energy industry be similarly taxed and handed over to the establishment of an industry that will duplicate the phenomenal potential displayed by the Millenium Falcon–hyperspace, laser cannons top and bottom…3D chess table, blast shield, light sabers…WOW!!
we need to revamp the tax code, and a flat tax is they way to go, but only if we repeal the income tax first! if we start a flat consuption tax, it is the most fair, because rich people consume more, thus pay more, poorer people consume less, and pay less, but they do pay. but if the income tax is not repealed first, we will have both taxes, and nobody in washington will mind screwing everybody, with all the extra money to spend. just like the immigration problem, first secure the border, then reform the system. they tried to do a reform in the past, without securing the border, and look at the mess it has created.
CITIZEN,
I also believed that till a friend here, John144 explained the difference between and the better results we would get with the FAIR TAX PLAN. I wish I had a link for you but it can't be that hard to google. Look it over. I think like me you might find it would work better and be more of a uniting kind of plan than the flat tax.
Dang I wish I could find John's post for you to read. Made things so clear and it really did seem a better idea. Anyway give it a look, see what you think.
To which I would hope every voter would add…..
You better. YOU BROKE IT! lol….
That said, I really can't see Brown as a serious candidate. He wasn't all that great so voters have to know what they're getting. And flirting with "celeb" governors like Jerry "me and Linda Ronstadt had a thang" Brown and Ahhhhnold should have given voters a belly full.
Course this is California we're talking about. God knows what goes through their minds on any given day! For example, O.M.G., Becky!
http://dailybail.com/home/meet-chairman-bernankes...
Who the hell can predict squat with folks like that voting. She is without a doubt the best argument for birth control OR euthanasia I've ever seen, bwahahahaaha.
OK, I've got to take issue with the carbon tax– The idea is completely without merit, if its intent is to MAKE me "conserve on petroleum products." It's none of the government's business how much petroleum I use, for any purpose. The theory of AGW is to date without merit, and is certainly not worthy of a tax on an element that makes up the atmosphere.
We probably agree in principle on most things, but we have to quit admitting that carbon is anything other than one of life's building blocks.
Boy, is this good news!
You can take any MSM article and decipher it this way it's sick!
But the sad news is the MSM ain't going nowhere!
It used to be that if a network wants to make money it needs to have viewers/readers in order to make money off advertisements. So the solution would've been very simple; don't watch/read their content and they'll simply go belly up and finish!
But today they don't have viewers/readers, they barely make money off advertisements and they're still in business. Because they're just borrowing and borrowing fully knowing that when they can't repay they'll get TARP3.
So what do we do now?
Like I posted in reply above look at the Fair Tax vs Flat Tax. John144 who posts here alot explained them both to me, course I can't find his reply now, but hopefully if he sees this he can do it again. But the way he put it in black and white really showed me anyway that Fair Tax was a better system in the long and short term.
Johhhhhhnnnnn where are you, lol! I so wish I had kept his explanation. It really brought up some of the problems of flat tax that fair tax makes more equitable while still achieving the same end goal. Anyone here got a handle on the two proposals and the differences?
As for Ms. Angle….I hope her win was not just the result of battling "Tea Party" groups, who each endorsed a separate candidate. Does ANYONE have any data on how each of the candidates polled against the dem? After all that's the end game….not who's got more Tea Party clout, but which candidate can beat the dem, right???
Anybody?
Is there a phone number we can reach this Michael R. Blood at?
I'm just thinking that if enough people call him and tell him how despicable he and the news agency he represents are, he might just might quit this nonsense?
I don't mean to harass him just want him to be aware that his misdemeanors don't go unnoticed and he should think twice next time before he writes an op-ed under the disguise of a news report.
Do yourself a favor and don't read the NYT's…………………………..it'll give you an ulcer.
Congratulations Sharron! You've shown that you're able to make the AP go utterly and intellectually spastic just by stepping on the stage, which is a good thing. A very good thing. Don't worry about the press, keep in mind that most of the press got into journalism to avoid the draft or because they couldn't hack it as art history majors. Just keep an ear out for what Andrew Klavan and Walter Williams say and you'll do all right.
Headline: BLANCHE LINCOLN WINS! Democrat incumbents safe! A ringing endorsement of Obama's agenda!
Back-up Headline: BLANCHE LINCOLN LOSES! Devoted progressive wins nomination! A ringing endorsement of Obama's agenda!
We are being taxed enough, thank you very much!
It just looks to me that people are just going to vote in a bunch of new morons, it is clear color and being a female is the only thing people go by in their so called non biased votes. This country is doomed.
Here makes it clear if your the skin of color even when drugged up and may go to jail that the negros still voted for him
Alvin Greene , the surprise South Carolina Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, was kicked out of the Army last year and is facing a pending felony charge, according to court records obtained by the Associated Press.
Greene, who has yet to enter a plea or be indicted, was arrested in November and charged with obscene behavior towards a female University of South Carolina student. He faces up to five years in prison if convicted.
Earlier today, the 32-year-old military veteran told ABC News that he has been unemployed and living in his rural hometown 60 miles south of Columbia since August, when he was involuntarily forced out of the Army after a 13 year career because "things just weren't working… it was hard to say."
He declined to discuss details of his discharge but said that he had served as an intelligence specialist in the Air Force and later as a unit supply specialist in the Army.
Greene shocked South Carolina Democrats Tuesday when he won a commanding victory over four-term state lawmaker Vic Rawl in the primary without the help of a war chest of campaign cash or an orchestrated effort to win voters across the state. In fact there is little evidence that he campaigned at all.
"I didn't spend much…I kept it simple, nothing fancy," he said in a sometimes rambling and incoherent interview with ABC News. "It was 100 percent out of my own pocket."
Greene, whose campaign slogan was "Let's get South Carolina back to work," said he was "a little surprised" by his victory but added, "I worked hard, I earned it." He did not provide details of how or where he campaigned.
Meanwhile, state Democratic Party leaders and Rawl, who raised close to $200,000 crisscrossing the state during the campaign, remain stunned that Greene captured 59 percent of the vote.
"Conventional wisdom was that Vic would win easily," said state Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler. "It is quite an upset…There really is no explanation for why he won."
Fowler said Greene's victory was a setback for Democrats' attempts to challenge incumbent Republican Sen. Jim DeMint. "Now that becomes harder with a candidate with no political experience," said Fowler, who has never met or spoken with Greene.
As Greene enters the national spotlight in his bid to unseat a popular senator in a conservative state, he faces tough questions about his personal and professional record and pressure to provide clear answers.
Bio-fuels aren't the answer in their current incarnation. They need to find some biomass that can be processed efficiently. I hear they are experimenting with certain types of algae which would be both less land intensive and more efficiently converted than any of the existing sources. There is also a newly discovered fungus that naturally produces most of the components of pure diesal fuel just naturally.
We don't need government subsidies to prop these sources up; if they can't compete, they simply aren;t viable alternatives.
The Fair Tax is much more flexible than a Flat Tax.
Blood is well named. It is a name a SNL writer might well have come up with for a really nasty character. His writing fits the snide, self aggrandizing image perfectly. He might well be a graduate of Harvard.
Hey there,
Do you have a good link so folks can read, maybe compare the two programs. I think many would see the Fair Tax plan is better for themselves.
I'll try to hunt John down tonight if he hits the boards and see if he can chime in. It really is a good idea. And I see no reason Angle would oppose it if she advocates a flat tax. Once you get past this system, it's not a big leap to either of the other plans.
aharris
Just out of curosity, how does the FairTax get people, "working off the books", drug dealers, under reporters of income, and outlaws to pay their fair share of taxes…??
It seems to me it would be best to have a "consumption tax" … COD essentially…
A la the "gasoline tax"…where everyone pays…pretty much..
call it a gas tax then…
But if we are going to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, a means of funding research and development- wholly paid for by the tax- would certainly help this action. And, it should be coupled with drilling in ANWAR. Makes sense here…
Get rid of Social Security! Shutter the Dept. of Education! Little or no taxes!
She ain't the only one, brother!
not sure we agree here…
Not talking about cap and trade. That needs to be discarded. Or global warming. Propaganda. But reliance on a diminishing resource- one that we have to deal withour nation's enemies to obtain- seems problematic. A fifty cent tax would help reduce consumption- and if funneled correctly could help fund biofuels. They are not pie in the sky- they can and do work.
Either that or continue digging 10,000 feet and more. What do YOU suggest?
call it a gas tax then…
this, of course, would be in conjunction with overall tax reform. Not in addition to…
I read the stream and understand where you are coming from, but disagree with you fundamentally. I don't propose giving up anymore money on taxes. I believe the best thing to do is to offer tax incentives to companies and/or entrepreneurs who would be willing to invest in and explore alternative fuels. History is rife with "temporary" taxes and tolls that were supposed to go away after the purpose for them was achieved, yet they are still with us and growing. Dems simply cannot get enough money. Look at the bailout. Barney Frank and his fellow dem buddies want to use the surpluse, the funds that weren't given out, to fund yet another project, one not authorized by law. We are trillions of dollars in debt, that money should go right back to the Treasury, as dictated by law, but once again, the dems are looking for a way to spend it.
ordinarily we would agree…
But oil is cheap- and we cannot move on to other forms of energy until it becomes cost effective. The solution is simple- drill in ANWAR, reduce the cost of oil even further, and use the tax as a revenue base to help the switch to biofuels. Either that, or continue busines as usual drilling 10,000 feet in the sea- and dealing withour nations enemies…
Exactly right.
All anyone running against Harry Reid needs to do is ask how Nevada is doing, what did Harry do to improve Nevada, and what, if anything, did he do when Obama nearly single-handedly, on multiple occasions, destroyed the tourism industry in Nevada, specifically, Las Vegas. Then they need to point out the health care law and his role in it. His defeat should be more than a slam dunk, but Angle can't let down her guard, not for a minute. Politics, as evidenced by our current president, is a strange entity.
LOL!
Shouldn't the headline have said, "Hell no to SENATOR Boxer?" Just saying.
And a headache.
I remember a joke during the Clinton years:
What did you make last year?
Send the same amount to the IRS.
I don't think it would work. Vermin like him live on negativity. He'd love it and it would probably encourage him to write more. No, I think the best thing to do is not give him any attention. Attention would mean people are reading his stuff, so whoever pays him would want him to keep it up.
Oil is, in no practical sense of the word, scarce or even diminishing. For some perspective you should pick up Jude Wanniski's book, The Way The World Works. He deals with this topic in the chapter "Energy in Abundance." It was written back in 1978 and he writes (to paraphrase), that if you were to dump all of the oil consumed by the world from 1859 (when it was discovered in Titusville Penn) into a lake the size of Chicago–roughly 227 sq miles– it would fill the lake to a depth of 300 feet. But, the worlds known reserves at the time would fill the lake to a depth of 2300 feet.
"At a UN conference in Austria in 1976, the Moscow Academy of Sciences was represented by scientists Nesterov and Salmanov, who estimated the crude oil resource base at about 12 trillion barrels; at current rates of consumption this would last several centuries. By counting the hydrosphere gases, natural gas dissolved in the oceans, icecaps, rivers, lakes and swamps, they estimate that the planet contains something like 350 billion trillion cubic feet of natural gas, enough to last 20 centuries."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php/index.php?pageId=739...
On his own site, he added to the end of this story that, on his office wall map, Lake Tahoe didn't even show up as a dot of ink, thus illustrating how tiny a bit of oil we have used in comparison to the vast size of the planet, much of which remains unexplored.
If you are not convinced, if you persist in believing that "the planet is running out of oil," fine.
For the sake of discussion, why does it have to be a tax? Why not allow business as usual and let the oil companies keep their profits and use THAT to experiment with and discover the magic elixer?
What I suggest is getting the government the hell out of the way, tell the Sierra Club et al to take a flying leap so that (profit making, greedy) oil companies can explore for new finds and develop existing finds. ANWR, the outer continental shelf, shale oil in Colorado and North Dakota, to name a few, are vast pools of oil waiting to be tapped.
Here in Canada, Alberta is home to the largest deposit of oil on the planet, albeit oil that is trapped in sand and is thus more expensive to market, though prices have come way down in the past 20 years.
Returning 100 years would limit the federal robber-barons like The Constitution intended. Perhaps the bureaucRATS could get productive jobs.
AP=Always Propaganda
what is your fascination with the end of fossil fuels and the beginning of 'something new'??
easily retrievable oil seems to be what's disappearing- not the substance itself. Am familiar with Wanniski ( a BIG supply sider, smart guy) and his work. Government can have an honest role in research; it doesn't always have to be Obama and his leftist ideologues. But we import FAR too much of our oil, and a great deal of it is transported in very vulnerable tankers. Something has to happen, and in our view a combination of relaxed regulations on land based oil (ANWAR) and developing the shale (we have plenty down here as well)- keeping the money inside our borders- plus incentives for development of alternative energy sources seems appropriate.
You do make good points…
well msm has a bone to pick with a GOP candidate, and that surprises who? So far they have ridiculed the TeaParty, they have dismissed it, they have tried to ignor it……………..IT won't go away! Kind of like Sarah Palin, the more animus this throw her way, the more support she generates. Keep on with the "cheer leading" msm.
well, they do seem to be problematic at this juncture of our society…
Largely geo-political. We don't buy into the global warming stuff. And, as you point out the world is awash in a sea of the stuff. But it is getting harder to bring it to market. Experts have testified that the 'low hanging fruit' for the most part has been used. Listen, we knew when the Pipeline was being debated at the time the left said it was only a 'few years' of oil. They were spectacularly wrong.
This is about keeping the money here- sustainability- and cleaner air. It seems that there are other ways to 'skin the cat' then proceding down the same path as we have for 50 years. Let the middle east keep their oil- and their politics…
Wanniski is (or, unfortunately, was) without peer in the economic understanding and forecasting business. When you combine his understanding with Robert Bartley's writing skills, you can understand why the WSJ editorial page was such an influential place in the Carter and Reagan years.
Another BIG problem in the oil sector is the abandoning of the gold standard. The monetary disruptions caused by that continue to this day; who wants to make long term investments in drilling or refining when you don't know that the value of the dollar (thus the price of your product) will be when the oil is found or the refinery built.
There is NO way that oil should be at $70+ a barrel when US unemployment is 10%! That is solely a monetary phenomenon.
I am with you 100% about keeping the money here and not sending it to the middle east. It doesn't make the most sense from a free trade point of view (people in the northern US and Canada import oranges from Florida, for example, and send their money away from 'home'), but it would be hilarious to see the Saudis wake up one day to find that they have no customers.
Of course the US would get blamed for the collapse of the Saudi economy, lol, as they would have lots of oil but no money with which to buy stuff. The US just can't win, no matter what it does.
sure we can win…
We could easily be self sustaining. But the internationalists- the Soros crowd- will not allow it. And, seeing Obama is a wholly owned subsidiary of this cartel we will be destined to keep hemhorraging
money- for now.
Imagine if we built,say 25 nuclear plants- along with breeder reactors to 're-use' the waste that's stored- drilled in ANWAR, developed a serious alternate fuel policy- and told the rest of the world to take a hike.
Imagine…
agree completely…
And what makes it worse is we are no longer on even an oil based economy- but one based on the 'voodoo economics' of credit derivatives.
It's why you are seeing deflation despite the massive printing of fiat currency. No doubt Wanniski- like Laffer- would be horrified by this hydra.
It's why a sea change is needed in DC…
Great!
We already knew how they thought of us.Just took some Americans awhile to catch on.40 or 50 years.
I remember seeing pictures of communists (flower power/peace/living in communes/Jim Jones/Berkley) people when I was young.I wonder why the previous generation didn't deal with them and watch out for them.
Creepy,creepy people
Short of getting caught with child porm I can't see her not beating Harry!
lol , these marxists/communists have only had absolute power for 1 1/2 yrs.Already we're insurgents.
You know how to keep them out.The same way they got in.
when they are elected.they bargin their way up.Stop letting "a little" left repubs in.Period.
People like McCain and Fiorina are a "little" left.They lean that way…and lead us to believe we have to bargin with communists/marxists.
Go by the constitution….not any room for them there.
This kind of "journalism" is why Glenn Beck says: know what you believe. Blood's hit piece, and those certain to follow against Angle and other conservative candidates, will sway those who substitute others' opinions and talking points for their own critical thinking.
Infrastructure, logistics and ultimately end user vehicles play a large part too. You can't pump E85 into a vehicle that doesn't have a fuel system that can handle it.
Oil is cheaper than bottled water and we need to take a look at our own resources. I'm not against leveraging that sensibly to find the next resource either.
Cogent argument but I've never liked the word "sustainable". So far, that hasn't applied to a large scale economy. If and when it does, I'll invest hardcore in it.
I live in Nevada, and I guarantee you I will vote your ticket in November. I was not counted in the primaries, I'm Independent. But there are lots of us.
BTW there were 9300 dems, that voted 'none of the above', and if all the reps who voted the three way horse-race, show up and vote for you, he's down 40,000 votes, minimum. The 9300 makes it worse. Now add the Independent swing.
Nevada, send him AND HIS SON home in November…
We don't have enough bandwidth here to voice my anger, but this idiot sent the Amnesty bill back to the floor, SEVEN times.
We still don't have control over our borders, but there are congressmen who have the floors of their offices, paved in the bricks we sent them.
Harry, you have yet to answer ONE of my letters.
Screw you sir!
The numbers are from 50% reporting, when Fox declared her…
So you're upset that people would begin to see the true cost of their favorite government handouts?
The Fair Tax is calculated into the final cost of a consumption item. It's a flat percentage calculated into the cost of the new car you buy, for example. If a drug dealer buys a paper notepad or a computer to help him keep track of his "business" he pays the tax on those items because that's a flat percentage added to the cost. With the Fair Tax, anyone who buys something to use it pays the tax. You can under-report your income all you want, but you still buy new items to consume for yourself. Even thieves buy things new.
No, it won't force drug dealers and dealers in black market items or even cash only purchases to add the tax to their prices, but unless the percentage of tax paid is onerous, most people won't bother to go out of their way to purchase that way, same as now. Additionally, because you're not taxing every step of the process of making and selling something, only the end product at its final point of sale, prices should go down on most everything.
If there were a candidate who pledged to return to the gold standard, that would be enough to elect that person in a landslide. EVERYTHING wrong with the economy today can be laid squarely at the feet of Aug 15, 1971.
It used to be that you could put your money into a savings account and earn a few dollars interest; big returns weren't necessary because the value of the dollar deposited would be the same when withdrawn.
I seem to recall, during the record high oil prices of two years ago, a column by Ann Coulter (?) saying that there never used to be wild price fluctuations in the price of oil even during WWII; supply ships were routinely sunk, oil routinely washed up on shores, yet the price remained steady at $3 barrel.
Then there was Jude's op ed in the WSJ Journal, The Way We Used To Be, where he chronicled how he was able to save up for a new house in Vegas four years out of college; the principle interest and taxes being $125 a month, equal to a quarter of his monthly salary. The 75 cents an hour he earned as a laborer in his teen years was worth 75 cents before and after taxes. His day had a grade 8 education and raised a family on $75 a week; that $75 being worth that much before and after taxes, too. Their new car was about $2000, if memory serves me.
"Capital was lightly taxes and was plentiful; if you looked like a good bet you would probably get more than you asked for."
Then came the necessity of having to put your savings into the stock market and chase after gains just in order to keep up. Then came 22% mortgage rates (in order to give the bankers a premium for lending money in a 14% inflation environment). My brother in law told me of how his first mortage had that ridiculous interest rate, and after the first year he owed more than he had borrowed.
Then came deficit spending which would never have been allowed to happen had the dollar remained linked to gold; the outflow of gold would have caused a decline in the monetary base, squeezing the economy into recession until more favorable fiscal policies emerged to draw the gold back and allow the monetary base to expand in order to finance economic growth.
There is NO WAY Obama could run a $1.8 trillion deficit in a gold standard environment.
Then came the stock market crashes, not only wiping out any gains one might have made, but in this last one, chewing away at the principle, so to speak. So you're worse off in both real and nominal terms.
Thanks, Nixon. Thanks, Keynes. Thanks, Bernanke (perhaps the biggest idiot ever to hold the office of Fed Governor).
NONE of this BS would be possible if people were able to protect their savings via the dollar being tied to gold.
I could go on and on about this, but I think you get the point, lol.
I absolutely agree that we need to drill in ANWAR, exploit the Bakken formation, and drill closer in to shore. Our environmental lobbies have pushed current oil exploration to the limits of our technological ability as the Gulf Spill makes plain. Additionally, we should be exploiting nuclear power more than we are, too, and I'd like to see more research into thermal depolymerization which would create sustainable petroleum so long as we have organic waste to pump into the process. Imagine if our sewer treatment plants were pumping out impurity-free oil and gas as well as pure water.
I place greater faith in manned space exploration to produce the next great energy source than I do on bio-fuels. You are correct that scarcity create innovation by necessity. Long-term habitation on either the Moon or Mars would create that situation, but using subsidies is not the way to go.
You're right. What was I thinking!
Ah
Ok….Fair Tax = ConsumptionTax….I'm for it…We need it…
Thanks for the concise explaination…
well, self- sustaining is a better term, don't you think? A South African acquaintance of ours once opined (with a tad of jealousy) that 'you yanks really don't need the rest of the world'…
no disagreement here, either…
Henry Kissinger- who will be enshrined in the Progressive hall of fame someday- next to Woodrow Wilson- was instrumental in selling Nixon on this, a key component of the Progressive plan to usurp the US economy from it's rightful owners- the people- and give control to the foreign owned and controlled institution that is the Federal Reserve.
At the time the rock band Montrose (with Sammy Hagar) wrote a song called 'Paper Money'. It said 'Take away all my silver/ take away all my gold/ and give me a stack of paper/ Paper money, paper money don't hold/ Paper money don't hold…
Remembered that for a long time, we did…
never claimed to be an expert on this…
It is just a common sense argument. When Bush 41 started talking about switchgrass, we took a look at that- and it seemed VERY promising. If indeed there are other cutting edge technologies out there let's use 'em. But as long as the government is controlled by international concerns- whose single minded issue seems to be depleting the US of wealth- this is all academic, anyway…
A little off topic,This just in.
ACTION ALERT – STOP HR 5175 – The DISCLOSE Act
>> Primary video link: http://realityreport.blip.tv/file/3735441/
>> Secondary video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IWovVEFNaA
A new bill is about the change the face of politics forever.
The "Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in
Elections Act" or the DISCLOSE Act, should be renamed the
"Stifling Grassroots Political Support and Removing Political
Privacy Bill". This act affects ALL people and organizations.
The bill, sponsored by Maryland Representative Chris Van Hollen
has moved out of committee and currently has 114 Cosponsors.
It is on its way to the House floor for a vote.
HR 5175, is written to ensure freedom groups cannot rally their
members in the upcoming elections by placing erroneous reporting
mandates on them and by forcing them to disclose their
membership rosters and donor lists. These mandates apply to
individuals and groups which make independent donations or promote
their favored candidate outside the realm of the official
campaigns, namely Grassroots activism.
This biggest difference is as follows:
Flat tax is across the board, everyone pays whatever the tax is no matter their income.
Fair tax is like the VAT Consumption Tax but has three important caveats that I recall:
1) While food *is* taxed, any individual or family can apply to the government to have a stipend check mailed back monthly. This check would be equivalent to the amount of tax paid on food and other items deemed as 'necessities' for a family of four working at poverty income levels, cheapest food and products available. Basically it counteracts the tax on lower income families while offering no real benefit for those buying high grade products.
2) No tax on used items. Cars, houses, bicycles, toys… it's almost like a garage sale. The item was taxed once when it was new. Never again. Since lower income families are more likely to buy used items instead of new this prevents them from being burdened with more taxes.
3) No income tax. Repeal the 16th amendment
The wonderful Ghd Hair Straightener heating panels are painted with ceramic paste imported from Korea; it can generate infrared ray and negative ions which can lock in moisture,natural oils,Each pink patterned Cheap Ghd Hair Straightener comes with a gorgeous beautiful bag and compact mirror,so you can be sure your transformation will send hearts a flutter wherever you go.Come on to take the Ghd Hair Australia!The Ghd Mini Styler also comes with universal voltage for optimum performance wherever you travel. Welcome to order Ghd Straighteners in Ghd AU Store! We promise free shipping and within 7 days fast delivery to your door.
Visitor recommendations trackback……
[...]one of our visitors recently recommended the following website[...]………
Check this out……
[...] that is the end of this article. Here you’ll find some sites that we think you’ll appreciate, just click the links over[...]………
Superb website…
[...]always a big fan of linking to bloggers that I love but don’t get a lot of link love from[...]……
Best Links 2011…
Everything is very open and very clear explanation of issues. was truly information. Your website is very useful. Thanks for sharing….
I developed a joomla site on my localhost. Now I want to upload it to GoDaddy. How do I do that?…
GoDaddy tech support is so frustrating. First, I used their applications panel to install joomla, but when I uploaded my local site via ftp, it didn’t work. I called GoDaddy support and they do not give support for migrating a local site to their host…
Best Links 2011…
Thanks a bunch for sharing this with all of us you actually know what you are talking about! Bookmarked. Please also visit my web site =). We could have a link exchange arrangement between us!…
Links…
[...]Sites of interest we have a link to[...]……
You must be logged in to post a comment.