Islam: The Religion Of Peace And Tolerance

Do you recognize this girl?

No? How about another pic. Maybe you recognize her from this?

Ah. Well, that makes things a bit easier, doesn’t it?

The girl’s name is Afshan Azad, and she plays Padma Patil in the Harry Potter series.

Her father’s name is Abul Azad and her brother, Ashraf Azad. They are both practicing Muslim. The two peaceful men assaulted Afshan, branded her a prostitute, and threatened to kill her. In fact, an exact quote from the peaceful father was that he would kill her because he didn’t want his sons to “have her blood on their hands and he would do time for it.”

The reason these peaceful men were so outraged is because she dated a non-Muslim, a Hindu, in fact. The religion of peace and tolerance doesn’t allow for that sort of thing.

Unfortunately, as often happens in domestic violence cases, Afshan later equivocated, through fear or embarrassment, and refused to give evidence to convict the two men. Her brother yesterday pled guilty to assault and charges of threatening to kill her were dropped against both.

Read more in the Telegraph and the Post.

This is Islam. The religion of peace and tolerance.

We’re Number One!

Woohoo! We’re Number One! We’re Number One!

America now has the highest corporate tax rate of all developed nations.

Wow. Yay for us.

Japan had been #1, but they dropped their rate 5%. Why?

Japan will cut its corporate income tax rate by 5 percentage points in a bid to shore up its sluggish economy, Prime Minister Naoto Kan said here Monday evening.Companies have urged the government to lower the country’s effective corporate tax rate — which now stands at 40 percent, around the same rate as that in the United States — to stimulate investment in Japan and to encourage businesses to create more jobs. Lowering the corporate tax burden by 5 percentage points could increase Japan’s gross domestic product by 2.6 percentage points, or 14.4 trillion yen ($172 billion), over the next three years, according to estimates by Japan’s Trade Ministry.

Japan’s sluggish economy currently has an unemployment rate around 5%, in case you’re keeping score.

This blog has long been in favor of completely eliminating the corporate tax in America. Corporate taxes are merely an effort by the government to disguise the actual personal tax rate. All corporate taxes are passed on to the individual in one way or another. Eliminating corporate taxes would be a boost for transparency in government and would be like giving the economy about 12 double espressos.

From the CATO Institute:

It’s also worth noting that the average corporate tax rate in Europe has now dropped to less than 24 percent, so even welfare states have figured out that a high tax burden on business doesn’t make sense in a competitive global economy.

Sometimes you can fall farther behind if you stand still and everyone else moves forward. That’s a good description of what’s happening in the battle for a pro-growth corporate tax system. By doing nothing, America’s self-destructive corporate tax system is becoming, well, even more destructive.

Others in the world are starting to see the relationship between a growing economy and corporate tax rates. South Korea’s is 24%. Germany is 29%. Still too high, but headed in the right direction. Our government doesn’t care. President Barack Obama (D-USA) is anti-capitalist, anti-populace, and anti-transparency. He will do anything possible to continue to hide the ever increasing encroachment of the government over our personal lives.

I’m Starting to Agree With Ron Paul

Let’s get rid of the Federal Reserve.

The latest Obamanation from the Feds occurred in Oklahoma.

Federal Reserve examiners come every four years to make sure banks are complying with a long list of regulations. The examiners came to Perkins last week. And the team from Kansas City deemed a Bible verse of the day, crosses on the teller’s counter and buttons that say "Merry Christmas, God With Us." were inappropriate. The Bible verse of the day on the bank's Internet site also had to be taken down.

[…]

Specifically, the feds believed, the symbols violated the discouragement clause of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, "...the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication ... express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion."

The bank is a private enterprise. This is not about putting a nativity scene in front of the state capitol building. This is about the federal government using its authority to limit what private enterprises can say and do. This is a clear First Amendment issue as well as a personal liberty one in general.

This isn’t something government needs to be involved in. And shows once more that our current administration doesn’t understand capitalism and the free market at all. If people are offended by what the bank is doing, they are free to choose another bank or complain to the bank management about it. If enough people do so, the bank will realize that it’s losing money on the issue and change its practices. That’s how things work in a free society.

Each time that I think my disgust with Washington has reached its zenith, something like this happens and I realize that there’s still a long way to go before this government stops finding ways to sicken me.

The 2012 National Local Issue

One of the things Republicans have done well in this century is turn nationwide angst into local issues that help them at the ballot box. Ok, maybe it’s one thing they’ve been sleazy about, but it has been effective.

President George W. Bush (R-USA) benefited greatly in both 2000 and 2004 due to gay marriage initiatives appearing on several state ballots. This increased conservative turnout in those states which helped him win.

It appears that there’s a sleeping issue on the horizon for 2012, and that’s state enforcement regarding control of illegal aliens. The Arizona law, despite being challenged by the Barack Obama (D-USA) White House, remains immensely popular, not only in Arizona, but nationwide. Democrats predicted it would be the swan song for Governor Jan Brewer (R-AZ), when in fact she won re-election in a landslide and was never seriously challenged.

Now, Florida is following in Arizona’s footsteps. Governor-elect Rick Scott (R-FL) has made it a priority.

Scott, in particular, made the Arizona law a major piece of his race for governor, frequently mentioning it at campaign stops and urging Floridians to follow his lead and make a donation to Arizona's Border Security and Immigration Legal Defense Fund. Since his election in November, the incoming governor has been largely quiet on the subject and has not drawn up any specific proposals yet, but his spokesman said the governor maintains his position on the issue.

And they aren’t the only ones:

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, as of Nov. 10, six other states have already filed immigration bills similar to Arizona's and six other states have filed resolutions either supporting or condemning Arizona's law.

Two of these six states are Michigan and Pennsylvania. Combined with Florida, these three states control enough electoral votes to easily flip the Presidential 2012 election. And it’s hard to see how Obama can spin it to his advantage. He’s been extremely publicly critical of the Arizona law and has urged his Justice Department to pursue an attack on the law in a manner most closely resembling a Chicago-style vendetta. Even if he keeps quiet on the other cases, Republicans in those states will surely bring up Obama’s obvious views on the subject.

222 Companies Now Protected From ObamaCare

222 companies have now been granted waivers from the penalties created by ObamaCare.

As I keep saying, these waivers create additional cost for the law. This must be made up by a) increasing taxes, b) increasing debt) or c) increasing penalties upon those not granted waivers, or the average small business, in other words.

At this point you’d have to be a lunatic or a moron to believe this law is a success.

President Barack Obama (D-USA) is using this waiver process to decide who must face this burden and who can skip right on by. Think he’ll be nicer to companies that donate heavily to Democrats? Again, if you own a small business, you probably can’t donate enough to make his radar. Of course, if you’re the owner of The Home Depot, and you’ve been criticizing Obama publicly lately, you probably shouldn’t expect a waiver either.

If this sounds to you like the way capitalism is supposed to work, then I think you slept through that lecture in your civics class. If this sounds to you like economic freedom, then I think you slept through that lecture in your economics class. If this sounds to you like its going to improve health care or health care costs in America, then I think you slept through all your lectures in all your classes.

This law has to go and soon, before it single-handedly destroys America.

Keynesian Economics 101

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity has a good, but not great, video on what’s wrong with Keynesian Economics. Consider this video a first day lecture on Econ 101 or even Keynesian Econ 101. There’s much more to this class to come.

Still, the video is worth watching. Take a peek below.

 

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air nails it with his summary:

Think of it as a Cash for Clunkers economic plan on a larger scale.  The intention is to fool people into spending money in order to give the illusion of growth, and have that illusion somehow become reality through a process best known as FM; the M stands for “magic,” and you can guess what the F means.  The problem is that the interventions run out of steam quickly without addressing the actual issues of income and asset value that drives organic consumer spending.  Instead of increasing the size of the pie, we just cut it in different shapes.

The policies implemented in the early 1980s, in contrast, focused on generating growth in investment and income by reducing the government’s role in the economy and their bite out of it.  That approach succeeded in long-term growth and prosperity by increasing the size of the pie.  Critics scoff at this as “trickle-down economics,” but as the last two years showed, the Reagan approach worked while Keynesian Obamanomics has mainly generated nothing but short-term gimmicks and long-term stagnation.

In truth, Keynesian economics ONLY works if you have a surplus that you’re willing to spend to stimulate the economy. Keynes even basically said so, a fact that’s forgotten by his purported followers these days. Otherwise, as noted below, the only way to get a temporary stimulus is by borrowing. And the stimulus is indeed temporary so more borrowing is needed to keep it going. And more borrowing, and more borrowing.

This is essentially President Barack Obama’s (D-USA) plan. The problem is that the borrowing creates a burden on the economy, thus requiring the need for more stimulus.

And more borrowing.

If you can see the death spiral here, you’re smarter than the average Democrat in Washington, D.C. If you can’t, please run for office. You’ll fit right in.

This Has Been a Pretty Good Week

Senator Harry Reid’s (D-NV) NIGHTMARE act died a glorious and painful death. The New York Times calls its fate “uncertain”, but that’s putting so much spin on it that they should sell tickets for being a thrill ride. If a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens couldn’t be passed in the first two years of President Barack Obama’s (D-USA) Presidency, it has no chance whatsoever of passing in the second two years, facing a Republican controlled House and a much slimmer Democratic majority in the Senate. The only things more certain than this bill’s demise are death and taxes.

Obama’s pork-laden omnibus spending bill died a glorious and painful death. And Republicans may be finally getting the message. Some of them, anyway. Others still need work.

But Republicans said one lesson they learned from last month's election that big spending bills - in this case, a 1,924-page measure Democrats produced just two days earlier - shouldn't be jammed through the chamber with short-circuited debate.

Bingo. That goes for START too, btw.

Most of the Obama tax increases were defeated.

The bill, which was largely worked out earlier this month between the White House and Congressional Republicans, extends the Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans for two years, extends unemployment benefits for 13 months and includes a one-year Social Security tax cut, among other measures.

Yes, I know that DADT repeal passed a cloture vote in the Senate, and therefore will likely head to the President’s desk for signing before the year is out. But…

First, I’m ambivalent on the entire topic. Yes, I think it will create some hardships on the American military. However, these are some of the best people we have, and I’m confident of their ability to handle the hardships. Will there be bumps and bruises along the way? Yes. But it’s clear that homosexuality is far more mainstream and acceptable to the average Joe than it was when Clinton put DADT into effect. And the military is a dinosaur in that respect.

Second, let’s face the truth here. DADT is going away, no matter what. The courts have made it clear that if the legislative and executive branches don’t act on this topic, then they will. And that’s very wrong. The way to handle this is through legislative deliberation and executive sign off. That’s what we’re going to get, and from that perspective this is a victory for the Constitution.

Third, DADT does amount to discrimination. Something that I am opposed to in any way shape or form. Anytime discrimination is eliminated, I’m going to be generally for it.

So, as I said, a pretty good week. Of course, this week least year, I thought ObamaCare was dying, so there’s obviously more weeks ahead that will not be as good.

Congratulations to Drew Brees

Hats off to New Orleans Saints (and former Purdue) quarterback Drew Brees. He has been named Sports Illustrated’s Sportsman of the Year.

Go Drew!

Palin Couldn’t Be President of Black America or Hispanic America

So says Richard Cohen of the Washington Post.

Sarah Palin teases that she might run for president. But she is unqualified - not just in the (let me count the) usual ways, but because she does not know the country. She could not be the president of black America nor of Hispanic America. She knows more about grizzlies than she does about African Americans - and she clearly has more interest in the former than the latter.

Remember that being a liberal means having contradictory thoughts and not seeing the contradiction. They’d fit in well in Orwell's 1984. Liberals claim to be all about inclusion and integration, when in fact they are all about exclusion and segregation. They see African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans and Irish-Americans and a thousand others. They see Hispanic America and Black America.

Conservatives see Americans and America. I don’t give a whit that President Barack Obama (D-USA) is black. Or half-black, or Kenyan, or whatever. I care that he’s a stupid, inept President that is destroying our country and turning it into a third world nation.

Mr. Cohen, your words show the elitist snob you are. Sarah Palin understands our country in ways that the Obamas never will. When she looks out across our nation and talks to our people, she sees our successes and our failures, our strengths, and our weaknesses, our hopes and dreams, and our despairs and nightmares. And she sees where we can go if we follow our hopes and dreams. The Obamas only see where we can go if we announce our guilt over our failures and weaknesses. That is a weak attitude from a weak person. Mrs. Palin’s attitude is one of strength.

That’s why Mrs. Obama has never been proud of her country. She never even sees the strengths. She is a weak person and so is her husband. Their desire has been to make Americans feel shame for our history, not pride. Well, they have accomplished that, at the very least. I’m ashamed of what our country did on November 4, 2008.

Mr. Cohen, Sarah Palin is extremely qualified to be President. Not because she’s a Caucasian American, but because she’s an American.

You need to learn the difference.

Big Surprise. Democrats Hate Fox News

Well, why shouldn’t they? Everyone wants reliable news, right? And we’ve commented on Faux News before. Oh yeah, that’s right. None of those were on Fox. And surprisingly, the Democrats didn’t complain about them. So, faux news isn’t the problem. Maybe, like Lt. Daniel Kaffee, they “can’t handle the truth”.

The other thing they can’t handle is the First Amendment, because since they can’t handle the truth, they want to shut it up.

These ideas are not just from lunatics at the fringe, but leaders of the party, people like Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Howard Dean.

Don’t believe me? Let’s go to the tape.

And here.

 

Notice they’ve gotten a bit craftier here. They know that MSNBC is hard left and has been beaten up a bit lately, so they throw them under the bus along with Fox News in an effort to look like they are balanced.  Make no mistake. This isn’t about MSNBC. This is about shutting up Fox News. That’s what the resurgence of talk about the Fairness Doctrine has always been about. Shutting up Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. If they have to take down MSNBC in the process, that’s no big deal. No one watches them anyway.

Liberals always claim to be all about tolerance. Yet this is just one more of the numerous examples of them showing that they are the intolerant ones. Voices of dissension can not be tolerated. President Barack Obama (D-USA) has made a point of attacking Fox and Rush since day one of his administration. In fact, that’s about the only thing for which he’s shown unrelenting consistency.

Let’s check a couple quotes from those videos again.

From Dean:

Americans don’t know what’s going on and therefore the media can have their way with them intellectually.

And from Rockefeller:

There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC (Federal Communications Committee) to say to Fox and to MSNBC “Out.  Off.  End.  Goodbye.” Would be a big favor to political discourse, our ability to do our work here in Congress and to the American people to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly in their future.  We need slimmed down channel packages that better respect what we really want to watch

These are terrifying words. Dean thinks that government control of the media is the answer to an uninformed electorate. And Rockefeller wants to eliminate diversity with “slimmed down channel packages”.

You know, they tried this in the Soviet Union. They had two newspapers, one controlled by the Communist party, and one controlled by the Soviet government. Those were the only two allowed news sources. The names of the two newspapers were Pravda and Izvestia, which mean “truth” and “news” respectively. This led to a popular Russian saying, "v Pravde net izvestiy, v Izvestiyakh net pravdy", which translates to “In the Truth there is no news, and in the News there is no truth.”

This is what the Democrats want. No truth and no news. Only Democrat approved spin. And then they will own you and the country, lock, stock, and barrel.