Don't Let Liberals Elect the First Female President!

AlfonZo Rachel provides commentary on politics and social issues. 

In this monologue Zo says Hillary Clinton will be the next President of the United States if Republicans continue running like the have been.

 

He says the ground work is already being laid to paint Republicans as the party of old white men, and much needs to be done in the culture to keep Hillary from being the first woman president. 

He also says running Rubio or West in 2016 will guarantee a Hillary victory.  I am not sure if I agree, but it is interesting commentary. 

Finally, he believes Republicans can’t just run a woman and expect her to win without taking on social issues and dealing with the culture.   

That is much different from the advice of the Main Stream Media and Establishment Republicans who advise Republicans to ignore Social and Cultural issues. 

Very interesting to watch:

Crisis de Jour: Milk Prices Could Climb to $8 a Gallon Next Year

Senator Robert Casey Jr. recently warned that the price of a gallon of milk could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon next year if Congress fails to pass a new farm bill before Jan. 1.

Casey, a Democrat, urged the Republican-led House to approve a Senate farm bill that passed overwhelmingly in June with bipartisan support.

"If the House doesn't take action, we could revert to a 1940s-era law that could waste taxpayer dollars and cause milk prices to skyrocket," he said. "By refusing to take up the farm bill, the House is forcing the Department of Agriculture to implement a dairy policy which is decades old. It could cost the government, by one estimate, $12 billion to $15 billion."

Under the law, the secretary of agriculture would be required to set federal price support subsidies at levels equivalent to those used in a 1949 law that Congress has overridden repeatedly in the decades since. Those levels are several times higher than current levels.

Retired General Norman Schwarzkopf Dies Age 78

General Norman Schwarzkopf, the Commander of the U.S.-led coalition that drove Saddam Hussein's forces out of Kuwait in 1991, died today at the age of 78.

Schwarzkopf, a much-decorated combat soldier in Vietnam, was known by the nicknames "Stormin' Norman" and "The "Bear".

He retired in 1991 and lived in Tampa, Florida amid speculation that he might run for political office, but he never did run.

In an official statement released by the White House, President Barack Obama stated: "With the passing of General Norman Schwarzkopf, we've lost an American original. From his decorated service in Vietnam to the historic liberation of Kuwait and his leadership of United States Central Command, General Schwarzkopf stood tall for the country and Army he loved. Our prayers are with the Schwarzkopf family, who tonight can know that his legacy will endure in a nation that is more secure because of his patriotic service."

Former President George H. W. Bush, who as Commander in Chief ordered Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, released the following statement: "Barbara and I mourn the loss of a true American patriot and one of the great military leaders of his generation. A distinguished member of that 'Long Gray Line' hailing from West Point, Gen. Norm Schwarzkopf, to me, epitomized the 'duty, service, country' creed that has defended our freedom and seen this great nation through our most trying international crises. More than that, he was a good and decent man — and a dear friend. Barbara and I send our condolences to his wife, Brenda, and his wonderful family."

He is survived by wife Brenda and children: Cynthia Schwarzkopf, Jessica Schwarzkopf, and Christian Schwarzkopf.

Soledad O'Brien Completely Boggled by John Lott in Gun Control Debate

John Lott explains why gun bans and more gun laws are not the solution to reducing mass shootings, but Soledad O'Brien somehow cannot understand what he is explaining to her.  O'Brien continues repeating her same points even after Lott gives her examples and statistics to counter her talking points.

One example Lott gives is Germany where 3 of the 5 biggest mass school shootings occurred even with their ban on semi-automatic weapons and their very strict gun laws. 

Lott’s examples and statistics can do nothing to cause O’Brien to even acknowledge that he may possibly have a valid point.  She has no counter-arguments, alternative statistics, or rebuttals for the information Lott presents, but she acts as if Lott was the one who gave no legitimate reason to oppose her views.  

Great Britain Banned Guns But Violent Crime Higher Than U.S.

Today I heard someone tout the British and how their gun ban reduced the gun crime in Britain.  Let’s take a look; Britons suffer 1,158,957 violent crimes per year, which works out at 2,034 per 100,000 residents. By contrast the U.S. has a rate of 466 per 100,000 residents, which would not even be in the top ten in the European Union according to the U.K. Daily Mail.  Maybe it is because criminals know the British are unarmed? 

Would you put a sign in your window or yard advertising that your home is a gun free zone?  Guns are not the problem; it is the people using guns in ways they are not meant to be used that’s the problem.  Was there a push to get rid of planes after September 11, 2001?

Sparks Fly: Bill O'Reilly vs Bob Beckel

Sparks fly when Bill O'Reilly faces off with Bob Beckel regarding a Marine in Mexican prison and the Pakistani Doctor who helped us get Bin Laden in a Pakistani prison. 

O'Reilly said Obama has shown no leadership while the two are "rotting in prison" and he points out there is no evidence of any progress by the Obama administration in securing the release of either prisoner.  Beckel tries to defend the Administration, but with no evidence of success despite the many months in captivity, O'Reilly gets the better of Beckel IMHO.

Tax Increases: For the Rich or For Me?

A friend recently said, “If it is between tax increases for the rich or tax increases on me, I’ll take tax increases for the rich every time.”  I agree if the only two choices we have are tax increases for the rich or tax increases for me.  If tax increases on the rich would solve our debt problem, help the economy grow and/or reduce unemployment, I am all for it. 

Unfortunately, as explained in my blog post “Will Taxing the Wealthy Bring Back Prosperity?” taxing the wealthy will not do any of these things, in fact, it will make the problems worst.   President Obama wants us to believe that it was tax increases early in President Clinton's first term that led to the 90’s boom, when in fact it wasn't until welfare reform, and especially the capital gains tax rate reduction that the economy boomed.

President Obama said not raising taxes on the wealthy violates core principals he campaigned on, while Republicans have “ideological positions that don’t make much sense”.    I agree the current Republican leaders don’t make much sense, considering their proposals will do as little as Obama’s proposal to solve our Countries problems, but it is Obama’s position that is ideological.  He blindly insists on raising taxes when the evidence shows raising taxes will hurt, not help the economy. 

Another problem during the current fiscal cliff negotiations is both Republicans and Democrats talk like tax cuts are a cost to the Government when in fact Tax cuts will not necessarily “cost” the Government anything as explained in my post “Tax Cuts Don't"Cost" the Government”.  In fact, tax revenues went up when tax rates went down, as far back as the Coolidge administration.

As long both parties continue to promote the false argument that tax increases are necessary, and the only disagreement is how much of an increase is required and who will pay that increase, we will be left with an unnecessary choice of tax increases for the rich or tax increases for the rest of us.