“There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily.” –George Washington
On Tuesday night, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney squared off in the second of their three debates. It was “town hall” style with the audience asking questions pre-selected by moderator Candy Crowley of CNN. As expected, Obama came out swinging to shake off his flat-footed performance in the first debate. Obviously, he concluded that he had been “too polite.” Fortunately, he didn’t reach the depths of bad behavior that Joe Biden did in the vice presidential debate.
We have covered previous debates as point-by-point as possible in a short space, but this go-around, we want to focus on two areas: Fiscal policy and energy.
Mitt Romney laid out the Obama record: “We have fewer people working today than we had when the president took office. The unemployment rate was 7.8 percent when he took office; it’s 7.8 percent now. But if you calculated that unemployment rate, taking back the people who dropped out of the workforce, it would be 10.7 percent [today].” He later added, “I look at what’s happened in the last four years and say this has been a disappointment. We can do better than this. We don’t have to settle for … 43 months with unemployment above 8 percent, 23 million Americans struggling to find a good job right now. There are 3.5 million more women living in poverty today than when the president took office. We don’t have to live like this. We can get this economy going again.”
In short, Obama made promises he didn’t keep. He promised that headline unemployment would be 5.6 percent by September 2012. Instead, as Romney noted, it’s 7.8 percent (and we have doubts about that number). He promised to lower unemployment by spending trillions of dollars on “stimulus,” all while cutting the deficit in half. Instead, he nearly tripled the deficit, in large part by expanding the European-style welfare state. The bill for the 83 means-tested welfare programs (not including Social Security, Medicare or unemployment benefits) covering some 100 million people was a staggering $1 trillion in FY2011 (combining state and federal spending), making it the federal government’s largest expenditure and taking a serious toll on the states. Obama’s answer to this was to gut welfare reform, which will only increase the bill.
Another of Obama’s favorite recited promises is the one to cut taxes for the middle class and small businesses. It’s true that he and Congress cut the payroll tax, set up the “Making Work Pay” tax credit, and offered various other credits to business, but these were all temporary gimmicks and incentives for favored behavior that did nothing for the economy. And his claim to have “cut taxes for middle-class families … by $3,600” is true — but only if you spread it out over four years, which no honest person would. Furthermore, he’s not advocating continuing any of those cuts or credits.
In fact, he’s waging class warfare against the “wealthy,” demanding that they pay their “fair share” before agreeing to not raise everyone’s taxes in 2013. When that $500 billion tax increase hits on Jan. 1, the paltry economic growth we’ve seen so far this year will grind to a halt, if we don’t dip into recession again. Yet Michelle Obama claimed this week that “we are in the midst of a huge recovery … because of what this president has done.” What recovery?
Energy policy is tightly interwoven with the economy, and Obama is no less derelict here. When asked about high gas prices, he avoided a direct answer. He once again claimed to advocate an “all of the above” energy policy, though in practice he has done the opposite. “[W]e have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years,” he said. “Natural gas production is the highest it’s been in decades. We have seen increases in coal production and coal employment. But what I’ve also said is we can’t just produce traditional source of energy.” Which is why he’s “invested” billions of dollars into green-energy firms owned by campaign-contributing cronies.
Romney conceded, “[T]he president’s right in terms of the additional oil production,” but he then added the all-important caveat: “[N]one of it came on federal land. As a matter of fact, oil production is down 14 percent this year on federal land…. Why? Because the president cut in half the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands, and in federal waters.” Indeed, the only reason for the increase is drilling on private land, especially in North Dakota’s Bakken Range. And not only does Obama not have anything to do with that production, but his EPA is doing their dirty work to slow and stop it.
Romney also wondered how someone could block the Keystone XL oil pipeline as Obama did, cutting off an important supply of oil and thousands of jobs along with it. The answer, of course, is the green lobby, but Obama responded with the bizarre claim that “we’ve built enough pipeline to wrap around the entire Earth once.” We wonder how that sat with those greenies. And the Canadians will still sell their oil; it just may be to the Chinese instead of us.
As for coal, back in 2008, Obama candidly admitted that his policies would cause electricity prices to “necessarily skyrocket.” And indeed, per his further ’08 warning that “if somebody wants to build a coal plant … it will bankrupt them,” the EPA has gone after coal with a vengeance. Coal production is down 6.5 percent since 2008, and though that’s partly caused by cheap natural gas, Obama’s policies have created a tremendous burden. Coal now accounts for just 32 percent of net electric generation, down from 48 percent in 2008.
Millions unemployed, taxes rising for everyone, deficits as far as the eye can see and energy policy that’s making us all poorer. All told, as Romney’s mantra goes, we can’t afford four more years of Obama.
Help You Don’t Need
“Governor Romney’s argument is, ‘We’re not fixed, so fire him and put me in.’ It is true we’re not fixed. When President Obama looked into the eyes of that man who said in the debate, ‘I had so much hope four years ago and I don’t now,’ I thought he was going to cry. Because he knows that it’s not fixed.” –Bill Clinton campaigning for Obama — we think
Candy Crowley displayed blatant bias Tuesday, both in the selection of questions from left field and the outrageous and inaccurate “fact-checking” of Mitt Romney mid-debate. But that was hardly surprising from a Leftmedia talkinghead who described Romney’s choice of running mate Paul Ryan as “some sort of ticket death wish” because of Ryan’s efforts to reform the entitlement programs of Medicare and Social Security before they bury our nation in debt.
Crowley helped Obama secure a narrow “win” on style points in CNN’s post-debate poll asking, “Who won the debate?” But digging deeper in the same poll — on questions of substance — we discover that when asked who would better handle the economy (58-40), health care (49-46), taxes (51-44) and the deficit (59-36), Romney won handily. Of course, the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day.
Looking Forward to Monday’s Debate
Monday’s final debate will focus on foreign policy. Indeed, as John Adams wrote, “National defense is one of the cardinal duties of a statesman.”
However, it was apparent that in preparing for the last debate, Mitt Romney’s team did not review our “Memo to Mitt From Grassroots Americans,” which we know his communications staff received.
Romney’s weakest campaign link is his disconnect with conservative grassroots Americans — millions of Patriots who, if energized, will have enormous influence on the sea of undecided voters Romney needs to win this election. The fact is, Romney really does care about grassroots folks — he genuinely cares about Americans from all walks of life. Unfortunately, too many of his campaign staffers are Beltway politicos and debutants, who are clearly out of touch with grassroots Americans. There is still time to energize grassroots voters if Romney’s staff will give him some good advice from the trenches.
The current 24-hour news recyclers are pressing the Libya question, who knew what and when, ad nauseam. Of course the reason Obama is obfuscating the facts on Libya is that he would like Americans to believe that al-Qa’ida died when he (actually Navy SEALs) killed Osama. Thus, Obama insisted that protests over a web video insulting Islam led to the deaths of Americans in Libya. That smokescreen dissipated quickly when Congress pressed for answers.
The reality is that al-Qa’ida is alive and well, and their ultimate goal is to obtain a nuke (hello Iran), and detonate it, most likely, in the harbor of an East Coast urban center.
Don’t get mired in the minutiae of who knew what and when in Libya. The real issue regarding our foreign policy in the Middle East and elsewhere is Obama’s appeasement of our enemies — from the “apology tour” after his election, to his smirking snubs of our most significant ally in the Middle East, Israel. Romney must focus on the grievous failure of Obama’s foreign policy overall.
Oh, and Obama snuck in a reference to the “47 percent” video in his closing remarks of the second debate. As a counterpunch, Romney should highlight Obama’s remarks, caught on tape, to then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev about watering down our national security: “After my election I will have more flexibility.” Medvedev responded, “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.” That would be now-Russian President Vladimir Putin. Whose side is Obama on?
Shift the conversation back to the economy by noting that al-Qa’ida is not the greatest threat to our national security, the crushing burden of our national debt is — and it’s past time for a president who will work with Congress to solve the debt crisis.
Here’s the bottom line: The only unemployment number that matters is 23 million, including those who are underemployed and those who have simply given up looking for work. In addition, households considered impoverished have grown to one in six, and there are 47 million food stamp recipients — up 50 percent since Obama’s election. Obama has also amassed $5 trillion in new debt, and our national debt now totals $16 trillion, which for the first time in history now exceeds U.S. annual economic output. Median household income has declined by $4,520 (8.2 percent) since Obama took office. This is the real “Obama tax.” Energy prices have doubled because of Obama restrictions, and economic growth has slowed to an anemic 1.3 percent.
Obama can’t be trusted to do what is necessary to protect our national interests, nor can he be trusted to deal with our failing economy and policies that help businesses create jobs. He can’t be trusted to reduce our national debt, which will crush the next generation of Americans.
Obama’s road “Forward” is a dead end. He can’t be trusted with the future of America. He has been elected once but surely our countrymen are smart enough not to be fooled twice.
We ask you, Governor Romney, to recall the words of George Washington at a turning point during the American Revolution: “A few short weeks will determine the political fate of America for the present generation, and probably produce no small influence on the happiness of society through a long succession of ages to come.” Let the American people know that our nation is at such a turning point again.
Footnote: There are still two weeks for a diversionary “October Surprise.” That could be a “rice-paper” (easily dissolvable) gesture from Iranian mad man Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promising to slow down their uranium enrichment plans. It could be a kinetic interaction between U.S. forces and Iran’s navy. Alternatively, Obama promised in the last debate, “We are going to find out who [attacked our Libyan embassy] and we’re going to hunt them down, because one of the things that I’ve said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after them.” Thus, expect BO to drop a few 500 pounders on some peasant villages in Libya and claim direct hits against those who attacked our embassy — since the diversionary 500 pounder they dropped on that anti-Islamic web video maker did not suffice.
Publisher’s Note: The Letter From Karen
Thursday I forwarded you a letter from “Karen,” an Obama voter who now has buyer’s remorse. Some readers didn’t get an earlier message I sent advising of the letter coming in a format that could be easily forwarded to others. I apologize for any confusion that created. That letter is posted on our Grassroots Commentary page, where we are posting many outstanding responses to Karen. If you haven’t already, we encourage you to read Karen’s letter, and if you think it would be beneficial to those you know who might reconsider voting for Obama again, copy the contents of that letter and forward it to them.
Also, don’t miss my Memo to Mitt From Grassroots Americans, a thorough collection of advice and talking points for Mitt Romney in advance of Monday’s debate.
The challenges that America faces today are not new. Watch the short movie “Does History Repeat Itself?”, in which one of America’s greatest presidents reminds us of where we’ve been, and where the right plan for recovery can take us.
As George Washington said, “We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times.”
Government and Politics
Campaign Trail: Biden’s Fact-Free Claims
During last week’s vice presidential debate, Joe “Chuckles” Biden claimed that ObamaCare doesn’t force Catholic institutions to provide contraception coverage with their insurance benefits. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), however, quickly refuted Biden’s laughable claim. Biden’s remark was intended to deflect criticism that the health care law tramples the religious liberty of Catholics and other groups, but, as were so many of Biden’s assertions, that too was blatantly false. The administration issued the decree in February that contraception, including abortifacients, be covered by insurance offered by all employers, even religious ones.
The USCCB pointed out that the Department of Health and Human Services did carve out a narrow set of exemptions that spare certain religious organizations from having to comply with the contraception mandate, but the exemptions are arbitrarily applied and haven’t been extended to numerous Catholic hospitals, schools or charities. As stated in a complaint the organization filed with HHS, “in order to safeguard their religious freedoms, religious employers must plead with government bureaucrats for a determination that they are sufficiently ‘religious.'” More than 40 Catholic dioceses and other Christian groups have filed lawsuits against the Obama administration over the mandate.
The Obama campaign resolutely stood by Biden’s lie, and they have attempted to spin it back to the Romney-Ryan ticket for trying to play politics with the issue. But the question remains as Paul Ryan asked last week: If the Obama White House is indeed respectful of our First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty, “Why would they keep suing” the administration?
News From the Swamp: Schumer Shoots Down Tax Reform
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) explained his version of tax reform at the National Press Club last week, although his plan is just another leftist call to raise taxes. Schumer stated that traditional tax reforms such as that enacted in 1986 or the Simpson-Bowles proposal of 2010 are out of date because we now have a larger deficit and greater income inequality. His solution is to broaden the tax base and raise taxes at the same time.
Schumer claimed his so-called tax reform would raise rates on higher incomes and use the additional revenue brought in from closing tax code loopholes to reduce the deficit. He fully supports the Obama income redistribution model, claiming that the rich are ducking out of paying their “fair share.” The richest one percent pay 40 percent of all income taxes — how much “fairer” does Schumer think it can get? And there’s no reason to believe that Schumer and Congress would follow through on funneling additional revenues toward reducing the deficit. Time and again, he’s proven to be one of Congress’s most notorious spendthrifts, opposing every GOP spending cut proposal and seeking unchecked expansion of entitlements. If real tax reform does come to Washington, it won’t be because of Chuck Schumer. It will be in spite of him.
Fast and Furious Update
Vince Cefalu, a 25-year agent with the ATF and co-founder of the whistleblower website CleanUpATF, was fired last week for what he believes are complaints he made about Operation Fast and Furious. Cefalu, long an outspoken critic of ATF policies, had been on administrative leave for a year. The official reason for his termination was “lack of candor” regarding his testimony in an unrelated case, but he maintains that it was a retaliatory move and he plans to challenge it. We think he has a fair point.
In other Fast and Furious news, the Justice Department is asking the courts to dismiss a lawsuit filed against it by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The Committee is demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder turn over records related to the gun-running program that led to the deaths of two federal agents and hundreds of Mexican citizens. Holder, who made numerous conflicting statements while testifying before Congress earlier this year, was found to be in contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate with the investigation. He’s currently hiding behind Barack Obama’s bogus claim of executive privilege. DoJ wants the suit thrown out on the grounds that the Constitution doesn’t grant the courts power to resolve political disputes between the executive and legislative branches. Nor does the Constitution grant federal agencies the power to introduce illegal weapons into Mexico allegedly in order to catch bad guys, and then lie about it when the operation goes terribly wrong.
Hat Tip of the Week
Timothy P. Carney of The Washington Examiner has one of the most enjoyable smack-downs of a Leftmedia propaganda piece we’ve seen in a while. Politico recently featured a story worrying about the influence of lobbyists should Mitt Romney win the election. Carney proceeds to count more than 50 lobbyists serving in the White House, and he’s only scratching the surface. Read the rest here.
Income Redistribution: GM and Green Subsidies
In another “government knows best” moment last week, Barack Obama claimed, “[W]e got back every dime we used to rescue the financial system.” Problematically, the Congressional Budget Office disagrees. According to the CBO, not only did we not recoup the loss, but the government currently stands to lose about $24 billion on the 2008 TARP bailout. If that’s not bad enough, money that went to General Motors has escaped U.S. borders and is now propping up overseas operations as the company redirected some of its federal resources to rescue its foreign business divisions. Wasn’t the bailout supposed to help the U.S. economy?
It doesn’t stop there. The last two weeks alone brought news of woe from two other beneficiaries of taxpayer dollars. First, Bloomberg reports that A123 Systems, an electric car battery maker that received nearly $250 million from the federal government in 2009, has filed for bankruptcy. But in 2010, Obama said that the company’s work was “about the birth of an entire new industry in America.”
Second, Vestas, a Danish wind turbine maker with plants in the U.S. and the recipient of $50 million in tax credits, announced layoffs of more than 800 in the U.S. and Canada. In 2010, Energy Secretary Steven Chu lauded the company’s “wind manufacturing operation … [as] an example of the economic opportunities in the clean energy sector.” If this is what comes from government “help,” businesses should run the other way at the sight of Obama and his green-energy goons. Indeed, as Mitt Romney chastised Obama in the first debate, “you don’t just pick the winners and losers, you pick the losers.”
Regulatory Commissars: Wasteful Spending on the Fast Track
In our era of environmental correctness, this contrast is all too familiar. But since the question of oil production came up in this week’s debate, it’s worth mentioning that the Obama administration, despite objections from Alaska’s state government and their bipartisan congressional delegation, recently left closed to oil and gas exploration about half of Alaskan land designated as a national petroleum reserve. Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar said the plan to only open up a portion of the National Petroleum Reserve created by Congress in 1976 would expand what he termed “safe and responsible oil and gas development,” but claimed in the same breath that the plan would protect “wildlife and subsistence rights of native Alaskans.” Despite Alaska’s natural wealth of oil, the high percentage of land under federal onerous regulation leaves it producing less oil than North Dakota. The difference? Private-land development is possible and encouraged in North Dakota.
By contrast, those ready to cash in on the boondoggle of solar energy will benefit from fast-track permitting on 285,000 acres spread out among six western states as Salazar’s Interior Department approved a development program for solar panel fields in those areas. The government even promised to facilitate access to existing or planned electric infrastructure.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that Barack Obama’s so-called “all of the above” solution only applies to those energy sources deemed to be most conforming to the pipe dreams of environmentalists who prefer subjecting us to a lifestyle left behind in the 19th century. An administration that complains about Chinese subsidies of solar-panel makers while propping up losers like Solyndra and Ener1 shouldn’t be taken at its word.
The Libya Crime and Cover-Up
In 2008, a candidate for president declared, “I believe we need a president who believed what Harry Truman believed — that the buck stopped in the Oval Office.” No, it wasn’t Barack Obama; it was Hillary Clinton. This week, the buck stopped with her, not in the Oval Office, over the security snafu that lead to the murders of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, at the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya. While in Peru, the secretary of state finally conceded, “I take responsibility” for the 9/11 anniversary attacks, though she proceeded to blame “security professionals” who made the arrangements — in other words, subordinates. After letting Clinton take the fall, Obama pointed out in Monday’s debate that “she works for me. I’m the president and I’m always responsible,” which sounded more to us like a reminder of who won the 2008 primary than actually taking responsibility.
More to the point, the real issue is that the attack in Libya is a symptom of Obama’s failed foreign policy of appeasement and American weakness. Perhaps that’s why the White House leaked that it’s considering a drone strike soon in retaliation. Election considerations trump all.
National Review’s David French writes, “On the strategic level, this administration has been a complete disaster. Obama has moved decisively against allies, failed to complete a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq (a grave and inexcusable mistake), and joined the naïve rush to endorse the various ‘Arab Spring’ revolts and the resulting Islamist governments. As we pull out of Afghanistan, Obama’s Middle East legacy will be a hostile Egypt, Iran substantially closer to a nuclear bomb, Syria in chaos, Iraq slipping into neutrality (at best), portions of Libya under jihadist control, Afghanistan under renewed Taliban assault, and America as despised as it’s ever been, with the black flag of jihad hoisted over embassy after embassy. Oh, but we’ll have drones orbiting overhead, launching the occasional pinprick strike. Do you feel more secure?”
This Week’s ‘Alpha Jackass’ Award
“Here’s what I’ll say. If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal. We’re going to fix it. All of it. And what happens during the course of a presidency is that the government is a big operation and any given time something screws up. And you make sure that you find out what’s broken and you fix it.” –Barack Obama during an interview on the all-important Comedy Central
Head-in-the-Sand Foreign Policy
When it rains, it pours: As if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weren’t on the ropes — or rather, under the bus — over Benghazi, a new bus is revving up on word that the U.S. is inadvertently funneling arms to its enemies, namely, Middle East terrorists. And why wouldn’t it be? Since the Obama administration has done everything possible to lower America’s standing among nations of the world, why should this revelation be considered a bombshell?
The State Department and CIA are frantically trying to bail water for their part in the plan to arm Syrian rebels, a plan that actually resulted in arming jihadis. After Barack Obama’s utter failure in Libya, he hasn’t dared intervene further. Remember that the administration’s previous “plan” included backing surrender-specialist Kofi Annan in the role of UN envoy to “unify the international community.” The “community” (terrorists and terrorist backers) indeed “unified” — against the U.S. — while Syrian President Bashar al-Assad murdered thousands of his own people to quash rebellion. Having seen the UN-led diplomacy strategy work so well, brain-donors at State and the CIA decided the best encore would be arming a slew of jihadis.
When America shows strength, it is respected and treated seriously; when it shows weakness — as in the case when Obama bows to foreign leaders, fails to confront threats head-on, and ignores support for freedom-loving societies — it is attacked and ridiculed. The truth is that Obama’s “easy war” in Libya has been the touchstone of a host of conflicts in Middle Eastern hot zones, and with minions like Ms. Clinton still claiming that Arabs across the region have “firmly rejected the extremist argument,” we should expect to see more of them.
A More Serious Biden Gaffe
During the vice presidential debate — and between bouts of derisive laughter — Joe Biden said of Afghanistan that “[w]e are leaving in 2014, period, and in the process, we’re going to be saving over the next 10 years another $800 billion. We’ve been in this war over a decade. The primary objective is almost completed.”
This wasn’t exactly a “mission accomplished” moment on Biden’s part, but it wasn’t exactly true either. Maybe Hillary Clinton’s contention that internal State Department business doesn’t reach the White House is true, but it’s more likely that Barack Obama can’t trust our gaffe-prone vice president to remember that Obama and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement back in May that committed our presence in Afghanistan through 2024.
While the number of troops remaining in Afghanistan is yet to be determined, earlier this week NATO announced it would keep troops in-country beyond 2014 for training and assistance purposes. So Americans shouldn’t be anticipating any sort of Afghan “peace dividend” anytime soon, let alone $800 billion over the next decade, but they can always count on Joe Biden to get the story wrong.
‘Non Compos Mentis’
“How many of you know someone who served in Iraq or Iran?” –Joe Biden to a campaign audience, confusing Iran and Afghanistan
Climate Change This Week: Baby It’s Cold Outside
The media were — surprise! — deafeningly silent this week in reporting a new climate study by the UK Meteorological Office. Why? Because the study found that global warming has been essentially nonexistent for the last 16 years.
Data from 3,000 measuring points located on both land and sea showed that the global temperature averaged no change from 1997 until August 2012. The UK Daily Mail reports, “This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years. … This stands in sharp contrast to the release of the previous figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 — a very warm year.”
This matches up well with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) index. El Ninos (which tend to warm the globe) are more common during warm phases of the PDO and La Ninas (which tend cool the globe) are more common during cold phases. With the PDO now back in its cold phase along with recent La Nina episodes, it only makes sense that global temperatures would begin to level out and even fall. It would seem that the law of averages also applies to climate.
As expected, however, certain alarmists aren’t happy with the findings. The Daily Mail continued, “Some climate scientists, such as Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, last week dismissed the significance of the plateau, saying that 15 or 16 years is too short a period from which to draw conclusions.” Funny that he sang a different tune when he wanted to push his own theory.
Judicial Benchmarks: Court Strikes Down DOMA
On Thursday, the Despotic Branch “ruled that a U.S. law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman unconstitutionally denies federal benefits to lawfully married same-sex couples,” Reuters reports. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit struck down the Defense of Marriage act as “unconstitutional.” At issue in this particular case was that Edith Windsor had to pay estate taxes on the assets of her late parter, Thea Clara Spyer, which she alleged violated the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection.
Though six states have legalized same-sex marriage — five of them via judicial diktat — the federal government and other states are not (yet) bound to recognize those marriages. The administration itself declared the law unconstitutional and said that it would no longer defend it in court. That task now lies with Congress.
Village Academic Curriculum: Florida’s Race Bait
The Florida State Board of Education passed a plan that lowers expectations for student achievement based on race. The plan’s goal is for 90 percent of Asians, 88 percent of whites, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of blacks to be reading at or above grade level by 2018. The state set similarly offensive goals for math. Blacks and Hispanics should be outraged by this plan rather than supportive of the Obama administration’s view of “empowering” minorities, which only further lowers their kids’ achievement. For some time, the White House has been pressuring schools to lower their standards for certain racial and ethnic groups. Apparently, they’re committed to what former President George W. Bush termed “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”
Proponents of the plan claim the change is necessary because some students are not starting out on equal footing with others, despite Head Start and dozens of other government programs designed to improve minority children’s performance. But what are we saying as a nation if we pigeonhole our children’s potential based on the Left’s classification by color? Leftists are always quick to tout themselves as colorblind egalitarians, but this abhorrent plan once again exposes the truth: They’re okay with racial profiling as long as, in their opinion, it benefits the minority. The conservative view is that when you treat people differently based on something like race, it never truly benefits anyone, especially the minority. One can only hope and pray that the courts agree. The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case brought by a white student fighting the race-based admissions policy at the University of Texas, a case that could have ramifications down the line.
Are you looking to get engaged soon? If so, we know a jewelry store in eastern Iowa where you can buy a ring … and get a free shotgun with your purchase. We’ve certainly seen our fair share of free gun offers, but this one just might take the cake, so to speak. As humorist Frank J. Fleming quipped, “So you get the ring and the way to make sure you get your ‘Yes’ answer.” In fact, it gives a whole new meaning to the term “shotgun wedding.”
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team
Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post.