Michael Steele’s Weekly Republican address
Here is new RNC Chairman, Michael Steele’s weekly Republican address, from YouTube.com:
He needs some practice, maybe even a few classes from the Leadership Institute, but I’m confident he’ll get better over time. At least the message is on point.
If you cant access YouTube, here is the transcript:
“This is Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Democrats have controlled both branches of government for less than a month. And you have to wonder if all that power has gone to their heads.
“For the last two weeks, they’ve been trying to force a massive spending bill through Congress under the guise of economic relief.
“All of us — Republicans and Democrats — agree the government must act to kick-start the American economy. American families are doing their best to balance their own budgets and pay their mortgages.
“The fastest way to help those families is by letting them keep more of the money they earn. Individual empowerment: that’s how you stimulate the economy.
“But the Democrats have a different philosophy. Instead of leaving money in the family checkbook, they want to send it to Washington, run it through a slow and inefficient government, and hope that does some good.
“When families keep the money, they spend it, save it, or invest it. And the private sector economy benefits when families and businesses buy consumer goods or invest it for the future. But when Washington spends the money, some of it may flow into the economy, but all too often, much gets wasted.
“Democrats in Congress want a one-trillion dollar spending bill. You’ve heard about the pork-barrel programs they want to fund… 45 million dollars for ATV trails and removal of fish passage barriers is one that caught my eye. Exactly what is a fish passage barrier and why does it cost 45 million dollars to stimulate the economy with it?
“That’s why Republicans in the House voted against uncontrolled spending. This is not a bragging point, but rather a statement that at least Republicans would stand with the American taxpayer.
“But voting ‘no’ is not enough… and Republicans have offered innovative ideas to help struggling families and small businesses. We’ve offered plans to spark job creation and investment through lower taxes, to stop the taxation of unemployment benefits, and to help Americans keep their jobs and their homes.
“The comprehensive Republican plan would lower taxes for all working American families. If you’re married, the first 16,750 dollars you make this year will be taxed at ten percent. Why don’t we cut that rate in half to give instant buying power to every working American family?
“Good ideas… lots of them… all left out of this plan by the Democrats in Congress.
“Republicans stand ready to work with reasonable Democrats to do what is right for America.
“But it will take more than bipartisan words from the President. It will require fair-minded action from Democrats in Congress.
“Thanks for listening.”
It doesn’t pass the smell test: Richardson, Geithner, Killefer, Daschle… is Gregg next?
And the honeymoon is over. For anyone who is keeping count – that’s five failed or badly botched nominations in two weeks for President Obama (you may only be able to count to four, but guess which new nominee’s Senate staff is being investigated for their strong ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff).
Obama’s winning line up:
First was Bill Richardson who had been nominated as Commerce Secretary but pulled out because he is facing a grand jury investigation (remember when he was running for President? Oh how things can change…)
Next up was Tim Geithner for Treasury Secretary. He wants to lead the United States out of its overwhelming economic crisis, but he can’t figure out how to pay his taxes. He paid $34,000 in back income taxes and we confirmed him because his late payment gave our economy a boost – thank you Mr. Secretary!
In the middle we have Nancy Killefer who wanted to be Obama’s Chief Performance Officer, or “Performance Czar” as the Obama Administration likes to call the position. The Performance Czar does not require a Senate Confirmation, but Deputy Director of the OBM does, and when everyone discovered that Nancy doesn’t pay her “help” at home, she withdrew her name and crawled back to McKinsey & Co.
Batting clean up was the left’s shinning star Tom Daschle. Daschle had lost his South Dakota Senate seat to John Thune in 2004 (49% to 51%) and was looking for a way to redeem himself in national politics, his plan was to hand out “free” health care to everyone and just charge the bill to America’s credit card. How hard is it to take a former Senate Majority Leader down? Apparently it’s pretty easy, especially when he doesn’t pay $130,000+ in taxes. My question is what is Daschle so afraid of? Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said that “[Daschle] is like a brother to me,” and Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee Max Baucus said he was “shocked” to hear that Daschle was dropping out.
Apparently there is more to the story because with Reid and Baucus backing him, Daschle should have been confirmed despite his tax blunder. Senator Ensign has said Daschle’s situation “doesn’t pass a smell test,” and I agree. Senator Thune’s seat is up for re-election in 2010 – maybe Daschle will get back in the race then.
And wait, we just went into extra innings – pinch hitter Judd Gregg maybe in trouble. Senator Obama’s pick to replace Richardson as the Commerce Secretary, has some trouble brewing of his own.
A former congressional aide to Commerce Secretary-nominee Judd Gregg, Kevin Koonce, is now caught up in an investigation into a Capitol Hill lobbying scandal involving notorious lobbyist Jack Abramoff. How close was Koonce to Senator Gregg? He was his Legislative Director (that’s the #2 job) for Gregg’s Senate office from 2002-2004. Koonce is accused of taking tickets to hockey and baseball games from Abramoff’s former deputy Todd Boulanger in exchange for “received favors” in spending legislation. Now it’s up to Obama to ask Gregg if he’s a sports fan.
Read more about the possible Gregg scandal here: http://www.koat.com/politics/18640535/detail.html
Let’s hope Gregg didn’t resign that Senate seat just yet.
Republican Minority Leader John Boehner goes High Definition
Here is a great video from House Minority Leader, John Boehner, showing that Republicans in Congress are finally starting to “get it” when it comes to getting their message out to the masses.
I would have been pleased with a cell-phone quality video, so shooting this in HD is even more impressive.
We are Republican?
Here is a new video from RebuildTheParty.com, titled “WeAreRepublican.” I’m not sure why it’s one word, but for whatever reason that’s how they decided to do it on their YouTube page. While it doesn’t earn points in terms of search engine optimization and quality YouTube tagging, I think it’s well produced.
My thoughts on some of the profiles:
Warie: “I’m proud to be a Republican, because the Republican Party offers the best opportunities to all.”
While that sounds great, who is “all?” One of the problems that we have within the GOP is our position on immigration. Some factions of the party would like to see a more “open-border” approach implemented, whereas others would like to build fences and make everyone waits there turn.
Even though it’s easy to make a statement suggesting that we offer the best opportunities for all, the reality is that currently (as a party), we don’t even have a definition of “all.”
We can’t brand ourselves as the party that offers the best opportunities until we know who they apply to, and more importantly, what those opportunities are.
Sean: “I just align myself with the Republican Party, anything from going hunting, to buying my first firearm, starting to pay taxes…”
This clip was obviously designed to target the pro-gun crowd, which I agree is an important segment of the Republican Party. However I always find it odd when people try to bring the NRA into these political debates by making it sound like the NRA is a Republican front-group. The reality of this is false, as the NRA has endorsed dozens of Democrats over party-line towing Republicans.
Dale: “I never followed politics until I owned my own business. I’m a small business owner…”
Perfect! Now this is exactly what we need to be focusing on. People vote with their pocketbooks, and unfortunately over the last 8 years, the Republican Party hasn’t done much to protect and/or expand them.
Velle: “I immediately found out that most of my beliefs are in line with what the Republican believe: Less taxes, less government, defense of my community and my nation…”
I agree with Velle, but unfortunately you’re always going to have caveats due to the power of single issue voting blocks. Sure, we might push for less government in terms of business and the economy, but then when it comes to issues like abortion, gay marriage, and even education, we’ve often been the first to show up with a plan to use the big hand of the government to exert power.
Barry: “I want to see a leader who believes in what they do, not someone who says or will do anything because they think it will be popular.”
Excellent.
Diana: “To be a conservative, to be a Republican, means that you believe in the core Republican values… lower taxes, smaller government, transparency in government…”
One of the biggest challenges that the Republican Party needs to face is the fact that we are never going to be the party that is 100% conservative (unfortunately).
The problem is that “conservatism” has become so skewed by the religious right over the last 30 years that many don’t even know what true-conservatism is anymore. Beyond that, I think it’s safe to say that Americans are becoming even more libertarian (some fusionist, maybe), so that’s an audience the Party will eventually have to cater to as well. However, she is spot on with the rest of her vision.
Harry: “The Republican Party is a party that believes in the equality of all people…”
Unfortunately, as long James Dobson is on his soapbox instructing his followers what to do, the Republican Party is going to have a tough time becoming something that emphasizes total equality for all.
I was extremely thrilled to see that they brought Barry Goldwater into this video, highlighting a quote from his 1964 speech at the Republican National Convention:
Our Republican cause is to free our people and light the way for liberty throughout the world.
While that’s a good quote, there are two even more fitting quotes from the very same speech:
Fellow Republicans, it is the cause of Republicanism to resist concentrations of power, private or public, which enforce such conformity and inflict such despotism. It is the cause of Republicanism to ensure that power remains in the hands of the people. And, so help us God, that is exactly what a Republican president will do with the help of a Republican Congress.
and
Balance, diversity, creativity - these are the elements of Republican equation. Republicans agree, Republicans agree heartily to disagree on many, many of their applications, but we have never disagreed on the basic fundamental issues of why you and I are Republicans.
Unfortunately, it seems like that last quote is the one that many Republicans (some who we’ve spent countless hours trying to get elected) have forgotten.
Windfall Profit Madness
Even before gas prices started to inch near the $4.00 mark, one of the hot items in Washington has been a Democrat-pushed effort to try and pass a “windfall profit tax” on big oil companies.
If you work on the Hill or read the news regularly, odds are you’ve heard the concept of this tax tossed around dozens of times. However, one thing that you never hear when this is discussed is what does “windfall profits” actually mean?
Yes, I know that this effort has been blocked by Republicans in the Senate (thanks, guys), however I’m quite confident that this isn’t the last you’re going to see of this, or something similar. Take note that Harry Reid voted against this bill, just so they would have the issue back on the floor.
So the question what are “windfall profits?”
Instead of me trying to explain it, I think the Economist does it best:
A controversial concept, often used by politicians to justify imposing a tax on profit that in theory is earned unexpectedly, through circumstances beyond the control of the company concerned, and is thus deemed undeserved and ripe for the taking by the tax authorities. As the profits were neither expected nor a result of the efforts of the firm, taxing them should not harm the firm’s incentives to maximize future profits.
The problem comes when greedy politicians start claiming that profits are windfalls when in fact they are deserved and expected. Then taxing them sends a signal to firms that they should not try too hard to make profits, as if they do too well they will not get to keep the profits anyway. If this became widely believed, effort would probably decline and economic growth would be slower.
Why on earth would the government ever want to present a proposal that would suggest that if something happens beyond your control and you make money on it, you should be taxed more excessively than if they were planned occurrences? Since when was America about the government telling you what profit is reasonable?
To make this issue resonate and make it more comfortable amongst constituents, Democrats paint a nice picture of these tax dollars going towards advancements in energy independence. They make it sound like taxing evil big oil is going to save the world and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
If it wasn’t so ridiculous, their logic would be funny to me. From what I gather, the Democrats model to energy independence runs something like this:
- Excessively tax oil companies who happen to make a profit off of selling a product to American consumers.
- Prevent any attempts to tap into American oil reserves
- Propose some ridiculous new government program
- Blame the Republicans for our current energy and economic problems
- Take a long recess
Both House and Senate Democrats (and even a few Republicans) need to get together and take a crash course in basic economic concepts. The principles of supply and demand are very powerful, and it should be no surprise to anyone that they play more of a factor in the price of oil than any executive.
Instead of listening to what the pundits are saying about the price of oil, I recommend that anyone who is interested in this issue start following what the business news channels are saying. For example, here is what you won’t hear the pundits talk about:
Citigroup raised its 2008 oil price forecast to $117 from $95 a barrel, and boosted its estimate for 2009 to $122 from $88 a barrel, citing fundamental reasons for the upward trend, driven by continued erosion of non-OPEC supply estimates, and the fact that demand, while softening, is by no means falling low enough to materially offset tightening supply. (Source: BusinessWeek.com)
When you follow the business side of the news, you often see things from a different perspective than what is being presented to you by the network news. Furthermore, if you follow international headlines, like this one from two weeks ago:
Nigerian militants warn of attacks on oil facilities
You’ll start to get a better glimpse into why we’re in the position we’re in today, as well as a better argument for why we should start tapping into some of the oil that we have here as a means to offset these unpredictable situations that are increasing the price we pay at the pump.
I know that there is a lot more to this issue; however, I’ve noticed that there are a lot of people, including many Hill staffers and Members of Congress who have resorted to simply using the talking points that the majority leadership has put together, without addressing the real issues we’re facing.
Sadly, the only reason that their talking points are able to work is because the American public is so uninformed, and reliant on news outlets to digest complex stories for them.
Maybe $5.00 per gallon gasoline will lead people to start doing their homework?
—
Of course, I can’t write about oil and gas prices without providing a shameless plug to a great petition that I urge you all to sign: GasPriceProtest.com