Media Watch

It seems like everyone has an endorsement proclamation to share, so I decided I wanted one too. Mine is simple and based on something rational, for a change, like the rule of law.  And in order to restore the rule of law, we need leaders focused on limiting government to only the powers permitted under this nation's charter. We have been drawn so far from these core American values that they seem radical, naive, dangerous and idealistic by today's standards. But returning to these standards must be our aim if we are to preserve this republic. Foreign Policy It was never the founders' conception that the US government would intervene in matters of other sovereign nations.  We know that doing so causes unintended blowback.  One example came to us in 1967 during the six day war, when Israel blasted the USS Liberty, a ship sent to the Sinai  Peninsula on a listening mission.  Candidates who demonize non-interventionism, characterizing it as isolationism, either don't

One of the reasons I enjoy working in the media is the perks.  At a large outdoor concert we put on, members of the staff and clients were shielded from long lines and the general filth that the "regular" goers endured.  We were treated to a better class of faire and impressive access backstage and the performers. It's all perfectly legal, but if I were a standard ticketholder, I might not have the same appreciation for such perks, especially as I'm being herded like cattle. The Wall Street Journal reported numerous examples where members of Congress, their staff, friends and family were able to enrich themselves through insider trading.  This elite class of folks can come to Washington with only a few bucks, but leave with millions more. Is that fair?  Is it true that Congress is exempt from insider trading rules imposed on us "regular" folk? Ron Paul recently spoke on the issue after 60 Minutes did an expose on how Nancy Pelosi and others were get

I'm often insulted when I see in the media that the most important issues are brushed under the rug and petty bickering makes the headlines. On MSNBC's Martin Bashir program Friday (Oct. 27), Democratic analyst Karen Finney said of the white Republican base, "They think [Cain is] a black man who knows his place." A cohort of mine subsequently shared a link to a Weekly Standard web page featuring the exchange and remarked, "Left wing racism rears it's ugly head again. Disgusting!" Putting aside for a moment his misuse of the contraction, my friend uses circular reasoning to arrive at a conclusion that the Democratic analyst is racist for accusing the white Republican base of holding a racist viewpoint. This is also a classic example of feigning dismay in order to arouse the right-wing base and distract them from the truly important issues of the day, like the poor economy and the high unemployment.  Anyone that's paying attention should re

In this rant: Why I dislike Spotify. It's spyware and malware and junkware all wrapped up in one cute package.  Plus it incessantly announces to which song certain friends are listening, further advancing the wholesale distribution of useless information. Join me next time as I rail against multiple entities reposting the same information to dozens of walls.

Michele Bachmann, John Huntsman and Sarah Palin are all saying how they'd help businesses create new jobs by lowering or eliminating corporate taxes, which would shift more of the federal revenue burden on the individuals.  They all mention a fundamental restructuring of the tax code.  I agree. But how is shifting the responsibility for generating government revenue to the individuals good for the American people? I'm running for president and I have my own plan.  It comes in two easy steps. Individual income tax came about within the last century and it's resulted in a power and wealth shift toward big business and an explosive growth of government. The fact is, the earners in this country that have the biggest need and the most to gain from lowering the federal overhead, but are the ones with the least power to influence a change, which creates a fundamental (some say fatal) flaw in the system. Money flows in a circular fashion, from manufacturers to individuals

When a political party identifies itself as a champion against taxes, insisting on extending ten-year tax cuts that benefit rich folks indefinitely, then says it's OK to allow certain other tax cuts to expire (a payroll tax cut that would help low income earners), it becomes clear what the goal is. The 6.2% Social Security payroll tax on employees that was temporarily reduced to 4.6% by Democrats is ending on schedule, thanks to Republicans, who want that particular tax to expire. The tax cut only applies to the first $100,000 in earnings, meaning that a maximum of $2,000 will be gained by any earner.  That is to say, for millionaires it's not that significant of a cut to be concerned with.  Millionaires will forgive their Congress for such a petty loss. But the gains for the federal coffers could be $120B.  So even if it is a tough chunk for earners to swallow, Republicans really have to show fiscal responsibility at this point in time.  They're running for the White