Category Archives: Republicans

UPDATED: Chucky Krauthammer’s Keynesianism (Neocon Chucky: Tinkering Technocrat)

Economy, Federal Reserve Bank, Intellectualism, Neoconservatism, Regulation, Republicans

On Special Report today, Chucky Krauthammer could be heard quickly correcting his characteristic Keynesianism when fellow Fox-News panelist neoconservative George Will made him look, well, silly. As she knows nothing about economics, the blond Kirsten Powers, also empaneled to discuss the economy, was none the wiser. Neither did host Bret Baier notice Chucky stumble and recover.

The Fed had set the price of money at zero, Krauthammer noodled. In his opinion, this served as a positive impetus for steady but slow economic growth. The far cleverer George Will jumped on this, pointing out that quantitative easing was the Democratic equivalent of faux trickle-down economics. In other words, the manufacturing of paper money inflates prices on the stock exchange, enriches a few big players, and leaves the rest of us holding devalued dollars and struggling to survive. (Naturally, this is not verbatim. I paraphrase from memory, since few news outlets bother with the written word any longer.)

Like greased lightening, Krauthammer leaped to finesse his Fed demand-creation Keynesianism.

As mentioned, other than the two men involved, nobody (except a few Austrians like myself) noticed.

UPDATE (1/3): EPJ on Chucky’s Nutty Two Tier Minimum Wage Proposal. Our neocon is such a tinkering technocrat.

This is truly goofy. It would result in businesses hiring teenagers over breadwinners. Since the advocate Charles Krauthammer seems to understand that raising the minimum wage causes unemployment, his proposal has to be classified as pathological altruism.

Here’s Philip Klein on the problems with Krauthammer’s proposal:

On a Fox News panel earlier this week, Charles Krauthammer floated a proposal for a two-tiered minimum wage system in which the rate would be raised for individuals who are the breadwinners of their families and remain the same for others. But this would be an absolutely terrible idea.

MORE.

The Price Of ‘Certainty’

Debt, Democrats, Foreign Policy, Government, Military, Republicans

Sec. 401. of the ‘‘Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013’’ (on page 2 of 77 pages) stipulates the obvious “Increase in contributions to Federal Employees’ Retirement System for new employees.” Well of course.

Conversely, Sec. 403. of the same impenetrable document stipulates an “Annual adjustment of retired pay and retainer pay amounts for retired members of the Armed Forces under age 62.” Judging by the apoplexy among members of the military, the verbiage means cuts to the warfare arm of the welfare-warfare state.

New York Time:

Senators Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Roger Wicker of Mississippi, all Republicans, will bring military families to the Senate on Tuesday to protest the cuts. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, complained of “a real hit to military retirements,” and said the measure did not do enough to reduce the deficit.

Those gullible enough to serve Uncle Sam without questioning whether going abroad in search of monsters to slay is indeed tantamount to defending “American Freedoms”—should wisen up. Of course your pay will be cut first. To your masters, your life is also forfeit.

And:

Under the budget deal, spending on defense and nondefense programs would rise from the $967 billion slated for this fiscal year to $1.012 trillion, mitigating the impact of across-the-board spending cuts and allowing congressional lawmakers to draft detailed spending plans for the first time in several years. Spending in fiscal 2015, which begins Oct. 1, would rise from $995 billion to $1.014 trillion. Though total spending would rise $63 billion over 10 years, the measure would trim the deficit slightly.

Here’s Judge Andrew Napolitano’s take on the agreement struck between Rep. Paul Ryan and Senate Budget Committee chair, Democrat Patty Murray (here they are on Meet the Presstitutes):

The speaker has demonstrated a poverty of leadership,” Napolitano said. “He did get 332 votes because he got the Democrats to vote with him and he lost the Republicans who retain the value of small government. This doesn’t decrease the deficit, it adds to it. It doesn’t decrease the debt, it adds to it.”
“This is an absolute fraud. They’re afraid of reality. They have no sense, the Republican establishment,” he continued. “They have no sense of small government values that they were elected to put into law.”
“Wow, tell us how you feel,” co-panelist Juan Williams joked.
“There is no distinction between John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi on this,” the judge asserted.

Mitch (McConnell), Mark (Levin), And The Military Industrial Complex

Military, Republicans, The State, Welfare

In an effort to further marginalize those “Republican challengers further to the … right who have few qualms about trimming military budgets,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been rattling the defense industry with threats that “spending cuts” favored by tea party-aligned Republicans will come at the expense of “robust national-security spending.”

We can only hope so.

Writes Wall Street Journal Editor in Chief Gerard Baker:

What he’s really saying is that he’s a big spending Republican [IM: is there any other kind?] who will take care of these special interests if they help him in the primary …’It’s, you scratch my back, I will scratch your back.’

What I don’t get is this: This story I got from an exercised Mark Levin. The broadcaster, an unwavering champion of the warfare state and the welfariate that mans it, was irate. Why? Isn’t Mitch, on this front, more aligned with Mark than “tea party-aligned candidates,” some of whom wish to cut military spending?

For Wanton Destruction (& Deaths That’ll Follow) Democrats Deserve Kim-Jong-Un Justice

Conservatism, Democrats, Healthcare, Justice, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Republicans

They may pose as adversaries on TV, but they all hang together: Conservatives love banal-brain Juan Williams, boorish Bob Beckel and the weak-minded Lanny Davis. Sean Hannity even advertized the other day that Beckel has they keys to the Hannity home.

FOX AND IMBECILE FRIEND LANNY DAVIS
How else would chattering class detritus such as Lanny Davis get away with twice admitting—and with no intelligent cross examination—on Fox News, that he supported Zero Care, because he and his Democratic ilk did not comprehend that the price of premiums would rise [when you pile on the coverage mandates], and that policy holders would lose coverage [when you legislate their “sub-standard” policies out of existence].

Oops.

The only point Megyn Kelly’s stand-in should have made during the Davis segment is this: So you’re an imbecile, Lanny (what sort of name is that, for a man?). You can’t see a few moves ahead. Fine. We get it. But there were legions of people who spoke eloquently and endlessly about the outcome of Zero Care central planning for the country.

The main crime for which these “despicable human scum,” the words of North Korea’s Kim Jong-un about his uncle, is to implement this wrecking ball of a health-care law without consulting and heeding the clever people in the room.

For this wanton destruction, Democrats deserve Kim-Jong-Un style justice.