Michael Medved's daily syndicated radio talk show reaches one of the largest national audiences every weekday between 3 and 6 PM, Eastern Time. Michael Medved is the author of eleven books, including the bestsellers What Really Happened to the Class of '65?, Hollywood vs. America, Right Turns,, The Ten Big Lies About America, and 5 Big Lies About American Business
The Obama administration and its allies are so eager to portray tax hikes on the rich as the solution to all our problems that they desperately desire to persuade the public that tax cuts for the rich caused all those problems in the first place.
Americans have always reveled in nostalgia about the music, fashion or favorite foods of bygone eras, but a sudden yearning for the high tax rates of yesteryear represents a startling new development. While some opinion leaders pine openly for the tax system that once claimed a big majority of income from top earners, their cozy, communitarian vision offers a deeply distorted view of those good old days.
In the debate on our fiscal crisis, one crucial question is never answered or even asked: if we’re supposed to go back to Clinton-era tax rates because they were good for America, why don’t we simultaneously return to that era’s spending rates?
Some fringe conservatives seem perversely determined to turn a stinging electoral defeat into an epic, sweeping disaster. That’s the deeper meaning of current talk about impeachment, secession, third parties, civil disobedience, and onrushing apocalypse.
To paraphrase the traditional Passover formulation honored in Jewish homes: why was this election different from all other elections? What makes 2012 stand out in recent political history, either as a temporary anomaly or a significant, long-term shift in the electorate?
No matter who wins the presidency on Tuesday, one outcome is all but certain: Barack Obama will draw less support and fewer votes after four years as president than he did as an untried, little-known, freshman senator from Illinois. In other words, the more the American people know about this particular politician the less they seem to like him.
Shared Priorities Overcome Religious Differences
Perhaps the most significant if unspoken argument for voters to settle on November sixth involves the bitter dispute over which candidate has lived the more virtuous, worthwhile, constructive life: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?
Forget about Barack Obama’s eagerly awaited emergence from his first debate coma: the biggest question about the second candidate confrontation centered on whether Mitt managed to maintain his undeniable momentum.
In his feeble, distracted debate performance against Mitt Romney, President Obama all but ignored the major Democratic lines of attack against the Republican nominee, forcing Joe Biden to consider an effort to renew those forgotten narratives when the vice-presidential candidates face one another Thursday night.
Both presidential candidates describe this election as the most important choice in a generation and insist that the outcome will fatefully shape the direction of government and society.
With the conventions concluded (inconclusively) and the presidential race still breathlessly close, the next big chance for a game-changing development comes with the debates, scheduled for Oct. 3, 16, and 22, with the single vice-presidential debate on Oct. 11.
The explosion of anti-American unrest in the Islamic world will damage the Obama campaign in its drive for reelection for two reasons.
The Democrats who gathered in Charlotte tried to cast themselves as the party of working people, or of struggling middle-class families, or of aggrieved and downtrodden Americans in every corner of the economy. In presidential politics, however, a more accurate designation would identify the Dems as the party of lawyers: with the re-nomination of Obama and Biden, all six available spots on the last three national tickets have gone to working attorneys.
Despite all the posing and polarization of recent weeks, everyone in Washington knows that Republicans and Democrats will reach some big agreement on tax rates within the next four or five months. So if compromise is ultimately inevitable, why wouldn’t President Obama take the lead in brokering that deal before the election, grabbing credit for averting disaster and saving the country from plunging over the dreaded “fiscal cliff”?
What does President Obama plan to do to slow or stop the explosive growth in the number of Americans who count on regular welfare checks from the federal government?
New polls showing President Obama enlarging his lead over challenger Mitt Romney have brought some Republicans to the point of panic, but logic and history should reassure them that the race will inevitably tilt in their direction.
In selecting Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney signals his determination to conduct a campaign of ideas.
Will Barack Obama’s innate likability turn out to be the decisive factor that keeps him in the White House?
In a range of different realms, prominent people fell victim recently to their own controversial comments and associations, illustrating the application of political correctness at both its most appropriate and most oppressive.