That America created only 88,000 jobs in March, less than half the number anticipated, was jolting news, indicating the recovery that the White House has boasted about may not be at hand.
Were a rational person given the assignment to search this planet to find the best place for human beings to live and build wealth, he might well settle on San Joaquin County, Calif.
Not so long ago in this republic, most parents of school-age children would frequently visit grocery stores where they would use their own money to buy things like peanut butter and jelly, and bologna and cheese to make lunches for their kids to haul to school in brown paper bags.
It would be difficult to expand the food stamp program (officially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP) much further.
In an early strategic preparation for the struggle to avoid the fiscal cliff, the president and several Democratic luminaries decided to redefine as essential several entitlement programs. In an old fashioned way of manipulating the public, they began to redefine commonly held beliefs. In the interest of time, we will share only one example.
Throughout the presidential campaign, Republican candidates pointed to the number of food stamp recipients -- increasing from 33 million people in 2009 to 43 million in 2012 -- as a sign that poverty had skyrocketed under President Obama. But a new study suggests that the reason there has been such an increase in food stamp recipients during the last four years is even more pernicious.
A Psalm of Obama (To be sung by children, K-12, every morning of their seven-day school week.)*
The left-wing media went wild after the election when analysis showed that many poorer Americans supported President Obama and entitlements could have been a major reason why. Liberals always like to think of themselves as noble, and the thought that some vote-buying could have occurred is deeply offensive to them. Nevertheless, the facts speak for themselves.
Four years into the Obama Administration, Democratic Party leadership realized that it needed Republicans; not for their ideas or even for their votes. They need the tax revenue suppliers to fund their Keynesian aspirations.
Have you heard the rumor that the number of food stamp recipients has increased during President Obama’s term from 28.2 million to 46.6 million? Have you heard that in only three years, the annual cost of the program, which was already astronomical at $35 billion, has soared to $76 billion?
With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy, you just might be a liberal if...
Mitt Romney has conceded that his thoughts, expressed at that Boca Raton, Fla., fundraiser, were "not elegantly" stated. Those mocking him might concede he has tabled one of the mega-issues of our time.
The challenge for modern-day campaigns is that the rapid speed of the news cycle ensures that new news is created on a daily basis, even when it is not really news. Blame the hunger for something novel and fresh that can eat up time on the 24-hour cable news channels.
Newsbusted Conservative Comedy
"Forward" is a perfectly appropriate slogan for progressives. Progress suggests forward or upward motion. That's why revolutionaries and radicals as well as liberal incrementalists have always embraced some derivation of the forward trope. So ingrained are these directional concepts in our political language, we often forget they are mere geographic metaphors applied -- and often misapplied -- to policy disputes.