From the Left to the Right

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House, President Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Newt Gingrich”, “Speaker of the House”, “President Clinton”, “Obama, Pelosi, and Reid”

You can also read this blog at “Your Hub”, which is part of The Denver Post online, at Your Hub. Next, scroll down or “Edit/Find” the word, “blog”.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

NM State of the State Reminds Me

Written : Jan. 30, 2011

New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez (R-NM) gave her first State of the State address on January 18, 2011. Not the perfect speaker, she pitched the positive and appeared practically presidential. Sounding a little like no one I've ever heard, her talk rang true. Inspiring, non-partisan, and motivational, she framed the issues and laid a foundation to fix the state’s problems with examples and specific solutions. That, my friends, is what we call Reagan-esque!

Reminiscent of someone we haven’t heard in years, and out of left field, she shocked me by saying she'd cut the state's film subsidy from 25 to 15 percent. What? But then she explained, "When a film is made in the state, New Mexico taxpayers cover 25 percent of the costs." She also said, "I support the film industry and support maintaining the incentive at 15 percent. But in these tough times, when New Mexicans are facing an historic budget deficit, I cannot support subsidizing the expense of Hollywood by cutting programs like child care services for working moms." Nice to hear, right?

Governor Martinez also said, "Unfortunately, some are still pushing tax hikes: Doubling the tax when you buy a car. Taxing job creators. Even taxing the Internet. To make them sound better, some call them 'revenue enhancements.' They can be called many things but they will all be vetoed." I found this statement refreshing, but we have the right to be cynical. We’ve heard it all before. Let's see how she handles the power of the veto pen.

To help address her state's deficit, she spoke about cutting costs "by reducing the governor’s budget. I cut overall salaries within my cabinet by 10 percent. I will reduce the number of political appointees in state government by at least 20 percent." The Governor then widened some eyes when she offered to "cut costs at the Governor’s residence by 55 percent – permanently eliminating the positions of two personal chefs." She added, "The First Gentleman will just have to help out with the cooking." Unfortunately, she flubbed the line, saying it in a way that made me think of the first personal chef! I have to admit I didn’t get it until I read it.

Remember how Nancy Pelosi, when she was Speaker of the House, demanded the use of a large, private jet at the federal government's expense? Well Gov. Martinez said in her State of the State that she "will get rid of that ultimate symbol of waste and excess, we will sell the state’s luxury jet." The Governor of New Mexico is a politician who seems to be aware of what's going on. Her address can be read and heard at: Gov. Martinez' first NM State of the State Address I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Gov. Susana Martinez, New Mexico, State of the State, The First Gentleman, Ronald Reagan

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Gov. Susana Martinez”, “New Mexico”, “State of the State”, “The First Gentleman", “Ronald Reagan “

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

The Great Disguise

Written : Nov. 2, 2010, and Jan. 3-4, 18, and 25, 2011

Liberals say they abhor what they call "the Archie Bunker mentality of bigotry and pig-headedness." And yet, Helen Thomas, a self-proclaimed liberal reporter, said on June 4, 2010, that the Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine," and go back to Germany and Poland. Liberals have always preached that they are the most open-minded of people, but Thomas once said she didn’t have any idea how anyone could ever have a philosophy other than a liberal one. But, of course, how could anyone think differently? (Hold finger horizontally over mouth… moustache!)

Liberals used to stand up for freedom of the press (as expressed in the first amendment to our Constitution). Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), (picture him with a beard), said the following this past November, “We need new catalysts for quality news and entertainment programming. I hunger for quality news. I’m tired of the right and the left. There’s a little bug inside of me which wants the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, ‘Out. Off. End. Good-bye.’ This [the stifling of free expression] “would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and, more importantly, in their future." In addition, left-wing National Public Radio (NPR) fired pundit Juan Williams for saying what was on his mind on FOX news. It seems that instead of supporting free speech, liberals are now champions of censorship.

It was suggested by Al Sharpton that former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) made a racist comment when he spoke last week about President Obama’s suggestion that answering questions about abortion were above his paygrade. Santorum referred to a statement in the U.S. Constitution regarding slaves being counted as three fifths of a person. Comparing it to the ‘when does life begin’ question, the former Pennsylvania Senator merely said that blacks should be particularly sensitive when declarations are made about which groups of people are considered people and which are not. Some liberals slam comments like Santorum’s, but they can say nearly anything without suffering any consequence. For example, during the 2010 campaign, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), (climbing into Red Riding Hood’s bed), said, ”I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic origin could be a Republican.” No one in our liberal media batted an eye!

(And, they hide behind a curtain…) Liberals say they favor openness and transparency, and yet Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said of the Health Care bill, "... You have to pass the bill to see what's in it..." Voila!

Well-meaning Americans, who want their country to stop spending money it doesn’t have, demonstrated peacefully all over this country in 2010. So, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (wearing some strange mask,) said this of the Tea Party: "I think they’re Astroturf… You be the judge. "They’re carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare." But they didn’t do any such thing.

Perhaps you believe that liberals are as open-minded as they’ve proclaimed. Or, were you tricked by their disguise, as I once was?

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, No Labels, The Tea Party, Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Juan Williams, Archie Bunker

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “No Labels”, “The Tea Party”, “Nancy Pelosi”, “Sen. Jay Rockefeller”, “Juan Williams”, “Archie Bunker"

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Dealing with Mental Illness

Written : Jan. 18, 2011

The Jan. 8, 2011 shooting rampage in Tucson, Arizona has prompted many of us to think about how to prevent such a tragedy from happening again. Let’s assume that guns will not be outlawed, as two prominent liberals have done. I usually don’t agree with radio talk show host Ed Schultz, or with liberal TV pundit Dylan Ratigan, but they were both correct as each focused on mental illness during their shows last week. Their assumption about guns was based upon the strength of the gun lobby, but my argument is that guns don’t kill, people do. As New York Post columnist S.E. Cupp said, similar acts of violence primarily occur in gun-free zones, such as schools. When weapons are fired at a gun show, as S.E. says, the other side may have an argument worthy of consideration.

Accused Tucson shooter Jared Loughner was allegedly face to face with Pima County deputies several times prior to the Jan. 8 episode at the Safeway shopping center. He was also turned away by his college and by the military. Why are people who exhibit signs of dangerous behavior before they commit crimes, able to purchase guns so easily? Could we value people’s personal rights over the safety of others? Is this something we should reconsider? We want a quicker diagnosis of people with mental illness, but should a person see a psychiatrist at the suggestion of someone he or she doesn’t know?

Would it be fair if someone accused you of mental imbalance, and as a result you were imprisoned or committed to an institution? We don’t want that to happen, but we might want to prevent someone rejected by the military to experience a delay in purchasing a firearm. Perhaps someone who confronted law enforcement in their past might need additional time added onto his or her waiting period.

Let’s not be silly here and accuse anyone for stoking violence with images of targets. Both sides have used military terminology to describe their struggle for votes. Let’s not stoke fears about guns for political gain. You may recall that Juan Williams was fired from NPR when he said that he’d be afraid on an airplane if he saw someone dressed in Muslim garb. Yet, last week Tom Brokaw, the former NBC News anchor, said that with the current Arizona gun laws, he’d be afraid to go into any bar in that state. No, he shouldn’t be fired, but do statements like his effectively deal with the mental health issues raised by the recent violence in Tucson?

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Tucson Tragedy, Mental Illness, S.E. Cupp, Jared Loughner, Ed Schultz, Dylan Ratigan

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Rep. Gabrielle Giffords”, “Tucson Tragedy”, “Mental Illness”, “S.E. Cupp”, “Jared Loughner”, “Ed Schultz”, “Dylan Ratigan"

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Tucson Tragedy – Jumping to Conclusions

Written : Jan. 11, 2011

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) was the most famous of the victims of the shooting rampage, which occurred on Jan. 8, 2011 in Pima County, Arizona. I hope she – and all the other survivors - make a swift and complete recovery. My prayers go out to all those wounded, and I wish to convey my heart-felt condolences to the families of the murdered victims. This was a senseless tragedy, but not everyone thought so shortly after it occurred. It’s a shame that so many placed blame right away, adding fuel to the tense national political climate.

Markos Moulitsas, founder of the left-wing Daily Kos blog site, tweeted the following, just over two hours after the tragedy, "Mission accomplished, Sarah Palin." Liberal Paul Krugman blamed conservative rhetoric about three hours after Giffords had been shot. He posted, “We don’t have proof yet that this was political [implying a crazy conservative shot a liberal], but the odds are that it was.” But it turns out it wasn’t. The alleged shooter, Jared Loughner, was described later as a left-wing pothead. (Conservatives are not pointing fingers, by the way.) However, Pima County’s Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, a Democrat, prematurely implied that right-wing hate speech was to blame for this shooting. But it wasn’t. Loughner, it turns out, was a disturbed individual, someone not interested in politics. Why do liberals always jump to blame conservatives in similar matters? Why can’t they wait to see what motivates people?

For a long time politicians have used rhetoric and metaphor to enhance their chances in elections. Googling “target republicans” returns almost 16 thousand hits. Try “republicans in the crosshairs,” and you get 31,800 hits. Leave out the quotes and you get many more. Yet, Democrats have said (and mainstream media reporters have implied, and liberals Kathy Griffin and Jane Fonda have tweeted) that Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) is responsible for the Tucson murders by creating a map of districts ‘targeted’ for Republican victory in the last election. Their problem is that images of cross-hairs appeared on her map. One of those districts belonged to Ms. Giffords. Palin did not mean that any Democrats were targets for assassination; they were merely important districts for Republicans to win. How ultra-sensitive we have become!

I wish my liberal friends would realize they are ratcheting up the rhetoric when they suggest that conservatives are to blame. In 2006, a debate over trying President Bush and Vice President Cheney for war crimes was big in the old media. At least one movie was made depicting Bush’s fictional assassination, and t-shirts were made with “Kill Bush” in prominent, bold letters. Protesters carried signs, which said, “Bush, the only dope worth shooting.” Posters were made showing his decapitated head with blood dripping from his neck. How do you think that made his supporters feel? Was that not too extreme? President Obama said, "If they [the Republicans] bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun," in 2008. He added fuel to the fire in 2010 by saying the Republicans were hostage takers and by telling Hispanic voters to vote against their ‘enemies.’ Although both sides are to blame, liberals have peddled this kind of rhetoric more than conservatives. Just listen to Randi Rhodes and Ed Schultz on progressive-talk radio!

Concerning the tragedy in Tucson, liberals will bring up the second amendment, the right to bear arms, and they’ll say something like, “This incident illustrates why we have to ban guns.” But it’s a smoke screen. The real issue is how we treat mental illness when we see it. How do we decide who is mentally ill, and when? Guns don’t kill people, people kill people and we need to formulate a method for identifying potential madmen. There’s a way to do it without making it into a Salem witch-hunt. This is something America will have to deal with, and soon.

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Tucson Tragedy, Markos Moulitsas, Jared Loughner, Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, Sarah Palin, Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Rep. Gabrielle Giffords”, “Tucson Tragedy”, “Markos Moulitsas”, “Jared Loughner”, “Sheriff Clarence Dupnik”, “Sarah Palin”, “Randi Rhodes”, “Ed Schultz"

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

No Labels II

Written : Dec. 31, 2010

The philosophy of the No Labels movement is a thoughtful one. It’s based in understanding and kindness. No Labels believes in not forgetting about, but putting aside our labels (such as Democrat, Republican and Independent) in order for the Congress to do the work of the people in Washington, D.C. They say, “Not left, not right, but forward.”

Former Representative Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN) wrote an article for the Washington Post on Dec. 31, 2010 outlining five tips for what new members of Congress need to consider as they join their respective Houses in early January, 2011. One of these is: "...real leaders aren't afraid to compromise." He further states that the newly elected (mostly Republican) leaders should not "...allow party orthodoxy or leaders' expectations to stop you from doing what's in the best interests of your constituents and the country." He's right, of course, and No Labels has many supporters.

But, one must ask: Where was former Representative Ford's bipartisan sentiment when Democrats called for a criminal investigation of the entire Bush Administration for war crimes and the like? Where was Mr. Ford when Senator Harry Reid squinted his eyes, and with anger in his voice said the Democrats wouldn't let President Bush fix Social Security? Compromise was not in the cards in those days!

Was Congressman Ford sleeping when Nancy Pelosi called President Bush "a total failure" in 2008? Or when Senate and House Democrats created the 2,000+ page Health Care bill in the dead of night without consulting the Republicans? Or when President Obama told the Republicans, "I won," to indicate to Republicans they would be shut out of the discussion on the Health Care bill if they didn't support his agenda? Where was he when the Speaker said, "If the election results close one door to reforming the health-care system, you go to the gate; if the gate's locked, you climb over the fence; if it's too high, you pole-vault in; and if that doesn't work, you parachute in?" Was Rep. Ford absent when the Dems rammed the unread and non-debated Health Care bill through without a single Republican vote? Why does his article appear now?

Even after their loss of over 60 seats in the House and after the creation of the No Labels movement, the Democrats kept the lame duck session of Congress open and in a partisan manner pushed many pieces of legislation through. The Republicans were voted in and will now be in charge of the House of Representatives. Therefore, one must wonder: After all the partisan bickering since the Democrats took over in 2006, why is everyone suddenly calling for bipartisanship?

After saying all of this I still believe each side needs to listen to the other, and we do need to work together to solve America's problems. But remember, in the event of a tie, we won!

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, No Labels, The Tea Party, Nancy Jacobson, John Avlon, William A. Galston

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “No Labels”, “The Tea Party”, “Nancy Jacobson”, “John Avlon”, “William A. Galston"

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

No Labels

Written : Dec. 28, 2010

Let me introduce the No Labels movement to you. They say, “We are Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who are united in the belief that we do not have to give up our labels, merely put them aside to do what’s best for America.” Sounds nice, doesn’t it? And, as I suggest in my book, From the Left to the Right, we need to lower the level of vitriol in our political dialogue, while adding a large dose of civility at the same time. They apparently agree, and I like their slogan, “Not left, not right, forward.” Cumbaya so far!

I find this movement intriguing, yet somewhat disturbing. Let me say first that none of the following items - by themselves - is any big deal. First of all, No Labels was kicked off on Dec. 13, 2010, at Columbia University in New York City, both bastions of liberalism. Secondly, any party, or ideology, which gets bashed in a national election, seems to start a ‘movement’ after their defeat. The Democrats just got throttled, so I have to ask myself if this is their movement. Thirdly, this centrist movement seems to be an extension of the Coffee Party, which was formed to counteract the Tea Party. Anything that distracts from the Tea Party in my opinion, is a detriment to our country, and no one even mentioned the Tea Party in the initial meeting of No Labels. In addition, the founders of No Labels are mostly left leaning, former Democratic Party operatives. Lastly, most of those who spoke at their first meeting were liberals and/or Democrats.

The group has some good ideas, but as with anything new, we need to be a little skeptical. Remember the brutal resistance the Tea Party encountered when it was first formed? Is No Labels a genuine and dedicated group of Americans who will really put partisan politics aside and work for the benefit of our country? Or, is this a slick group of liberals who are angry they were trounced in the last election and have a left-wing agenda to carry out? Time will tell…

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, No Labels, The Tea Party, Nancy Jacobson, John Avlon, William A. Galston

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “No Labels”, “The Tea Party”, “Nancy Jacobson”, “John Avlon”, “William A. Galston"

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Responsibility vs. Morality

Written : Dec. 21, 2010

David Gregory of Meet the Press quoted President Obama from his book, Audacity of Hope, on the Dec. 19, 2010 show. Mr. Obama found the Bush tax rates for the wealthy “morally troubling.” Vice President Joe Biden said, “They are.” Mr. Biden insisted that he and President Obama still believe lower rates for the rich are immoral.

Bill O’Reilly took a more sensible view on his own show a day later. Bill feels it’s immoral for the responsible to pay for the irresponsible. O’Reilly believes the responsible can support others if they so choose, but it should not be an imperative set in place by the government. I agree, it should be up to us as to what we share, and not up to someone else’s arbitrary view of morality. Should others tell you what to do?

As one TV commentator puts it, “How much is too much?” Rich people pay about 70% of all U.S. taxes, depending upon how you define ‘rich.’ Their individual tax rates can be as high as 60%, if you include state, local, and sales taxes to federal. If taxes are to be raised on upper-income people, what is the appropriate rate? Do we try 80%? Why is that fair, and how do we know they are not already investing the extra 20% in stocks or in some form of business? Therefore, how can we assume they are not already creating or maintaining jobs for some of us? Wouldn’t it be suicide for us to pull the rug out from under them?

The Vice President said he and The President broke their campaign promise on letting the Bush cuts expire, and supported the recently passed the tax compromise bill only to help the middle class. This bill extends the Bush-era tax cuts for every American for another two years. Does he not realize that the struggle is and should be an individual one, and not based upon one’s economic class? Vice President Biden wants to revisit raising taxes on entrepreneurs prior to the next presidential election. Does he not understand that this is a recipe for disaster for his party? I guess not!

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Vice President Biden, President Obama, tax compromise, Bill O’Reilly, Meet the Press, David Gregory

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Vice President Biden”, “President Obama”, “tax compromise”, “Bill O’Reilly”, “Meet the Press”, “David Gregory"

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Grover Norquist, Part II

Written : Dec. 7, 2010

…continued from last week…

The spectacular appearance of Grover Norquist on Washington Journal on Dec. 5, 2010 is worth discussing some more. He said that President Obama’s so-called stimulus package cost $800 billion, which led to higher unemployment, lower growth, and made the economy worse. How can you disagree?

Host Pedro Echevarria said the New York Times recently listed how much extending the Bush Tax Cuts could cost - and what it might yield for the U.S. if not extended. Each household over $250K would get an extra $25K annually if continued, while if the cuts expire, the Government would receive about $60 billion in revenue. The NYT suggested the $60 billion could buy - for example - a tripling of federal funding for research, or universal pre-school for 3- and 4-year-olds, or a much bigger troop surge in Afghanistan, etc. Mr. Echevarria asked Grover Norquist to respond.

The founder of Americans for Tax Reform surprised me with a little more excitement. “I don’t care what greedy politicians [want to do with] your income!” He then said that the NYT and the federal government play God and they think we’re wasting our money on our families. Norquist argued that we could spend it better. “The whole idea of the Tea Party was: You know what, Washington, you can’t spend my money better than I can and second of all, it’s not your money!”

Mr. Norquist continued, “The King wants the peasant’s money and he thinks the peasants are wasting it… It’s not the King’s money, it’s the American peoples’ money. We don’t have peasants in this country: We are citizens. …The nerve of the New York Times to announce: ‘Let me walk through your house and take things out...’ It’s not their job!”

Grover Norquist concluded, “Where was the NYT when we spent $800 billion on the so-called stimulus package…?” He then used an analogy. Take a cup to a lake and fill it with water. Next, walk around to the other side of the lake and dump the water in the cup back into the lake. And the so-called stimulus did it 800 billion times. Norquist suggested that Keynesian economics says if you take $1 from someone and give it to someone else it stimulates the economy. Doesn’t it seem like a silly idea?

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform, President Obama, Tax Compromise, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Grover Norquist”, “Americans for Tax Reform”, “President Obama”, “Tax Compromise”, “Nancy Pelosi”, “Harry Reid"

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Grover Norquist, Part I

Written : Dec. 7, 2010

Did you catch Grover Norquist on Washington Journal on Dec. 5, 2010? Fortunately, I did. Mr. Norquist is the head of Americans for Tax Reform, and he was stellar on CSPAN!

According to Mr. Norquist, the Dems would like to make you believe they urgently want to extend the current tax rates for some but not for all. “Think about that,” he said. Democrats have had a majority in Congress for years (since 2006) and they’ve never even written a bill to extend the rates for anyone! “Not for poor people, not for middle-income people, for no one.” So, Mr. Norquist argued: President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Sen. Harry Reid have gotten up every morning and never lifted a finger to extend these tax cuts. The concept that they have a burning desire to extend the lower rates for anyone is nonsense. They were hoping they could let the Bush cuts expire, but they were beaten in the last election.

He explains my position beautifully. Grover Norquist painted a verbal picture of the President standing in front of businesses with a sledgehammer. Since Norquist’s appearance on this program, the Congress and the President have compromised on an extension of the cuts for two years. But he was prepared for the circumstance. Mr. Norquist said that President Obama would say to businesses, “We’re not going to smash you in the face now, we’re going to smash you in the face in two years.”

Norquist maintains, “Do you think investors and businesses [are going to say] that’s great, we’re going to build a new factory because we’re protected for two years? And then you hit us in the side of the head? No. Temporary tax cuts don’t have the incentives…that people face.” He says that the President’s plan is to make the change temporary, and then cause them to expire after he gets re-elected.

Grover Norquist concluded that since the cuts are not permanent now, we have to replace President Obama “in two years with a president who respects that when people earn money, it belongs to them [and] not to some greedy politician....” Well put, man!

...to be continued next week…

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

How Conservatives Can Win in 2012

Written : Nov. 29, 2010

We'll need to screen our candidates more carefully for the 2012 presidential election. What do I mean? The Republican Party will need to do its homework. Christine O'Donnell (R-DE) was a disappointment because once she unseated the incumbent Mike Castle (R-DE) she could not beat the Democrat in the general election. She was qualified enough from my perspective, but there was one skeleton too many in her closet. The media exploited it and she looked silly. Her “I’m not a witch” ad didn’t help, either. Our biased media has done the same thing with Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK). She'll make a wonderful distraction and should take all the flak in 2012, but I believe she can't win at this stage.

Rep. Sharron Angle (R-NV) was tough enough and said the right things to beat Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), but she could not overcome the machine. The twisted media blurred Ms. Angle’s message. Her strange facial expressions and imperfect speaking style were accentuated and therefore, she could not win. If you’re a Republican you must project a perfect image.

In contrast, when a Democrat is weird, the media makes him (or her) seem likeable. Take Alvin Greene (D-SC), for example. He was completely off his rocker and as unqualified as any candidate who ever ran for office, but the media portrayed him as just a tad nutty, and Keith Olbermann took him ever so seriously. We didn't know anything about President Obama (D-IL) as he entered the 2008 presidential race, but the lame-stream media ignored it for 'hope and change.' However, they sent teams of reporters to Alaska to dig up any dirt they could find on Sarah Palin. I ask you, how fair was that?

In 2012, I want candidates who can stand up to the media's standard for Republicans. If that makes me a sell-out, then fine, but whomever runs must win. They have to be well spoken, presentable - but not too beautiful or too handsome, they can't appear odd in any way, and they have to limit the gaffs. Let's play this one by their rules. Of course, our candidates must show leadership, stand for the right policies, and they must be capable of reversing the damage done to our country by the current administration. And, no more bowing to world leaders!

Who qualifies? These potential candidates: Senator-elect Rand Paul (R-KY), Gov.-elect Nikki Haley (R-SC), Rep.-elect Allen West (R-FL), Senator-elect Marco Rubio (R-FL), Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), Rep.-elect Kristi Noem (R-SD), Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ), and Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) are among the least likely to be unfairly tarnished by today's partisan media. They have the fewest negatives and the most positives, unless someone else emerges. Did I leave anyone out?

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Airport Security Scans, Airport Pat Down, Airport Searches, TSA, frisk, pat down, search

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Airport Security Scans”, “Airport Pat Down”, “Airport Searches”, “TSA”, “frisk”, “pat down”, “search"

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Scan Me, Bro

Written : Nov. 23, 2010

Imagine this scenario. A Mexican, after a long walk through treacherous terrain, tries to get into the U.S. He is stopped at the border and his body is scanned for contraband. Next he is patted-down rather briskly by a male U.S. border guard. They find nothing. He is given forms and is urged to apply for citizenship. Then he is fingerprinted and is free to follow his American dream.

Back in Phoenix, a suspect is caught after a fifty-mile car chase. He is tackled immediately after fleeing his vehicle. The man is frisked and two weapons are removed from his pockets. He’s arrested and is headed to jail.

At the airport, you are going through security. The airline knows you are a U.S. citizen, and have been employed by your company for several years. You are not connected to any terrorist groups. Your carry-on gets scanned, but you are exempt. So, which of these situations require pat downs? Yes, you’re right, the first two. You do not need to be scanned or patted down because the Transportation Security Administration (the TSA) did a little homework. Imagine that.

What if it didn’t work that way? Which method would I prefer? If I didn’t travel often, I’d prefer the body scan. Who cares if someone sees this ugly body? If I traveled often I’d worry about radiation, but I don’t. All the worry and the protests occurring today associated with invasive touching in the name of security could be avoided if the TSA would peer into who is flying. But they won’t.

The Israelis know who their passengers are and scrutinize their terminals intently. El Al Airlines is known as the world’s most secure airline. Their passengers are all interviewed and are asked to report to the airport three hours early. The TSA would rather suspect you of terrorism than following the fine example set by the Israelis. I wonder why, don’t you?

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

When We Say / Who Are We?

Written : Nov. 15, 2010

When we say Walmart and Sears are evil for deciding to remain open on a holiday like Thanksgiving, who are we to decide that ALL their employees want to be home when everyone else celebrates? We can agree that businesses shouldn’t force their people to work a holiday, but those who want to work should go to the head of the class and get the chance. And, if we boycott these companies, aren’t we also hurting their employees in the long run?

When we say the idle rich should pay their fair share, who are we to say which people are ‘idle?’ For example, how do we know whether Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton are not earning their keep? Who are we to say what they can and cannot afford? Who are we to say they don't have solid investments in our economy? Do you think we should penalize the successful among us? If that be the case, why try to succeed? God bless the successful, for they are the ones who create jobs!

When we say corporations never pay any taxes, aren’t we being stubborn? I’ll argue they do pay some taxes. But we’ll agree on this - they'll pass along any future increases to you and me. If we decrease their taxes in an economy in which businesses have confidence, what happens? Ok, in addition to doling out those horrid bonuses we all despise, they absolutely will invest more in jobs and new equipment (expansion, growth, more jobs, fewer handouts, more taxes being paid at the lower rates). That’s good for everyone, right?

When we say higher taxes mean higher federal revenues, aren’t we ignorant by not analyzing the idea? Aren’t we repeating a mantra? Presidents Ronald Reagan (and JFK, a liberal Democrat) understood this theory: If you cut tax rates (taxes were topping out at 91% when JFK cut rates to 37%), revenue to the feds goes UP. This is not intuitive, nor is it a wacky idea: it is indeed a solid fact. My intelligent reader, please take a minute to think about why!

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, When We Say, The Idle Rich, Reducing Taxes, Raising Taxes, Ronald Reagan, JFK

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “When We Say”, “The Idle Rich”, “Reducing Taxes”, “Raising Taxes”, “Ronald Reagan”, “JFK"

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

The Party of No

Written : Nov. 7 and 9, 2010

You’ve probably heard Democrats say, “The Republican Party is the Party of No.” But do you really believe it? This slogan is really a fabrication created by the Democrats. Recently Senator John Kerry (D-MA) said, “…people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth...” In this case, I agree.

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate Majority Leader, said this in one speech in 2005: "And we're not going to let President Bush and the Republicans weaken the most successful social program in the history of the world."

Reid showed both arrogance and anger in his opposition to President Bush’s innovative idea to allow the younger contributors of Social Security to manage their own money with stocks and bonds if they so desired. Don’t you remember? "We're going to stand united against privatization,” he said, with a crinkled brow, a frown, and eyes squinting.

"But first it means doing everything we can, every waking minute, to make sure that George Bush finally hears the message that you've delivered today: Stop trying to privatize Social Security." Senator Reid would not even consider a debate about the plan. Or a tweak. It was just plain old, “NO!”

"It may take 60 days, it may take six months, it may take six years, but it doesn't matter, we're not going to back down." Yes, Harry Reid said it. He also said, "Well, as you see here today, Democrats are ready to fight!" Why fight, why not debate?

Harry Reid added, "The Bush plan would take our already record high $4.3 trillion debt and put us another $2 trillion in the red. That’s an immoral burden to place on the backs of the next generation." Meanwhile, he was in charge of the U.S. Senate and his Democratic Party held a huge majority when the national debt soared from under $9 trillion to almost $14 trillion. I guess there are times when it’s ok to increase the burden on our children and grandchildren. To see the current national debt (careful, it may scare you) click on this URL: U.S. Debt

In 2010, Pelosi and Reid oppose the extension of the Bush tax cuts. In other words, they blindly oppose anything with the name “Bush” on it. Seriously, they are for increasing taxes on the highest earners in society. You know, the ones who create jobs… Can’t they keep what they earn? Pelosi and Reid say, “NO!”

Truth be told, the Republican Party is really the party of "know." See: Party of Know

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Senator Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Party of No, Party of Know

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Senator Harry Reid”, “Speaker Nancy Pelosi”, “Party of No”, “Party of Know"

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

NOW (The National Organization for Liberal Women)

Written : Oct. 19 and 31, 2010

NOW says it's the National Organization for Women, but is it? Defenders say it stood up for Chelsea Clinton when MSNBC’s David Shuster commented on the time she campaigned for her mom. He said, "Chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way...” NOW and other groups called on NBC president Steve Capus to do something and he suspended Shuster. NOW called for a boycott of Glenn Beck when he called Mary Landrieu a prostitute for taking the Lousiana Purchase deal in exchange for her vote on the recent health care bill. That's standing up for women, isn't it? So what's the problem?

NOW’s motto is ‘taking action for women’s equality since 1966,’ but does it take action for all women? NOW Endorsed Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL 8), but he once called one of Ben Bernanke's aides a “K Street whore.” NOW endorsed Jerry Brown (D-CA) for California Governor over Meg Whitman (R-CA) one day after a Brown aide called Whitman a whore. Brown was heard on a recording then implying his campaign could ‘use that.’ Why did NOW only scold Brown - and maintain their support for him?

NOW endorsed N.Y. Senator Hilary Clinton in 2008 , but Sarah Palin (R-AK) was savaged by the media during the same presidential campaign. A demeaning photo was even taken through Palin's legs and it made news. Why did NOW say and do nothing?

Go to NOW's PAC site and see which Republican candidates are supported. There are none, although there are many fine, Republican women candidates running. Does it make you wonder if NOW really supports all women?

But things will change. Lifelong Democrat Shelly Mandell, the President of the NOW chapter in Los Angeles, CA, spoke at a Sarah Palin rally and spoke of Palin to the crowd, "America, this is what a feminist looks like." There's hope. Eventually everyone will recognize that conservative women are also pioneers making progress!

For more information about Mark A. Cohen, see The Castle Rock, CO Gathering Place, Writer of the Month for Nov. 2010

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, NOW, National Organization for Women, Sarah Palin, Shelly Mandell

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “NOW", "National Organization for Women", "Sarah Palin", "Shelly Mandell"

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Supporting Juan

Written : Oct. 26, 2010

When does political correctness become censorship? When you say what you and others feel when people dressed in Muslim garb appear on an airplane. We mentally associate 9/11 with Muslims, but why can’t we say it? All the 9/11 hijackers were Muslims, but not all Muslims are hijackers: we get it.

NPR fired one of their best people, Juan Williams, for expressing a similar opinion while appearing on The O’Reilly Factor last week. A Muslim group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which I blogged about on Jan. 19, 2010, said they were insulted by Mr. Williams’ comments. NPR, in a fit of Islamophobia (fear of Muslims and/or what they might do to retaliate), got rid of him.

Juan Williams is a liberal who has often appeared on FOX News’ shows. I found him irritating at times, but he was always fair and thoughtful, and he was never a demagogue. I’ve enjoyed hearing Mr. Williams’ and other liberals’ views, expressed on the only conservative-leaning TV news channel you can find, anywhere. It would be quite boring to hear only conservative opinions expressed over and over, wouldn’t it?

NPR, a liberal organization, doesn’t agree…apparently. Liberals define themselves as open-minded, but many left-wingers tend to ignore, avoid, or react in anger to opinions with which they don’t agree. Just ask Joy Behar and Whoopee Goldberg. See the U-tube walk-off here: Bill O’Reilly on The View, Oct. 14, 2010 (Skip to the 5-minute mark if you are in a hurry.)

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. Once on page 21, go to the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, Juan Williams, FOX News, NPR, Whoopee Goldberg, Joy Behar, The View

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Juan Williams”, “FOX News”, “NPR”, “Whoopee Goldberg”, “Joy Behar”, “The View”

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

My Liberal Friend, You May be a Conservative!

Written : Oct. 11-12, and 19, 2010

Do you believe in individual liberty? Are you in favor of government interference in your life, or do you like to have more choices? In this case, if you side with the people and with choice, you may be a conservative!

Do you dislike “Tax Day?” Do you think that people should not be taxed so much? If so, you may be a conservative!

Are you jealous of rich people, or do you want everyone to succeed, rich and poor alike? If you’re for everyone’s advancement, you may be a conservative!

Do you think America is exceptional, or do you think America’s a bully and should be minimized in the world? If you think America’s a special country, you may be a conservative!

Do you believe that the true definition of the newly coined word, ‘Islamophobia,’ meaning ‘fear of Muslims,’ is best illustrated by an editor’s refusal to publish a cartoon depicting the prophet Mohammed? If so, you may be a conservative!

I heard someone call into the Mike Gallagher show on Sep. 28, 2010, and call a conservative a name like “moronic.” Gallagher challenged the caller and simply asked him why he would call the person a name. The caller responded that anyone who thought that way is a moron. If you think people should not be categorized in this fashion, you may be a conservative!

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. On page 21, at the bottom (scroll down), it shows and points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, You May be a Conservative

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “You May be a Conservative”

You can also read this blog at “Your Hub”, which is part of The Denver Post online, at Your Hub. Next, scroll down or “Edit/Find” the word, “blog”.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

A Clear Choice

Written : Oct. 11-12, 2010

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has an idea. On Oct. 6, 2010, she said she learned this at a hearing: The quickest way to create jobs is to provide more funding for food stamps and to provide unemployment insurance for those who need it. She said it, really! Newt Gingrich, a former Speaker, has a firm understanding that jobs are created when businesses are empowered by fewer restrictions and by lower taxes. This is why Gingrich cleverly coined the phrases “Party of Food Stamps” for Democrats, and “The Paycheck Party” for Republicans during this election cycle.

I’m not gloating here. I wish liberals understood the idea that businesses do not create jobs when they are profitless, but most can’t or won’t comprehend it. Democrats, including our president, are running with the idea that we have to take a good portion of the profits of businesses away and hand them over to the ‘people.’ But, this business model never works.

In an Oct. 5, 2010 debate with Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Linda McMahon (R-CT) boiled the essence of the upcoming midterm elections down to its barest bone. She asked him, "How do you create a job?" And he took the bait. Blumenthal looked befuddled. He used double-talk to zig and zag his way through, and most of the time he said nothing. Toward the end of his talk he mentioned that government programs were the way to create jobs through “creative” and “buy America” policies.

Like a breath of fresh air, McMahon’s answer stood out. “Government does not create jobs. It's very simple how you create jobs. An entrepreneur takes a risk. He or she believes that he creates goods or service that is sold for more than it costs to make it. If an entrepreneur believes he can do that, he creates a job.” There you go. On Election Day our choice could not be clearer, could it?

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Conservative Blogs Central. On page 21, at the bottom (scroll down), it points back to this blog.

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From the Left to the Right, Creating a Job, How to create a job, Linda McMahon, Richard Blumenthal, Newt Gingrich

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Creating a Job”, “How to create a job”, “Linda McMahon”, “Richard Blumenthal”, “Newt Gingrich”

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Playing a Joke on Congress

Written : Sep. 28, 2010

Isn’t it funny? Stephen Colbert (pronounced Cole-bear), the political satirist and comedian, testified in front of Congress on Sep. 24. He usually puts on a persona and imitates what he imagines is a Bill O’Reilly-like character. At times he makes me laugh, but when watching him I always keep in mind that he’s a liberal who is pushing a liberal agenda, don’t you? Colbert used his one day of experience picking corn as justification to appear on behalf of migrant farm workers.

He stayed in character, though, while testifying in front of the Senate subcommittee. That prompted John Conyers (D-MI), to ask Mr. Colbert to leave. However, the chairwoman and the member who invited him, Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), let Colbert give his sarcastic, comedic performance in front of our lawmakers and the camera. And, you, the taxpayer, paid for it.

One wonders what Lofgren was trying to accomplish by having a comedian entertain at a hearing. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), who has enjoyed his multiple appearances on Colbert’s TV show “The Colbert Report (pronounced Re-pore),” says Colbert is the best “fake newsman” around. Chaffetz also said that if we’re going to hold a fake hearing, “I guess that’s the best way to do it.”

Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA) said that Colbert’s appearance was “appropriate.” If anyone can speak for the Democratic Party, it’s the Speaker of the House. The Democratic Congress does not seem to respect our institutions: they don’t take the Senate seriously. Do you think paying for a comedian to speak before Congressmen or Senators is a good use of U.S. taxpayers’ money? What if your taxes were spent for a conservative to testify with sarcasm? He’d be given the opportunity to crack jokes, spout his views, push his political agenda, and try to influence our lawmakers. Would you support such an event? I don’t think it’s the right thing to do to let anyone abuse and make a mockery of our political system.

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, Comedy Central, Bill O’Reilly, John Conyers, Zoe Lofgren

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “Stephen Colbert”, “Jon Stewart”, “The Colbert Report”, “Comedy Central”, “Bill O’Reilly”, “John Conyers”, “Zoe Lofgren”

You can also read this blog at “Your Hub”, which is part of The Denver Post online, at Your Hub. Next, scroll down or “Edit/Find” the word, “blog”.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Social Security and FDR’s Grandson

Written : Sep. 14 and 21, 2010

James Roosevelt Jr., a grandson of U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, appeared on CSPAN on 8/26/10, and spoke at the National Press Club about Social Security. Roosevelt is a staunch defender of the same program his grandfather is credited with starting. He said it’s not in danger [chuckle]. However, he suggested it would be able to provide about 75% of benefits after 2037. To put his comment in perspective, my children will retire (near age 70) around the year 2060, and I want them to receive 100% of what they’ll be owed. The way to pay for it, Roosevelt said, is to raise taxes on everyone across the board with a one percent FICA tax increase on workers and employers, and a higher estate tax on wealthy people. Do you really want more new taxes? I don’t!

FDR’s grandson said the enemies of Social Security want to privatize it, yet he suggested that the fund should be able to invest in private companies (just as many plans do today). James Roosevelt justified his version of privatization by saying that in his plan the risk would be spread over time.

Roosevelt’s predictable positions are full of holes. For example, I am not “an enemy,” and yet I want to allow recipients who are around 20-30 years old now to have the choice to invest their shares in market funds or stocks, as they see fit. They should not be forced into any similar plan, but they should be given a chance to make such a decision. What’s wrong with that? Shouldn’t each person take responsibility for the management of his or her own account? Ah, freedom!

The concern many have over the current Social Security fund is that the huge pile of money has been and is used to pay for other government programs. I don’t think the folks running the U.S. should be using our money in that manner, do you?

BLOG ROLL:

BLOG-PING SITES:

Keywords: Conservatism, Conservative blog, politics, political, Mark Cohen, Mark A. Cohen, From The Left to the Right, James Roosevelt Jr., Social Security, FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, FICA

Keyword Phrases: "Conservatism", "Conservative", "blog", "politics", "political", "Mark Cohen", "Mark A. Cohen", "From The Left to the Right ", “James Roosevelt Jr.”, “Social Security”, “FDR”, “Franklin Delano Roosevelt,” “FICA”

You can also read this blog at “Your Hub”, which is part of The Denver Post online, at Your Hub. Next, scroll down or “Edit/Find” the word, “blog”.