More myths from 2011 exposed! 3


By Tom Quiner

In my previous post, I presented five myths that worked there way through the nation’s media last year. I barely scratched the surface. Here are five more:

MYTH #6: America suffers from consumer inequality. This is the natural extension of the 1% vs the 99% argument made by the Occupy Wall Street movement. But this isn’t remotely true. I started my business twenty five years ago. My long distance bill dropped from 25 cents per minute to less than a nickel. How? Government broke up the Ma Bell monopoly and unleashed the power of the marketplace. My fist MacIntosh Computer cost over $4000.  Today I own four of them, each thousands of times more powerful than my original at less than half the price.

The Wall Street Journal had a whole article on the subject today on consumer equality. Today, middle America gets plastic surgery, knee replacements, cars loaded with gadgets, big screen televisions and oodles of goodies that were once only available to the rich. Lots of people became wealthy, as they should, through their wonderful innovations, such as the late Steve Jobs. But why should we begrudge them their wealth when we have all benefited? There is more consumer equality than ever when market forces have been allowed to work.

On the other hand, prices have skyrocketed in market segments, such as health insurance and health care, where government has unduly intervened and suppressed (over regulated) the market..

MYTH #7: Newt Gingrich was reprimanded and fined by the House of Representatives. Here are the facts: Mr. Gingrich was charged with 83 ethics violations. Eighty-two of them were dismissed. He was reprimanded for the final infraction and agreed to pay the House $300,000 to cover the cost of the investigation. One year later, the IRS weighed in and said Gingrich did nothing wrong. He was innocent. Candidates who flout Mr. Gingrich’s ethic charges are being dishonest, because Gingrich was exonerated. Whether you like Gingrich or not, let’s shoot straight on this issue and drop it.

MYTH #8: Newt Gingrich served divorce papers on his first wife as she was dying of cancer in the hospital. Mr. Gingrich’s daughter, Jackie Cushman Gingrich, a political columnist, set the record straight. First, her mother didn’t have cancer. Secondly, she wasn’t dying and is still alive today. Thirdly, they had already decided on divorce before she ever entered the hospital. They story is factually incorrect on these three details.

MYTH #9: Barack Obama was alleged to have said: “I only saw Rod Blagojevich one time, and that was in the stands and from a distance at a Chicago Bears Football Game.” Quiner’s Diner posted several photos of President Obama standing next to former Illinois Governor, Rod Blagojevich, a few days ago, suggesting that the quote above was dishonest. One of our readers took us to task and questioned the authenticity of the quote. I tried to track it down and was unable to find the source. I am removing that post with my apologies to the president until someone can verify that the quote isn’t an urban legend.

MYTH #10: Obamanomics works better than Reaganomics. Die-hard leftists believe this. The president and a dwindling number of his party believes this. The media believes it. Most Americans don’t because the data refutes it. For example, when Ronald Reagan took office, the misery index (the unemployment rate added to the inflation rate) stood at a staggering 19.33. By the time he left office, it had fallen to 9.72.

When Barack Obama took office, the misery index stood at 7.83. In his third year in office, it has risen to 12.67.

The Reagan economic recovery averaged 7.1% per year compared to Mr. Obama’s 2.8%.

Unemployment fell 3.3 percentage points during Reagan’s first seven quarters compared to 1.3 for Obama.

Mr. Reagan inherited an economy that was arguably in worse shape than did Mr. Obama. Reagan staked out an approach that was the exact opposite of Obama’s, including lower taxes. deregulation, and tighter monetary policy. It far outperformed the Obama model.

2011 myths exposed! Reply


By Tom Quiner

Joseph Goebbels was Adolph Hitler’s Propaganda Minister. His philosophy was specific:

“Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right.”

Does it sound to you like the ends justify the means from what he is saying? In other words, is it okay to bend the truth or outright lie? Mr. Goebbels expands on his philosophy:

“I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin, and when I speak in Bayreuth, I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall. That is a matter of practice, not of theory. We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses. Propaganda should be popular, not intellectually pleasing. It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths.”

Intellectual truth is not the issue to the propagandist like Mr. Goebbels. It is conquering the broad masses by saying whatever lie will get the job done. He and his boss, Adolph Hitler, were very effective at it. Just watch the video clip above.

That brings me to America in the year 2011. Technology is a wonderful thing, but it has simplified the art of the lie. Many things are said as a fact that may not be true, and is sent around the world in minutes by well-meaning folks who believe it to be true.

Could you imagine the internet in the hands of the Nazis?

It is incumbent on American voters to always seek the truth. Quiner’s Diner tries hard to convey opinions grounded in logic and backed by the truth. Today, I would like to expose some myths that just don’t seem to go away:

MYTH #1: Obama’s stimulus spending was a cost-effective way to create jobs. The White House claims the stimulus created or “saved” 2.4 million jobs in the private and “public” sector at a price tag of $666 billion. The bottom line? The stimulus cost taxpayers $278,000 per job, much of which was borrowed from China. It is far more cost-effective to leave job creation to start-up companies, but that would require more favorable tax policy than Mr. Obama and his party are willing to grant.

MYTH #2: Jane Fonda betrayed American POWS to their North Vietmanese captors. This old story crossed by desk in 2011. The essence: Jane Fonda visited Hanoi in 1972. She was presented with apparently well-treated American POWs. They attempted to secretly pass on to her slips of paper with their social security numbers on them so their family would know they were still alive. Legend has it that Ms. Fonda passed them on to their captors who beat several of them to death. I’m no fan of Ms. Fonda, but it looks like this story is false. Go to the Snopes link above for details.

MYTH #3: The 1% are rich at the expense of the 99%. The suggestion is that the rich are siphoning off wealth from the rest of us. In fact, the “rich” have a shrinking piece of America’s wealth, their share dropping pretty steadily for close to a century. Today, their share is about half of what it was in 1930.

 MYTH #4: America’s deficits are the result of the rich being under taxed. Quiner’s Diner’s famous Federal Spending for Dummies Chart quickly dispels the myth that we have a taxation problem. We have a mammoth spending problem, accelerated under the Bush II years and injected with stimulus-spending steroids under the Obama/Pelosi/Reid years:

MYTH #5: Greedy corporations are the problem. If that’s the case, talk to the 57% of Americans who hold stock in corporations, who depend on their growth and profits to pay for their retirements. The so-called 99% really have an issue with a lot more than 1% of Americans, they have a problem with the investor class, who include firemen, school teachers, and merchants.

[Check back tomorrow for more myths of 2011]

Quiner’s Diner’s top ten posts of 2011 Reply


By Tom Quiner

These were some of the posts that meant the most to me in 2011. If you missed them, you might enjoy catching up.

Thanks for reading. I appreciate it. Happy New Year!

***

10. Three Reasons Pro Abortion Advocates Should Support Defunding Planned Parenthood: Got your attention? There are rational reasons proborts should pull the plug.

9. Courageous Leaders: Presidents Reagan and G.W. Bush made tough decisions that were unpopular in the short run, but vindicated by history:

8. The Unspoken Debate: What is the role of God in American government? I discuss the prevalence of God in our architecture in the nation’s capital:.

7. Should We Err on the Side of Humanity? I present four scenarios when considering the implications of abortion.

6. A Nation of Radical Ideals: Is America exceptional? Gingrich says yes, Obama no.

5. The Contagious Mass Psychosis of 1917: Either a whole lot of folks saw the laws of nature bent, or else thousands suffered from the same contagious mass psychosis.

4. What’s the Solution: Higher Taxes or Spending Restraint? Liberals say we need more taxes, conservatives, less spending. Who is right? Read this post and you will have the definitive answer.

3. Gingrich Offers a Dynamic Pro-Growth Economic Plan: We need Reaganesque economic growth to help tame our deficits and national debt issues, issues which have reached crisis proportions. This piece analyzes why Mr. Gingrich’s approach to taxation and monetary policy would send our economy into overdrive and put people back to work.

2. Peace Begins in the Womb: Peace activists are frequently pro-choice when it comes to abortion issues. I take them to task.

1. In praise of Adolph Hitler: Local liberals were outraged that Dowling Catholic High School in West Des Moines decided not to honor an alum when they learned she had served on Planned Parenthood’s board. I attempt (successfully, I hope) to point out the flaw in their thinking.

Our knowable God 1


By Tom Maly

Jesus leads us to the Father, Abba

Throughout the history of humankind, “god” or “gods,” including the God of the Old Testament, were seen as entities to be feared as they were harsh, judgmental, and punitive.

As we are all aware, there have been numerous occasions where humans were sacrificed to appease those gods.

One of the aspects of the incarnation of Christ, the Son of God, is that God can now be seen and known as a human.  His entire life was a witness to and exemplification of the true nature of the God who created us and all of the universe.  He was as “real” as any other human who lived at that or any other time.  In short, God became imminent, became knowable in an entirely new way.

Paul captures that reality in the reading today from Galatians.

The word Abba, is said to mean “papa” or “daddy,” each of those being very familiar, intimate forms of address.  You will recall that Jews were not to utter or write the name of “God” as it was considered that humans were unworthy to utter that name or that it was somehow disrespectful.  Paul is saying that as adopted daughters and sons, we are invited to be comfortable with a daddy who loves us with an unconditional love, a love beyond any we can imagine as human beings – God is our “daddy”.

In a word, Jesus changed it all.  It is an awesome gift we have been given –praise God!

[Thanks to guest contributor, Deacon Tom Maly, for sharing this reflection.]

Gingrich offers a dynamic pro-growth economic plan Reply


By Tom Quiner

There is only one way Republicans can beat President Obama next year. They must run a pro-growth campaign.

Ronald Reagan did it so beautifully. He appealed to the proven track record of American free markets, limited government and taxation, and the glory of entrepreneurship, which is essentially the exact opposite of the Obama approach.

Independent voters are more suspicious of Republicans, whether that’s fair or not. But they respond overwhelmingly to a positive campaign that sells market-driven pro-growth policies. Again, just look at Ronald Reagan’s success.

Our biggest problem isn’t really the national debt, it is slow economic growth imposed on America by Obamanomics.

Each of the Republican candidates have good ideas to promote growth. In reviewing them, Newt Gingrich has the best plan.

Unlike Mitt Romney or Rick Perry, Mr. Gingrich calls for a return to the monetary policies of the Reagan era that reigned in inflation. The loose money policies of the Obama years weakens the dollar and sets the stage for a hidden tax on Americans: inflation.

If we want to get America’s economy jump-started fast when Mr. Obama leaves office, Gingrich’s approach to lower corporate tax rates will be a God-send to our economy. He proposes a 12.5% rate compared to Perry’s 20%, Romney’s 25%, and Obama’s 35%.

Do you know where most of the new jobs come from in this country? From fast, young, growing companies. Retained earnings fuels their growth. Mr. Gingrich recognizes that these companies can use their own earnings better than Big Government to create jobs and grow the economy.

This is exactly what Ireland did in 1995, and their economy exploded, growing at a robust 7.4% a year ever since.

One of my friends who is an Obama supporter found it amusing that I didn’t like the payroll tax cut which Congress recently renewed. He said, “I thought you never met a tax cut you didn’t like.”

Well, the corporate tax rate cut is one I love, and Newt Gingrich has the best plan. If the Gingrich plan is passed, get your resume’ ready, because employers will be hiring again.

The capital gains tax is another tax that has a tremendous impact on the economy and job creation. Mr. Gingrich along with Rick Perry, have the best approach on this tax: eliminate it! Mitt Romney would keep it for wealthier Americans, and President Obama, whose instincts are always wrong when it comes to the economy, wants to raise it.

Why is cutting this tax such a big deal? Because 100% of new jobs come from start up companies. Start ups need investors, sometimes known as “Angels” to provide the start up capital to launch their enterprise. The higher the capital gains rate, the less money those Angels have to invest in dynamic, new companies that create the jobs and prosperity that has made America so great.

Unlike President Obama and Mitt Romney who pick winners and losers with their approach to tax reform, Newt Gingrich’s approach benefits everyone.

Would the Congressional Budget Office like Newt’s approach? No … because their static analysis is incapable of factoring in the surge of new tax revenues the government will enjoy as the economy explodes, just as it did under Ronald Reagan.

[Critics of Ronald Reagan talk about the high deficits during his terms. That was due to a profligate Congress, not a government starved for cash. Congress rejected Mr. Reagan’s budget 7 out of 8 years. Had they implemented it, the budget would have been balanced by 1989.]

Here’s what I’m saying: economic growth means everything to creating jobs and solving our debt problems. Under Obamanomics,long term growth is only projected to be 2.1% . The present value of future revenues is $1900 Trillion. If economic growth increases to merely 2.5%, they double to $3,800 Trillion.

After Reaganomics was passed, GDP grew by 7.4% in 1984 and averaged 3.4% during his two terms.

Economic growth solves a lot of problems. Newt Gingrich has far and away the best economic plan of all the candidates. If you want a higher paycheck and more jobs in this country, vote Newt.