Tag Archives: President

Scott Walker: eliminate NLRB, enact national right-to-work, ban federal public sector unions

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

I hope that by the end of this post, everyone will consider whether it makes more sense to elect someone who says they will do something conservative as President that they have already done in their state, as Governor.

The story is from the Daily Caller.


Republican presidential hopeful Scott Walker promised Monday to go far beyond what he did to rein in union power in Wisconsin if elected to lead the country.

The plan includes eliminating the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), eliminating federal employee unions and implementing a national right-to-work law. It will also do away with federal workers being allowed to do union work on taxpayer time.

[…]The plan would go far beyond the career defining reforms Walker pursued in 2011 during his first term as governor of Wisconsin. The changes to labor policy in the state, known as Act 10, mostly just outlawed mandatory union dues for state public employees.

[…]Critics have argued the NLRB unfairly benefits unions, often at the expense of employers and their workers. This includes changes to union elections, contracting and the franchise model. Walker also promised to outlawmandatory union dues for all public and private workers. A policy known as right-to-work.

[…]Walker also plans to end the policy which allows government workers to do union work on taxpayer time. The practice is known as “official time” on the federal level.

“In 2012, taxpayers subsidized 3,395,187 hours of ‘official time’ time spent working for the union or lobbying,” Walker noted. “That cost the taxpayers $156 million.”

“While the IRS was busy harassing conservative organizations they also had more than 200 federal employees whose only work was for the big government union bosses,” Walker continued. “How about the Department of Veterans Affairs? While more than 600,000 veterans were facing delays for medical care in the VA system, more than 250 federal employees.”

There’s no question in my mind that Walker has the strongest record of activism as a fiscal conservative in the GOP primary. He is only proposing to do at the federal level what he already has done at the state level. No other candidate has the record of past performance that Walker has. Been there, done that – wrote a book about it. It’s very important that we get the public sector unions out of politics, because they are always pushing for bigger and bigger government, which means higher taxes for you and your children. And of course the unions are pro-abortion and anti-natural-marriage. By the way, workers like right-to-work: a recent Gallup poll found that non-union workers are happier with their work than forced-unionized workers.

I expected Walker to do this if he were elected President, which is why he was my first choice for so long. (He is now #2, behind my #1 pick Bobby Jindal) It’s a shame that he had to tip his hand, because it will make it harder for him to win in the general election, now. I really think I might have to put him back in as my #1 choice because I think that getting rid of NCLB and public sector unions would be such an Earth-shattering conservative move. This truly would be on the level of some of the radically leftist policies that Obama pushed for. I trust Walker to do what he says, because of his record of achievement in Wisconsin along these same lines. This is not just talk.

People should have understood what they were getting in Scott from his past record, but I fear that many Republican voters (not evangelicals, of course) are not looking into the candidates’ backgrounds. They are being swayed by charismatic talk from leftist clowns like Donald Trump. They should be looking for proven leaders who have made good things happen at the state level – as governors, preferably.

By the way, Walker is one of one three candidates who has a plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. The other two are Jindal (of course) and Rubio.

Related videos

Anyway, for the rest of this post, I want to include a few short, 5-minute, videos on capitalism and unions. These are all from Prager University, and I hope they help you to understand why you need to support the free enterprise system, and oppose public sector unions.

George Mason University professor of economics Walter Williams on “Is Capitalism Moral?”:

Entrepreneurship guru George Gilder on “Why Capitalism Works”:

City College of New York professor of political science Daniel DiSalvo on how unions influence politics:

Stanford University professor of political science Terry Moe on how teacher unions oppose the interests of students:

Please look into these issues, and consider supporting either Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal or Ted Cruz for President in the general election. These guys understand economics, and will get good things done if elected President.

Related posts

Scott Walker presidential announcement speech: video and transcript

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

Video posted by the left-wing Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Transcript is here courtesy the left-wing Time magazine.

His central themes:

Americans want to vote FOR something and FOR someone.

So let me tell you what I’m for: I’m for Reform. Growth. Safety.

I’m for transferring power from Washington to the hard-working taxpayers in states all across the country. That’s real reform.

I’m for building a better economy where everyone can live their piece of the American Dream. That’s pro-growth.

I’m for protecting our children and grandchildren from radical Islamic terrorism and other threats in the world. That’s true safety.

Let’s look at his achievements, since that’s the only thing we can really know about the candidates. You can watch the whole speech to see what he promises, but I only care about what he has already done.

Cut spending and lowered taxes:

Since I’ve been Governor, we took on the unions and won.

We reduced taxes by $2 billion and lowered taxes on individuals, employers and property. In fact, property taxes are lower today than they were in 2010. How many Governors can say that?

Since I’ve been Governor, we passed lawsuit reform and regulatory reform. We defunded Planned Parenthood and enacted pro-life legislation. We passed Castle Doctrine and concealed carry. And we now require a photo ID to vote in the State of Wisconsin.

Education reform:

Today, people elected by local taxpayers actually get to run the schools. Our reforms ended seniority and tenure. Now we can hire and fire based on merit and pay based on performance. We can put the best and the brightest in the classroom.

Four years later: our graduation rates are up, third grade reading scores are higher and Wisconsin’s ACT scores are now second best in the country.

Welfare reform to reduce dependency:

In Wisconsin, we enacted a program that says that adults who are able to work must be enrolled in one of our job training programs before they can get a welfare check. Now, as of the budget I just signed, we are also making sure they can take a drug test.

Health care reform:

First, we must repeal ObamaCare. That’s right, repeal the so-called Affordable Care Act entirely and put patients and families back in charge of their health care decisions – not the federal government.

As Governor, I approved Wisconsin joining the lawsuit against ObamaCare on my first day in office. We need a President who – on the first day in office – will call on Congress to pass a full repeal of ObamaCare.

Reduce red tape and bureaucracy:

Next, we need to rein in the federal government’s out-of-control regulations that are like a wet blanket on the economy. Yes, enforce common sense rules – but don’t add more bureaucratic red tape.

In Wisconsin, I called for an overhaul of Wisconsin’s regulatory process on my first day as Governor. We can do the same in Washington, then we can act to repeal Obama’s bad regulations.

School choice, including homeschooling:

In Wisconsin, we reformed our public schools and gave families as many quality choices as possible because I trust parents to make the right decision for their children. I believe that every child deserves access to a great education – be it in a traditional public, charter, choice, private, virtual or home school environment.

His domestic policy will be all about federalism: transferring tax revenue and decision-making away from Washington, D.C. down to the state level, down to the local level, down to individual families, down to individuals. It was federalism all the way. Get the money and the power out of Washington, let the people make their own decisions. The second half of the speech was on national security and foreign policy.

When I compare and contrast this speech with the speeches of Hillary Clinton, it’s night and day. She has no achievements, she has no accomplishments. She hasn’t done anything. Walker is different – he can talk about the things he has done, and anyone can see that he’s actually done it. Let’s elect someone who knows what he is doing this time.

Related posts

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is running for President

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal

If you don’t know who Bobby Jindal is, just know that I have been following his career since the year 2002. I have always consider him to be the Savior of the Republican party, and told all my Indian friends that he would be President one day. You can read his biography here.

Life News has the story about his Wednesday announcement.


In January, for the fifth year in a row, Louisiana was declared the most pro-life state in the nation by American’s United for Life (AUL).

[…]During Jindal’s time in office he’s signed countless pieces of pro-life legislation as well as limited Obamacare by prohibiting the coverage of elective abortion in health care plans.

The pro-life legislation Jindal’s signed include everything from bills that ban abortion at 20-weeks and stop coerced abortions— to legislation that requires abortion facilities to provide ultrasounds prior to an abortion and ensures that medical professionals don’t have to participate in abortion.

In 2014, Jindal signed Louisiana Right to Life’s flagship legislation, the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act (HB 388), which could close three of the five abortion clinics in the state. HB 388 requires that abortion providers have admitting privileges within 30 miles of a local hospital; clarifies that informed consent protections apply to both surgical abortion, as well as to RU-486 chemical abortions; and that facilities that perform more than five abortions maintain proper licensing. After the passage of the HB 388 through the Louisiana Legislation, Gov. Jindal said, “This bill will give women the health and safety protections they deserve.”

Earlier this year, The Washington Times reported that Jindal blasted U.S. House Republicans after they pulled a bill that bans abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. He said, “The American people elected a Republican majority to support the pro-life movement and champion conservative principles. I hope they reconsider.”

In January, the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, which serves under Jindal’s administration, announced that they are blocking abortions at an abortion facility Planned Parenthood is building in New Orleans. Originally, their facility was supposed to open by the end of 2014; however, due to opposition from pro-life Louisianans, including Louisiana Right to Life, the Jindal administration and the Archdiocese of New Orleans, their efforts have been stalled.

The Executive Director of Louisiana Right to Life, Benjamin Clapper, told the Washington Post more about Jindal’s commitment to protecting unborn life. He said, “He’s not just been pro-life behind closed doors. He’s also been proudly pro-life across our state.” American’s United for Life also told the Post that during Jindal’s time in office, Louisiana has been the most pro-life it has ever been.

Remarkably, Jindal has always been completely honest about his pro-life views.

In 2003, he said, “In my first race in 2003, at one of my first fundraisers, my first question was from a fairly liberal woman who asked me my position on abortion. I told her I was pro-life. I remember thinking I was going to have to return all the money I had raised! But amazingly, she became a financial supporter despite our differences over abortion. It turns out she already knew I was pro-life; she just wanted to see if I would be honest about my position or if I would waffle in order to get her money.”

According to the National Right to Life Committee, Jindal had a 100-percent voting record during three years as member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Additionally, Louisiana Right to Life has honored Gov. Jindal on numerous occasions for his pro-life stand in the Pelican State. In January, as Jindal left the stage after speaking at their annual pro-life rally Clapper said, “Bobby Jindal is the most pro-life governor in the history of Louisiana.”

Bobby Jindal is very good on defending natural marriage, as well. On fiscal and foreign policy, he is absolutely perfect.

In his announcement video below, he mentions some of his other accomplishments as governor of Louisiana – anti-corruption measures, school choice programs, cutting government waste, cutting taxes, and more… everything you could want as a conservative. I don’t really care at all what candidates promise, or how I feel when they speak. I don’t care which candidate is anointed by Fox News, Wall Street, or the Republican Party. I just want to see the past achievements of the candidates. That’s how we ought to make this hiring decision – show me the numbers.

The transcript is here, and pay attention to this part about religious liberty, which is my top concern:

I know that some believe that I talk too much about my faith. But I will not be silenced in order to meet their expectations of political correctness.

They don’t accept the idea that you can be both intellectual and Christian. They can’t fathom the notion that you can be both smart and conservative. But, they need to get out more. There’s a big country out here with millions of Americans who believe in God and are not ashamed to say so.

I would be wary of a president who didn’t seek wisdom from the Almighty. I don’t know about you, but I’ve met many very smart people who lack wisdom. Yet Christianity is under assault today in America. But the liberals have forgotten their history. Religious liberty is not some quaint notion from the past. It is fundamental to our freedom. That’s why it is protected in the First Amendment to the Constitution. I’m going to say this slowly so that even Hillary Clinton can understand it. America did not create religious liberty, religious liberty created the United States of America.

[…]As Republicans, we’ve already tried to appease the Left, to make the media like us better, to talk in politically correct language, to hide some of our beliefs by calling them distractions. We’ve tried to mask our conservative ideals, and we have failed.

Every Republican will say they are for school choice, shrinking government, cutting the government workforce, and getting rid of Common Core. But talk is cheap. Talk is just talk. I haven’t just talked about doing these things, I’ve actually done these things.

Every Republican will say they will fight to protect the unborn, repeal Obamacare, secure the border, and destroy ISIS. I won’t simply talk about these things, I will do these things.

If I could say one thing to my opponents in the Democrat Party and the left-wing media, I would say that. If you’re an evangelical Christian, you won’t find a better champion than Jindal. Other people talk the talk, but Jindal walks the walk. Bobby Jindal has no filter. He tells you exactly what he thinks, and he does exactly what he says. And when he is finishing doing it, he will not apologize for it.

Watch the speech. Read the transcript.

UPDATE: My Twitter friend Rachel Alexander has an article on Jindal on The Stream.

Florida senator Marco Rubio will compete in the GOP presidential primary

Florida Senator Marco Rubio
Florida Senator Marco Rubio

Here’s a profile of Marco Rubio posted by Rachel Alexander at The Stream.

She writes:

On Monday night, Florida Senator Marco Rubio became the third major Republican candidate to announce he was officially running for president, after Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. He made the announcement from the Freedom Tower in downtown Miami, considered the Ellis Island of Florida, where Cuban refugees seeking political asylum from Castro’s communist regime were processed by the federal government in the ’60s and early ’70s. It made a powerful statement, that the son of refugees is now running for president.

Rubio’s parents came to America before the Castro regime, and took menial jobs. He told the cheering crowd, “My father stood behind a small portable bar in the back of a room so that tonight I could stand behind this podium in front of this room.”

Rubio has been an outspoken critic of Obama’s efforts to relax relations with Cuba, and takes a hawkish approach to foreign policy. Earlier this year, he published the book American Dreams, which lays out how to rise to success economically in the U.S.

The youngest candidate in the race, Rubio reached out to younger voters in his speech, saying, “This election is not just about what laws we will pass, it is a generational choice about what kind of country we will be.”

He has lots of experience and a track record we can analyze:

A lawyer, Rubio worked his way up through the political system, serving in the Florida House from 2000 to 2008 and eventually becoming Speaker. While there he developed a reputation for pursuing innovative policy ideas and while Speaker of the Florida House, he wrote a book, 100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future, which contained many ideas he implemented while Speaker.

He went on to defeat liberal Republican turned Democrat Charlie Crist in a surprising underdog campaign to become U.S. Senator in 2010, making him an instant Tea Party favorite. The New York Times magazine declared him the “first Senator from the Tea Party.”

His most exciting policy is his tax policy:

On the fiscal side of the conservative equation, Rubio’s new tax reform proposal is raising some eyebrows. Introduced with conservative stalwart Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the plan would consolidate income tax rates into just two, 15 percent and 35 percent, eliminate capital gains taxes on investment income for individuals, combine all corporate tax rates to 25 percent, and resuscitate the child tax credit, which had shrunk under the Obama administration. However, individuals making as little as $75,000 would be subject to the 35 percent rate. Many conservatives prefer the more radical flat tax option advocated by Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.

Mike Lee is my favorite conservative in the Senate.

Rubio is a solid conservative in terms of voting:

He has a 98.67 percent lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, higher than most other Republican Senators.The Pulse 2016, a new site tracking the presidential election, gave Rubio an A grade on handling the Indiana religious freedom law controversy. The site noted that during an appearance on The Five, Rubio spoke “intelligently, knowledgeably, and at length about the need to protect the rights of Christians to follow their religious convictions.”

But he doesn’t have the executive accomplishments of a Scott Walker or a Bobby Jindal, since he isn’t a governor.

This is his biggest flaw:

Since taking office, Rubio has disappointed the Tea Party once, in 2013, when he joined a bipartisan group of Democrats and moderate Republicans to propose a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, which went further than even Jeb Bush’s plan. Bush supports a path for legal status only. Rubio’s legislation failed, and at CPAC earlier this year, he said he now would only support a path to citizenship after securing the border.

Rubio is a strong candidate, but I can’t forgive him for endorsing a path to citizenship for those who break the law coming into the United States without a work permit. I don’t even favor work permits for people who break the law, much less permanent residencies, much less citizenship. Rubio is far to the left of me on immigration. But if you take away that negative, he is a formidable candidate in the general election. He would make an extremely difficult opponent for Hillary Clinton, or whoever the Democrats choose.

I am OK with him being our candidate in the general, and I think he would be as electable as Scott Walker, my top choice. If we were just choosing positions, I agree most with Cruz, but Cruz lacks accomplishments and I don’t see intelligent policies coming out of his mouth – the kinds of policies that can move us in a conservative direction, while still appealing to independents.

But I rank Rubio fifth in my list:

  1. Gov. Scott Walker
  2. Gov. Bobby Jindal
  3. Gov. Rick Perry
  4. Sen. Ted Cruz
  5. Sen. Marco Rubio

I like Rick Santorum more than Marco Rubio, but I’m not sure if he’s running. Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson are not on my list because of lack of experience, but I would love to see them run and be present to speak at the debates – I like listening to them both. They are both stars, but maybe not ready for the Presidency.

Rand Paul is a good candidate on fiscal policy. His statements on social policy are good, but he lacks accomplishments.His foreign policy is too much like Obama’s for me. He has said some good things, but he lacks accomplishments. I don’t want any more weakness and appeasement. Paul is to the left of Cruz and Rubio on foreign policy – I don’t want him on my list. But I’d put him in charge of the Federal Reserve in an instant.

We have SO MANY good candidates, and the Democrats have picked themselves a stinker. It’s so good! I feel bad that young people are so lousy on the marriage issue, but maybe with a good leader, we can change some of their minds during the debates? Do young people even watch debates?

Hillary Clinton never signed separation form that required her to turn over all e-mails

National Review reports:

After days of fending off the question, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki admitted on Tuesday that the department has no record of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signing a separation form that could open her up to perjury charges.

Form OF-109 is a document required to be signed by all State Department employees as they exit the department. In it, the employee claims, under penalty of perjury, that he or she has turned over all relevant communications to the government at the time of his or her departure.

By turning over her private e-mails at the end of 2014, two years after leaving office, Clinton violated that agreement — if, in fact, she signed it.

On Tuesday, the State Department finally indicated that she did not — or at least, they have no records of her doing so. “We have reviewed Secretary Clinton’s official personnel file and administrative files, and do not have any record of her signing the OF-109,” Psaki said on Tuesday. “It is not clear that this form is used as part of a standard part of check-out across the federal government, or even at the State Department. So we’re certainly looking into that.”

AP reporter Matt Lee pressed Psaki, asking why the department had previously intimated that the form was “required” and if Clinton’s non-signature violated any rules.

“It’s not a violation of any rule, no,” she said, saying that signing the form may not be a common departure practice and that “there are differences between regulations and, certainly, recommendations.”

“The form exists, certainly,” Psaki said. “Beyond that, I don’t have more statistics on what percentage of State Department employees sign on departure from the building.”

“Yes, the form exists, and it exists for a reason,” Lee replied. “It doesn’t exist simply because someone thought, ‘Hey, let’s have a form that someone has to sign!’ It exists for a reason, and probably a pretty good reason, right?”

“Well, there are probably hundreds of forms in the federal government that exist — thousands, tens of thousands of forms that exist,” Psaki said. “So I don’t know that I would over-emphasize the existence of a form.”

They don’t have a record of her signing a required form. Everyone is supposed to sign that form before leaving the State Department. If the signed form were recovered, then she would be guilty of perjury for keeping a private e-mail server and deleting the e-mails. Add the missing e-mails to the millions of dollars of donations to the Clinton Foundation, and you have the makings of a serious, serious scandal.

Your puny laws don't apply to Queen Hillary!
Your puny laws don’t apply to Queen Hillary!

My absolute favorite liberal journalist is Ron Fournier, who writes for the very left-wing National Journal.

He says this is a big deal:

National Journal Senior Political Columnist and Editorial Director Ron Fournier said that Democrats are “scared to death” over the scandals regarding donations to the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton’s emails on Monday’s “Special Report” on the Fox News Channel.

“Don’t buy the spin, they [Democrats] are scared to death. And there’s a lot of them who are already starting to think ‘is she really the best candidate for us?’…Their bench, compared to the Republican bench is awfully, awfully thin. And there’s a lot of Democrats, by the way, who are saying ‘follow the money.’ A lot of Democrats are really worried about the Foundation, that’s what they’re really worried about” he stated.

Earlier, Fournier said that the Clinton Foundation’s acceptance of Chinese donations is “a big issue. There’s a lot of other ways the Chinese government, and the Saudis, and the [Qataris] — there are other ways that they can help the world if that’s what they want to do. They’re giving their money to the Clinton Foundation for a reason. They want something out of it. So I know, what I really want to see in these e-mails is any e-mail that mentions the Foundation and mentions one of the donors.”


This should sink Hillary Clinton as a candidate, and it will, so long as the heat stays on.

White House turns its back on transparency

You might recall that previously, Barack Obama told us that his administration would be the most transparent ever:

But the White House is now refusing to comply with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests:

The White House is exempting an office from compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, angering open-government advocates, who accuse President Barack Obama of not living up to his pledge to run the “most transparent administration in history.”

The White House said Tuesday that the move to exclude the White House Office of Administration from the federal open-access law reflected a court ruling that predated the Obama administration and wouldn’t have any effect on its commitment to open records and its compliance with requests for records.

“This is a matter of just cleaning up the records that are on the books,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said. “It has no impact at all on the policy that we had maintained from the beginning to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, when it’s appropriate.”

The move, announced Tuesday in the Federal Register, came as news organizations marked Sunshine Week to showcase the public’s right to know, and it drew sharp criticism from advocates who already give the administration poor marks for news-media access.

“This is another example of the White House position avoiding transparency,” said John Wonderlich, policy director of the nonprofit Sunlight Foundation. “Instead of creating more and better access to information, it’s trying to control it.”

“The president has routinely failed to deliver on his promise,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who’s proposed a law that would reduce the use of exemptions to withhold information from the public.

The most transparent administration in history? Not a smidgeon of corruption? Not so much.