All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/

Economist Paul Ryan disgusted with Obama’s childish emotional bloviating

Republican economist Paul Ryan responds to the community-organizer/teleprompter-reader.

Here’s the transcript. (H/T Lonely Conservative)

Excerpt:

I’m very disappointed in the president. I was excited when we got invited to attend his speech today. I thought the president’s invitation to Mr. Camp, Mr. Hensarling and myself was an olive branch. Instead, what we got was a speech that was excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate, and hopelessly inadequate to addressing our countries pressing fiscal challenges.

What we heard today was not fiscal leadership from our commander-in-chief. What we heard today was a political broadside from our campaigner-in chief.

I guess it’s no coincidence that last week when the president launched his billion dollar re-election campaign was the week we launched our effort to try and get this debt and deficit under control and get our economy growing.

Last year, in the absence of a serious budget, the president created a fiscal commission. Then with his budget he disavowed his fiscal commission. He ignored all of its recommendations. Now he wants to delegate leadership yet again to a new commission. How are we to expect different results? And the measurements of results of this new commission are lower than the measurements of success of the last commission that ended a few months ago.

We need leadership. We don’t need a doubling down on the failed politics of the past.

[…]Exploiting people’s emotions of fear, envy, and anxiety is not hope; it’s not change. It’s partisanship. We don’t need partisanship. We don’t need demagoguery. We need solutions. And we don’t need to keep punting to other people to make tough decisions. If we don’t make those decisions today, our children will have to make much, much tougher decisions tomorrow.

Paul Ryan and Jeb Hensarling are the two best-known Republican budget wonks.

You can read more about Paul Ryan in this Business Week interview.

Excerpt:

President Obama called your plan “a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them … but we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy.” How do you respond?
I don’t even know what to say about that. First of all, we’re not even talking about cutting taxes. We’re talking about keeping tax revenues where they are [by making the Bush tax cuts permanent] and cleaning up all the junk in the tax code for a flatter, fair, simpler tax system. So we’re not talking about cutting taxes. We want to keep the tax revenues where they are and fix the tax code. And with respect to all the spending—you know, that partisan-spending rhetoric—if you don’t fix entitlements, Charlie, if you don’t get spending under control, there’s not going to be any money left for those other things, for roads, for bridges, for education, for the environment. So I’m amazed that he would use that kind of hyperbolic, hyperventilating rhetoric to describe our plan.

I find it interesting that last week we heard William Lane Craig chastise the child Sam Harris for making “stupid and insulting” remarks about Christians, we are now getting Paul Ryan making similar assessments of our naive, childish President. Have Christians and conservatives finally reached their limit of tolerating stupidity and incompetence?

More about Paul Ryan and his budget proposal in my previous post.

Should pro-life social conservatives vote for Stephen Harper?

Unborn baby scheming about tax cuts for married couples
Unborn baby scheming about tax cuts for married couples

Don’t listen to me, listen to Dave Warren.

Excerpt:

Our tax code has everything to do with our societal propensity to demographic extinction.

It helps destroy families in two major ways (and many minor ones for which we won’t have space). It forces the mother of small children to work for a second (heavily taxed) family income. Then, offers her the alternative of becoming a “welfare mom” -effectively a ward of the state, but with the bill sent these days to anything that looks like an ex-husband.

Fatherless households, with or without angry mothers, are in turn the source of so many of the children we do have: the ones who have survived the abortion mills. Those, of a certain age, acquainted with the modern schoolyard, will have noticed the general tendency toward juvenile delinquency. Though, overall crime rates balance out, thanks to the diminishing number of juveniles, as a proportion of our aging population.

The tax code isn’t, of course, the only cause contributing to this demographic, social, and moral disaster. The “culture of death” is also communicated through mass media and entertainment industries, and catered to by every sort of commercial advertising.

Yet the tax code is the principal originating cause. Over many decades, it has facilitated the Nanny State, by treating citizens as income-earning atoms. The capitalists feed upon conditions in the resulting market, wherein everyone is an atomized consumer, living narcissistically for the day.

It is against this very real background that the Harper government has proposed the one thing that looks like a serious policy proposal in the current general election campaign. It is to change the tax code to reduce the penalty on one-income families. I’ll leave the technical description of this “income splitting” to the tax experts and policy wonks.

Naturally, the feminists, and all other “progressive” people, are outraged by a scheme that would reduce this penalty. A woman’s place is in the workforce, according to the received progressive view; which holds that men and women must be treated as interchangeable; which makes children, by extension, discardable lifestyle options. (See rude reference to abortion mills, above.) That is why the last Pope called it the “culture of death.”

By contrast, the “culture of life,” to which humans are called by nature -often in the face of social engineering -envisions a world in which mothers and children play an important, and often the commanding part.

Just look at this chart from the Heritage Foundation:

Marriage and Poverty
Marriage and Poverty

Job creation reduces abortion. Intact families reduce abortion. A father in the home reduces abortion. Tax credits for children reduces abortion.

There is more than one way to be pro-life, especially in Canada where the majority of the people are not pro-life. Abortion is the consequence of the gender-feminist revolution that destroyed marriage and the family and replaced parents with public schools that push sex education, even onto very young children. The way to turn the tide back to the pro-life position is to first build consensus for pro-life laws by creating the conditions where every unborn child can be welcomed into the world by a loving married couple. There are financial incentives in Stephen Harper’s Family Tax Cut plan that will encourage people to get married and stay married. Harper is a social conservative and social conservatives should vote for Harper. He does the best he can by putting pro-life financial incentives in place.

You can read more about Stephen Harper’s 5-point Here for Canada policy plan and the Conservative plan to promote religious liberty abroad.

Conservative Party unveils plan to promote religious liberty abroad

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

From the Montreal Gazette.

Excerpt:

A Conservative government would create a new, special “Office of Religious Freedom,” the party announced in its electoral platform on Friday.

The office would be housed at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and its role would be:

  • To monitor religious freedom around the world;
  • To promote religious freedom as a key objective of Canadian foreign policy;
  • And to advance policies and programs that support religious freedom.

Under the heading, “Defending Religious Freedom,” the Conservatives said they recognize that “respect for religious pluralism is inextricably linked to democratic development.” And that the federal government could and should do more to respond to the plight of those “who suffer merely because of their faith.”

[…]The Conservative platform also includes a pledge to create a national Holocaust memorial in the Ottawa area and to support the establishment of a memorial to the victims of communism.

This is not a surprise, as the Canadian conservatives are famous for taking bold stands to defend the rights of persecuted Christians in places like Egypt.

Excerpt:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper participated in a round table discussion on security with Coptic Christian leaders.

A deadly suicide bombing in Egypt on New Year’s Day claimed the lives of some 21 worshippers.

And nearly 100 people were wounded in the attack as they left a midnight mass at an Alexandria church.

Harper condemned the attacks, saying the international community must stay vigilant against such violence against Coptic Christians.

Harper met with several priests at the Church Of the Virgin Mary and St. Athanasius in Mississauga Thursday.

He says he wants Coptic Christians in Canada to know the country stands behind their right to safely practice their faith.

So, not only is Harper introducing policies that will strengthen families and marriages so that there will be fewer abortions and healthier children, but he is also dedicated to defending the religious liberty of minorities abroad.