128 million Americans are now on government programmes. Can America survive as the world’s superpower?
I have just read a staggering report written by my colleagues Patrick D. Tyrell and William W. Beach for the Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis (I direct the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at Heritage.) It is a real eye-opener for anyone who cares about America’s future as the world’s superpower, on either side of the Atlantic. Ironically, Britain, through the tremendous determination of Iain Duncan Smith and his team at the Department of Work and Pensions, is starting to roll back the welfare state, precisely at the same time the current US administration is expanding it.The United States isn’t just gliding towards a continental European-style future of vast welfare systems, economic decline, and massive debts – it is accelerating towards it at full speed. Or as Acton Institute research director Samuel Gregg puts it in his excellent new book published today by Encounter, America is already “becoming Europe,” with the United States moving far closer to a European-style welfare state than most Americans realize.
Tyrell and Beach point out in their Heritage paper, which is based on extensive analysis of the recently released March 2011 US Census Bureau Current Population Survey (CPS), that more than two in five Americans are now on government programs:
The number of people receiving benefits from the federal government in the United States has grown from under 94 million people in 2000 to more than 128 million people in 2011. That means that 41.3 percent of the US population is now on a federal government program.Just as worrying is the rate of increase in spending on these federal government programmes:
Between 1988 and 2011, spending on dependence-creating federal government programs has increased 180 percent versus “only” a 62 percent increase in the number of people who are enrolled in federal government programs, and a 27 percent increase in the population. Not only are more people enrolled in government programs than ever before, but more US taxpayer dollars are being spent on each recipient every year.This level of spending is simply unsustainable. “In 2010, over 70 percent of all federal spending went to dependence-creating programmes,” a figure which is likely to rise further in coming years, with the number of Americans enrolled in at least one federal programme growing “more than two times faster than the US population.” As the report’s authors argue:
The time to reform dependence-creating government programs is now. The problem is too much government subsidizing, and too much transfer of wealth from taxpayers to those who pay fewer and fewer taxes. After all, government does not create wealth by spreading it around.In terms of indebtedness, America is well on the way to financial ruin, with total national debt already exceeding 100 percent of GDP according to the OECD, with publicly held federal debt projected to exceed 100 percent of US GDP by 2024. America’s government debt as a percentage of GDP (109.8 percent) based on 2012 figures now exceeds that of the general Euro area (100.6 percent), as well as France (105.1 percent) and the UK (105.3 percent). Only Greece (181.3 percent), Iceland (124.7 percent), Ireland (123.2 percent), Italy (127 percent) and Portugal (125.6 percent) currently exceed the US in terms of government gross financial liabilities as a percentage of GDP.
Congress would do well to remember that there are no free subsidies and benefits. The government today is borrowing from future taxpayers to pay the current government program enrollees.
Unless there is a dramatic reversal in the overall approach taken by the US government, with deep-seated entitlement reform, significant cuts in government spending and taxes, and a return to policies that advance rather than hinder economic freedom, the United States faces a bleak economic future, with devastating implications for American leadership on the world stage and the future of the free world.
It is simply unimaginable for US leadership to be replaced by that of China, with its callous disregard for liberty, human rights and democratic values. An America that ends up like much of the European Union, dominated by big government ideology, drowning in debt, over-regulation, heavy taxation and chronically high unemployment, combined with weak militaries and an unhealthy deference to supranationalism, is a nightmare scenario. Unfortunately the US presidency remains firmly stuck in denial, as it has been for the last four years. This latest report serves as another warning for an administration perilously sleep-walking America towards economic disaster. It is time for the White House to wake up.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100196709/128-million-americans-are-now-on-government-programs-can-america-survive-as-the-worlds-superpower/
Good News: Obama's Disastrous Former Budget Director to Replace Geithner at Treasury
Jacob "Jack" Lew is the current White House Chief of Staff. Before that, he served as the director of the the president's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). During his tenure there, the president released an astonishingly reckless budget proposal that went down in unanimous flames on Capitol Hill. Lew's term at OMB was smack dab in the middle of America's dysfunctional budget-free bender, which is now approaching its fourth consecutive year. He presided over the ugly continuing resolution fight in the spring of 2011, as well as the bruising debt ceiling brawl that summer. And now, he's failing upwards to the cabinet secretary position being vacated by Timothy Geithner:President Barack Obama plans to name White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew tomorrow as his choice for Treasury secretary, replacing Timothy F. Geithner, a person familiar with the process said. Lew, 57, who also has served as director of the Office of Management and Budget, has been offered the Treasury post by Obama, according to the person, who asked for anonymity to discuss personnel matters. Geithner, 51, the only remaining member of Obama’s original economic team, has told White House officials he doesn’t want to serve in a second term and intends to leave the job by the end of the month.Ed Morrissey notes that Lew is essentially a government careerist lifer -- having spent only a short time in the private sector. When he's been confronted about his party's ritual budget abdication, Lew has responded in a manner that suggests he's either hopelessly incompetent and ignorant, or a partisan liar.
One can argue over whether a high school civics student should know that budgets are exempt from the possibility of filibuster and only require a simple majority for passage in the United States Senate. One cannot credibly argue that the White House budget director is be unaware of this fact, but that's exactly how he presented things to the American people on national television. He earned a fact-check slap down from the Washington Post for his performance. Lew attended Harvard and Georgetown Law. He's not a stupid man and he knows how Washington works, so it's not a stretch to conclude that he's a serial purveyor of untruths. Two more cases in point: He falsely claimed that the 2011 debt deal's "sequester" was Republicans' idea, and made ludicrously inaccurate assertions about the FY 2012 White House budget he oversaw:
"Our budget will get us, over the next several years, to the point where we can look the American people in the eye and say we're not adding to the debt anymore; we're spending money that we have each year, and then we can work on bringing down our national debt."Even left-leaning Politifact had no choice but to rate this claim "false." Neither that budget nor Obama's subsequent offering ever comes remotely close to achieving primary balance, let alone doing anything to reduce the national debt. Indeed, it was projected to add over $7 trillion to the pile. (The closest Obama's FY 2013 budget came to balancing over the next decade -- even with rosy growth and revenue projections -- was a $617 billion deficit in 2017). Its 2012 predecessor was so reckless that even some liberals felt compelled to criticize it, prompting Lew's outright lie. Unlike Geithner, Lew doesn't appear to have any personal tax problems in his past, but that'll be little consolation when he's juggling trillion dollar coins in his office at the Treasury. Our national budget debacle is in some measure his handiwork and his legacy, so naturally he's being promoted to a position of even greater authority. Elections have consequences. This is one of them.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/01/09/jack-lew-treasury-n1485579
PK'S NOTE: My question is how the hell are they letting getting away with such unconstitutional power grabs? Why won't anyone stop him?
Obama to Use Executive Order on Gun Control
Vice President Joe Biden is meeting with victims of gun violence today. Speaking with reporters beforehand, Biden said President Obama may use an executive order to push through more gun control and Second Amendment restrictions. More from the Weekly Standard."The president is going to act," said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. "There are executives orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required."We knew this was coming. The White House has been saying for a month that they are acting "quickly" on new gun control measures. Senator Dianne Feinstein's sweeping new gun control legislation hasn't even been introduced yet and Obama isn't the kind of president who has shown a willingness to wait on Congress.
Biden said that this is a moral issue and that "it's critically important that we act."
Biden talked also about taking responsible action. "As the president said, if you're actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."
If Obama pushes through new regulations using executive powers, the process will unfold in different parts. After an order is signed, the Department of Justice led by Attorney General Eric Holder, will be in charge of enforcement through the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. Now, how far the order will go is the big question. You can bet it will ban semi-automatic rifles and large ammunition magazines, but how Obama grandfathers in old, lawfully purchases semi-automatic rifles remains unknown. Will he require citizens who already own these weapons to be fingerprinted as Feinstein's bill requires? Or will he go so far as confiscation as New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has suggested? Time will tell.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/09/obama-to-use-executive-order-on-gun-control-n1485645
Defying the Obama Administration on
Religious Liberty
Religious Liberty
Hobby Lobby gained national attention when its leadership announced they would not bow to the Obama Administration’s violation of their religious liberty. Thousands of Americans pledged to shop at the retailer over the weekend to show their appreciation for this stand—a stand that could cost the company up to $1.3 million in fines per day.
Like many other companies, Hobby Lobby’s health insurance plan renewed on January 1, causing them to be subject to the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate under Obamacare. This mandate forces employers to pay for coverage of abortion-inducing drugs like the “morning after” and “week after” pills, which directly violates many Americans’ deeply held beliefs—including Hobby Lobby’s owners, the Green family. The Greens, who founded the company, close all its locations on Sundays and seek to operate in accordance with Christian principles—including offering an employee health care plan that aligns with those values.
The Obama Administration’s outrageous position is that business owners’ rights to religious freedom end when they walk into their workplaces, claiming that “for-profit, secular employers generally do not engage in any exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment.”
If employers don’t change their health plans to comply, they will be hit with fines—up to $100 per employee per day. But if they stop providing health coverage, Obamacare’s double whammy means that, come 2014, employers with more than 50 employees could instead be hit with fines for that.
Thirteen for-profit companies have received rulings touching on the merits of their cases from the courts so far. Ten have secured relief—though temporary—from having the mandate enforced against them. Three companies have been denied relief: Hobby Lobby, Autocam Corp., and Grote Industries.
Hobby Lobby founder and CEO David Green said, “The conflict for me is that our family is being forced to choose between following the laws of the country that we love or maintaining the religious beliefs that have made our business successful and have supported our family and thousands of our employees and their families.”
Hobby Lobby has more than 13,000 employees, so the $100 per employee per day fine is crippling.
John Kennedy, CEO of Autocam in Grand Rapids, MI, says his employees “are like family” and that he “can’t in good conscience choose between violating my beliefs and meeting my associates’ needs. It just doesn’t seem right.”
William Grote III, CEO of Grote Industries, which manufactures vehicle lighting and safety systems, has said, “It would easily destroy the company should we not do it.”
For family business owners like the Kortes, a Roman Catholic family seeking to manage their construction company, K & L Contractors, in a manner consistent with their faith, this means penalties of as much as $730,000 per year, an amount that would be financially ruinous for their company and for them personally.
But at least one federal appellate court has expressly rejected the position that the Kortes’ religious freedom rights depend solely on the fact that they operate a secular, for-profit business, and litigation over this key legal question, which affects other family business owners like the Greens of Hobby Lobby, is likely headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Late last year, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to issue a preliminary injunction in favor of the Kortes, concluding that their Religious Freedom Restoration Act challenge to the HHS mandate is likely to succeed when their case is ultimately decided. It criticized the government’s position for “ignor[ing] that Cyril and Jane Korte are also plaintiffs” who “would have to violate their religious beliefs to operate their company in compliance with [the HHS mandate].” “That the Kortes operate their business in the corporate form is not dispositive of their claim,” the court held.
In other words, the fact that they operate a business doesn’t mean they give up their rights.
Pastor and author Rick Warren said in a statement about Hobby Lobby’s stance:
Every American who loves freedom should shudder at the precedent the government is trying to establish by denying Hobby Lobby the full protection of the First Amendment.
Freedom of religion doesn’t stop when an American walks outside his or her home or place of worship. For these business owners trying to live out their beliefs in the way they run their businesses, this mandate forces an excruciating decision.
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/09/hobby-lobby-defying-the-obama-administration-on-religious-liberty/
Teacher Stomps on American Flag inside Classroom
A South Carolina school district has launched an investigation into a high school teacher who allegedly threw an American flag on the floor and stomped on it as a classroom full of students watched.Mark Bounds, a spokesman for the Lexington –Richland5 School District, confirmed to Fox News that an English teacher at Chapin High School was placed on leave as they investigate the incident
.
“There were allegations that at a teacher took a flag down from the post in the classroom and stepped on that flag as part of the lesson,” Bounds said, indicating the act was repeated in several other classes. “It was not a spontaneous act, but one he worked into the lesson.”
He said there was “sufficient evidence that the teacher needed to be put on administrative leave and a full investigation needed to take place.”
Bounds said they could not provide additional information because it was a personnel matter – but he stressed that the school district took the matter extremely seriously.
“We have a very patriotic community with many military veterans,” he said. “Fort Jackson, the largest training base in the world is part of our community and you can see why this is especially important.”
Michael Copeland’s daughter was in the classroom when the incident occurred. He told television station WIS that the teacher’s actions were disrespectful and unpatriotic.
“He drew a couple of symbols, like one of them was a cross, and he said, ‘What does this represent’ and everybody said ‘Christianity,’” Copeland said. “Then he proceeds to take down the American flag and said, ‘This is a symbol, but it’s only a piece of cloth. It doesn’t mean anything,’ and then he throws it down on the floor and then stomps on it, repeatedly.”
Malcolm Kline, executive director of Accuracy in Academia, told Fox News he was impressed that the school district took action.
“I’m astounded by this,” said Kline, whose organization exposes political bias in public school classrooms. “What you usually hear is students suspended for actually wearing an American flag.”
“I would have expected something like that somewhere in the northeast rather than below the Mason-Dixon line,” he added.
Bounds, who served 20 years in the military, stressed the seriousness of the incident.
“So many of our veterans have made sacrifices for that flag,” he said. “We still have men and women deployed in service to our country and we do take this very seriously.”
“We want to make sure our classrooms are unbiased of teacher’s personal opinions,” he said. “By the same token we want to give the teacher every opportunity to demonstrate what was going on the classroom at that time.”
But the unidentified teacher does have some supporters.
“There are so few teachers in South Carolina willing to show students a broader perspective,” one person wrote on the local Patch website. “When we are lucky enough to have one, they should be supported, not undermined. Obviously the administration and parents need to sit in on the lesson and listen as well.”
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/teacher-stomps-on-american-flag-inside-classroom.html
We are raising a generation of deluded narcissists
....As if to keep up with the unreality of media and technology, in a dizzying paroxysm of self-aggrandizing hype, town sports leagues across the country hand out ribbons and trophies to losing teams, schools inflate grades, energy drinks in giant, colorful cans take over the soft drink market, and psychiatrists hand out Adderall like candy.All the while, these adolescents, teens and young adults are watching a Congress that can’t control its manic, euphoric, narcissistic spending, a president that can’t see his way through to applauding genuine and extraordinary achievements in business, a society that blames mass killings on guns, not the psychotic people who wield them, and—here no surprise—a stock market that keeps rising and falling like a roller coaster as bubbles inflate and then, inevitably, burst.
That’s really the unavoidable end, by the way. False pride can never be sustained. The bubble of narcissism is always at risk of bursting. That’s why young people are higher on drugs than ever, drunker than ever, smoking more, tattooed more, pierced more and having more and more and more sex, earlier and earlier and earlier, raising babies before they can do it well, because it makes them feel special, for a while. They’re doing anything to distract themselves from the fact that they feel empty inside and unworthy.
Distractions, however, are temporary, and the truth is eternal. Watch for an epidemic of depression and suicidality, not to mention homicidality, as the real self-loathing and hatred of others that lies beneath all this narcissism rises to the surface. I see it happening and, no doubt, many of you do, too.
PK'S NOTE: It's not the government's responsibility to provide housing, healthcare, childcare or to raise your children. But part of the plan here is to change red counties into blue for future elections. I would recommend to counties/cities: stop taking federal money.
HUD Unveils Massive Integration Plan
HUD intends to submit a new rule proposal in April targeting massive desegregation of each of the nation's more than 74,000 census tracts. The plan, modeled on HUD's Westchester County, NY low-income housing mandate, will require that each census tract contain a similar percentage of minority families that now live in concentrated areas of a local/regional government's jurisdiction. HUD determined that the county's minority population is 10%, mostly concentrated in White Plains and Yonkers.
While Westchester's minority populations are minuscule, making it easier to apply sanctions on a percentage basis, it remains unclear how HUD would determine percentages to be applied to census tracts when minority populations in urban settings surpass the surrounding white populations by a large margin, such as Detroit.
Under the proposal, any unit of local government that receives, and has received, any federal subsidy that specifies the application of housing provisions, such as Community Development Block Grants, must prove that it followed HUD's requirements to provide housing for poor minority families. Failure to provide such proof would subject municipalities to the loss of subsidies or require equivalent housing for the minority poor in each of their census tracts -- each tract contains about 4,000 residents.
Elections Delayed Agenda Release
HUD has kept its new plan under wraps for more than a year by delaying release of its semi-annual Unified Agenda of Regulatory & Deregulatory Actions. Sources tell HAL the Obama administration deliberately withheld the Spring 2012 Unified Agenda (UA) because of the political volatility of some of the proposals. OMB delayed release of the Fall 2012 UA until after the November elections for the same reason. The UA was finally released late Dec. 21 after government operations were shut down for the Christmas holiday, keeping the issues well under the political radar.
The new Fair Housing Act change is the only rule proposal listed for HUD. The department says the rule is intended to "overcome the legacy of segregation" by applying the law "proactively."
"HUD is committed to helping...the middle class and those aspiring to join the middle class, through access, opportunity and fairness, and HUD can do this by strengthening the statutory mandate to affirmatively further fair housing," the UA document says.
Calling it a new approach, HUD will apply the lessons learned from its Westchester County experience. The affluent New York City suburb was taken to task in 2009 for failure to sufficiently apply its CDBG grants to provide housing for the poor. A New York metro fair housing organization sued Westchester in 2006 under the 1863 Federal False Claims Act, known as the Lincoln Law, which allows private parties to recover triple damages from anyone who fraudulently takes federal money.
A federal judge found the county had failed to meet the preconditions of $52 million in CDBG awards by failing to analyze impediments to fair housing based on race and it misrepresented its efforts to desegregate overwhelmingly white communities when it applied for the revenue sharing.
Officials Mum On Plans
The county settled with HUD rather than risk losing more than $85 million in future CDBG grants, agreeing to pay $51.6 million to build or buy 750 houses in 31 select communities in seven years and provide them to poor black and Hispanic families on a percentage basis. And the county was required to pay the Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York $10.5 million for filing the lawsuit.
The settlement calls for 630 of the homes to be reserved in areas where blacks constitute 3% or less of the population and Hispanic make up less than 7%. The remaining homes meet different criteria for ethnic concentration and costs. The county must recruit minority tenants for the new homes from the surrounding metro area. Tenants would be provided Section 8 housing vouchers to pay rental costs.
HUD officials decline to discuss the UA because the proposal for new rules has not been officially issued. But HUD sources tell HAL the department seized the Westchester settlement as its pilot for a plan to ensure that all census tracts in the nation are properly desegregated. HUD has been researching more than 1,000 municipalities nationwide for discrepancies in their federal grant agreements.
http://cdpubsonline.com/12all/index.php?action=message&l=33&c=7687&m=5094&s=a45c742d0b7311288afce82746bba654
Burn Down the Suburbs?
(Note: article first posted prior to election)
President Obama is not a fan of America’s suburbs. Indeed, he intends to abolish them. With suburban voters set to be the swing constituency of the 2012 election, the administration’s plans for this segment of the electorate deserve scrutiny. Obama is a longtime supporter of “regionalism,” the idea that the suburbs should be folded into the cities, merging schools, housing, transportation, and above all taxation. To this end, the president has already put programs in place designed to push the country toward a sweeping social transformation in a possible second term. The goal: income equalization via a massive redistribution of suburban tax money to the cities.
Obama’s plans to undercut the political and economic independence of America’s suburbs reach back decades. The community organizers who trained him in the mid-1980s blamed the plight of cities on taxpayer “flight” to suburbia. Beginning in the mid-1990s, Obama’s mentors at the Gamaliel Foundation (a community-organizing network Obama helped found) formally dedicated their efforts to the budding fight against suburban “sprawl.” From his positions on the boards of a couple of left-leaning Chicago foundations, Obama channeled substantial financial support to these efforts. On entering politics, he served as a dedicated ally of his mentors’ anti-suburban activism.
The alliance endures. One of Obama’s original trainers, Mike Kruglik, has hived off a new organization called Building One America, which continues Gamaliel’s anti-suburban crusade under another name. Kruglik and his close allies, David Rusk and Myron Orfield, intellectual leaders of the “anti-sprawl” movement, have been quietly working with the Obama administration for years on an ambitious program of social reform. In July of 2011, Kruglik’s Building One America held a conference at the White House. Orfield and Rusk made presentations, and afterwards Kruglik personally met with the president in the Oval Office. The ultimate goal of the movement led by Kruglik, Rusk, and Orfield is quite literally to abolish the suburbs. Knowing that this could never happen through outright annexation by nearby cities, they’ve developed ways to coax suburbs to slowly forfeit their independence.
One approach is to force suburban residents into densely packed cities by blocking development on the outskirts of metropolitan areas, and by discouraging driving with a blizzard of taxes, fees, and regulations. Step two is to move the poor out of cities by imposing low-income-housing quotas on development in middle-class suburbs. Step three is to export the controversial “regional tax-base sharing” scheme currently in place in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area to the rest of the country. Under this program, a portion of suburban tax money flows into a common regional pot, which is then effectively redistributed to urban, and a few less well-off “inner-ring” suburban, municipalities.
The Obama administration, stocked with “regionalist” appointees, has been advancing this ambitious plan quietly for the past four years. Efforts to discourage driving and to press development into densely packed cities are justified by reference to fears of global warming. Leaders of the crusade against “sprawl” very consciously use environmental concerns as a cover for their redistributive schemes.
The centerpiece of the Obama administration’s anti-suburban plans is a little-known and seemingly modest program called the Sustainable Communities Initiative. The “regional planning grants” funded under this initiative — many of them in battleground states like Florida, Virginia, and Ohio — are set to recommend redistributive policies, as well as transportation and development plans, designed to undercut America’s suburbs. Few have noticed this because the program’s goals are muffled in the impenetrable jargon of “sustainability,” while its recommendations are to be unveiled only in a possible second Obama term.
Obama’s former community-organizing mentors and colleagues want the administration to condition future federal aid on state adherence to the recommendations served up by these anti-suburban planning commissions. That would quickly turn an apparently modest set of regional-planning grants into a lever for sweeping social change.
In light of Obama’s unbroken history of collaboration with his organizing mentors on this anti-suburban project, and his proven willingness to impose ambitious policy agendas on the country through heavy-handed regulation, this project seems likely to advance.
A second and equally ambitious facet of Obama’s anti-suburban blueprint involves the work of Kruglik’s Building One America. Traditionally, Alinskyite community organizers mobilize leftist church groups. Kruglik’s group goes a step further by organizing not only the religious left but politicians from relatively less-well-off inner-ring suburbs. The goal is to build coalitions between urban and inner-ring suburban state legislators, in a bid to force regional tax-base sharing on middle-class suburbanites. That is how the practice came to Minnesota.
The July 2011 White House conference, gathering inner-ring suburban politicians for presentations by Rusk and Orfield, was an effort to place the prestige of the Obama administration behind Kruglik’s organizing efforts. A multi-state battle over regional tax-base “sharing,” abetted by the president, would usher in divisive class warfare on a scale likely to dwarf the puny efforts of Occupy Wall Street.
Obama’s little-known plans to undermine the political and economic autonomy of America’s suburbs constitute a policy initiative similar in ambition to health-care reform, the stimulus, or “cap-and-trade.” Obama’s anti-suburban plans also supply the missing link that explains his administration’s overall policy architecture.
Since the failure of Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty and the collapse of federal urban policy, leftist theorists of community organizing have advocated a series of moves designed to quietly redistribute tax money to the cities. Health-care reform and federal infrastructure spending (as in the stimulus) are backed by organizers as the best ways to reconstitute an urban policy without directly calling it that. A campaign against suburban “sprawl” under the guise of environmentalism is the next move. Open calls for suburban tax-base “sharing” are the final and most controversial link in the chain of a reconstituted and redistributive urban policy. President Obama is following this plan.
Middle-class suburban supporters of the president take note. It isn’t just the pocketbooks of the “1 percent” he’s after; it’s yours.
— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. This piece is adapted from his new book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama Is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312807/burn-down-suburbs-stanley-kurtz#
Also Read:
No comments:
Post a Comment