Barnes & Noble

Free Shipping on the Freshest Gear at!  No Minimum Purchase Required!  Some Exclusions May Apply, Contiguous U.S. Only.








at our


Don’t forget to add your “Buzz” to our  Table!


With all of the SCANDALS surrounding the White House our TABLE is BUZZING!

Which Scandals is most important to you?

We’d love to add your voice to our


A Return to Keynes?

By Thomas Sowell -

October 15, 2013


Thomas Sowell

Author Archive

The nomination of Janet Yellen to become head of the Federal Reserve System has set off a flurry of media stories. Since she will be the first woman to occupy that position, we can only hope that this will not mean that any criticism of what she does will be attributed to sex bias or to a “war on women.”

The Federal Reserve has become such a major player in the American economy that it needs far more scrutiny and criticism than it has received, regardless of who heads it.

Ms. Yellen, a former professor of economics at Berkeley, has openly proclaimed her views on economic policy, and those views deserve very careful scrutiny. She asks: “Will capitalist economies operate at full employment in the absence of routine intervention?” And she answers: “Certainly not.”

Janet Yellen represents the Keynesian economics that once dominated economic theory and policy like a national religion — until it encountered two things: Milton Friedman and the stagflation of the 1970s.

At the height of the Keynesian influence, it was widely believed that government policy-makers could choose a judicious trade-off between the inflation rate and the rate of unemployment. This trade-off was called the Phillips Curve, in honor of an economist at the London School of Economics.

Professor Milton Friedman of the University of Chicago attacked the Phillips Curve, both theoretically and empirically. When Professor Friedman received the Nobel Prize in economics — the first of many to go to Chicago economists, who were the primary critics of Keynesian economics — it seemed as if the idea of a trade-off between the inflation rate and the unemployment rate might be laid to rest.

The ultimate discrediting of this Phillips Curve theory was the rising inflation and unemployment, at the same time in the 1970s, in what came to be called “stagflation” — a combination of rising inflation and a stagnant economy with high unemployment.

Nevertheless, the Keynesian economists have staged a political comeback during the Obama administration. Janet Yellen’s nomination to head the Federal Reserve is the crowning example of that comeback.

Ms. Yellen asks: “Do policy-makers have the knowledge and ability to improve macroeconomic outcomes rather than making matters worse?” And she answers: “Yes.”

The former economics professor is certainly asking the right questions — and giving the wrong answers.

Her first question, whether free market economies can achieve full employment without government intervention, is a purely factual question that can be answered from history. For the first 150 years of the United States, there was no policy of federal intervention when the economy turned down.

No depression during all that time was as catastrophic as the Great Depression of the 1930s, when both the Federal Reserve System and Presidents Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt intervened in the economy on a massive and unprecedented scale.

Despite the myth that it was the stock market crash of 1929 that caused the double-digit unemployment of the 1930s, unemployment never reached double digits in any of the 12 months that followed the 1929 stock market crash.

Unemployment peaked at 9 percent in December 1929 and was back down to 6.3 percent by June 1930, when the first major federal intervention took place under Herbert Hoover. The unemployment decline then reversed, rising to hit double digits six months later. As Hoover and then FDR continued to intervene, double-digit unemployment persisted throughout the remainder of the 1930s.

Conversely, when President Warren G. Harding faced an annual unemployment rate of 11.7 percent in 1921, he did absolutely nothing, except for cutting government spending.

Keynesian economists would say that this was exactly the wrong thing to do. History, however, says that unemployment the following year went down to 6.7 percent — and, in the year after that, 2.4 percent.

Under Calvin Coolidge, the ultimate in non-interventionist government, the annual unemployment rate got down to 1.8 percent. How does the track record of Keynesian intervention compare to that?

Read more:
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

Race In America! -

President Obama & The Race Problem! – O’Reilly Talking Point



Charles Krauthammer Reacts to O’Reilly’s Talking Points -

Race & Crime in America -


flv= e

Bill O’Reilly:

Are Jay Z & Kanye West Hurting Black Kids?

O’Reilly Panel Erupts Over Race:

‘White People Don’t Get To Tell Us Who Our Civil Rights Leaders Are


Sharpton Fires Back At O’Reilly:

Since When Are You The ‘Expert On What African-Americans Want?’



The Five Hosts Tear Into Al Sharpton:

‘Race-Baiter,’ Pressured Zimmerman Arrest & Trial


Krauthammer’s Take:

Obama ‘Re-Racialized’ Martin-Zimmerman AfFair





Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly reacted Monday to criticism from MSNBC “PoliticsNation” host Al Sharpton.

During one of his opening “Talking Points” monologues last week, O’Reilly tied the death of Trayvon Martin to elements of black culture, an observation that Sharpton condemned.

Nonetheless, O’Reilly stood by his comments and reiterated statistics about the black family.

“Al Sharpton and the grievance industry strike back — that is the subject of this evening’s ‘Talking Points Memo,’” O’Reilly said. “Last week, we told you that one of the big reasons Trayvon Martin lost his life was that George Zimmerman feared the image he projected that night in Florida — his clothing, his presence. Zimmerman profiled Martin, and disaster followed. The anger this case has engendered was understandable. If Trayvon Martin was my son I would be doing exactly what his parents are doing. But out of tragedy can come something positive, and that is why ‘Talking Points’ is urging the civil rights folks to stop maligning the country and face up to a huge problem that is directly harming millions, primarily in the African-American community.”

“Young black Americans are the most violent group in this country by far,” he continued. “The reason is the collapse of the traditional African-American family unit. Fifty years ago when blacks had it much worse than they have it now 25 percent of black babies were born out of wedlock. Today the number is close to 75 percent. That is catastrophic. But the civil rights industry and the white power fracture basically ignore the problem. They also ignore the entertainment industry putting out vile products aimed at young people, some of whom incorporate the gangsta culture into their own lives.”

Since making those statements, O’Reilly had come under fire from Sharpton. To attack O’Reilly’s credibility on race issues, Sharpton used a 2007 clip from O’Reilly’s now-defunct radio program about an experience he had with Sharpton in a Harlem restaurant. O’Reilly argued that clip had been played out of context and offered the clip entirety as a way to debunk Sharpton’s attack.

He then said this was the beginning of the end for Sharpton and other “race hustlers.”

“‘Talking Points’ believes the day of the race hustlers is coming to an end,” he said. “This ‘we’ and ‘them’ business gets the country nowhere. Fair-minded Americans well understand there are severe problems in the black community that have to be solved. And it will take honest, courageous people to do that.

Screen Shot 2013-06-30 at 3.17.44 PM

The Top Twenty Obama Administration Scandals


by KEITH KOFFLER on MAY 31, 2013, 9:54 AM


It’s easy to forget that the three scandals currently swirling about President Obamaare just the latest episodes of potential misdoings by the scandal-plagued Obama administration.As a refresher, here is a full list of the administration’s most egregious scandals.

1. IRS targets Obama’s enemies: The IRS targeted conservative and pro-Israel groups prior to the 2012 election. Questions are being raised about why this occurred, who ordered it, whether there was any White House involvement and whether there was an initial effort to hide who knew about the targeting and when.

2. Benghazi: This is actually three scandals in one:

  • The failure of administration to protect the Benghazi mission.
  • The changes made to the talking points in order to suggest the attack was motivated by an anti-Muslim video
  • The refusal of the White House to say what President Obama did the night of the attack

3. Watching the AP: The Justice Department performed a massive cull of Associated Press reporters’ phone records as part of a leak investigation.

4. Rosengate: The Justice Department suggested that Fox News reporter James Rosen is a criminal for reporting about classified information and subsequently monitored his phones and emails.

5. Potential Holder perjury I: Attorney General Eric Holder told Congress he had never been associated with “potential prosecution” of a journalist for perjury when in fact he signed the affidavit that termed Rosen a potential criminal.

6. The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme: Allowed weapons from the U.S. to “walk” across the border into the hands of Mexican drug dealers. The ATF lost track of hundreds of firearms, many of which were used in crimes, including the December 2010 killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

7. Potential Holder Perjury II: Holder told Congress in May 2011 that he had just recently heard about the Fast and Furious gun walking scheme when there is evidence he may have known much earlier.

8. Sebelius demands payment: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius solicited donations from companies HHS might regulate. The money would be used to help her sign up uninsured Americans for ObamaCare.

9. The Pigford scandal: An Agriculture Department effort that started as an attempt to compensate black farmers who had been discriminated against by the agency but evolved into a gravy train delivering several billion dollars in cash to thousands of additional minority and female farmers who probably didn’t face discrimination.

10. GSA gone wild: The General Services Administration in 2010 held an $823,000 training conference in Las Vegas, featuring a clown and a mind readers. Resulted in the resignation of the GSA administrator.

11. Veterans Affairs in Disney World: The agency wasted more than $6 million on two conferences in Orlando. An assistant secretary was fired.

12. Sebelius violates the Hatch Act: A U.S. special counsel determined that Sebelius violated the Hatch Act when she made “extemporaneous partisan remarks” during a speech in her official capacity last year. During the remarks, Sebelius called for the election of the Democratic candidate for governor of North Carolina.

13. Solyndra: Republicans charged the Obama administration funded and promoted its poster boy for green energy despite warning signs the company was headed for bankruptcy. The administration also allegedly pressed Solyndra to delay layoff announcements until after the 2010 midterm elections.

14. AKA Lisa Jackson: Former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson used the name “Richard Windsor” when corresponding by email with other government officials, drawing charges she was trying to evade scrutiny.

15. The New Black Panthers: The Justice Department was accused of using a racial double standard in failing to pursue a voter intimidation case against Black Panthers who appeared to be menacing voters at a polling place in 2008 in Philadelphia.

16. Waging war all by myself: Obama may have violated the Constitution and both the letter and the spirit of the War Powers Resolution by attacking Libya without Congressional approval.

17. Biden bullies the press: Vice President Biden’s office has repeatedly interfered with coverage, including forcing a reporter to wait in a closet, making a reporter delete photos, and editing pool reports.

18. AKPD not A-OK: The administration paid millions to the former firm of then-White House adviser David Axelrod, AKPD Message and Media, to promote passage of Obamacare. Some questioned whether the firm was hired to help pay Axelrod $2 million AKPD owed him.

19. Sestak, we’ll take care of you: Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel used Bill Clinton as an intermediary to probe whether former Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) would accept a prominent, unpaid White House advisory position in exchange for dropping out of the 2010 primary against former Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.).

20. I’ll pass my own laws: Obama has repeatedly been accused of making end runs around Congress by deciding which laws to enforce, including the decision not to deport illegal immigrants who may have been allowed to stay in the United States had Congress passed the “Dream Act.”


 Screen Shot 2013-06-30 at 3.14.52 PM


Screen Shot 2013-05-04 at 11.18.56 AM



Special forces could’ve responded to Benghazi attack,


whistle-blower tells Fox News…




part 1





part 2


lv= i


part 3



Screen Shot 2013-05-04 at 11.19.21 AM


State Department’s Benghazi review panel


under investigation, Fox News confirms



Published May 02, 2013








Bill O’Reilly:

Liberal indoctrination poisoning our colleges

By Bill O’Reilly

Once again, graduation time is upon us, and a new study by the Los Angeles Times says plenty about the state of higher education in America. The paper looked at the invited commencement speakers for 150 colleges and universities. There are just four conservative speakers, as opposed to at least 69 liberal speakers.
In fact, Newark (N.J.) Mayor Cory Booker, a very liberal guy, has as many campus addresses as all elected Republicans combined.
There is no shortage of intellect or accomplishment on the right. The reason few conservative speakers are invited is that college administrators are frightened by radical-left students and faculty.

Last month, Karl Rove’s speech at the University of Massachusetts was disrupted, and so was the address by Sen. Rand Paul at Howard University. Nobody wants a graduation ceremony turned into an ideological circus, and that’s what often happens when perceived conservatives are invited to speak on certain campuses.

Last year, I headed up a benefit for the It Happened to Alexa Foundation at Boston University, where I received a master’s degree in broadcast journalism. As a freshman, Alexa Branchini was raped in a BU dorm and had to withdraw from the school. She eventually founded, with her parents, an organization to help victims of violent crime. I felt the campus of Boston University would be the perfect place to hold a fundraiser for this fine charity.

How wrong I was.

A number of far-left professors and administrators, including a university vice president, boycotted the event. The school did little to promote it and essentially folded under the pressure of zealots. It was an absolute disgrace and an insult to Alexa and her family.

That tells you all you need to know about the mentality of fanatical college professors and the cowardly administrators who enable them.

There is no question that liberal indoctrination is a fact of life on most American college campuses. Tenure means never having to say you’re sorry or you’re wrong. And, overwhelmingly, tenured college teachers are liberal. They dominate and intimidate their students.

If you go up against them, your grade often suffers. There is a tyranny in higher education that is gravely harming this nation.

When a distinguished medical doctor and author such as Ben Carson has to withdraw as a commencement speaker at Johns Hopkins University because some loons don’t like his conservative point of view, you know there is trouble in River City. And little is being done about it.

It is long past time to call out America’s colleges, especially those funded by taxpayers, and demand that they be fair in their hiring practices and speaking forums. I give a nice annual donation to Marist College, where I obtained a degree in history, because it is fair.

But I’ve stopped giving to Boston U. and to Harvard (where I received a master’s in public administration), because those schools are not fair. All college grads should evaluate their contributions.

That’s the only way the liberal higher-education stranglehold will be broken. Many of those pinhead professors espouse socialistic tenets — but, believe me, they want the money. The goal of higher education should be to champion the airing of all honest viewpoints.

Nothing less is acceptable.

Email Bill O’Reilly at


2016: Obama’s America


By Dinesh D’Souza”s











By Neal Boortz


Yesterday afternoon I finally found the time to head to a theatre to see 2016 – Obama’s America,


In the book D’Sousa tried to determine just what was driving Dear Ruler’s rage (dare we say hatred?) against successful wealthy Nations and Americans?  Why did he send the bust of Winston Churchill back to the British Embassy in Washington?  Why did he break with many previous presidents and take the Argentinian side on the Falkans controversy?  Why is the centerpiece of Obama’s reelection campaign his obsession on raising taxes on the rich, even when history clearly shows that raising taxes on the rich only serves to reduce revenues to the government?


To answer these questions D’Sousa traveled to Hawaii, to Indonesia, to Africa and around the Continental U.S. to interview the people who knew Barack Obama and people who have studied those who were close to Obama as he was growing up.


Now I tried to watch this movie with somewhat a different eye than most of the people in that theater.  As hard as it is to do … I tried to watch it as an Obama supporter.  I was looking for something that was clearly untrue or for logical lapses relating to Obama’s positions.  (Yeah, like a liberal would recognize a logical lapse.)  Not once did I think to myself “Oh now come on, Dinesh.  That’s a little much.”


There were a few things in the movie that I had not realized … a few surprises for me.




      • Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, truly seemed to despise the United States, so much so that she gravitated solely to men from the “third world.”



      • Obama’s father was married at the time he met and married Ann Dunham.  No judgment here – that might have been perfectly acceptable in his culture.  Just didn’t know that.



      • While living in Indonesia Obama’s mother sent him to Hawaii to live with his grandparents because she was concerned that Obama would be influenced by his step-father, Lolo Sotero’s, increasingly pro-American and pro-Western views and associations.



      • It was Obama’s grandfather, from whom his mother apparently got her strident anti-American views, who introduced Obama to Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis, with the intent that Davis was to become Obama’s mentor.



      • Obama’s private school in Hawaii, Punahou, was infused with an anti-colonialist fervor; an atmosphere of resentment toward the United States as having colonized Hawaii.



D’Sousa puts all of the information he gathers together and comes up with the conclusion that Obama’s driving philosophy is one of anti-colonialism.  His mother, father, grandfather and mentor were all strident anti-colonialists.  They all harbored the feeling that America’s wealth came from the exploitation of other nations and people.  Obama now sees the opportunity to honor the legacy of his parents by righting that wrong and by destroying much of America’s ill-gotten wealth.  This he is intent on doing through the destruction of our economy.


At the end of the movie the audience – as it had in other venues – burst into applause.  I heard yells of “Romney – Ryan” and “Take back America.”  Me?  I was shaken.  The documentary rang true.  It answered question for me – and left me even more afraid for the future of my country than I am now.


Much to the dismay of the left, the movie has been very successful in limited engagements across the country; so much so that the movie will open in an much-expanded list of theaters over the weekend.


Now .. here’s the problem.  The only people who will go see this movie are people who are already predisposed to vote for Romney.  The vast majority of people who will vote for Obama are not voting for a particularly philosophy … they are voting for one simple reason:  To get access to someone else’s wealth.  They don’t care what Obama’s motives or reasons are.  They care about one thing — their checks – their money – their ObamaMoney.


Here is the best way to use this movie.  Get a friend who doesn’t vote; a friend who basically shares your political philosophy, but who doesn’t plan to vote because they feel their vote won’t count anyway.  Take that friend to the movie.  Offer then dinner before or after .. but somehow get them to that movie.  This movie is so powerful it will take those “my vote won’t count” people and change them into “By God I’m going to MAKE my vote count” people.  That may save our Republic.





How much will ObamaCare really cost?

Jun 29, 2012- 3:02 –

Implementation might be more expensive than estimate



What does health care decision mean for doctors and patients?

Drs. Siegel and Samadi weigh in






ObamaCare and the politics of dependency


Published June 29, 2012


The cost of ObamaCare pales, economically or in terms of quality of care, in my opinion, in comparison to what President Obama’s health care law will cost our country, in terms of mindset.



Here’s why: The notion of an individual mandate, that is forcing Americans to buy something with their after-tax dollars (or pay a fine), can make citizens see themselves as serfs who actually have no right at all to the money they earn, and keep it only when it suits the federal government. Money is a metaphor:  Take away the right to determine what people do with their earned, after-tax income and you will take away their self-confidence, self-determination, creativity and courage to act on their beliefs and their ideas. An American citizen who willingly allows the federal government to earmark his or her after-tax income and direct it to insurance companies is an American citizen who has decided that the government “knows best.”  The federal government is, from that moment forward, (in at least some measure) that citizen’s parent, leaving them only with an allowance, consisting of what’s left after they buy what their “parents” in Washington tell them to. Every human being knows in his or her heart that the ability to earn a living and make decisions about the money that flows to him or her is one of the hallmarks of an autonomous life.

An American citizen who willingly allows the federal government to earmark his or her after-tax income and direct it to insurance companies is an American citizen who has decided that the government “knows best.”

Children and adolescents dream of the day when they will “have their own money,” because they understand that the roots of the monetary/financial system reach deep into sacred notions of individual choice and freedom.  Take that decision-making capacity away from the individual, and you risk slingshotting him or her back to a pre-adolescent stance. You infantilize that person. Seen this way, the individual mandate is, therefore, another in those forces unleashed by President Obama–along with lots of food stamps and lots of unemployment payments and lots of bailouts–which encourages adult Americans to turn to their government for nurturance, and to become angry at perceived oppressors when they feel unfulfilled. If you think that Occupy Wall Street was a spectacle, just wait and see how tens of millions of adult children, who have been told they can’t decide how to spend their money, behave when their allowance dries up. Seen through this “We the Parents” lens, rather than “We the People,” it should be obvious that ObamaCare is a terrifying trap. Under the guise of “helping” and “healing” and “caring” for Americans, it reminds them how vulnerable they are to illness. Under the guise of “fairness,” it takes away their financial decision-making capacity.  In true Progressive fashion, it makes people regress and feel as though they don’t know best how to manage their health or their affairs.  It renders them weak. Deep inside, people despise being weak.  It is an affront to their God-given rights to SELF-determination and the pursuit of happiness.  Hence, the stance of federal government as parent that sits so well with President Obama opens the door to depression and all manner of ills (including drug abuse) that afflict those who feel disempowered. With Egypt in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood, with Iran building nuclear weapons and with Europe facing economic calamity, the last thing we need are lessons from Washington in how to be weak individuals. Because courage comes from deep inside, from each adult American in this nation it will, ultimately, be the only thing that stands between us and calamity. The individual mandate of ObamaCare is a virus that could destroy that good psychological DNA.   Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at Read more:

Obama invokes executive privilege on Fast and Furious Jun 20, 2012- 2:50 – Talking Points 6/20

Congress calls for special prosecutor, gets visit from

Mueller, Clapper over security leaks

Published June 08, 2012

  • Security_leaks.jpg

    June 7, 2012: House and Senate Intelligence Committees. (L to R) Reps. C.A. Ruppersberger, and Mike Rogers; Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Dianne Feinstein.

The growing, bipartisan concern in Congress about national security leaks that appear linked to the Obama administration brought two of the country’s top intelligence officials Thursday to Capitol Hill –where they were told the once-secret information his now endangering the lives of Americans across the world.

“It’s outrageous that the White House would allow these ongoing alleged disclosures to jeopardize the safety of our intelligence professionals and the well-being of the American people,” GOP Sen. Roy Blunt said after a meeting with FBI Director Robert Mueller and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The meeting with Blunt and other members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence marks the first visit by administration officials to Capitol Hill, following a series of stories by the New York Times that detailed cyber-attacks on Iran’s nuclear program, the working of U.S. drone attacks in the Middle East and the human “hit list” — culled personally by President Obama. READ MORE>>

Bomb Plot Was Foiled by CIA Informer

WASHINGTON –  The would-be bomber in the airline plot was actually working as a U.S. intelligence informant, but the CIA had Al Qaeda fooled from the start.

A government source familiar with intelligence confirmed that an international sting operation infiltrated the Al Qaeda cell, Fox News’ Catherine Herridge reports.

Herridge says that the informant was apparently one and the same as the bomber got the device out.

Last month, U.S. intelligence learned that Al Qaeda’s Yemen branch hoped to launch a spectacular attack using a new, nearly undetectable bomb aboard an airliner bound for America, officials say.

But the man the terrorists were counting on to carry out the attack was actually working for the CIA and Saudi intelligence, U.S. and Yemeni officials told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

The dramatic sting operation thwarted the attack before it had a chance to succeed. READ MORE>>

Read more:

With TAXES being a Big Buzz around the Table…

TABLETALK takes a look at:

Phony fix: The prez’s “solution” doesn’t help students get out from under mountains of debt.

Phony fix:

The prez’s “solution” doesn’t help students get out from under mountains of debt.

O’s college cop-out

Here’s a real student-loan Rx

Last Updated: 4:56 AM, April 30, 2012

Posted: 11:19 PM, April 29, 2012

Glenn Harlan Reynolds

With student-loan rates set to double, President Obama has been busy posing as Mr. Fixit. Too bad it’s just a pose.

The country has a serious student-debt problem, and also a student-loan problem. But they’re two different things.

The student-debt problem is that too many students are borrowing too much money to finance educations that won’t earn them enough to repay the loans. This leads to misery.

A recent Wall Street Journal story noted that many students are postponing marriage, children and home-buying because of the difficulty — in some cases, the impossibility — of keeping up student-loan payments.

This is bad for them and the economy, because they won’t be available to soak up the excess houses built during the housing bubble, which also was fueled by cheap government loans.

If they postpone having kids, fewer taxpayers will exist to fund Social Security and other programs in a few decades.

If these younger people had gone into debt flipping houses in 2005, they’d be able to declare bankruptcy and get a fresh start — but the law doesn’t allow that.

Student-loan debt is treated like child support, meaning that it’s almost impossible to get out of. People who paid six-figure sums to universities that happily pocketed the money in exchange for gender-studies degrees that would never produce a job are now debt slaves, like the coal miners in Tennessee Ernie Ford’s “Sixteen Tons.”

Although 37 million adults owe student loans, only 39 percent are actually paying down balances. Some 5.4 million have at least one loan past due; loans totaling $270 billion are at least 30 days delinquent.

These numbers are likely to climb in coming months and years as US job-creation remains stagnant.

It’s a big crisis, all right, but Obama is doing nothing about it. His lower-rate plan would apply only to new loans, and only to loans taken out under the federal Stafford Loan program. He’s not helping previous borrowers get out from under their mountains of debt. He’s helping new borrowers build their own debt mountains.

In fact, another Obama policy is adding to the woes. Back when Democrats ran Congress, the president engineered a federal takeover of student-loan processing. Now the Chronicle of Higher Education reports that this is producing huge paperwork screwups that have thrown thousands of borrowers into default, more than doubling the number of defaulters since December.

What would a serious student-loan reform look like? Well, it would look more like normal loans. Students’ ability to borrow would be based on the likelihood that they’d be able to pay. Plus, loans would be dischargeable in bankruptcy if things turned out badly.

Right now, student loans are sold on the basis that “college” promotes higher earnings. But “college” isn’t an undifferentiated product. Some degrees — say in Electrical Engineering — increase earnings dramatically. Others — in, say, gender studies — not so much. A rational lender would be much more willing to finance the former than the latter.

Oh, and in ordinary credit transactions, creditors bear some risk. Loan someone money that they can’t pay back, and you take a loss if they go bankrupt. In the housing bubble, this discipline broke down because the people writing the loans weren’t going to hold on to the mortgages. Similarly, colleges today get their money upfront; if the student can’t pay it back, that’s someone else’s problem.

Let’s give colleges some “skin in the game” by making them absorb the loss, or at least part of it, if students can’t pay. Perhaps if students can’t pay their loans by 10 years after graduation, they should be allowed to discharge them in bankruptcy, with the institutions that got the loan money on the hook for, say, 20 percent of the loss.

You fix a malfunctioning credit system by ensuring that the people who can control the risks are the ones who face a loss if things go wrong. Obama’s interest-rate “fix” does nothing like that. It just pumps more hot air into the bubble. That’s not a solution, it’s doubling down on failure.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee. His “The Higher Education Bubble” hits stores next month

Read more:

The History of the Income Tax:

Dick Morris TV:


Amazing the Washington Post would print this about Obama.


by Designated Conservatives on Friday, December 2, 2011 at 7:08pm

Obama: The Affirmative Action President

by Matt Patterson (columnist – Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon,

a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man

so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy,

direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite

unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state

legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”) and

finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential

ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades

served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It

is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street


To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and

an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore

entitled in the eyes of ‘liberaldom’ to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were

a bit extreme, he was given a pass.

Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass — held to a lower standard — because of the color of his skin.

Podhoretz continues:

And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had

said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the

curse of racism to rest?

Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon — affirmative action. Not in the legal

sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are

designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities

to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high dropout

rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional

devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.

Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin — that’s affirmative action in a nutshell,

and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.

True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama

was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good

enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no

record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in

spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time

Obama speaks?

In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills,

intellect, and cool character. Those people — conservatives included — ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man

thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is

absent he can barely think or speak at all.

Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth — it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind

that has failed over and over again for 100 years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it

was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so

comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for

anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.

When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty

and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.


Hollywood’s Conservative Underground Grows

Monday, 24 Oct 2011

By Ronald Kessler

Lately, conservatives in Hollywood have been giving each other support in a secret organization called Friends of Abe, after Abraham Lincoln.

But Clint Howard, a conservative actor who is the brother of actor and director Ron Howard, says conservatives are still outcasts who have “trepidations” that their political orientation in a sea of outspoken liberals will sink their careers.

Like Jon Voight, Pat Boone, Kelsey Grammer, and Gary Sinise, Clint Howard is one of the few courageous enough to identify himself publicly as a conservative. Still, Howard, who has a long list of film and television roles to his credit, chooses his words carefully.

“For years conservative-minded people have been kind of subjected to a lot of — I wouldn’t say bullying, no it’s not bullying,” he tells Newsmax. “Conservative minded people have been subjected to a very liberal work place, and it has been frustrating.”

Howard usually plays comedic roles, but he sees nothing funny about the Hollywood establishment’s view of conservatives. Especially when George W. Bush was president, Bush and Republicans were “openly bashed” on movie sets, Howard says.

“They were made fun of, there were angry comments, there was vitriol,” Howard says. “I resented that because I felt like President Bush was doing a tremendous job under an extreme amount of pressure. My wife and I are so blessed that we were around when President Bush and Vice President Cheney were in control during these difficult times.”

Asked if he knows people who were shunned because of their conservative beliefs, Howard says it is always hard to pinpoint an exact cause and effect when actors are not hired or rehired.

There are a lot of liberal-minded people on the other side of that casting session,” Howard says. “I always tell younger conservative-minded people that they better mind their P’s and Q’s and remember that you want to have a career.

“I believe that conservative-minded people could easily alienate themselves from the business in terms of getting employment opportunities.”

Howard, who has lately had roles in “Alabama Moon, “The Dilemma,” and “Speed Dating,” says the overwhelming imposition of left-wing values in movies has been bad for business. As Pat Boone says, America is typically portrayed in movies as “the great Satan.”

“People in the business get so confused when a movie like ‘Fire Proof’ comes out and performs well,” Howard says, referring to the 2008 Christian drama. “It’s like wow — who would have thought?”

In the same way, MSNBC executives never seem to connect its left-wing approach with its miserable ratings as compared with Fox News.

Despite their opposing political views, Howard says that he and his brother Ron Howard, who did a commercial for Barack Obama, have a solid relationship.

“We never argue, and I don’t believe for a second Ron would ever consider somebody’s political beliefs while hiring,” Howard says. “He wants to make the best film he can make.”

The fact that conservatives are now meeting secretly — Howard won’t name the Friends of Abe — has given them a feeling of support. The group meets for lunches and dinners. After being launched in 2008, it now consists of up to 2,000 people.

“This sort of conservative-minded movement in the entertainment business makes me feel good personally,” Howard says.

Still, Pat Boone says, there is good reason to keep membership in Friends of Abe secret.

“If certain studio execs — hirers and firers — learn that this is a movement and growing, and that some of these people that they hire are of this inclination, these people could be unemployed,” Boone says.

Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of He is a New York Times best-selling author of books on the Secret Service, FBI, and CIA. His latest, “The Secrets of the FBI,” has just been published. View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you free via email. Go Here Now.

Read more on Hollywood’s Conservative Underground Grows
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!



[ flv=

Adele Song Covered By Military Band, SIDEWINDER,

Becomes Web Sensation

In what looks to be another YouTube sensation, the Air National Guard band Sidewinder has been swept up in

a flurry of media attention after their video covering Adele’s “Rolling in the Deep”

caught the eye and ear of the public and media.

Sidewinder is the 571st Air National Guard Band of the Central States Rock Band,

and is stationed at Lambert International Airport in St. Louis, Missouri as part of the 131st Bomb Wing,

Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, according to their Facebook site.


FBI, DHS Warn of Terror Threats to Small Planes

Sep 04, 2011 8:19 AM EDT


The FBI and Homeland Security have issued a nationwide warning about Al Qaeda threats to small airplanes, just days before the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Authorities say there is no specific or credible terrorist threat for the 10-year anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. But they have stepped up security across America as a precaution.

According to a five-page law enforcement bulletin issued Friday, as recently as early this year, Al Qaeda was considering ways to attack airplanes.

The alert, issued ahead of the summer’s last busy travel weekend, said terrorists have considered renting private planes and loading them with explosives.

“Al Qaeda and its affiliates have maintained an interest in obtaining aviation training, particularly on small aircraft, and in recruiting Western individuals for training in Europe or the United States, although we do not have current, credible information or intelligence of an imminent attack being planned,” according to the bulletin obtained by The Associated Press.

The bulletin also says Al Qaeda would like to use sympathetic Westerners to get flight training, then get them to become flight instructors.

Matthew Chandler, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, described the bulletin as routine.

“We shared this information with our partners to highlight the need for continued awareness and vigilance,” he said.

Aviation security is much tighter than it was a decade ago, but Al Qaeda remains keenly interested in launching attacks on airplanes, believing large attacks with high body counts are more likely to grab headlines.

Threats to small airplanes are nothing new. After the 2001 attacks, the government grounded thousands of crop dusters amid fears the planes could be used in an attack.

In 2002, U.S. officials said they uncovered an Al Qaeda plot to fly a small plane into a U.S. warship in the Gulf. And in 2003, U.S. officials uncovered an Al Qaeda plot to crash an explosives-laden small aircraft into the American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan.

Opinion Journal: The Politics of Debt 8/3/2011 1:17:24 PM

House majority leader Eric Cantor and Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan discuss the debt ceiling deal and the political fallout.

[stream flv=



History Myths

Posted by John Stossel | July 27, 2011

“It ain’t so much the things we don’t know that get us into trouble. It’s the things we know that just ain’t so.”

That famous line, attributed to many authors but apparently said by humorist Henry Wheeler Shaw (aka Josh Billings), applies to history as much as anything.

What liberates oppressed people? I was taught it’s often American power. Just the threat of our military buildup defeated the Soviet Union, and our troops in the Middle East will create islands of freedom.

Unlikely, says historian Thaddeus Russell, author of “A Renegade History of the United States.”

“As a matter of fact,” Russell told me, “in general American military intervention has increased anti-Americanism and hardened repressive regimes. On the other hand, American popular culture — what was often called the worst of our culture in many cases — has actually done more for liberation and our national security than anything that the 82nd Airborne could do.”

I told him that I thought that the Soviet Union collapsed because the Soviets spent so much trying to keep pace with Ronald Reagan’s military buildup

On the contrary, Russell said, “it collapsed from within. … People simply walked away from the ideology of communism. And that began especially when American popular culture — jazz and rock and roll — began infiltrating those countries after World War II.”

I demanded evidence.

“American soldiers brought jazz during World War II to the eastern front. Soviet soldiers brought it back. Eastern European soldiers brought it and spread it across those countries. … Stalin was hysterical about this.”

The authorities were particularly concerned about young people performing and enjoying sensual music.

“Any regime at all depends on social order to maintain its power. Social order and sensuality, pleasures of the body, are often at odds. Stalin and his commissars understood that.”

American authorities 30 years earlier also feared the sensuality of black music, said Russell, attacking it “as primitive jungle music that was bringing down American youth. Stalin and his commissars across Eastern Europe said exactly the same things with the same words later.”

Then rock and roll came.

“That was even more threatening,” Russell said. “By the 1980s, disco and rock were enormously popular throughout the communist world.”

The communists realized they had to relax the rules or risk losing everything, but it was too late. One of the most amazing and significant spectacles was Bruce Springsteen’s concert in East Germany in 1988, when a crowd of 160,000 people who lived behind the Iron Curtain sang “Born in the USA.” READ MORE>>

Enforcing Spending Cuts Dick Morris TV


White House Salaries Dick Morris TV

 [ flv=



[stream flv= e




Paul Ryan:

Obamacare is Real Medicare Killer

Thursday, 26 May 2011 07:52 PM

By Hiram Reisner


  • House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan says contrary to what Democrats are saying, it is Obamacare — not his budget plan — that will kill Medicare. Ryan also said Thursday on Fox News he has no interest in running for president in 2012, as he has enough on his plate trying to pass the budget.

“Obamacare kills Medicare as we know it,” Ryan said. “Obamacare raids $500 billion from Medicare to spend on Obamacare, puts in place a [15-member] board to ration Medicare. Our budget repeals the raiding, gets rid of the rationing board, preserves this program — makes no changes for a person 55 years of age or older, and saves Medicare. Ryan told Fox News’ Bret Baier the House GOP plan reforms Medicare “for our generation, so that it’s solvent.” “The president’s plan does not save Medicare — it lets it go bankrupt — rations the program and raids the program,” he said. “We get rid of the rationing, we stop the raiding, and we save the program from bankruptcy.” Ryan said Democrats are measuring the GOP plan “against a mythical future — a fiscal fantasy, which is a collapsing system. If we don’t fix Medicare it goes bankrupt.” “What we are trying to do here is give seniors more choices and have more competition to bring down . . . prices,” he continued, adding that private companies will drive down healthcare costs. “What we’re saying is, [have] a system of choice and competition — where Medicare sets up a list of competitive plans — guaranteed coverage options that seniors choose from, for 54-year-olds and below — and Medicare subsidizes those plans. “It’s the same system I’ve had as a congressman — it’s the same plan that President Bill Clinton’s bipartisan commission to save Medicare recommended,” Ryan said. “This is what we are proposing for 54 and below.” Switching to the 2012 presidential election, Baier said there has been some talk about Ryan running for president; the House Budget Committee chairman said he was not interested. “I’m really not,” Ryan said. “I really believe I can do more for this cause where I am right now as chairman of the House Budget Committee — I have no plans to [run] — it takes a tremendous undertaking to do this, and right now, where I am at this moment, in the budget fight we are in, I just believe I need to focus on this budget fight.” © Newsmax. All rights reserved.





Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution



Read Full Report
Key Facts & Summary


A Contrast in Budgets


Setting the Record Straight








Geithner Plans to Tap Pensions to Cover Debt

Monday, 16 May 2011 11:27 AM By Henry J. Reske


The government will to tap federal retirement funds to keep the government functioning. The government lost its ability to borrow when it hit the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling Monday — and it must find other ways to pay the bills unless the debt ceiling is raised, The Washington Postreported.


Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is undertaking other measures to keep the government chugging along but is only buying time. Geithner has said that, if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling by August, the government will begin to default on obligations with catastrophic consequences such as a suspension of Social Security payments, the Post reported.   Since 1985, Treasury secretaries have tapped into government programs six times to avoid default. However, because of the current size of the debt, such measures are less effective. The government currently needs $125 billion more a month than it taxes in, the Post reported. GOP leaders are skeptical of the consequences of failing to raise the debt ceiling and are pushing for spending cuts in return for raising the debt, according to the Post.




Ryan pushes spending cuts as U.S. hits debt limit

(Reuters) – The United States reached the legal limits of its borrowing authority on Monday as a top Republican increased his party’s demand for deep spending cuts as part of any increase.


The remarks by Representative Paul Ryan, the top budget writer in the House of Representatives, underscored the divisions that Republicans and Democrats will have to overcome in order to raise the $14.3 trillion debt limit and avoid a default that would roil markets across the globe. The Treasury Department said it was dipping into federal pension funds to pay the country’s bills, one of several emergency measures that should stave off a default until early August.READ MORE>>


Dick Morris Reports:


How To Win The Debt Limit Fight




GOP Address: Spending Crisis Still Looms


flv= s]


Budget Chairman Paul Ryan:


The Republican Budget Proposal


Will Cut Over 4 Trillion Dollars

flv= e

Paul Ryan Is Right About the Budget –

Americans Cannot Afford Another

Decade of Massive Government Spending

By John Lott

Published April 05, 2011   | The deficit is a spending problem. That’s the simple truth. If federal government spending after President Clinton’s last budget had simply grown fast enough to keep up with inflation and the growth in population, the 2012 budget would be running over a $70 billion surplus. Instead, federal expenditures more than doubled from $1.86 to $3.82 trillion in the ten years from 2001 to 2011, causing this year’s enormous $1.65 trillion deficit. During President Obama’s first three years in office the government’s deficits are adding up to over $4.3 trillion. And there is no let up in sight. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the President Obama’s budget plans will add another $10.4 trillion in deficits over the next decade from 2012 to 2021. Americans can’t afford to ignore this problem. The pricetag for that expected addition to the federal debt over the next decade comes to over $134,000 for a family of four. That doubles the debt the CBO expects that families will already face by the end of this year. Tuesday Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Chairman of the House Budget Committee, will announce his proposal to make cuts in spending in order to trim the increase in debt by $4.4 trillion — down from the projected $10.4 trillion to $6 trillion. That is a serious start. Unfortunately, the proposal can be expected to be met by incredulity from Democrats, who don’t want to cut any spending and who labeled the current House Republican proposal for this year’s budget of a measly $61 billion as “extreme” and “reckless.” READ MORE>>



Gov. Christie on Face the Nation…

on Obama, Health Care Reform,…

The Unions and Collective Bargaining!

[stream flv=


Part 2 of interview:

[stream flv=

New Jersey Gov. Christie Visits Washington,


Discusses the National Debt


By U.S. News Staff Posted: February 17, 2011

In a visit to Washington on Wednesday, Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie accused members of Congress of not adequately addressing the national debt. In a speech to the American Enterprise Institute, Christie said, “Here’s the truth that no one is talking about: you’re going to have to raise the retirement age for social security.” He also joked about what he sees as Congress‘s failure to talk openly about the debt problem and entitlement reform. “Oh I just said it, and I’m still standing here. I did not vaporize into the carpeting. And I said it. We have to reform Medicare because it costs too much and it is going to bankrupt us. Once again, lightning did not come through the windows and strike me dead.” Christie, considered a rising GOP star and serving his first term as governor, took issue with the political climate among lawmakers in Washington. “My children’s future and your children’s future is more important than some political strategy,” he said. “What game is being played down here is irresponsible and dangerous.”  For More…




ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales -

Clobbers Middle-Class Americans

“I can make a firm pledge.  Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.  Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes,”
President Obama, September 12, 2008

Beginning January 1, 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income, including the sale of single family homes, townhouses, co-ops, condominiums, and even rental income.

In February 2010, 5.02 million homes were sold, according to the National Association of Realtors.  On any given day, the sale of a house, townhome, condominium, co-op, or income from a rental property can push middle-income families over the $250,000 threshold and slam them with a new tax they can’t afford.

This new ObamaCare tax is the first time the government will apply a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income.  This new tax on home sales and unearned income and other Medicare taxes raise taxes more than $210 billion to pay for ObamaCare.   The National Association of Realtors called this new Medicare tax on unearned income “destructive” and “ill-advised” and warned it would hurt job creation.

For previous ObamaCare Flatlines, visit click here.

Additional Document: The Costly Consequences of Health Care Reform (Courtesy of the Budget Committee)




Judge Rules Health Care Law Is Unconstitutional

Published January 31, 2011



A U.S. district judge on Monday threw out the nation’s health care law, declaring it unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause and surely reviving a feud among competing philosophies about the role of government.

Judge Roger Vinson, in Pensacola, Fla., ruled that as a result of the unconstitutionality of the “individual mandate” that requires people to buy insurance, the entire law must be declared void.

“I must reluctantly conclude that Congress exceeded the bounds of its authority in passing the act with the individual mandate. That is not to say, of course, that Congress is without power to address the problems and inequities in our health care system. The health care market is more than one-sixth of the national economy, and without doubt Congress has the power to reform and regulate this market. That has not been disputed in this case. The principal dispute
has been about how Congress chose to exercise that power here,” Vinson wrote.













Empty ad slot (#1)!

Empty ad slot (#1)!

Empty ad slot (#1)!

Empty ad slot (#1)!


fox news




NORDSTROM - Shop Fresh Fall Coats from Favorite Brands


Boston Proper, Inc.



Neiman Marcus Last Call (Neiman Marcus)





Vera Bradley Designs, Inc.


Plow & Hearth



NORDSTROM - What's Your Perfect Fit? Shop Jeans now.




Barnes & Noble


Gardener's Supply Company


NORDSTROM - Shop Eileen Fisher Fall 2014





Perfect invitations, great looks, great style

nordstroms BOOTS

NORDSTROM - Shop Hot Fall Boots from Vince Camuto, Frye and more.








J.McLaughlin Men's Sweaters



NORDSTROM - Shop New Fall Favorites from TopShop

Macy’s sale





Cutter and Buck, Inc.



Barnes & Noble


Waterford Crystal





















CHINA - Click Here!