Republican Convention

I am really enjoying the Republican convention this week. It's very interesting to listen to values they espouse as "American Values."  It's an interesting thought that an entire group of people can agree on values. I find it even more interesting as I listen to NPR unpack their speeches the next day. Mara Liasson (whom I very much admire) pointed out that Ryan's speech discussed how Obama's stimulus didn't save one of the GM plants. However, Liasson indicated that the plant was scheduled to be closed before Obama took office. It's an interesting question.

I love it that there are "fact checkers" who are validating these speeches. If the fact checkers point out that the plant was scheduled to close BEFORE Obama took office but didn't close until a few months AFTER he took office, should Obama be held accountable for not being able to close the plant?  True, he claimed that he could save jobs and keep plants from closing, but does that invalidate Ryan's statement?

Intellectual Laziness

I find it interesting that during an election season, many pundits, candidates and their supporters are charged with intellectual laziness. It's an interesting situation when we are charged with determining who is to lead our country. I think that our values speak louder than our intellect when we are determining such things, and I think that the candidates and their election team like to take advantage of us for the same things.

For example, I was just looking at a democratic website asking Romney to share his tax returns. He already shared his last year returns according to law, so why should more matter? Are his tax returns critical to making a decision about who is going to be a good president?  Personally, I am more curious about what kinds of laws he passed or signed into law in the state of MASSACHUSETTS when he was governor. Why are we not getting more information about that?  Conversely, why are we not hearing about  Obama's policies that he signed into law? What about the ones he requested but didn't get signed because of congress? I am still curious about why he brought us into the war in Afghanistan when we are now seeing soldiers being killed by their "trainees."  Why are we not talking about that? Why are we not talking about closing Guantanimo?

Our founders made sure that the President doesn't have too much power, but we certainly attribute a great deal of power to our president. There are many things that the president can control, but there are a great deal of things that he cannot since the Congress has much to do with what bills get passed, etc. Why are we not asking more questions about how the President can work with Congress? How well did Romney work with the MASSACHUSETTS state legislators? What's Obama's record?

Our values may be getting in the way of making a good decision in this election. I read an article recently in Salon.com that described our fascination with these "side stories" a matter of intellectual laziness. Is it? Can you find some evidence of intellectual laziness in some of the news stories about the upcoming election?

Sex Education in the Schools

The Governor just vetoed the Sex Education bill that passed during our legislative session. The bill required schools to teach abstinence only. However; right now, Utah has an "opt in" policy that means parents have to CHOOSE to allow their children to participate in the sex education in the schools.  They are still pretty strict in what they can teach, this bill just took the limitations one step further.

First, the supporters of the bill provided a pretty good argument that sex education should be taught by the parents and that students who learned abstinence only (according to their studies) tended to delay sex for longer.

The opponents of the bill suggested that the children should be armed with all the information they can get in order to NOT get STD's or get pregnant.

Where do you stand on this? Are you glad the governor vetoed the bill? Do you wish he hadn't?  What do you know about sex education and premarital sex?

I'd LOVE to hear from you!@
s

Proposition 8 ruled unconstitutional

We just heard over the news that Caliornia's supreme court has ruled that the popular vote to pass California's Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. This brings up an interesting question. We are NOT a democracy. We are a representative government. A democracy requires rules by popular vote. However, we are also bound by the constitution.

If, the people vote on something like Gay marriage, then the courts over-rule it...which is considered more valid. The courts or the people's views?

Families and Government

I caught the last part of the State of the Union address last night. Then I listened to the Republican rebuttal. I found it interesting that the Governor of Indianapolis thought to praise Obama for his dedication to family and spending time with them.

Michelle Obama is working on healthy diets for kids as her project while in the White House.  There are some guidelines created by the federal government about the quality of school lunches, etc.  Have the school lunches changed in the past 40 years?  Has the menu at home changed in the last 40 years?  What is the role of government in helping families to eat better?

media bias

We are now talking about bias in the media. Does it exist? Does it lean left or right?? or, are we all biased and see bias whenever someone doesn't agree with our own perspective.

My Aunt sent me a clip from "TOWNHALL.COM" (a VERY conservative) website. IT was a very interesting discussion about media bias to me.

I can't figure out how to link you to the site, so I decided to let you read the email itself.  I'd love to hear what you think about this!

January 20, 2012

ABC News Produces Empty and Biased Story on Mitt Romney and Tax Havens

By Daniel J. Mitchell

1/20/2012

Exactly 10 days ago, I predicted that the press would attack Mitt Romney for using tax havens. In that post, I wrote that, “…based on the questions, it appears that the establishment media wants to hit Romney for utilizing tax havens… As far as I can tell, none of these reporters have come out with a story. …But I think it’s just a matter of time.”

Sure enough, like the swallows returning to Capistrano, it’s happened. Two hacks at ABC News, Brian Ross and Megan Chuchmach, revealed (brace yourself for a real scoop) that Mitt Romney is a rich guy and some of his investments are based in funds domiciled in the Cayman Islands (gasp!).

Wow, what a revelation! This must be Pulitzer Prize material. Pray tell, what wrongdoing did the story uncover? Well, let’s excerpt the key passages from the article.

Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth in investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven. A spokesperson for the Romney campaign says Romney follows all tax laws and he would pay the same in taxes regardless of where the funds are based.  …Romney has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry. Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.  …Romney campaign officials and those at Bain Capital tell ABC News that the purpose of setting up those accounts in the Cayman Islands is to help attract money from foreign investors, and that the accounts provide no tax advantage to American investors like Romney. Romney, the campaign said, has paid all U.S. taxes on income derived from those investments. …Bain officials called the decision to locate some funds offshore routine, and a benefit only to foreign investors who do not want to be subjected to U.S. taxes.

You’re probably thinking you missed something, because there’s nothing to the story. But that’s because the reporters don’t have anything. And if you think I excerpted unfairly, feel free to read the whole article.

The only thing you’ll discover is that Ross and Chuchmach are biased hacks. Because not only did they write a story about nothing, they also quoted two left-wingers, Jack Blum and Rebecca Wilson, and failed to give the other side even an inch of column space.

Blum is a former John Kerry staffer who is most famous for making unsubstantiated claims (which he later admitted were fabricated) that tax havens resulted in $100 billion of lost revenue to the Treasury each year.

And Rebecca Wilson works for Citizens for Tax Justice, a union-funded group so radical that even congressional Democrats usually are reluctant to work with them.

But what about the other side of the story?

1. Did the article quote me, since I’ve been working on these issues for more than a decade? No.
2. Did the article quote anybody from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, the organization most active in the fight to defend low-tax jurisdictions? No.
3. Did the article quote Richard Rahn, the Cato Institute Fellow who was a Board Member of the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority? No.
4. Did the article quote any of the academic scholars who have written about so-called tax havens, such as Jim Hines of the University of Michigan or Andrew Morriss of the University of Alabama? No.
5. Did the article quote Bob Bauman, the former Congressman and offshore expert who serves as Legal Counsel of the Sovereign Society? No.

Fair and competent journalists would have done those things, but not the dynamic duo from ABC News.

Instead, they quote two hard-core lefts. And in a gross display of editorializing, they also referred to the Cayman Islands as a “notorious tax haven.”

Yet what is “notorious” about being a prosperous multiracial society with living standards considerably above American levels?

Moreover, Cayman has a tax treaty with the United States and an overwhelming share of the investment in the jurisdiction is completely legal institutional money – just like the Romney investment funds.

But I guess a place like the Cayman Islands must be bad, at least to biased people from the press. After all, a place with no income taxes, no capital gains taxes, no payroll taxes, and no death taxes must be condemned.

I’m not a Romney fan, as you can see by reading this post, but I believe in honest and intelligent debate. Too bad ABC doesn’t.

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a top expert on tax reform and supply-side tax policy at the Cato Institute.

Be the first to read Daniel J. Mitchell’s column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Conservative vs. Liberal?

I was listening to NPR today and they had several people, including the president of the Ayn Rand association talking with each other about the definition of "Conservative." It caused me to think that we should define these assumptions for class. Rather than me providing the definition, I am curious about what you think? What is a "liberal" in US? What is a "conservative" in the US?  Have any of you lived in another country where the definition of Liberal or Conservative is the same or different?

I would like to see if we can come to a consensus on this. Is it possible?