Remember the stimulus that did stimulate?


(My new American Thinker post)

It was 35 years ago that President Reagan signed ERTA or The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981.  It took a couple of years, but it was “Morning in America” when President Reagan was reelected in 1984.

ERTA kept a promise that Mr Reagan made in 1980:

The ERTA included a 25 percent reduction in marginal tax rates for individuals, phased in over three years, and indexed for inflation from that point on. The marginal tax rate, or the tax rate on the last dollar earned, was considered more important to economic activity than the average tax rate (total tax paid as a percentage of income earned), as it affected income earned through “extra” activities such as education, entrepreneurship or investment. Reducing marginal tax rates, the theory went, would help the economy grow faster through such extra efforts by individuals and businesses. The 1981 act, combined with another major tax reform act in 1986, cut marginal tax rates on high-income taxpayers from 70 percent to around 30 percent, and would be the defining economic legacy of Reagan’s presidency.

Reagan’s tax cuts were designed to put maximum emphasis on encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship and creating incentives for the development of venture capital and greater investment in human capital through training and education. The cuts particularly benefited “idea” industries such as software or financial services; fittingly, Reagan’s first term saw the advent of the information revolution, including IBM’s introduction of its first personal computer (PC) and the rise or launch of such tech companies as Intel, Microsoft, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Compaq and Cisco Systems.

In the end, “Reaganomics” proved to be an electoral success even if deficits were a bit uncomfortable for many of us.  I agree with The Tax Foundation that it was a “watershed event in the history of federal taxation,”  I just wish that spending had been controlled more.

Unlike the Obama “stimulus,” the Reagan plan put its faith in the private sector and US businesses. The Obama stimulus was focused on helping their supporters, including unions and many very wealthy supporters, as John Lott wrote in 2004.

And this is why we remember the stimulus that stimulated in the 1980’s!

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Airports and the agony of watching CNN



(My new American Thinker post)

Over the last week, we traveled to a niece’s wedding and had a chance to spend some time with my recently widowed mother. It was the kind of family quality time that we all yearn for except for having to watch CNN at hotel lobbies and airports.

On Tuesday night, the day that so many at CNN thought that Mr Trump had issued a call for NRA people to eliminate Mrs. Clinton, the panels at CNN were somewhere between silly and hysterical.It was the kind of selective outrage that we’ve come to love from liberals who went mute when far worse things were said about President Bush or VP Cheney.

At one point, I looked around the gate and nobody was watching…. wonder why? I got so fed up that I was following the Rangers-Rockies game on my phone!

On Wednesday, I reconnected with the world and found that CNN had dropped to 3rd, which is a fancy way of saying that you are last in the cable news business. In other words, there are only 3 so 3rd means last.

According to TV Newser, it was something like this:

FNC: 2.035
MSNBC: 1.407
CNN: 807

So even MSNBC, the laughingstock of cable news unless you think that President Bush knew of the 9-11 attack in advance, beat CNN by quite a lot.
My guess is that people watching MSNBC are so far gone that they are not even hearing the anti-Trump bashing. On the other hand, CNN reaches a lot of people at public places and most of them just looked at the phones and prayed that the flight was not delayed.

Maybe Mrs. Clinton will defeat Mr Trump. It goes without saying that Mr Trump has not helped himself much since clinching the nomination in Indiana, or over 90 days ago.

At the same time, there is a point where media bias is so obvious that even the people forced to watch CNN at airports just look the other way and find something else to do with their lives.

Let’s look at the treatment of Mr. Mateen, the gay-basher, Taliban-sympathizer father of the Orlando terrorist. He showed up feet away from Mrs. Clinton at a rally, then endorsed her, and everybody at CNN was looking to blame it on staff. On the other hand, David Duke endorsed Mr Trump and you’d think that it was the end of the world as we’ve known it!

Then there is the latest email dump! Many in the media defend Mrs. Clinton by saying that it was “staff” again. Whose staff are they? They work for Mrs. Clinton, who happened to be Secretary of State at the time that this was going on.

Trump has work to do but his enemies in the media are showing so much bias that a backlash in coming, and perhaps already underway.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Cuban-American Offers Thanks to Tampa Mayor Buckhorn


So often, people judge others based on their party affiliation. Republicans talk to you only if you are a party loyalist. Democrats are also guilty of the same sin. And, yet, there are people who judge others based on their principled stance on key issues ranging from the second amendment to U.S./Cuba relations.

And this explains why when I come across U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), I thank him when he criticizes President Obama’s Cuba policy. And, I find it despicable when U.S. Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) joins President Obama on the historic visit to Cuba.

Actions and values do matter.

The Tampa Bay Times ran an article this week putting down Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn (Democrat) for being out of the step with many around Tampa Bay who are lobbying Cuban officials to set up the first Cuban Consulate in their cities. (See:

Mayor Buckhorn could cares less about the incoming criticism, as he will not betray the core principles that he stands for. He stands with the cause to restore freedom and democracy to Communist Cuba. He honors a CIA agent who played a key role in the capture of aChesino Guevara, and he’s flown missions with Brothers to the Rescue.

Senator Menendez and Tampa Mayor Buckhorn remind me of a famous quote by German poet Bertolt Brecht: “There are men who struggle for a day and they are good. There are men who struggle for a year and they are better. There are men who struggle many years, and they are better still. But there are those who struggle all their lives: These are the indispensable ones.”

To me, Senator Menendez and Tampa Mayor Buckhorn belong to the “indispensable” category to bring back a Cuba Libre.

I’ve honored Mayor Buckhorn by penning a letter-to-the-editor to remind readers that he belongs to the “one of kind” politician. See:

New Librarian of Congress and Cuban-Americans

Carla Hayden, shown in 2015, was confirmed by the Senate on Wednesday to head the Library of Congress. Hayden is the longtime leader of Baltimore's library system

On July 13, 2016, the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Dr. Hayden as the next Librarian of Congress.

Dr. Carla Hayden, president of the American Library Association (ALA) from 2003-2004, refused to support an amendment to the section of the final report on the proceedings of the ALA’s mid-winter meeting to help free ten librarians that Fidel Castro had imprisoned for making available such documents as the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and George Orwell’s 1984.

It is noticeable that Dr. Hayden was a vocal opponent to the Patriot Act during her tenure as ALA president, leading a battle for the protections of library users’ privacy. She objected to the special permissions contained in Section 215 of that law, which granted the U.S. Justice Department and the FBI the power to access library user records. Dr. Hayden often disagreed publicly with then-U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft over the language of the law.

It is ironic that Dr. Hayden would not side with the ten Cuban librarians who were locked up by Fidel for circulating access to information to the Cuban people.


5 dead in Dallas…..5 more reasons to say that President Obama has failed us!

(My new American Thinker post)

Obama Care is a huge problem that President Obama will leave his successor. And there is Iraq, Libya and so on.  Lots of messes for his successor to clean up indeed.

In retrospect, race relations will be his biggest failure.

Back in November 2008, I voted for Senator McCain but looked forward that our first black president would bring us together. I was anticipating that he’d talk about the structural problems in the black community, such as the collapse of the black family unit and black on black crime in Chicago and other inner cities.

Instead, Obama has made things worse by focusing on the police and doing nothing about black districts lacking any hope or seeing no change.

A few months ago, Gil Troy, a professor of history at McGill University wrote an article that looks rather interesting after Dallas:

The last Democratic president and the last Republican president both managed race relations more effectively than Obama has. Seven years after American voters made history by electing the country’s first black president, racial tensions have worsened.

It didn’t rank on Obama’s one-item list of his “few regrets” during his State of the Union address. But signs of Obama’s failure are on our streets, on our campuses and among our leaders, left and right.

“Ferguson” has become shorthand for African-American fury objecting to insensitive white cops harassing young blacks.

The “Black Lives Matter” movement has spilled into American campus culture, as privileged kids attending the world’s finest universities bemoan their alleged oppression — bullying anyone who challenges them.

This black backlash has prompted a white backlash, personified by Donald Trump.

Every justifiable police shooting called “racist,” every Halloween costume labeled politically incorrect, every reasonable thought censored makes Trump look like America’s last honest man.

Amid this tension, Obama has been disturbingly passive — even during America’s first serious race riots since 1992.

He acts like a meteorologist observing the bad weather, not a president able to shape the political climate.

How embarrassing that Obama’s most memorable act of presidential leadership on race may end up being inviting a black professor and a white cop to the White House for his 2009 “beer summit.”

Yes, President Obama will be remembered for two things:

a) The articulate president who could not articulate a message to bring us together.  In other words, the man can speak but has little of consequence to say; and,

b) The first black president who did not understand the real problems in black communities.

His legacy will be that he left us more angry and divided than ever.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Obama left a lot of DREAMers with nightmares outside the Supreme Court



(My new American Thinker post)

As I’ve mentioned before in these pages, I support a limited plan to legalize those who were brought here by their parents.  My plan would legalize those young people who are doing well in school and staying out of trouble, who may even want to serve in the U.S. military.

It would not be a path to citizenship or amnesty.

It would simply legalize young people brought here by their parents.  My plan would not legalize their parents or every other relative.

This week, President Obama left a bunch of these “DREAMers” crying outside the Supreme Court.

So why was this case in the Supreme Court, anyway?

First, President Obama, with Democrat majorities, did not legislate the problem.  They promised but did not deliver on immigration reform.

Second, and worse, an angry President Obama reacted to the 2014 election (and the loss of the U.S. Senate) by waving the pen and signing an executive order legalizing millions.

It was arrogance of the worst kind.  It’s the kind of “presidencialismo” (presidential-ism) that has done so much harm to Latin America, from Perón in Argentina to Chávez in Venezuela to Mexican presidents who went around the legislature over and over again.

President Obama could have sat down with Congress and resolved this issue of the young DREAMers.  I think there are enough GOP representatives and U.S. senators willing to resolve the legalization of youngsters who were brought here years ago.  Again, we are talking about young people who are in many cases performing well in our schools and plan to attend our universities.  Are we really going to punish these youngsters because their parents walked into the country illegally?

We should add that the Supreme Court has stopped President Obama before, as the WSJ reported:

The one-sentence ruling was the latest defeat for Mr. Obama in the courts, which recently have stymied some of his administration’s top policy goals.

A federal judge in Wyoming on Tuesday blocked a rule setting stricter standards for hydraulic fracturing on public lands. And in February, the Supreme Court suspended the Obama administration’s cornerstone climate-change regulation limiting carbon emissions from power plants while litigation proceeds.

The DREAMers are now under the bus and will likely stay there for a long time.  They should blame President Obama.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

House Democrats behaving like Latin American lefties



(My new American Thinker post)

Some of us have seen this movie before.

Over the last few years, we’ve seen news reports from Latin America of left-wing legislators, or the interest groups that they support, chanting and going out of control when they don’t get their way.

Recently, the teachers’ union in Mexico blocked the entrances to the Mexico City airport or last week a confrontation with authorities followed their attempts to close the heavily used highway to Puebla.

Let’s add some members of the U.S. House to that list of legislators or activists who want their way even it means stepping on other people’s rights.

The House Democrats, many literally sitting on the floor, want a vote on gun control. Unfortunately for them, the majority in the House, or the people elected by voters across the country, would rather take up other issues.

We call it democracy. In other words, the majority party sets the calendar. Just ask the GOP senators who wanted then-Majority Leader Reid to bring ObamaCare to a vote on the floor.

Incredibly, Rep. John Lewis is connecting this sit-in with his illustrious past civil rights experience:

“Today we made progress. We have come a distance,” declared Lewis.

Lewis said he had to walk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge “three times” before he had completed the march to Selma, Ala. The Georgia Democrat suggested this was the first step on firearms.

“We have other bridges to cross. And when we come back in July, we start it all over again,” intoned Lewis.

At the same time, the hypocrisy of these Democrats is incredible given their silence about the shootings in Chicago.

Why don’t they get on a plane and block the street corners in Chicago where this violence is happening every weekend?

Why don’t they visit the churches and instituions of Chciago and call for an end to the mindless shooting?

Why not back the Chicago police that have to go into these areas every night?

Why not call on black leaders to have a frank discussion of the root causes of black on black crime in our cities? After all, Chicago already has a lot of gun laws.

The House Democrats are engaged in the worst type of grandstanding. We need dissent, but this is not dissent. This is chaos that threatens our rule of law.

Shame on Democrats. I never thought that we would ever see this in the U.S.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Hey, Bernie voters: Check out Venezuela


(My new American Thinker post)

Cheers for Vin Scully, the legendary voice of the Dodgers.  He’s called a lot of games and big moments over the years. His comments about socialism earned an A+ in the Truth Hall of Fame:

“Socialism, failing to work as it always does. This time in Venezuela. You talk about giving everybody something free and all of a sudden, there’s no food to eat. And who do you think is the richest person in Venezuela? The daughter of Hugo Chavez. Hello.”

Down in Venezuela, the situation has reached “failed state” status.  What do you call a state where soldiers have to protect bakeries so that people don’t steal flour or bread?  It is horrific, as we see in this report from The New York Times:

With delivery trucks under constant attack, the nation’s food is now transported under armed guard. Soldiers stand watch over bakeries. The police fire rubber bullets at desperate mobs storming grocery stores, pharmacies and butcher shops. A 4-year-old girl was shot to death as street gangs fought over food.

Venezuela is convulsing from hunger.

I visited Venezuela a couple of times before Chavez.  A nation “convulsing from hunger” is not what I found.

On the contrary, it was a happy country, full of well-stocked stores and some of the finest restaurants in the world.  To be fair, it was not a perfect country, from too much dependence on oil and too many imported goods.  Again, there was no hunger or shortage of anything.

Cuba went through a period like this in the 1960s.  Unlike Venezuela today, Castro had a USSR willing to pay the bills as long as he served as a spokesman for socialism in the Third World and sent troops to fight wars in Africa.

Here is the bottom line:  Millions of US citizens voted for Senator Sanders, a man who would love to turn the US into that place where the government gives you this and that, paid for by the rich.

I am not going to say that every Sanders voter was voting for socialism, but a lot of them did by accepting the idea that government would provide you health care and tuition.  How is that working out in Venezuela?   Frankly, how is “free stuff” working out anywhere else?

Here is an idea:  Every young person in college should listen to that quick audio from Vince Scully.  Better than, they should go down to Caracas for a few months and see what Sanders had in mind.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Obama a terrorist from GITMO is missing in Uruguay

Guess what?   One of the 5 guys that President Obama released to Uruguay is missing.  He is one of the 5 sent to Uruguay last year.   This is from Representative Royce’s office:

“The Obama administration is pushing dangerous detainees to countries that it knows can’t handle them. We’ve seen it across the globe, from Afghanistan, an active war zone, to Ghana, a country with limited security resources. And now, in Uruguay, a dangerous jihadist has gone missing in neighboring to Brazil.”

Uruguay has a big border with Brazil.   Let’s hope that we can find this criminal and send him back to GITMO.

In the meantime, why is President Obama releasing these men anyway?    They are not victims.  They are deadly terrorists!

Many in the left don’t want to see what is happening out the window


(My new American Thinker post)

We’ve all been there before. We’ve all refused to deal with a reality at some point in our lives and conveniently taken the distraction exit.

We are watching something like that after the Orlando shooting. Let’s check out some of the things that we’ve been hearing about the terrorist attack in Orlando.

First, we hear that he was not directed specifically by ISIS. However, he carried out a mission that made ISIS very happy. So do we need to find a letter from ISIS welcoming the terrorist to the club? Do we have to find a membership number along with car rental or cell phone benefits? Are we this silly?

Second, we have the usual shift to gun control.

Third, we see the failure to connect the dots or the PC attitude that is leashing our law enforcement agencies, as Bill Gertz wrote:

Security analysts said the attack exposed failures of the administration’s counterterrorism policies that were designed to separate Islam from the jihadist terrorism that continues to spread from the Middle East to Europe and now the United States.

What FBI agent wants to be disciplined for believing that the Muslim young man in front of him may commit a terrorist attack?

So what’s going on? I think that many in the left don’t want to look at the window and see the mess that eight years of Obama have left.

Obama promised to end wars. He has not. In fact, his premature withdrawal from Iraq created the vacuum that gave ISIS a second chance. Would ISIS be running the region if 10,000 U.S. troops had been stationed in Iraq after 2011? The answer is no. They would have quickly run into a very powerful U.S. force with F-16s dropping bombs. I hope that Mr. Trump brings this up in his attack of the Obama-Clinton foreign policy!

Second, would any of Obama’s gun laws have changed a thing? The answer is no. We are dealing here with a man on a mission. In other words, he would have found an alternative weapon, such as creating a fertilizer or pipe bomb that would have exploded outside the disco. Gun laws do not stop terrorists!

Third, Obama was supposed to be the “great communicator” or the man who would bring us together. In fact, he has not. He misunderstood that his 53-46% victory was some sort of a landslide or a call to change the country. It was not.

Fourth, electing our first black president was supposed to end racial tensions. In fact, it has not. We are now more racially divided, in large part because people like Obama call you a racist if you want to talk about black on black crime, the failure of public schools in black districts, or an honest discussion of the devastation of the black family.

The left can not deal with reality. More distractions are coming!

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Exhibit Bush vs. Exhibit Obama



We are counting the dead again. Fourteen innocent people were murdered in San Bernardino and the count is up to 50 in Orlando. Those are the victims of the last two terrorist attacks against the American people in the last year.

Sad to say, they won’t be the last. The U.S., and much of the West, is infected with people willing to commit horrific acts and kill innocents.

Nevertheless, President Obama was clueless again, as John Podhoretz told us:

He called it “terror,” which it is. But using the word “terror” without a limiting and defining adjective is like a doctor calling a disease “cancer” without making note of the affected area of the body — because if he doesn’t know where the cancer is and what form it takes, he cannot attack it effectively and seek to extirpate it.
So determined is the president to avoid the subject of Islamist, ISIS-inspired or ISIS-directed terrorism that he concluded his remarks with an astonishing insistence that “we need the strength and courage to change” our attitudes toward the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.
That’s just disgusting. There’s no other word for it.

As I watched Sunday’s events, and specially the aforementioned statement from President Obama, it made me think of President George W. Bush.

We can now compare their very different approaches to terror.

President Bush took the war to them, decimated Al Qaeda, left his successor with a stable Iraq and we had no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil after 9/11.

President Obama decided to lower the volume on terror, close Gitmo, withdraw prematurely from Iraq and let Russian planes fly over U.S. aircraft carriers without consequence.

President Bush took this war on terror very seriously and communicated that down the line. President Obama did not take it seriously and political correctness is now the rule of engagement.

I hope that # 45 is a lot more like Bush than Obama!

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

The Orlando shooter didn’t complain about Gitmo before shooting people


(My new American Thinker post)

We are learning a lot about the Orlando shooting.  We will probably know a lot more by the time that this post is published.  We hear that he pledged allegiance to ISIS and may have been shouted a few words in support of his fellow terrorists.

To my knowledge, he didn’t say a word about Gitmo.

Over the last few years, we’ve heard a lot about how Gitmo recruits.   We heard it from President Obama over and over again.

However, Gitmo did not inspire the shootings in Paris, or San Bernardino or now in Orlando.

What evidence do we have that Gitmo is a recruiting tool?

We don’t have any except a President who does not have the courage that he was wrong about Guantanamo in 2008.

In fact, Polifact looked at the controversy and concluded this:

Analyses of jihadist propaganda materials show that Guantanamo is rarely mentioned, especially compared to other grievances against the United States, like military airstrikes. Al-Qaida uses Guantanamo less frequently now than it used to, though it was never a primary focus of their propaganda.

Orlando demonstrates that we are losing this war and it is a war.  Our soldiers are not losing it.  Our political class invested in political correctness is losing it and putting Americans at risk.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

It’s time for Democrats to tell anti-Trumpistas to put down their Mexican flags


The Mexican flag is back on US soil and we don’t mean the one at the Mexican embassy, regional consulates or maybe a Cinco de Mayo celebration.

We mean protesters waving the Mexican flag to show their opposition to a US presidential election.

It reminds many of us of the immigration marches of a few years ago!  It turned off Americans back then and this will turn off voters again.

As a naturalized US citizen, who actually supports a “work visa” program for some people in the country illegally, I find these scenes of Mexican flags rather sick.

As a practical matter, every Mexican flag or riot is worth a million votes to Mr Trump.    It simply makes his point that there are too many people here who don’t understand immigration laws.

Back in 2002, some American students legally in Mexico decided to participate in a political demonstration about a new international airport outside of Mexico City. The students decided to join the environmentalists opposed to the construction of the airport.

What happened to these students? Let’s hear from Heather McDonald and her 2006 article:

What would Mexico do? The answer is easy: deport them on the spot. In 2002, a dozen American college students, in Mexico legally, participated peacefully in an environmental protest against a planned airport outside of Mexico City. They swiftly found themselves deported as law-breakers for interfering in Mexico’s internal affairs.
If Mexico was willing to strip these students of their duly-obtained travel visas, imagine what it would have done had the students broken into the country surreptitiously—not just summary deportation but undoubtedly howls of complaint to the U.S. government for winking at this double violation of Mexican sovereignty.

Yes, Mexican law is correct that immigration policy is about sovereignty.

Why isn’t the media asking Mrs Clinton or Senator Sanders about these Mexican flags or the violence?

It is pathetic what we are watching in the US!

I can guarantee you that Mexico would not tolerate anything like this on its soil.   They would scream sovereignty!

It’s a shame that no one in the Democrat Party will defend sovereignty north of the border.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

The Danger of Bernie Sanders



(My new American Thinker post)

To be fair, Bernie Sanders went to the USSR as part of an official trip as mayor of Burlington, Vermont.  He really did not go there for a honeymoon, as some of us have joked on social media.

Nevertheless, he did set up close city to city ties with the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and was very fond of their brand of socialism.  In other words, Bernie Sanders has always been fond of socialists, specially the ones who hate the US.

Bernie Sanders has gotten a free ride from the media and the GOP so far.  I guess that most of us just think that Bernie will fizzle out after Hillary Clinton clinches the nomination.  We shouldn’t be so optimistic.  Yes, Sanders won’t get the nomination, but he has lit up a left wing movement that we will see the next time that the Democrats choose a president.

Add to this what we are seeing in colleges, and these anti-American lefties will be around for a while.

We can say that Trump is tapping into frustration, from free trade deals to illegal immigration to a sense that that we don’t recognize the country anymore.

On the other hand, Sanders also is tapping into ignorance.  He is misleading masses with promises that we can’t afford and promoting a sense of entitlement that will frustrate his supporters the morning after they finally grow up.

We need to start calling out Sanders, and more specifically his crazy ideas.

I saw this editorial and I wish that more of us would take its message seriously:

Let’s face it.

Sanders isn’t a Democrat in the traditional sense.

He is a socialist who has based his entire run on a four letter word, “free.”

And that’s what irritates me more than anything else…free stuff, free stuff and more free stuff!

It’s one thing to promote socialism and the taxes or loss of personal freedom that come with it.  It is utterly disingenuous to sell socialism by saying that we will raise taxes on the rich.

Memo to the GOP:  Sanders won’t be around by Labor Day.  His movement will and may even push Hillary Clinton to the left.    We need to win this ideological debate or we won’t recognize the country for sure.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.