In the early 1990’s President Bill Clinton said: “We must say ‘no’ to illegal immigration so we can continue to say ‘yes’ to legal immigration.” At the same time he called for Congress to “protect our borders, remove criminal aliens, reduce work incentives for illegal immigration and stop asylum abuse.”
If corporations like Apple, Delta, Coca-Cola and even Hollywood studios are so concerned about equality that they are threatening to leave states that are legitimately tightening up their election laws against voter fraud, why are they all still doing business in China whose actions in Hong Kong and against Muslim minorities are clearly repressive?
In Washington you can call a pig by any other name, but it’s still Pork. Less than 10% of the $1.9 trillion “Coronavirus Bill” went to actually getting shots in arms; and only around 30% of the coming so-called “Infrastructure Bill” will be going to building or repairing roads, fixing bridges, strengthening the power grid and other long neglected, true infrastructure projects. And, speaking of Pork Barrel Politics, shame on both Parties for bringing back the earmarks that we had hoped were long dead.
On what is usually a most Taxing Day, we note that one-half of all taxpayers pay 97% of all taxes in the U.S.; and that the reviled “1%,” while doing quite well by making almost 20% of all taxable income, do pay more than their “fair share” by accounting for more that 37% of all taxes.
Four short years ago, when it was President Trump calling for an end to the filibuster, it was none other than Chuck Schumer who called The legislative filibuster “the most important distinction between the Senate and the House.” And now Senator Elizabeth Warren, who used that tactic against Senator Tim Scott’ police-reform bill, laughably calls that tactic “racist.”
To the Republicans who joined their Democrat friends in re-instituting the legislative/budget porkfest known as “earmarks” we remind them that the late Tom Coburn of Oklahoma called “earmarks” the “gateway drug” to big spending. And, we would add, that it will call for more and more taxes to support that habit.