Newt's Contribution to The 2012 Cause

Newt Gingrich blasted his way to the top of the South Carolina GOP primary on Saturday.  How did he accomplish this feat?  What are the misconceptions about the victory?  What does it really mean for 2012?  The victory in SC was triggered when Newt turned a huge negative story about the breakup of his previous marriage, which nearly everyone concurs was a malicious hit piece, and turned it into a huge positive by pointing out that the media is not an honest broker.  Voters were not necessarily agreeing with Newt on policy as much as they were sending a message that the double-standard of the main stream media with respect to how they deal with the two parties has reached the critical point.  To demonstrate the two different standards, let's look at how the media broke the story of John Edwards cheating on his terminally ill wife during his presidential run in 2008.  Oh, wait a minute, they ignored that story.  Okay, it was probably just an oversight.  Let's look at the story about the former student of Barack Obama's Constitutional Law class who had negative things to say about his former professor.  Oh, wait a minute, we are not sure that such a former student exists because we have never had a reporter speak to a former student.  Maybe there weren't any, but the media seems to have no interest either way.  Apparently, there are no former girlfriends or former friends because we have no history other than a campaign of celebrities telling us about the brilliance of Barry Sotero (oh yeah, it's not as romantic, but that is his real name about which you probably have not heard any reporting on either).  What I find interesting about this topic is that Democrats do not seem to agree that a bias in the media exists and they seem unwilling to consider the topic, yet some interesting polling data was released last week which shows that 40% of the American public identify themselves as Conservative.  On the other hand, 21% identify themselves as Liberal.  If this is the case, why does the media continue to frame the news where Conservatives are portrayed as a fringe and rabid minority?  The Conservatives (do not read that as Republicans) understand this bias and Newt's combative approach with the media is serving him well.  The real threat to the Democrats is if Newt is successful in, finally, highlighting this issue to the rest of non-Liberal, non-Conservative America (39%).  If the independent/moderates begin to side with the Conservatives (79%) on this bias issue, the control of the debate will be wrestled away from the main stream media and we will be witness to a landslide election in Nov 2012.  The misconception about Newt's win is that Conservatives agree with his attack on Bain capital and free enterprise or that they condone his personal behavior.  His victory last night was a strident repudiation of the media, nothing more, nothing less.  Lastly, the most overlooked story of this past week is that conventional wisdom by the "wizards of smart" in Wash, DC has been that the Tea Party has lost steam since the election of Nov 2010.  Sarah Palin spoke on Tuesday and mentioned that she would vote for Newt if she were a South Carolina voter in the interest of keeping the debate of issues ongoing.  It is no coincidence that Rick Perry made the decision to suspend his campaign no less than 24 hours later sending his voters to Newt.  Newt went from trailing 29-21 to Romney, to winning 40-28.  The huge turn around for Gingrich shows that the Tea Party is in the background and ready to pounce.  Romney has been ignoring this group at his own peril believing that he can run a campaign of the past.  In the end, if Newt does one thing well, it will be in turning the country against the media and its propping up of the current President.  For now, Romney was unable to deliver the knock out punch in SC and we move on to Florida.  As for which candidate will get the votes from the Conservatives, Tea Partiers and Republican Moderates in the general election - it has not changed:  ABO - Anyone But Obama!!

The Laffer Curve

My guess is that most people that have come of age since the 80's have heard of the terms, "voodo economics" and "trickle down economics" because these are the derogatory euphemisms that were used by Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media to brand the economic policies of the Ronald Reagan administration.  Folks would have a challenge explaining what those terms mean other that that they were a successful FALSE branding which lead the public to believe that rich people were getting richer and the poor people were getting poorer.  (Funny, how these same lame unprovable charges are still being hurled by the Left today).  However, the real hero of the Reagan economic policy team was Art Laffer, who was the genius behind the Laffer Curve.  The Laffer Curve was the graphical presentation of the economic analysis which proved how reductions in high income tax rates would lead to higher tax revenue receipts due to increased overall economic growth.  In short, an earner paying 40% tax rate on $1M will pay $400K in tax.  But, if you lower his rate to 25%, this will spur that earner to grow and expand which will increase profits.  The expansion allows for plowing some of those profits back into his/her business as investment where the earner could then make $2M and pay $500K in tax.  The earner pocketed after tax an additional $.9M ($1.5M vs $600K) and the government received an extra $100K.  Everybody wins as long as the government does not spend more than the extra $100K  (oops!).  Anyway, Mr Laffer has written an op ed in the Wall St Journal today which, logically, tears apart the notion that a surtax on the super rich (Buffett Rule) today will improve the economy.  Taxing the rich may appeal to some on an emotional level, but people should understand that, by looking at the actual numbers, the less affluent are the one who get hurt in a slow growth economy.  Please check out the article in the attached link.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203462304577138961587258988.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

The Horserace May be Entertaining, but....

The biggest surprise (too many) was that the 2008 Obama presidential campaign was successful in electing a person with no executive experience to the highest executive position in the world.  Count me among the surprised.  The campaign was executed to perfection with the assistance of big $$, intelligent marketing and a technologically savvy campaign team.  Despite Obama's baggage of being a Saul Alinsky disciple who was educated by Marxists professors, the adoption of new media enabled his team to surpass traditional message distribution (TV, radio & print) to tap into previously unharvested demo of folks who have their heads buried in their phones and laptops (and other places, as well).  The Obama branding superceded his actual background.  Unfortunately, there are many successful capitalists here in the Silicon Valley who know Marketing and know Technology and marvel at how the campaign was run without comprehending the results of the policies being implemented since the victory.  Hopefully, the coolness and smoothness of how a marketing campaign can be run has dissipated and the 2012 election will be seen as THE choice which it truly is:  Will our children and grand children be able to enjoy economic freedom or will they be destined to live in a European socialist' type nanny state?  Let stop admiring the process and realize what is at stake!

Cold War on Ice: Summit Series '72

I highly recommend the "Cold War on Ice: Summit Series '72" documentary which aired on NBC Sports (formerly Versus) last night. Great nostalgic look at the glory days of NHL hockey in the early '70s with an amazing East vs West geopolitical battle as the backdrop. Probably a better told story than the Miracle on Ice.  For those who were hockey fans way back, this documentary will be nostalgic.  For those who have come to enjoy hockey since the 70's, this documentary will be a great insight into one of the major turning points in the history of the game.   Also gives great insight into Phil Esposito, who was the goal scoring hero pre-Gretzky. To be replayed Sunday, Jan 8 at 10:30pm, Monday, Jan 9 at 7pm and Th Jan 12 at 9:30pm. set your DVRs.