Thursday, June 04, 2009

The Press’s Albatross?

I watched in disgust as my President yet again scolded the United States of America on foreign soil. I expect this kind of treatment from the likes of Cuba’s Castro, North Korea’s Kim Jong-il or Venezuela’s Chavez, but I never thought I would live to see the day America’s own President would join the “I hate America” chorus especially in a totalitarian country American taxpayers prop up to the tune of billions every year.

As he did in speeches in Europe and South America, Mr. Obama started and ended his address to his Cairo audience with niceties but couldn’t help apologizing for what he perceives to be America’s endless shortcomings. The only thing different this time was the speech’s religious tone. When distilled this event was simply an extension of Obama’s World Wide Apology Tour.

For those who wisely chose to sleep in this morning allow me to brief you on our President's positions.

All nation states are equal. America is no better than North Korea, Russia or Iran. When we think ourselves or our system superior to other countries or economic systems, we hurt the world’s feelings. When we hurt the feelings of other nations, conflicts arise. Therefore, America will strive, at least under the Obama banner, not to hurt anyone’s feelings. (And recess will be at 2 PM.)

According to Obama, America was misguided when we freed millions from tyranny in Iraq. It didn’t matter that Saddam was evil, had reneged on the Kuwait ceasefire or that our planes flying the UN mandated no fly zones were being shot at on a daily basis. What we did was wrong and he would not make the same mistake. As for the War on Terror or as the Obama administration prefers to call it our “Overseas Contingency Operation,” it received a finger wag and little more.

What was played up and given validation was every Muslim terrorist’s stereotype about America. Yes, we tortured prisoners. Yes, America in the past had shown disrespect for Muslims. Yes, but for our meddling in 1953, the Iranian government could have survived. In our President's mind, always we are wrong and always are enemy’s anger is justifiable.

Continuing his downbeat theme our President headed toward the Wailing Wall and took his next shot. Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, was made the moral equivalent of the terrorists who are Hamas. Brushing over the fact that Hamas continues to bomb the innocent, President Obama called upon Israel to make additional concessions without one concern if by doing so it could cost Israel their very survival.

That did not seem to matter today. Today was a day to glorify Islam and those who practice it regardless of what an Islamic world could mean to freedom and liberty.

In summation, our new President sees America’s past as appalling, but now that he is in charge, it will be good. He sees Israel as a barrier to peace, but now that he is in charge, he will work diligently to force it to be good as well. In short, President Obama mirrors his wife's view. He too was never proud of America until he took over the reigns of government. America is now good only because he is President. What utter hubris!

My disgust for this pair aside, what I don't understand is why our mainstream media continues to worship at the feet of this community organizer. Oh, he is a glib and talented politician. He is a great showman and that is important but so is substance. After two years following this man around and analyzing his every word, you would expect some in the media to look for results rather than fawn over rhetoric. Unfortunately just as Brian Williams sought Mr. Obama’s favor on television last night; his colleagues seem willing do anything, say anything for his approval. This is the pathetic state of American journalism today.

I thought journalists were sophisticated enough to know disrespect for America is no substitute for a peace plan and groveling actually makes us look weak not strong in the Arab world. And where is Obama’s peace plan? The Road Map is dead. Hasn’t he figured that out yet? Haven’t the press figured that out yet?

Further, have our ink stained friends no understanding that terror organizations will use these speeches to recruit killers to help them dismantle that which they loath, western civilization? Do our scribes of record not understand a free press is part of western civilization and if it is destroyed they too stand to lose? Do journalists actually believe Arab Muslims want to make nice, that Saudi Arabia and Syria are our friends? Can they be this naïve?

Although I am sure the President’s apologies will be heralded in the salons on the upper east side of New York as brilliant, they will have real world repercussions. His words place our military men and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world in greater danger. Do the journalists slobbering over this man even care? Surely they are urbane enough to realize appeasement has always invited more not less conflict.

Why then do they continue to view everything Mr. Obama says and does as manna from heaven? What exactly does this man bring to the table other than an utter disdain for the country he now leads?

Could it be they have so much invested in Obama that it has become close to impossible to do their job? Has “He” become yet another entity too big to fail?

It was Chris Mathews, a card carrying member of the mainstream media, who spoke my fears best during a conversation with Joe Scarborough on the Morning Joe show. When asked to criticize Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, Mathews declined. When pressed why, his retort was, “I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work.” When the incredulous host asked him whether the job of a journalist was to protect a politician in office, Mr. Mathews responded, “Yeah, it is my job. My job is to help this country.”

And what pray tell would happen should Mr. Obama be exposed to be less than what our press has touted him to be? What repercussions could follow for our friends in the Fourth Estate should Mr. Obama stumble?

For one, the mainstream media might have to face the fact their own templates regarding race and liberalism are wanting and that would be a blow for two reasons. The most obvious being it may force them to actually work instead of relying on stereotypical guides. And for another, no one wants to believe their life’s work was for naught.

The other problem with a failure of this magnitude would be some members of the mainstream media, perhaps even Mr. Mathews himself, might find themselves personally and professionally wounded. Their complicity in failure could be placed them under the public’s microscope. He might, for instance, be shunned by his colleagues (unlikely) or worse not invited to bloviate on camera anymore (a fate worse than death). Questions would be asked across the board about competence and cronyism. In short, some would fall.

For those who disagree and believed no journalist has ever lost their job supporting Democrats, there is the little matter of the economy to think about. Papers are on the brink of bankruptcy and there are just so many spots for overpriced news readers. Jobs are at a premium, important and high paying jobs. And one must remember the only loyalty in the news business is to the story and one’s own career. If Obama goes down, he will not go alone.

Obama is becoming the press’s albatross. They made him and are loath to break him. They have too much invested. So what’s a mainstream journalist, especially one who turned a blind eye, to do? Perhaps they are coming to the revelation it is easier to boost a fool than to admit their own pre-election failure and possibly lose their own jobs in the process.

But I doubt this strategy will work. Four year plans rarely do. This administration is beginning to make Jimmy Carter look like a genius and I would not be surprised if some in the media a couple of years hence begin mumbling the sentiments of the ancient mariner from Coleridge’s poem, The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.

Ah ! well a-day ! what evil looks
Had I from old and young !
Instead of the cross, the Albatross
About my neck was hung.

Monday, March 09, 2009

An Economic Primer for Obamabots

Welcome class.

Today’s lesson is for everyone who believes President Obama will deliver them to the Promised Land without a tax increase and for every teacher, journalist and/or news reader who passed up Econ 101 as an elective in college.

My brief lecture will tackle only one subject and a simple one at that...who is it who actually pays taxes.

This may sound simplistic, but bear with me. Nothing in this life is always as it seems. The obvious answer would appear to be the person who gets the tax bill is the person who pays the tax. At least that is what your government teacher, your favorite politician and every television news reader has led you to believe.

If you still have faith in the veracity of the above mentioned institutions, I may not be able to reach you. You may already be lost.

If, however, you have reached puberty, have an IQ over 70 and reside outside of academia, Washington DC and a newsroom ( I am certain most of you qualify), you have probably figured out by this time these three groups are not always the most reliable information disseminators. So it may not come as a surprise if I told you what these “authority figures” have relayed to you about taxes is only partially correct.

Ah, I see I have your attention. Yes, Betty, you have your hand up?

“How is it possible that I have been misled? The answer to your question is as plain as President Obama’s magnificence. Of course the person or entity receiving a tax levy would be the one paying for it and any other answer simply defies reality”.

Betty, I love your enthusiasm but you might want to wait for my explanation. You see, under our current tax system only the individual taxpayer really pays taxes.

“But, Mr. Mortensen, if that was true, that would mean there are no corporate taxes. The last time I checked they still pay taxes and rightly so. Why shouldn’t evil corporations, especially the ones who have been given big tax breaks in the past, be forced to pay their “fair” share? According to President Obama it was greedy CEOs and CFOs that put us in the precarious position we are in today. Why shouldn’t they be the ones who pay our way out of it? I know for a fact President Obama plans to increase their taxes. So, you see. You are wrong. Both individuals and corporations pay taxes.“

As much as I appreciate your righteous indignation, Betty, there is a dirty little secret that most Americans have not figured out. It has to do with how our society or any society that allows for the free flow of capital is structured. It is a secret your teachers either didn’t know or chose not to tell you. It is a secret every politician of either party would prefer you not hear. It is a secret your local news reader…well...they are excused because they appear to be simply factually challenged and it is un-American to condemn the handicapped.

Let me see a show of hands if you want to know what that secret is?
Wow! All of your hands are up. That’s great.

Okay, here is the secret…Corporations do not pay taxes!

Did you get that? If not, I will repeat it.

Corporations, even the ones you think are poisoning society with their products or are killing the Polar Bears, do not pay taxes. They never did and they never will. You could increase taxes on corporations twenty or thirty percent but it wouldn’t change the reality. Double their taxes, triple them and it would not matter. Oh, their products or services would of course be more difficult to sell because they would no longer be competitive and in turn they may have to lay off their workers or go out of business but they still would not have paid a single dime to Uncle Sam.

Want to know something even more shocking?

Other than how they affect his company’s productivity and competitiveness, your standard corporate baron doesn’t care about tax rates or taxes. So, if you are expecting or wanted to see hand wringing, tears of regret or corporate officers lying prostrate and self flagellating in front of their boards or stockholders, you will be disappointed.


Because taxes are simply the cost of doing business. No more, no less. They are one more variable cost that is added to the mix and these costs, all costs, are ultimately passed on in the form of price. The higher the tax the government puts on a company, the higher the final price for the product or service. Higher taxes translate to higher prices. It is just that simple.

Any questions? Yes, you in the third row next to the radiator? Bobby, isn’t it?

Good question, Bobby.

Did everyone in this class hear that? No? Well little Bobby wants to know if corporations don’t pay the taxes they are charged with, then who does? Who will ultimately pick up the tab for these increased taxes?

Well, class, the answer to that question is very simple and you will probably kick yourself for not figuring it out earlier. If you want to meet this sucker…err…I mean corporate benefactor…simply stand in front of the nearest mirror.

Stare into the reflective glass and meet the person who will be paying for the over six hundred billion dollar ($600,000,000,000) increase in energy costs the President is planning of leveling against corporations in the form of his cap and trade bill.

Stand in front of the mirror and it will reveal the person who will be shelling out a good chunk of “change” for the over one trillion dollars ($ 1,000,000,000,000) in spending for such things as pig flatulence research and rat museums.

Keep looking if you want to know who will be reimbursing the Saudis, the Chinese and our other “friends” for their loans so America can continue to exist with our fifty or so trillion dollar (~$50, 000,000,000,000,) long term debt.

What’s that? This wasn’t part of the bargain when you signed on to follow the new Messiah? You expected the world to change for “change”? Did you really believe Obama could achieve a cradle to grave Utopia powered only by solar panels and paid for by simply nailing the rich?

When President Cool told you ninety five percent of Americans would not be paying additional taxes, he was being …I shall try to put this nicely…a bit disingenuous. You may not be paying additional taxes via the Income Tax but you certainly will be paying a whole host of “corporate taxes” for his agenda.

But all is not lost. Just like those evil CEO’s who passed all of their taxes on to you, there will be a very easy way to avoid paying for your “fair share” of these corporate taxes as well. It is simple really.

When Obama’s grand design for the new America are finally in place, you will merely have to stop putting fuel in your car, turning on a light, flushing your toilet, buying a soft drink, using toilet paper, purchasing food, going to a sporting event, visiting your local pub, buying sneakers, buying formula, installing blinds in that extra bathroom, purchasing shampoo, watching television, using your cell phone, purchasing a Twinkie, …

Ring, Ring, Ring.

Well, there’s the bell. I guess that’s enough for today. Remember to complete your reading assignment tonight. As you all know or should by this time, it is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. We will have an open discussion during tomorrow’s class, if there is a tomorrow. For now, class dismissed.

Oh, one more thing, people. If you are having lunch in the cafeteria today, the lunch ladies are suggesting you steer clear of the Kool-Aid. Have a nice day.

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Two Sets Of Rules?

It was reported with much glee today that conservative talker, Rush Limbaugh, and the Republican Party national chairman, Michael Steele, had a dust up. The reports went on to say Mr. Steele eventually felt a need to apologize for calling Rush’s show “ugly”. Since this is a story that fit a specific journalistic template, the one that states any intramural brawl between Republicans is always news; it received very heavy play on television, radio and in print.

What was covered with less enthusiasm or not at all was the admission on by President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, that he and two reporters from CNN have been plotting for months to use Mr. Limbaugh as a means of crippling the Republican Party. The man who once said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste” seemed rather proud of his effort.

If you were alive in 1971, you could not have missed the coverage of President Richard Nixon’s “Political Enemies Project”. His list of political opponents was made up of journalists, politicians and entertainers. The howls at the time from those who are today‘s journalistic leaders was deafening and rightly so. It is not only improper for anyone in our government to target private individuals for destruction or ridicule; it is also immoral and un-American. Admittedly, Mr. Limbaugh is a public figure and this effort by the current White House is far less sinister than the effort Mr. Nixon’s people perpetrated, but it does foreshadow willingness by this administration to step close to the line, if not over it.

People have the not only the right but the duty to speak their minds with out fear of being targeted by their government. So I am left a bit stupefied when the same people who charged the barricades forty years ago in defense of free speech and dissent seem to be not only silent about a possible Obama enemies list but may also be complicit in its implementation.

Where is the outrage or at the very least where is the so called “journalistic curiosity”?

Could it be my friends in the media are simply too busy writing stories about how our new first lady keeps her triceps in such good shape they no longer have the energy to tackle stories with a bit more substance?

In an effort to help my very busy buddies, I have compiled a list of questions they may want to ask the White House and the management of both CNN and ABC News, a list my fellow Americans might want then to ask as well.

1. How much taxpayer money has been spent by the White House in their effort to compromise Mr. Limbaugh?

2. Since this effort was solely political and the cost should not be born by the taxpayer. How much money has President Obama’s political team repaid to the US Treasury?

3. Is Mr. Limbaugh the only person Mr. Emanuel and his co-conspirators have been plotting against? If not, who else has been targeted, who has access to this list and what are their plans?

4. Who in CNN’s management knew that two of their highly paid commentators were plotting with the White House to embarrass Mr. Limbaugh?

5. If anyone in CNN’s management did know, why was this not reported?

6. Does CNN condone the actions of their employees and if not are they to be punished in some fashion or do they simply remain as on air talent without CNN taking any disciplinary actions?

7. It has been reported George Stephanopoulos of ABC News has also been talking with these three conspirators on a daily basis. What did he know, when did he know it, and what part, if any, did he play in this scheme?

8. Did Mr. Emanuel simply leave out Mr. Stephanopoulos’s name when he was bragging about this plot because the ABC host of “This Week” is the only Clinton war room alum whose job requires a certain amount of objectivity? In short, was Mr. Emanuel simply offering Mr. Stephanopoulos political cover?

9. It is obvious the management of ABC News was aware Mr. Stephanopoulos has been talking with the President’s chief of staff and his other Clinton war room buddies on a daily basis. They even reported it with some pride. What is their stance with respect to this conspiracy? Were they aware of this effort and if so do they condone it?

10. What did President Obama know and when did he know it?

11. And finally, my journalist chum may want to look in a mirror and ask the most difficult question of all. Have the rules of “journalism” changed so much since Nixon that these questions no longer matter? Have the regulations that used to govern the interaction between government and citizen changed in some fundamental way that a conspiracy of this type is now acceptable or is it simply that Nixon was a Republican and Obama a Democrat?

If anyone reading this actually believes the American people with get answers to these questions please contact me through this blog as soon as possible as I have a perfectly good bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in buying.

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

Why I Too Want Obama To Fail

Many of my Democratic friends think our new President is the best thing since sliced bread. It is their belief he and his crowd are simply the same old Democratic Party operatives…only a bit more liberal. They couldn’t be more wrong.

This new administration is in fact dangerous. It may be due to naivete or it may be by design. Either way, I do not want them to succeed. I want America and Americans to thrive but for that to happen the plans these people have to remake America must be stopped.

Their stimulus package and first budget is little more than a wealth transfer from the productive members of our society to the nonproductive and a goody bag for bureaucrats. They are using class envy as an excuse to garner more power for their Party and for the State. They want people in fear. That’s how populism works. They want us to fight among ourselves so that they are left to their own devices. As Barack’s own chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, put it,”Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Does that really sound like an administration that is focusing on helping all Americans reach their potential or one that is focusing in on an opportunity to push their own ideology?

I believe this administration welcomes this recession. Like all good central planners, they need an enemy or straw man. It deflects scrutiny. They need someone or something to be used as a catalyst for change…their kind of change – a change they will claim needs to be done before the sky falls. They see this recession as a way to push their big government agenda such as government controlled health care and a cap and trade tax to combat non existent anthropogenic global warming. They care little about this country’s values or traditions. In fact, they care little about this country. If they did they wouldn’t be hell bent to remake it in their image. There are even some in the Democratic Party that see America as the embodiment of evil in this world. And although they may be in the minority, these celebutards and useful idiots are embraced by the Democratic Party elite. Have you ever asked yourself why?

Make no mistake, the main concern of the Democratic Party in recent decades has been and will remain the Party itself and its agenda for power. Their motto seems to be Party first, their own jobs second and country last.

This is not about bankers or brokers or doctors or the rich or excess or even the poor. This is about an assault on our very system, on our entrepreneurial spirit, on capitalism itself. The Democratic Party doesn’t believe in winners and losers. They believe this is unfair and want to change the natural order. That is why they are playing divide and conquer. They are doing this in standard Saul Alinsky mode with show trials on Capital Hill and personal attacks against their critics. They ignore their own culpability and point their fingers at anyone who does not share their radical agenda. They want you to forget the housing bubble started in the US Congress with their mismanagement of Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae and their resistance to real world regulation proposed by the Bush administration. And you honestly believe they are the solution?

What the Obama administration is doing is using the misery of others as an excuse to grab power for the Party and the State, one that believes it has a right to decide who wins and who loses in the market place. And unfortunately these power hungry politicians are being aided by a press who has long ago traded journalism for propaganda and who continue to confuse style with substance.

My yellow dog Democrats friends believe this is a good thing. They believe giving power to the Democratic Party translates into increased care. It is a tenet of their faith that Democrats care more about people than Republicans, Libertarians or Conservatives (and yes there is a difference between all three). In fact, Democrats believe caring is all that is needed…well… that and a ton of other people’s money.
Unfortunately, history does not bear out their assumptions and that is one of the problems. The Democratic Party has never been a party focused on results or for that matter history. They have always focused on the emotions of the moment.

Unfortunately, we live in times where results matter and cathartic emotion, while admirable, is not a solution. Our world today demands a thoughtful review of history to guide us as to what has worked in the past and what has not. Our very survival as a nation may depend on it. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party’s answer to the challenges that face us is to dust off the Marxism of the sixties and try to pass it off as something shiny and new. It is not. Collectivism has failed everywhere it has been tried. And worse, when it has been implemented, it has invariably decayed into oligarchy and political slavery. Cuba, USSR, East Germany and China all come to mind.

So count me as part of the chorus that wants this new administration to fail. If this is politically incorrect so be it. I want him to fail because if he doesn’t the American dream may become a nightmare. I want him to fail because I do not want to wake up in a European style socialist state where my main concern is how I can grab mine from the system. I want him to fail because when you remove failure as an option in life, the lessons of restraint and humility are never learned and you simply guarantee greater failure and misery. I want him to fail because he seems bent on rewarding bad behavior, punishing the productive and continuing the insanity of profligate spending. I want him to fail because I actually think it is venal to make policy by inciting panic and using fear as a political weapon. I want him to fail because I have always taken pride in the fact that Americans used to believe in personal responsibility and individualism, but this new President is only offering collectivism, division and scapegoats.

The Iron Lady of Britain, Margret Thatcher, once opined, “Socialism is fine until such time as you run out of other people’s money.” And folks, we are rapidly running out of money and when we do, we may well find ourselves not living beneath the flag of a Republic but under the thumb of a collection of oligarchs.

Put another way, as Ben Franklin was fond of saying, “He who would sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither.” I would add he who would sacrifice freedom for security will get neither. In short, I want this President to fail because I want to spare us all failure.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Saturday’s Big Lie.

It was Adolph Hitler who first coined the phrase the “Big Lie” in his infamous book “Mein Kampf”. For those unfamiliar with the phrase, it refers to a propaganda technique that involves telling a lie so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

The oft-cited “Big Lie” theory appears to have been the Nazi dictator’s explanation for how people came to believe that Germany lost World War 1 in the field -- a "big lie" that Hitler attributed to Jewish influence on the press. And it was Joseph Gobbles, Hitler's minister of propaganda, who is alleged to have stated that if a lie is repeated enough times it would become widely accepted as truth. Sadly this technique has worked in times past and because it has, the “Big Lie” continues to have its adherents.

Although I am loath to equate Hitler or his ideas with any modern day political party, one has to wonder after listening to this past Saturday’s Democratic Party radio address.

This week's talk was provided by one Fawn Townsend, a self-described waitress and minimum wage earner from Raleigh, North Carolina. In her speech, Miss Townsend lauded the Democratic Party for listening to the cries of the American electorate and finally passing an increase in the national minimum wage. She gushed poetically about how this monumental achievement of the Democratic Party will cause a “ripple effect” across our economy and will help her and her friends to finally realize their American dream.

With her new found government mandated wealth, Fawn promised to buy a used car, move out of the house of friends where she has been staying and live independently. She also proclaimed this “raise” would allow her to take up the study of nursing. According to her, all this will be accomplished only because the Democratic Party was able to beat back those greedy Republicans and secure for her a raise of seventy cents per hour.

I applaud ambition and industry, but I am afraid what Miss Townsend is peddling is neither. What she is peddling is the “Big Lie”.

If one is to take Miss Townsend’s claims at face value then it becomes obvious she is the product of our government schools and is therefore incapable of basic addition or multiplication. My first advise to her, other than not to spend money she doesn’t yet have, would be to invest in a cheap calculator before heading to her local used car dealer.

What Miss Townsend seems to have missed was the fact that seventy cents ($.70) per hour over a forty hour work week will reap the new minimum wager an increase of only twenty eight dollars ($28.00) a week. That translates into a potential gross raise of $1456 per year before taxes and not $4,400 as she claimed in her address to the nation.

This is $2944 dollars short of what she is expecting. So much for that spiffy new convertible!

And I have more bad news for Miss Townsend. Because she earns her living as a waitress who enjoys tips, she won’t be getting any raise at all. In fact, she may wind up bringing home less money in her paycheck at the end of the day. This time her enemy is not mathematics but the fine print.

As a former restaurateur, I know waitresses do not make the national minimum wage. Tips are considered basic wages and waiters are an exempt class. Putting aside state law, her bosses are only required to pay her $2.13/hr and not the new minimum wage of $5.85. If one consults the National Restaurant Association’s web site, this hasn’t changed.

What will happen during her next pay period, if it hasn’t already, will be that her employer and the IRS will demand that she declare more in tips to cover the difference between her wages and the new minimum wage. In other words, she will have to declare at least $3.72 cent rather than the former amount of $3.02 an hour to be considered in compliance with the new law.

If she is the rare hospitality employee who always declares 100% of their tips, she will not pay the IRS one dime more than she was paying before this congressionally mandated largess became law. She will also not make one dime more either. In fact, she may not even get a paycheck at all. In my former restaurants it was the rare waiter who made more than fifty dollars for two weeks full time work. Most waiter paychecks were between zero and twenty dollars as a result of paying taxes on their tips.

So what does today’s Democratic Party’s address tell us all?

The first is that Miss Townsend may not be who she pretends to be and if she really is a waitress from North Carolina, she is either incredibly gullible or stupid. It takes a dim bulb not to realize from whence it gets its income.

But I don’t think she is stupid. Nor do I think she is a full time waitress. I believe her to be a shill for the Democratic Party. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out she either represents union interests or works for the Democratic Party directly in another capacity. All I know for sure is that restaurant servers live off tips not their meager paychecks so the woman either hasn’t clue or she is being deceitful.

Secondly, this address tells me the Democratic Party has greater problems than I originally thought. The self proclaimed “party of the people” should know what a paycheck really means to a tipped waitron in North Carolina. If they do, then this address is an indicator of their venality and the lengths they will go to lie to the American people in their quest for power. But if they haven’t a clue what realities face a hospitality worker in America today, then they lack the gravitas and understanding to be a national party.

And finally, if the polls are correct and at least fifty percent of the American people actually believe the minimum wage is the pivotal income barometer for the American Dream, then the “Big Lie” as a political propaganda tool has survived and is alive and well today.