8:10 AM, Dec 20, 2012 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
It has become increasingly clear that the Obama-era Democrats view every major societal event as a new invitation to spend money, centralize power, or both. The horrendous shootings in Connecticut have the Democrats lobbying not only for new legislation, but new federal legislation — and hence more federal power — rather than entrusting the passage of any such legislation to the states. Meanwhile, the damage from Hurricane Sandy has the Democrats looking to do the only thing that they might enjoy even more than enacting cumbersome legislation — spending borrowed money.
In the John F. Kennedy years — back when we didn’t spend $11 for every $7 collected (as we have under Obama), and when the defense budget made up nearly half of all federal spending — the $60.4 billion that the Democrats now want to spend in response to Sandy would have funded the entire federal government for nearly a month.
According to official White House tallies (see table 1.3), the federal government spent $111.3 billion in 1963, or $832.9 billion in constant 2012 dollars. That works out to $69.4 billion a month — after adjusting for inflation.
With JFK in the White House in 1963, our inflation-adjusted national debt was $0.3 trillion — or $2.3 trillion in today’s dollars. With Obama in the White House in 2012, our national debt is now $16.4 trillion — more than 7 times higher (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than under JFK and a whopping $7 trillion higher than it was just five years ago.
Is it any wonder why? From their insatiable and unsustainable spending, to their preference for tax hikes over tax cuts, to their emphasis on redistributing wealth over promoting economic growth, to their determination to pursue an earthbound space policy over one that inspires the nation and leads the world, the Obama-era Democrats bare increasingly little resemblance to the Democrats of JFK.
. . . And the Pulitzer Prize for biography goes to Theodore Sorensen! Nov 22, 2010, Vol. 16, No. 10 • By MICHAEL J. BIRKNER
Did John F. Kennedy really write Profiles in Courage? It’s a question that has been on the table ever since Kennedy won the Pulitzer Prize for biography in 1957, and with the death of Theodore Sorensen—Kennedy’s able speechwriter—the issue of authorship has again surfaced. It’s an appropriate time to add new elements to an old story.
A new poll shows that it's a possibility. 9:10 AM, Oct 25, 2010 • By MICHAEL WARREN
Might voters replace another New England Kennedy with a Republican? A new poll, commissioned by the National Republican Congressional Committee and conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, shows that Rhode Island’s First Congressional District is in play, with Republican state representative John Loughlin tied with Providence’s Democratic mayor David Cicilline at 41 percent.
Letters of condolence to Mrs. Kennedy.12:00 PM, Oct 13, 2010 • By PHILIP TERZIAN
You might have thought that Kennedy kitsch was not likely to proceed much further beyond The Best Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, edited by Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg (2005), or that the gold standard had long ago been established with Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye: Memories of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, edited by Kenneth O’Donnell (1972). But you would be wrong.
Why Obama should relinquish control and lower tax rates for all Americans.2:00 PM, Sep 5, 2010 • By FRED BARNES
There’s a phrase that never crosses President Obama’s lips, even as he prepares to propose new tax cuts for small business. The phrase: permanent, across-the-board cuts in marginal tax rates for the wealthy.
Power, glamour, and the vagaries of transatlantic alliances. Jun 21, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 38 • By NOEMIE EMERY
On Israel, health care, and many other issues, Obama's opposition has its work cut out for it.Apr 5, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 28 • By WILLIAM KRISTOL
President Obama’s theory has always been that once health care reform passed, people would rally to it.
Kennedy's seat has been returned to the people. 10:25 AM, Jan 21, 2010 • By ROSS TERRILL
To the Boston left, "anger" and "Washington" explain Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts senate race, but the win was also a shaft of common sense hitting Bay State's echo chamber of liberal self-righteousness. "Voter anger caught fire in final days," said Wednesday's Boston Globe. "Massachusetts voters sent Washington a ringing message." Yet it wasn't anger, the final days, or just Washington, as the Globe suggested.
The junior senator from New York may be surprising some people with what she has to say about Saddam and weapons of mass destruction.2:30 PM, Sep 24, 2003 • By FRED BARNES
PRESIDENT BUSH has a surprising defender of his contention that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction--Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. "The intelligence from Bush 1 to Clinton to Bush 2 was consistent" in concluding Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and was trying to develop a nuclear capability, Clinton said this morning.
Will Schwarzenegger revive the fortunes of the Kennedys and the GOP?Sep 15, 2003, Vol. 9, No. 01 • By NOEMIE EMERY
HAVING SAVED THE WORLD many times over in one hit movie after another, Arnold Schwarzenegger now has the chance to breathe life into two real-world but comatose bodies: the Republican party of California and the Kennedy machine. Both once were fountains of power and energy.
From the July 7 / July 14, 2003 issue: What Kennedy knows that other Democrats don't.Jul 7, 2003, Vol. 8, No. 42 • By FRED BARNES
SENATOR EDWARD KENNEDY is more politically astute than Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle. He understands the legislative process far better than Senator Hillary Clinton does. He is a much cooler head than Senator Jay Rockefeller. And there's a good chance he'll turn out to be smarter than the entire Bush administration on the subject of Medicare and a prescription drug benefit for senior citizens.
Kennedy was the key figure in last week's Senate approval of a drug benefit and modest Medicare reforms. Without his support, the measure would not have passed.
From the June 2, 2003 issue: Too much energy in the executive.Jun 2, 2003, Vol. 8, No. 37 • By ARNOLD BEICHMAN
ALL THE TALK about President Kennedy and his sexual exploits with a White House intern is full of leers and jeers and smutty comparisons to President Clinton. There has been little talk, though, about how reckless behavior may have affected his ability to function as chief executive.
There is some evidence that those around Kennedy treated him with less respect than is due the American president. Could it be because they perceived him as the priapist he was and were contemptuous? Turn, for example, to the marvelous narrative history published in 1991 by Michael R.