The Fictional "War On Women"

I'm sure that every election year you hear the Democrats and Feminists across the country proclaim that Republicans are somehow waging a "War on Women", and to no surprise many left-leaning websites such as The Huffington Post and Politico confirm these claims to be somehow accurate.

There are many explanations as to why liberals make blatant attempts to try and expose conservatives for waging this fictional war, and two obvious reasons are most likely because, one: they gave up debating us on economics since they can never win on that issue, and two: simply so they can win the woman vote. The Democratic Party claims to embrace women, yet they ignore many of their own politicians sexual behavior towards females which include Anthony Weiner, San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, and most notably Bill Clinton, just to name a few.

Despite the hypocrisy on their part, Democratic elitists continue to push this fictional conservative "hatred" on women, claiming that Republicans oppose a woman's right to choose, are against equal pay for women, and oppose any type of measure that reduces their healthcare cost.

Lets now analyze every point made that way we can debunk these liberal myths, and take the time to accurately explain our positions on these issues.

First and foremost, almost every politically informed citizen in this country knows that the overwhelming majority of the Republican Party supports the right to life, and oppose any measure that promotes abortion which KILLS innocent lives. As conservatives, we believe that the greatest gift is life itself, and therefore it should be preserved. As far as incidents such as rape, many Republicans in congress have introduced bills that would ban abortions with the exception of rape or incest, despite the fact that abortions from rape account for less than 1% of all abortions. Unfortunately, all these bills have been met with strong Democratic opposition. We conservatives do not want to limit the rights of women, but when it comes to the life of an infant, we overwhelmingly support life over death. Besides, that infant deserves to live just as much as you do.

Another issue that I often hear liberals complaining about is this so called "equal pay for equal work" campaign which basically states that for every $1 a male makes, their female counterparts only make 77 cents. While this statistic may be true, there are many factual reasons to explain this, and, "Republicans and big businesses discriminate against women" is not one of them. For one, this 23-cent difference in pay doesn't account for occupations, hours worked, or education- it is simply the difference between average earnings of all full-time men and women. Many economists and various studies have already confirmed that when all of the important details are factored in, the gap in pay narrows down to around 5 cents. Additionally, men typically tend to pursue job opportunities in engineering, manufacturing, science, and mathematics - which all have a higher payout than other jobs - while females look for more flexible work especially if they are a mother. As a matter of fact, evidence even shows that women under 30 who are single, make 8% MORE than their male counterparts. Also, one has to wonder, if businesses were discriminating against women, wouldn't all males be unemployed? Wouldn't companies only hire women if they knew they could save 23 cents of every dollar made?

And finally, another issue has come forward regarding healthcare prices. As many know, Obamacare requires insurers to charge men the same for their premiums as women. Conservatives strongly oppose this notion, not because we "hate" women, but because you have to add a sense of reality to this as well. Unlike men, women deliver babies, and maternity care is nothing cheap. Additionally, female bodies are much smaller and are more prone to health issues. On top of the preventive care that women seek often, they also tend to live longer than their male counterparts. Sure it's great that females live longer, but with more overall visits to the doctor, and all the benefits that they receive, women should be responsible for the costs.

It's ironic that these issues only are addressed when the numbers show favorability towards males, but when other issues such as automobile insurance (males pay more than females) are brought up, the feminists and everyone in between go silent. The truth is that we shouldn't divide ourselves based on gender, but instead embrace it and accept reality for what it is.

25 Years Since "The Great Communicator" Bid Us Farewell

January 11 marked 25 years since President Ronald Reagan bid the United States farewell in 1989, just days before George H.W. Bush was inaugurated as President of the free world.

During his famous farewell address, Reagan proudly proclaimed the great achievements that had occurred during his administration which heavily included foreign and domestic policy. 

In terms of foreign policy, Reagan recalls his administrations biggest goal was to achieve global freedom, and the biggest obstacle overcoming this was communism. Reagan himself stated that, "Nothing is less free than pure communism." 

The Reagan foreign policy was designed exactly to combat communism and the terrible outcomes it would hold.  During his farewell address, the President emphatically recalled his successes of defeating communism: temporarily achieving peace in the Persian Gulf, which forced the Soviet Union to slowly depart from Afghanistan, and negotiating for the withdrawal of Cuban forces from Angola, as well as Vietnamese troops from Cambodia.

Additionally, while contending that the Cold War was much more complicated, Reagan still credits himself and his administration for the downfall of communist governments in Eastern Europe as well as the Soviet Union through his hard-lined policies which included fueling an expensive arms race. While Reagan did admit it was mostly defense spending that caused the national debt to increase dramatically, he still strongly supported his military proposals which ultimately caused the Soviet Union to undergo an economic collapse.

In terms of his domestic policy, President Reagan stated that his most notable achievements was his major economic program known as, "Reaganomics." 

Reagan's economic policy included massive tax cuts as well as wasteful government spending reductions targeted to promote and stimulate investment into businesses which in turn, would create jobs, reduce the dependency of welfare programs, and grow the economy. 

The supply-side policies enacted under Reagan proved to be the only solution and created overwhelming economic growth: 21 million jobs were created, tax revenues skyrocketed, inflation dramatically decreased, and interest rates also fell to record lows.

The Reagan policies also created the longest peacetime economic expansion in United States, lasting 92 months.

Throughout his career, President Reagan commonly described America as a, "bright, shining city on a hill." Whether or not the nation is as prosperous as it was during the '80's is up for debate, but one thing is for sure: President Reagan not only gave citizens hope, but he made them proud to be American, which is something that seems to be lacking in today's political climate in Washington. 

President Barack Obama: The Modern Day Franklin Roosevelt And Why It Is Bad For America

As we are now in the new year of 2014, the economy of the United States continues to face uncertainty. Increased taxes, new regulations, and wasteful government spending have all been the top contributors to the sluggish recovery from the burst of the government-inflated housing bubble in 2008. As a matter of fact, there are now 92 million Americans that are out of work, and the labor force participation rate is at it's lowest point since the Carter Administration. To make matters even worse, this continues to be the slowest recovery from a recession since the Presidency of Socialist Franklin Roosevelt. 

There is a similarity between the economic policies of Barack Obama and Franklin Roosevelt: they are both Keynesian. Those who follow the Keynesian school of thought believe that more government spending will stimulate the economy. The radical policies of Roosevelt, in short, prolonged the Great Depression for roughly 8 years. Fast forward to the present time, and the current President is maneuvering a very similar agenda as FDR: more ridiculous stimulus spending that has proved to do nothing but skyrocket the deficit. 

Is it a coincidence that the two Presidents with the most Liberal agendas have had the two slowest economic recoveries in history? The simple answer is no. The reality is also simple: Liberalism has proved time and time again that it does not work.

Increasing taxes on working class Americans, imposing unnecessary regulations on small businesses, and expanding entitlement programs for those who don't need them hurt the economy because when taxes are raised, citizens think twice about using their money and investing it back into the market. When thousands of ridiculous regulations are implemented on small businesses, citizens may find it too difficult to open and be able to maintain a small-business that will earn them a comfortable living. When entitlement programs are expanded to citizens that don't need them, not only does employment reduce, but reckless spending towards these programs increase. 

Almost every policy enacted or proposed by the Democratic Party is a key ingredient to creating a slow, and poor economy. 

However, on the flip side, when Conservatism prevails, America prospers. 

Unlike Liberals who believe government intervention solves all the nations problems, Conservatives take a step back and allow the gracious free market to correct itself, by simply reducing taxes and regulations to establish a pro-business environment. 

This was strongly evident during the recession of 1920-21, which had the capabilities of becoming as bad as the Great Depression. Since President Harding and Coolidge advocated free market principles and reduced tax rates, the recession ended in 18 months, compared to 132 months during the Great Depression.

If Roosevelt and Obama advocated and implemented the same free market policies as Coolidge, and more recently Ronald Reagan, could the devastating effects from the Great Depression and the Great Recession have been avoided or at least shortened? We may never know, but we do know this: the Keynesian system has never worked and it never will, but when free market principles are established, America becomes prosperous. 

Perhaps President Obama will learn from history and give reality a try? Unfortunately in the end it's just politics as usual, so I wouldn't hold my breath. 

The Minimum Wage: Over-Promising and Under-Delivering

With all the political madness that faced us in 2013, we are already facing new challenges in this new year. By new challenges, I mean the same ones that Liberals tend to bring back to the table every few years which include new regulations, tax increases, extending unemployment benefits, and most importantly: raising the minimum wage. Liberals within the Democratic Party typically use an emotional standpoint in attempting to pass these radical laws, claiming that it is for "the good of the people" and that they are ecstatically showing "compassion" for the poorest Americans. But they fail to understand the truth about what minimum wage laws have caused, and their bad effect towards small businesses and the economy as a whole.

A simple fact that is noteworthy in economics is a consumer tends to buy a product when the price is lower. Likewise, these same consumers think twice about purchasing the item if it's price is higher. While almost every sane individual within the political spectrum tends to agree with this, Democrats still seem to believe that you can raise the price of labor, and yet the amount of labor being hired will not be reduced. 

Nearly every statistic and fact seems to contradict their claim that raising the minimum wage will work wonders with the economy. For example, every state in our nation that has a higher minimum wage than the federal $7.25 an hour, also has a much higher unemployment rate. A noteworthy case to this was one pointed out in 2010, when the unemployment rate in Michigan was 14%, compared to only 3.8% in North Dakota.

On the international scale, it is almost exactly the same: countries with higher minimum wage laws also have much higher unemployment rates than countries with lower ones. Now of course, not all these countries had minimum wage laws enacted at one point or another, and the amazing truth is when the laws were not in place, the unemployment rate has been much lower in these same countries.

A country worth noting is Switzerland, which up until recently, had no minimum wage law at all. In February 2003, Switzerland experienced their highest unemployment rate in 5 years, and the rate was 3.9%. In February 2013, their unemployment rate was 3.1%. 

Most Americans cannot recall the last time unemployment was so low in this nation, besides the years of prosperity that were left following the Reagan Administration. But here in the States, prior to the enactment of the minimum wage law, rates that low were common. Many economists even point out that during the Coolidge administration, the unemployment rate was as low as 1.8%. 

Despite all the facts, Liberals still tend to believe that these laws help the poorest of Americans, when the only thing it does is reduce their actual chance of being able to find a job. 

Even the claim that minimum wage laws help minorities make a decent living can be challenged. The last time black unemployment was lower than white unemployment in the United States was in 1930 - ironically the last year before any federal minimum wage law was enacted. 

Yet it's the Republican Party who still only care about the richest Americans and hate poor people. Here is a tip regarding these laws that the Democratic Party claim are good for America: don't judge a book by it's cover.