Democrat talking points are sometimes taken right from the Internet and repeated — without an attempt at clarification or confirmation.
In “It is Congress that is broken” (Sept. 2), Bruce McCutcheon cited a list of 12 bills that were “blocked” by the Republican-controlled House. (“Blocked a bill that would tax companies that ship jobs overseas, blocked the small business jobs act,” and so on.) Not coincidentally, an identical list of Republican-blocked bills —in exactly the same order — appears on pro-Democrat websites including (perhaps the original) on Capecodtoday.com. You can Google “and now a word from the Republicans” by one Joe Quigley, left wing cartoonist who draws for the Elizabeth Warren campaign — the Massachusetts Democratic candidate for Senate who sought racial advantage at Harvard and elsewhere using exaggerated claims of Cherokee ethnicity.
Each “blocked bill” is easy to explain with minimum research.
For example the claim about a bill taxing companies for shipping jobs overseas: The GOP blocked it because Reid wouldn’t allow any reasonable amendments. Outsourcing is a means by which companies maximize profits — what businesses must achieve to exist, satisfy shareholders and provide jobs. It’s called free enterprise — something detested by socialists.
The majority of U.S. foreign-made products (“shipping jobs overseas”) goes to other wealthy nations where law and regulation is less restrictive and there’s a market. The primary reason for corporations establishing foreign facilities is to satisfy demand there, not exporting back to the U.S.
Over 93 percent of the sales by these foreign affiliates are made in the foreign countries themselves with only 7 percent to U.S. customers.
Some successful companies are investing and providing jobs here at home with their overseas operations complementing rather than supplanting their U.S. operations but anti-investment, anti-business policies of our government is responsible for deterring foreign investment here while chasing some U.S. companies away.
On another note, I was surprised by the over-the-top, vehement rhetoric found in Annie Capistany’s “Flush budgetary terrorism,” Sept. 9.
Those whom she labels “Rand-publican extremists” are as compassionate as she regarding the poor. The difference is they seek more realistic ways to help them than wealth redistribution.
It’s a disservice to denigrate them, their wealth and “white skin” in a tirade that some may construe smacks of reverse discrimination. As with many idealists, some Ayn Rand concepts were questionable, but not others — including recognizing that “unregulated laissez-faire capitalism” is the preferred social system most beneficial to everyone, including the poor.