You deserve a break today

You may have heard that Burger King is planning to merge with Tim Horton’s, a donut company that is the Canadian equivalent of Dunkin Donuts here in America. The merger would effectively relocate Burger King’s headquarters to Canada. Most of what we hear about Canada is runaway socialism. So, why would any corporation want to move to Canada. Although their income taxes — combined national and provincial — may be high, their corporate tax rate is considerably less than that of the United States. When all corporate taxes are considered it’s about half of the United States.

In fact, the U.S. has the highest corporate rate of any developed economy in the world. If Burger King relocates, just the corporate tax itself, not to mention other taxes related to running a corporation, would drop from 35% in the U.S. to about

That creepy Burger King mascot

 26.5% in Canada. Ireland’s corporate tax rate is 12.5% and for companies doing business in Europe it has become the country of choice.

The Obama administration calls companies like Burger King “corporate deserters.” Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is calling for a “new sense of economic patriotism.” They want congress to pass laws preventing American companies from relocating outside the country, a sort of corporate Berlin wall. Their approach demonstrates their gross misunderstanding of, or total disregard for, capitalism as we know it.

In the world of business you try to remain competitive by aligning your prices with the competition. Or, if you’re more expensive you make the case for why. With all of the emerging markets in the world it doesn’t make sense to have the highest corporate tax rate. There are a lot of people who have been arguing for a long time that it needs to be lowered.

I’ll go them one better. The corporate tax in America needs to be eliminated. That may be shocking to some of you who’ve become accustomed to believing that corporations should pay their “fair share,” but corporations don’t pay taxes. You do, as a consumer of their product.

Taxes are just another expense to a corporation. There’s not some rich fat-cat who’s getting hosed by the corporate tax. Some fear that’s the guy the corporation will give a raise to if the corporate tax rate is lowered. Chances are he’s already in the 39.6 tax bracket. That means if all the money the company saves went to him we’d be getting more in taxes than we do when the corporation pays it.

But, as I’ve stated, the corporation doesn’t pay it. They pass it along. Let’s say you own a fast food restaurant. There’s the cost of labor, electricity, advertising, uniforms, food product, etc. Taxes are simply factored in as another expense like those when the owners are deciding what to charge for that burger. Can you imagine how much less that burger would be if there were no corporate tax?

And don’t think they’d keep the prices high and pocket the money. Their competition surely wouldn’t and competition is what drives prices lower. Also imagine how many corporations around the world would be flocking to the United States if we eliminated the corporate tax. Imagine how many jobs that would create. Imagine the new taxes from income tax that would far surpass any money we’re getting from the corporate tax. Imagine how much better off we’d all be if we stopped with this class warfare and hating on corporations and realized that it’s the corporations that create the jobs and the tax revenue for the country.

Remember, corporations don’t pay taxes, consumers do. It’s time to give consumers a break.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

Real hope and change for Ferguson and the country

The situation in Ferguson, Mo. is so sad and so unnecessary and so predictable. A black teen is killed by a white police officer and too many people won’t wait for an investigation. They have to act now. And act they did.

They burned and looted their own neighborhood. They punished people who had nothing to do with either Michael Brown or the officer who shot him. And then people say, “I don’t condone the looting but you have to understand their anger.” By saying that “you have to understand their anger” you’re condoning the looting. The killing of a black teen and the looting of convenient stores and shoe stores have absolutely no connection. The only link is that some thug opportunists took advantage of the situation.

In fact, we now know that rent-a-mob types from Oakland and who knows where else flocked to Ferguson to take advantage of the ugly atmosphere. Should we be at all surprised? This is the conduct that results from an entitlement

mentality. Black-on-black crime happens many times a day yet you never see Al Sharpton showing up to do something about it.

The reason so many black people in Ferguson and other American cities are angry is because, whether they realize it or not, their lives have been destroyed by liberalism. The American left thought it would help black folks by righting the wrongs of the past with free stuff from the government. Instead of freeing black people from the chains of racism it merely changed the lock to government dependence.

This is LBJ’s Great Society. It doesn’t look so great today, does it? And it’s all been by design.

Government housing projects are nothing more than petri dishes for crime. They certainly don’t make lives better. They destroy them. Most of us can’t imagine raising our kids in those conditions but for too many it’s a cyclical way of life that dates back 50 years.

Ask any cop in any major city where the crime is and he or she will tell you. Around the housing projects. So, what’s the solution? Destroy the housing projects. Yeah, I know. It’s as simple as that. It really is.

Of course, that’s not to say that you dump all the residents out on the street. First of all, you need to separate the needy from the greedy. Make sure we’re only giving shelter to those who can’t physically or mentally take care of themselves. The others need to go find employment and start putting their lives back together.

For those who truly need government assistance, whether it be a single mom or an elderly grandfather, we give them a voucher for a set amount. They take that voucher to any apartment complex and they get an apartment. We have to make sure we limit the number of units in any apartment complex to ten percent or we’re just going to relocate the housing project.

We give welfare recipients more flexibility, better living conditions, and more responsibility. If they’re running meth out of the apartment they lose their voucher. If they’re trashing the apartment and its surroundings they’re evicted. We have to start demanding that the government-dependent start acting like the rest of us or face the consequences like the rest of us.

That’s how you build productive citizens. That’s how you create hope. That’s how you save another generation from the gangs and the pimps and the pushers. That’s how you prevent people from burning down neighborhoods because they’re angry. That’s how you restore dignity. That’s how you solve problems.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

California's proposed 'yes means yes' law redefines rape

California, the state that pioneered co-ed dorm rooms, is now grappling with another on-campus problem. The state is now looking at legislation to define consensual sex among college students. Don’t tell me they’re surprised that more people are having sex now that they’re living in the same room.

Typical California, this new law would require universities that receive public funds to set standards for when yes actually means yes. As opposed to, I guess, when yes means no. Or, when no means yes. They’re calling this an “affirmative consent standard” and it’s defined as “an affirmative, unambiguous and conscious decision” by both parties engaged in the sexual activity. By the way, silence or lack of resistance doesn’t constitute consent.

So, let me get this straight. They’re now expecting young adults whose hormones are crawling the wall to come to some

kind of verbal agreement on matters of whoopie? It’s not going to happen, and even if it does it’s still a matter of he said-she said.

Look, we all know what rape is. We all know what date rape is. This opens up a whole new world of litigation. Let’s say a girl at a frat party has a little too much to drink and goes for some guy she wouldn’t ordinarily go for. As the way things go, there was not much conversation between the two when she ended up in bed with him. The morning after she has regrets. Bingo. He didn’t follow the affirmative consent standard. He didn’t get her verbal permission. It’s not her fault. It’s his! He’s now under arrest.

Since the verbiage of the law makes it clear that it’s mutual consent, the ladies could find themselves in the very same situation when a guy wakes up sober with regrets.

No surprise here but this ‘yes means yes’ legislation is based on a White House task force’s recommendations. They claim that 1 in 5 female college students is a victim of sexual assault, which I find impossible to believe. When uber-libs are assigned to a task force there’s no telling what constitutes sexual assault in their minds. In fact, there was a feminist book from the ‘80s that argued that all heterosexual sex was rape because women were objectified in this “male supremacist society” of ours.

A writer for Salon.com a couple of years ago made a case that the classic song Baby, It’s Cold Outside is a date rape anthem. No, I’m not kidding. Of course, this same writer has written articles saying Hall & Oates and the Eagles are absolutely awful and The Beatles’ I Want to Hold Your Hand was overrated. Still, this is the mantra with many on the left.

What it does is actually diminish the horrors of real rape. If Dean Martin singing about wanting a girl to stay is rape then it cheapens the very meaning of the word. But it’s all about the victim mentality. Women who are forcibly raped are victims in the truest sense of the word. Women who see every man as a predator are not. They’re just nuts. That’s what’s driving this California law.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

Ebola - What's the real story?

I’m a bit perplexed. We’re told that Ebola can’t be contracted through casual contact yet the two missionaries in Africa who were flown back to the U.S. were wearing full hazmat suits when they contracted it and still got it. All of the health workers who assisted in their return to Atlanta were wearing hazmat suits.

We’re told you must come into contact with bodily fluids. It’s made to sound a lot like AIDS. No one treats AIDS victims in hazmat suits. What I’m learning is, yes, it’s transmitted through bodily fluids but, unlike AIDS, those bodily fluids include saliva and sweat. A simple handshake with someone infected with Ebola could spread the disease. That’s the very definition of casual contact!

The question now becomes why is the government not leveling with the American people? The very same CDC that tells

us Ebola is difficult to transmit is the same CDC that freaks out about the flu almost every year, urging everyone to take precautions and get a flu shot. Now one of the deadliest diseases on earth is loose and they tell us you can’t get it through casual contact. That, quite frankly, is a lie.

I was reading a piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer and they quoted a doctor as saying, “It is a disease that is very serious and can be fatal, but it’s very difficult to transmit.” Difficult to transmit? Newsweek and other outlets have reported how the two missionaries got it even though they were wearing hazmat suits. It doesn’t sound too difficult to transmit to me. Later in that same Inquirer article they stated that Ebola could be spread “through sweat, breast milk, saliva.” None of this adds up.

So, why so secretive about the fact that Ebola is extremely deadly and so easily transmitted? I think there are two big reasons. First, they don’t want to cause a panic. That seems to be the concern in every disaster movie like this. Well, what’s the worst that can happen if people panic? They take extreme precautions not to get the disease which is exactly what the health officials should hope for.

The second reason I think the government is lying to us about Ebola is because of political correctness. Let’s face facts. This is a disease that’s now pretty much isolated to Africa. I believe government officials think if Americans knew how easy it was to get Ebola they would take it out on all black folks. I know that sounds silly but that’s how bureaucratic minds work.

Certainly I wouldn’t be more cautious around black people but I would avoid African people or anyone who had recently been to Africa. In fact, I don’t understand why we haven’t instituted some kind of waiting period or quarantine for people coming from these infected countries. Again, I fear political correctness is the reason.

Speaking of which, I was almost amused if it weren’t so serious. News reports said all eyes were on the airports to make sure people with symptoms of Ebola weren’t getting off planes from Africa. First of all, isn’t this the very profiling the left tells us is racist? And how about all of the folks streaming across our unguarded border? There’s a new report out from Customs and Border Protection that reveals 71 individuals from Ebola-infected countries have been caught sneaking across our border. That’s how many have been caught. No telling how many have actually made it.

Our porous border is a ticking time bomb. The government watches the front door while the back door is left wide open. 

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

The Democrats' Impeachment Strategy

So, here is the Democrats’ new strategy. Gin up impeachment talk in order to garner sympathy for the president and raise a lot of money. It may be the first time in history that a political party is actually fanning the flames of impeachment for one of their own.

Dan Pfeiffer, Assistant to the President of the United States, floated the idea out to reporters recently at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. He hinted that Obama might go outside the law and the Constitution and grant illegals amnesty by executive order and warned that such action would draw impeachment from Republicans.

In fact, President Obama seems to be daring the Republicans to impeach him. His numerous illegal delays on Obamacare, his blatant refusal to enforce immigration laws, not to mention deliberately selling guns to drug cartels in the

Fast and Furious scandal, demonstrate his contempt for the limits of his office. He routinely goes around — or over — congress when he doesn’t get his way, demonstrated by his famous “I’ve got a pen” remark.

He knows, however, that impeachment, as the power structure is currently aligned, is impossible. First of all, John Boehner doesn’t have the guts to launch impeachment charges. Second, it doesn’t matter if Obama held up a bank, Harry Reid’s senate would never vote to convict. That’s the sad reality of the Democrat Party. They circle the wagons when one of their own is under attack, even if they’re guilty.

Remember Watergate? Remember “What did the president know and when did he know it?” Those were Republicans asking the tough questions of a Republican president. Sen. Barry Goldwater marched a contingent of Republicans down Pennsylvania Avenue, not to stand behind the president, as the Democrats did Clinton, but to demand that Richard Nixon resign. It was Republicans who put aside petty politics and did the right thing.

Today’s Democrats are incapable of such conduct. No matter what one of their own does, they call it a witch hunt. The only time in recent memory where Democrats have gone after one of their own was the ethics trial of Congressman Charlie Rangel in 2010. Democrats voted with Republicans to convict Rangel of 11 ethics charges. Still, the Democrat leadership did not insist that Rangel resign and the idiots who reside in his district recently voted to return him to congress for a 23rd term. They get the representation they deserve.

Perhaps the same can be said of the country at large. It’s not like no one knew what they were getting with Barack Obama after the first term. People just weren’t paying attention. Now they have voter’s remorse. A recent poll showed that if the 2012 election were held today, Mitt Romney would win by 9 points. It’s too late for a do-over. 

The Democrats are making bank on impeachment talk. Big donors are ponying up big bucks any time folks like Dan Pfieffer even hint the Republicans might be ready to impeach, which has led the White House to believe the more they can push the issue the better off they are. They believe the more the president ignores the law and the Constitution the more money they can raise. They may have made a gross miscalculation.

If Obama does, in fact, sign blanket amnesty, as Pfieffer has suggested, there’s no doubt that would be an impeachable offense. If the act so angers voters that Republicans take the senate then Obama’s buffer between him and impeachment is gone. If the Republicans take control of both houses of congress the Democrats better be careful what they wish for.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

Rick Perry's Border Solution?

Governor Rick Perry is deploying the National Guard to the border. Well, sort of. The National Guard, in the words of Texas Adjutant General John Nichols, will be “referring and deterring” illegals. They won’t be detaining them. Not sure how much good that will do but at least a governor somewhere is doing something.

Texas Democrats accused Perry of militarizing the southern border, a charge the governor vehemently denies. But that’s the only thing that will stem the tide of illegals streaming across the border. As for those crossing, AG Nichols said, “We

think they’ll come to us and say, ‘Please take us to a Border Patrol station.’” Quite frankly, they’re already doing that.

If Rick Perry really wants to do something then he’ll use the National Guard in a manner that’s really effective, and that is to protect the border from invasion. People ask if I’m willing to have the National Guard shoot people who try to enter illegally. My question to them is what happens if someone tries to blast past a border crossing station? My assumption is there will be serious consequences. Just think of National Guard troops spread across the border as one big border crossing station. If anyone tries to breach that border then the same thing should happen to them that happens to anyone who crashes a border patrol station.

I found it very interesting that in Gov. Perry’s remarks announcing his deployment of the National Guard he cited a statistic that illegals had committed over 640,000 crimes in Texas alone since 2008, including over 3,000 murders. That figure jumped out at me. Over 3,000 homicides that would never have taken place were it not for our lax border enforcement.

It might not surprise you that I scanned the reports of every major media outlet and not one included the startling crime stats cited by Gov. Perry. In fact, CNN, NBC and others purposely edited out that section when they posted his press conference.

I’ve often told you that it’s not what the media tell you that should concern you. It’s what they don’t. Naturally, if the average American knew that illegals had murdered over 3,000 people just in Texas over the last six years they would be stunned and outraged. They might even be moved to insist we do something about. That’s why the media folks can’t let these little tidbits loose on the public. They’re no longer in the business of reporting events. They’re in the business of shaping them.

So far they’ve managed to put a poor, pitiful face on the border crisis. They blame drug violence and poverty for the sudden DREAMer streamer but these Central American countries have had poverty and drug violence for as long as anyone can remember. That’s not what’s drawing them here. They’re being drawn here by a president who promises they’ll get to stay if they come. So far, that’s been the case, and there’s no sign of that changing anytime soon.

My theory is the drug cartels are behind the exploitation of the president’s executive order. Notice that almost all of these so-called unaccompanied children are coming through one point at the border; the Rio Grande Valley sector. The federal government has had to scramble personnel and resources to that one sector, leaving the rest of the border vulnerable.

That was part of the reason why Perry called in the National Guard. Crime in other parts of Texas is going through the roof. 

It appears we’re being played and either the Obama administration knows it or they’re too dumb to see it.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.

The Logical Next Step

I knew it was only a matter of time. Last week, a judge in Australia dismissed some of the rape charges against a man accused of having sex with his sister. He allegedly had sex with her when she was 10 and he was 18. Those charges stood. However, the relationship began anew when she was 18 and he was 26. The judge ruled that since she was of age the sex was consensual, even though the woman was his sister.

Incest, he ruled, is no longer taboo now that homosexuality and gay marriage are widely accepted. This should come as no surprise, especially to advocates of same-sex marriage. You see, one can’t logically argue against incest while

arguing for same-sex marriage. If your argument is no one should be able to tell you who you can love then you should be prepared to stand by that argument, even if that person is the lover’s sister.

If you think that’s rather crude you need to understand something. Society — any society — sets its own norms. Western civilization, for the past several thousand years, has established a “norm” of marriage between one man and one woman. There have been pockets of societies that embraced polygamy but they were nowhere close to the majority. Marriage is a public proclamation to society of a joined union. It’s generally a way of conforming to the norms of society. Marriage is about tradition and traditionally marriage has been a union between a man and a woman. Once you venture outside that norm you better be prepared for anything.

Understand, sanctioning a marriage is not the same as allowing a relationship to take place within a society. We have evolved as a society to tolerate pretty much any relationship. In other words, the days of the police knocking down your door and arresting you for a homosexual relationship are over. But if we’re going to tolerate adult men and women making decisions about who they sleep with we need to be prepared for pretty much anything consenting adults can dream up.

I’m a live-and-let-live guy. If you’re a guy and you want to have a relationship with another guy, I’m not one to tell you how to run your life. Same goes if you want to sleep with your sister. Having society recognize and approve of such relationships is a different matter altogether. Again, no one’s trying to tell you how to live your life. It’s simply a matter of what society sanctions and what it doesn’t.

For example, most states, if not all, require you to be 21-years-old to buy alcohol. I remember a time when the drinking age for beer and wine was 18. The federal government got involved and threatened to withhold highway funding if states didn’t raise the drinking age so society was forced to do it. However, a law doesn’t always change societal norms. Many people think it’s perfectly acceptable for college-aged adults to consume alcoholic beverages. That’s an example of society ignoring the law.

Only time will tell how the gay marriage thing shakes out. Right now most people in rural states don’t cotton to it while more urban states do. That’s how this country was designed. To be honest, we’re a mix of societies. Each state has its own unique personality. So far, each state has decided the issue of gay marriage on a state-by-state basis, which is as it should be.

But look out for the next big trend. Incest will be coming to a marriage protest near you.

Phil Valentine is the host of the award-winning, nationally syndicated talk radio show, The Phil Valentine Show.