As is my frequent custom, I recorded a spot for a Northern Indiana AM radio station. These segments are aired on that station and its FM affiliates the following morning, with the occasional hour-long round-table airing live.

Now, this is just a little piece of media in a small Hoosier area. However, you might be surprised at the number of emails I receive from listeners who appreciate a college and university professor explicating issues relative to business and economics in a manner inconsistent with the liberal bent we all have come to know and despise. Below I have pasted a brief summary (as detailed in yesterday’s media appearance) of my take on the impending budget battle and what it means for the country. Please feel free to comment/criticize/support in any way you deem appropriate…I have thick skin

General Budget Notes

In his final budget request prior to the 2012 Election, President Obama rolled out a $3.8 trillion spending request for Fiscal Year 2013 that promises more debt than the president’s proposal to reduce debt back in September of 2011. In the best of circumstances and according to his own economic team, President Obama’s budget will add an average of no less than $600 billion annually to an already $16 trillion national debt. This means that the national debt, by the end of 2022 and under the best of economic circumstances, will climb to $22 trillion.

That’s the bad news…here is the really bad news:

The president’s estimates operate under a number of optimistic assumptions. Namely, that the unemployment rate will slowly drop to (and stay at) 5% by 2020 and that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will simultaneously ascend beyond the 1-3% range it currently produces to the tune of 4-5% growth. This budget also assumes that inflation will remain relatively static – an assumption that is contradicted by the existence of recurring deficits and a weak dollar.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, here is the really, really bad news:

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid program spending obligations are projected by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to comprise amounts equal to 12.5% of overall GDP. That number is presently about 10%. At the same time, according to the CBO the number of Social Security recipients is expected to jump to about 75 million Americans by 2022 compared to 55 million as of 2012. This jump occurs at a time when the birth rate in the United States is about 3% lower than in years past…meaning there will be less workers paying the bills for these programs.

So what’s the deal?

If ever there was a time for House Republicans to hold the line on spending and validate the support they received during the 2010 midterm elections, that time is NOW. The Democrat-controlled Senate will likely rubber-stamp Obama’s budget request, opting to punt to the next congress and avoid making tough choices before the election. However, the House of Representatives is controlled heavily by a GOP faction that was put in place to handle this very dilemma.

The absolute worst thing Republicans can do is cower from a budget fight. Economically, this country is stuck in the mud due to recurring deficits, a weak dollar, and high oil and gas prices that have persisted due to that weak dollar. Businesses are just beginning to hire again, but they will be less likely to further do so if they believe their taxes will be increased in the months and years to follow…and the president’s budget proposal stands to do that very thing.

Then there are the last GOP presidential candidates standing. If ever there was an opportunity for Newt Gingrich to stay competitive in this race, that time is NOW. He was House Speaker when we balanced our budget. He has also successfully stared down a popular Democrat president (Clinton) and won battles on several fronts…including budgetary, social and energy-related fronts. Mitt Romney must hammer away at the business end of the discussion by pointing out that the path to robust business growth does not involve depriving small businesses, many of whom will fall under Obama’s $250,000 or more tax target, of operating capital. Rick Santorum? He should forget the other two candidates and be in full-time attack Obama mode. This budget gives him a mighty salient and convenient tool to do so.

This is a dangerous time for the country and its economy. Greece is in ruins because it kicked the debt can down the road so long that is was forced into severe
spending cuts to secure a path out of oblivion. Will the United States take a quicker path to solving its budget woes, or will it kick the can like Greece has? Do we have the will to do what is necessary, or will we wait until the spending cuts are so draconian (and the tax increases so debilitating) that the country will slip into depression? That answer may well rest with House Republicans – who are likely the only obstacle standing between fiscal and monetary sanity and another $6+ trillion in debt.

I have been very torn in recent weeks over which candidate would be a better nominee to take back the White House…Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry.

Both men have flaws…and let’s be honest, ALL HUMANS have flaws. But it occurs to me that among this list of flawed candidates rests some pretty terrific talent to bring conservatism back to the forefront in American policy making at a time when it has never been needed more.

Given those realities, I have come to the conclusion that a Perry/Gingrich ticket is the best available to conservatives…and here are just a few of the reasons why:

1. Rick Perry has the money, record and value system to advance conservatism in a big way. He is terrific on the stump…and despite my shrinking concerns about his debating skills, many on this site have convinced me that his ability to derail the calm, cool and collected demeanor of Romney and Obama will be on display full force should he get the nomination. I agree with this premise more each time I read and consider it.

2. One of the reasons I like Newt Gingrich is his ability to intelligently and articulately express why conservatism is good for the country. That is no small task on the big stage. However, why couldn’t he advance these ideals as the #2 on the ticket? He’ll be campaigning with Perry and debating JOE BIDEN, of all people. If that isn’t a stage for success on the policy communication platform, I don’t know what is.

3. These two candidates, presented in this ticket, will rally conservatives AND Independents alike. Indies LOVE winners…and there are few who have won as much during their careers as Rick Perry. Plus, we will have a ticket that has balanced budgets and created jobs…the two most important economic tasks facing a new administration.

4. It is becoming abundantly clear that the media is scared stiff of the possibility of Obama facing someone like Perry. That same media has always feared Gingrich, as they remember when he took it to Clinton on welfare reform and balanced budgets. Plus, their mantra of the idiot conservative would pretty much vanish into thin air with a Ph.D. and historian on the ticket. Their dream ticket of Romney/anti-Romney would also be crushed – as would Obama’s chances of re-election – if we didn’t nominate someone with such easily-exploitable policy flaws as Mitt Romney.

Call me crazy, but I think this is the path to certain victory in 2012. As always, I welcome your spirited dissent in the comments to follow!

I am not a Libertarian. I am a conservative.

Yet I find myself perplexed by the number of conservatives ready to toss Newt Gingrich aside because of his personal life. What is it that drives this insatiable need to sit in judgment of this man and the decisions he has made in his personal life?

Is it the squeaky-clean lives we all have lead where we have neither committed physical adultery, nor have we lusted after another in our minds? (Both ARE sins, according to the scripture…)

Is it the fact that we are looking to tear down a candidate who might not be our personal favorite? I thought that was what Democrats did to their opponents…correct me if I’m wrong here…

Is it the fact that SOME of Newt’s policy positions, which he puts forth with unequaled eloquence and mastery, simply do not sync with our own? Last I checked, even Reagan had some policy positions nearly every conservative disagreed with at some point or another. Did we work to tear him down endlessly?

Is it because we see him as less electable than the other candidates?

Is it because he isn’t physically fit?

How many other petty reasons will we use to justify drudging up 20 year-old personal matters that have nothing to do with saving this country?

People, we have serious problems to fix…and we need a problem solver NOW.

I don’t give a rip who Newt has cheated on in the past. That’s right…I DON’T CARE. The man has obviously made some terrible personal mistakes, but look at this from a practical point of view: If God hadn’t forgiven him for his sins, would he have put this historic opportunity to transform the greatest nation on Earth within his grasp?

As for the other candidates…

Rick Perry would have been my preferred candidate…if only he could find a coherent sentence once in a while when speaking in front of a national audience. The guy simply isn’t ready for the GOP prime-time, let alone for an all-out war with the Obama machine. At one point I wasn’t sure, but now I am convinced: Obama v. Perry on the national stage = 4 more years of darkness…BANK ON IT.

Mitt Romney is worse than a RINO. He is a wolf in sheeps wool, pretending to be just conservative enough to fool the GOP primary electorate until he sprints to the left in the general. NO THANK YOU…

Bachmann…Santorum…Paul…Huntsman…pretenders all…

Newt Gingrich may not be the perfect candidate, but he is one who can, at a minimum, serve to right many of the Obama wrongs socially, economically, and with regards to foreign affairs. And he can crush Obama not once…not twice…but THREE (3) times in nationally-televised  debates. Don’t tell me that prospect doesn’t make you grin ear-to-ear!

I will not presume to tell anyone here how they should feel and vote. Each person desiring a dramatic shift in this country’s direction must leave his/her own decision at the foot of his/her conscience.

As for me, I will not “hold my nose” and vote for this guy if he is our candidate. I will proudly say that I chose the candidate best able to restore America’s greatness.

Just when you thought hope for conservatism was lost on college campuses, they let one of us take the wheel.

I am a Master’s graduate nearing Ph.D. conferral. My dissertation is being written to demonstrate the overwhelming viability of lessened government intervention in free markets and reduced taxes as a conduit to lower unemployment, higher wages, and better benefit dissemination.

I am also a proud professor of political science and economics.

I know what you must be thinking:

What the heck is a conservative, anti-Keynesian economist doing infiltrating liberal academia?

My answer is very simple: I am fed up with the left-wing indoctrination of our susceptible, impressionable youth via public education - and rather than complain about it, I am taking my fight to the trenches.

If there is a canard to be refuted in politics, it is the ridiculous notion that liberals are somehow more educated than conservatives. Quite the contrary, conservatives have historically relied on facts and reason to quash the ideals of those espousing public-sector solutions to policy problems. It has only been the betrayal of conservative principles and values that has allowed liberal ideals to win over what has been, at times, a snake oil buying public.

The unsurprising reality of the college classroom is much like it is at the ballot box. As easily as a student can be indoctrinated by a left-wing ideologue in the classroom, he can be freed from the lies and distortions of the left with regards to conservatism. When both options are presented in a non-biased (yet factual) manner, it’s quite refreshing to witness the number of students who, through no coercion whatsoever, opt for the conservative route.

This was the case when I recently presented the president’s budget and the bleak economic outlook of the country (as the projected deficit exceeds 10% of the overall GDP) to my class. As they took a look at receipts and outlays, it became patently clear to all that the spending of the federal government was bankrupting their future and the futures of their children and grandchildren. As they pondered the total accumulation of debt at the end of the decade, they swiftly began to loudly proclaim that spending cuts were necessary to save the country’s economic future. Not a single student made the assertion that raising taxes was the solution to this economic quandary.

This was, my friends, a class of mostly liberal students before the debate based on their comments to that point. That so many could be persuaded by facts so quickly via a single class session speaks volumes of the opportunities we have to encourage such revelations from the inside.

If you take anything away from this diary, please let it be the following:

There are some within the walls of higher academia working to overturn what has, thus far, been an unbalanced diet of anti-capitalist nonsense fed to the mouths of babes. Some of these students were strong enough to overcome the indoctrination, but others have simply needed the opportunity to properly digest both lines of thought before realizing which ideology is the economic path to individual, group and aggregate prosperity and which represents the path to despair.

There was a time when I thought my principles and values would exclude me from higher education. Now that I’m inside, expect nothing but my relentless mission to reverse the damage that has been done to our precious youth as they helplessly made their way through public school systems. The left had their opportunity to ruin these kids. Now, they’re mine to educate the right way.