All posts by Dr. ESP

Maybe They Are Right

I continue to be surprised how many people who have read my book In the National Interest ask me, “Do you believe it was possible that Kennedy ordered his own assassination?”  I even had one reader ask me, “How did you, of all people, get possession of that journal?”  On Facebook and Reddit sites dedicated to the assassination, I constantly have to remind commenters who want to poke holes in the narrative that it is a work of fiction, not intended to solve the crime of the 20th century.

This morning, based on efforts by the MAGAverse to put the brakes on Kamala Harris’ game-changing entry into the 2024 presidential sweepstakes, I wondered if there was room for one more work of conspiratorial fiction.  Was this mastermind Joe Biden’s last act, eclipsing his rigging the outcome of Super Bowl LVIII?  Another saga in which the mystery is not “who dunnit” but “how dunnit?”

I, therefore, offer for your imagination In the National Interest Redux by Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.  President Biden has only forwarded the preface to me, but promises to send the complete story to be offered as a serial.


PREFACE
Wednesday, November 6, 2024

Dare I say, “Mission Accomplished!”  On January 20, 2025, Kamala Harris will take the oath as 47th president of the United States.  The first woman and second person of color to occupy the Oval Office.  No surprise, Donald Trump has yet to concede even though the final vote tally represents a larger Democratic margin of victory than 2020.  And the MAGA conspiracy machine is in fifth gear.  Of course, their malarky theories cover all the usual bases.  Corrupted voting machines.  Fake Harris and destroyed Trump ballots.  Foreign interference.

If only they knew the truth.  They are half right.  There was a conspiracy, a grand one in fact.  It was launched years before the election and had nothing to do with when and how people voted.  That is the beauty of a truly great conspiracy.  Get the victim to focus on the wrong things, especially when he fancies himself as a master of misdirection.  I laughed when Trump, immediately following my announcement that I would withdraw from the race, threatened to sue the DNC.  He claimed his campaign had wasted millions of dollars running against me when I had always planned to step aside.  A classic case of the fraud calling the bluffer black.  Donald, you’re getting warmer than you imagine.

Let me take you back to the beginning, January 20, 2021.  When Donald and Melania Trump never invited Jill and me to the White House and said he would not attend the inauguration, I knew he would not ride off into the sunset.  If you are someone who picked up this book, you already know that is who he is.  Therefore, 2020 was not a one-off.  We would have to defeat him again, and this time, he would up his game of fear, lies and misinformation.  He would have four years to build a case against me and my record, regardless of our success or failure.  We, too, needed a four-year strategy.

Now, you may find this hard to believe, but back in 2020, at age 77, I knew I was old.  And I knew if I wanted to run again in 2024 at 81, I would be even older.  That is why I suggested on several occasions, one term was enough to do the things I hoped to do.  Save the country from a second Trump term.  Bring us back from the pandemic.  Restore the United States’ reputation as leader of the free world.  And lay the foundation for the next generation of American leaders, hopefully Democratic ones.

I also knew, to defeat Trump again, we needed to rely on the same coalition of minority voters, progressives and educated suburban voters to counter any increase in my predecessor’s recruitment of cult followers and believers who wished for a return to their delusional memories of a “simpler time.”

One more thing you might find hard to believe.  I did not pick Kamala Harris to be my running mate.  Donald Trump did, unwittingly of course, but that’s a given.  Although she did not win the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton had been right about what a Trump administration would mean.  Especially, appointments to the Supreme Court and the danger to women’s rights, years before the Dobbs decision.  By putting Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett on the Court, it was Trump who created the backlash that assured time had come for a female chief executive.

Then I had to do my part.  Which is why, on August 11, 2020, I announced the Biden/Harris ticket.  Thus began the journey which brought us to this moment.  However, before I share the details, I need to correct something I wrote previously.  This may have been a grand scheme, but it was no conspiracy.  A conspiracy requires the collaboration of two or more people.  Prior to this account, no one, not family, close advisors or even Kamala, knew this was the plan from day one.  I may be old,  but I can still protect a secret, classified or not.

TO BE CONTINUED
Dr. ESP

“FORE” More Years

I have been briefed on the shooting at Donald Trump’s rally in Pennsylvania.  I’m grateful to hear that he’s safe and doing well. I’m praying for him and his family and for all those who were at the rally, as we await further information.

~President Joe Biden/July 13, 2024

Crooked Joe Biden was not fit to run for president, and is certainly not fit to serve – and never was!  He only attained the position of president by lies, fake news, and not leaving his basement…We will suffer greatly because of his presidency, but we will remedy the damage he has done very quickly.

~Former President Donald Trump/July 21, 2024

Donald Trump loves to talk about his golf game.  And as anyone who has picked up a club will tell you, golf is a game of honor and respect for others on the course.  This includes fixing divots on the fairway, raking sand traps and repairing ball marks on the green.  Failing to do any of these is more an inconvenience, not a matter of life or death.  There is only one courtesy that approaches the latter.  Yelling “FORE” following an errant shot in the direction of another player or spectator.  I doubt whether Trump has ever used the term, since according to him, he has never endangered the safety of another golfer, having never executed anything but a “perfect” swing.

As America enters the final phase of what must be one of the least predictable contests in the history of presidential contests, the above quotes are one more reminder of the choice voters have on November 5, 2024.  In the face of potential tragedy, one side yells “FORE!!!”  Despite the bucolic nature of the rolling fairways, forests and water features of  August National, Pinehurst, Pebble Beach or St. Andrews, competitors and spectators are often subjected to incoming projectiles.  And on those occasions when one of those dimpled spheres collides with its unintended target, the responsible golfers, regardless of the severity of the strike, inevitably check to see if their “victims” are okay and wish them well.  That is what Biden and every Democratic officials did upon hearing of the events at Trump’s Butler, Pennsylvania rally.

Golf news 2024, Xander Schauffele wins British Open Championship ahead of Justin Rose

An equally defining moment in golf comes at the end of a match when competitors, regardless how intensely their rivalry played out, acknowledge their common experience.  Yesterday was a prime example.  Runner-up Justin Rose congratulated Open Champion Xander Schauffele and conceded he had been outplayed on the final nine holes.  Likewise, Schauffele attributed his ability to focus on the task at hand to Rose’s equally good showing.  Not so with Trump.  Despite his professed love of golf, his response to Biden’s announcement again proves he may understand the mechanics of golf but has never mastered the culture of the game.

This fact is documented in sportswriter Rick Reilly’s 2019 book, Commander-in-Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump.  His dislike for Trump has nothing to do with politics, triggered initially by Trump’s many outrageous claims of golfing excellence on Twitter and confirmed by rounds of golf with the former president.  Reilly writes, “I wasn’t offended as a voter. I was offended as a golfer.”  For example, he recalls how Trump races ahead of his playing partners in a “turbo-charged golf cart,” giving him time to improve his position before the others catch up to him.  Balls landing in hazards beam, Star Trek-like, to preferred lies in the middle of the fairway.

Reilly’s primary thesis in his book is to reveal a much larger truth about Trump and others who approach the game in a similar manner.

If you’re going to cheat at golf, you’re going to cheat on your taxes, cheat on your wife and cheat on — what else? Elections? If you’re going to lie about your round, why not lie about how many votes you got, or how big your inauguration size was? Do you realize he lies about the size of his buildings? It’s incredible to me.

It is too bad First Tee, launched by PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem in 1997, did not exist when Donald was growing up.  It would have a been a better alternative to the lessons he learned at New York Military Academy.  For those unfamiliar with First Tee, here is its mission statement.

First Tee is a youth development organization that enables kids to build the strength of character that empowers them through a lifetime of new challenges. By seamlessly integrating the game of golf with a life skills curriculum, we create active learning experiences that build inner strength, self-confidence, and resilience that kids can carry to everything they do. 

What does this have to do with the presidential election, especially in light of Biden’s withdrawal from the contest?  Echoing Richard Nixon’s “last press conference” after losing his 1962 bid for governor of California, the press won’t have Joe Biden to kick around any more.  Which shifts the spotlight back on Trump.  And as he demonstrated in his nomination acceptance speech last Thursday night (and Friday morning), there is no “newly tempered Trump,” chastened by his near encounter with death.  He will return to form, taking errant shots at his opponent, especially if it is Kamala Harris.  Meanwhile, none of his sycophants dare remind him to yell “FORE!”  Instead, they will “let Trump be Trump” for the 105 days between now and the election.  Hopefully voters will recognize only they can yell “FORE,” warning others of Trump’s barrage of incoming misinformation, outright lies and gaslighting.

What is the message?  There is no “new Trump” just as there was no “new Nixon.”  And the question?  Is 15 weeks of the “old Trump” enough to jog voters’ memory how quickly they tired of the chaos, making four more years (or longer) of it an unbearable eternity?

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Shooting the Messenger

There is no justification for what happened in Butler, Pennsylvania Saturday afternoon.  It was an unacceptable assault on democracy.  And America is fortunate the shooter was a less skilled marksman than Lee Harvey Oswald or James Earl Ray.  In a rare moment of agreement, both President Biden and Donald Trump called on their supporters to “cool down the temperature.”  This period of reconciliation did not last 24 hours. 

Biden went on national television Sunday night and reminded Americans, “We settle our differences at the ballot box, not with bullets” and pulled ads his campaign planned to run during the Republican National Convention.  Trump sent his supporters a fundraising letter which included a stylized version of AP photographer Evan Vucci’s image of the blooded candidate raising his fist in the air.

The question that haunts me today is, “Will Americans let a misguided 20 year-old with his father’s AR-15 decide the future direction of our country?”  Thomas Matthew Crooks must have thought he could.  Which brings me back to my previous posts, especial the one from July 9, titled, “An Unwitting Asset.”  The 2024 election, regardless of the Republican nominee, should never be about an individual.  “The soul of America,” about which Biden so often refers, has been under assault for decades.  When Democrats, myself included, focus on Trump’s flaws, we drop the ball.

I apologize for repeating myself, but the vision of America that will be laid out in Milwaukee did not begin with Donald Trump.  The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by Paul Weyrich, Edwin Feulner and Joseph Coors.  [Note:  Weyrich, a la Gene Wilder in Young Frankenstein, insisted his last name was pronounced “Wy-Rick” instead of “Way-Rich.]  Weyrich, a conservative commentator, political activist and ordained deacon in the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, recruited Coors, patriarch of the brewery which bears his family name, to underwrite creation of the Heritage Foundation.  Feulner, after serving as an aide to Congressman Phil Crane (R-IL), became Heritage’s first president.

If you think Project 2025 is the first time the Heritage Foundation played a major role in setting the agenda for a Republican administration, think again.  In 1981, the foundation provided policy guidance for incoming president Ronald Reagan including a document with 2,000 specific recommendations titled (drum roll) “Mandate for Leadership.”  Sound familiar?  Heritage exerted similar influence during the George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations.

Following the announcement of Trump’s entry into the 2016 election cycle, the foundation was no fan of the future president.  Heritage Action director Michael Needham, during a Fox News appearance, said, “Donald Trump’s a clown.”  However, after Trump secured the GOP nomination, the Foundation forwarded a list of potential appointees, according to the New York Times, drawn from “a 3,000-name searchable database of trusted movement conservatives from around the country who were eager to serve in a post-Obama government.”  (Again I ask, “Sound familiar?”)

Which brings me to the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies (FedSoc), founded in 1982 by law students at Harvard, Yale and the University of Chicago.  It claims to be a response to judicial activism and often quotes Alexander Hamilton to support their views.

It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy, may substitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature.

To achieve that goal, FedSoc  wanted to flood the courts with their members.  And flood them they have.  All six Republican appointees to the Supreme Court belong to FedSoc.  And surprise, surprise, so does Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, who, as I am writing this, just dismissed the classified documents case against Trump.  Among the law professors in the FedSoc ranks is former dean of the Chapman University School of Law John Eastman, one of the architects of the 2020 fake electors scheme.

While the Heritage Foundation is the policy arm of the one-percent, the Federalist Society is the judicial branch of the same confederation.  Donors include the Koch family ($116 billion net worth), the Richard Mellon Scaife family ($1.2 billion) foundation and the Mercer family ($900 million) as well as major corporations such as Google and Chevron.  Yes, that Chevron.  The losing plaintiff in a 1984 case which was recently overturned by a six member majority, you guessed it, the GOP appointees who just happen to be FedSoc members.  [NOTE:  The Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society are both 501(c)(3) educational foundations which means, assuming these major donors are in the maximum 37 percent marginal tax bracket, the federal government subsidizes 37 cent for each dollar they give to their “noble” cause.]

To suggest that FedSoc-appointed justices selectively suffer amnesia when its comes to Hamilton or their originalist philosophy is an understatement.  The dam broke with Citizens United v. FEC.  So much for legislative prerogative as Hamilton advocated.  This case literally outlawed federal and state legislators’ role in regulating campaign financing.  And, to this day, legal scholars are still looking for constitutional language that equates MONEY with SPEECH.

Likewise, by reversing the 1984 Chevron decision, the justices stripped Congress of its Article I authority to legislatively delegate rulemaking to federal agencies.  To the contrary, the courts anointed the judiciary as the venue for oversight.  In general, the Roberts court has repeatedly ruled in favor of management over workers, overturned state election laws and ignored the Article II of the Constitution in support of the the Heritage Foundation’s belief in the unitary theory of the executive branch.  Can you say “presidential immunity?”  I knew you could.

So forget Donald Trump!  Republican presidents since 1980 have been doing the bidding of this cabal of oligarchs not unlike the one that pulls Vladimir Putin’s strings.  Giving them massive tax breaks.  Reducing regulations promulgated to protect the public health and safety. Appointing their hand-picked justices and judges who regularly decide cases in favor of the privileged. The difference with Trump is that they now have someone who revels in the trappings of the White House, unlike his patrons who prefer life under the radar.  Equally important, even as he tosses out non-sensical ideas such as replacing the income tax with tariffs, he eventually lands exactly where they want him to be, deeper tax cuts and deregulation.  It is this system, not Donald Trump, that should be on trial November 5th.

The solution? 

  • #1: Reposition the 2024 election as something other than a “grudge match” between Biden and Trump by nominating someone who can prosecute the oligarchs’ agenda rather than their mouthpiece. 
  • #2: Structure the Democratic convention to expose the consequences of an administration based on Project 2025.  Do this with presentations by one member of Trump’s first administration who tells voters how implementation of Project 2025 proposals would corrupt the executive branch, followed by a Democrat who lays out an alternative agenda for the next four years.  Each presentation should be illustrated with examples of the consequences for most Americans. 
  • #3:  After pointing out Trump is only the messenger for the uber-rich elites, never mention his name again.  Although Trump claims he is a changed man following his brush with death, does any actually believe him?  Based on past behavior, I trust he will prove us correct without our help.

The prime directive?  Explain why the 2024 election is a choice between Russian-style oligarchy and democracy.  And separate voters’ perception that the MAGA agenda is a populist response to their grievances from what it really means for their families and wallets.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Both Sides Now

Jimmy Carter described his run for the White House as a marathon.  In actually, Presidential politics is more akin to a horserace.  The lead shifts when a candidate is positioned to take advantage of an opponent.  Maximizing that advantage requires vision, strategy and focus.  The last thing you want is to say or do something that erases that edge.

For most of the two weeks following Joe Biden’s “bad night,” the Biden campaign and his supporters had been playing defense.  Trump seized that advantage, until the Biden folks, and at last the media, decided to focus on Project 2025.  In response Trump did the only thing he could to accelerate this momentary shift in attention from Biden’s fitness to serve for another four years.  He tried to distance himself from the Heritage Foundation’s manifesto for an imperial presidency.  More importantly, of course he lied, posting on Truth Social, “I know nothing about Project 2025.  I have no idea who is behind it.” A laughable response considering so many members of his post-2020 brain trust and likely second term officials are listed as authors and contributors to the 940 page document.

Yesterday, everything changed.  But not for the reason you think.  Of course, Trump and his team will take advantage of the fortunately bad marksmanship of a wannabe assassin. Since January 6, 2021, Biden and Democrats had an ace in hole.  Trump peppered his speeches with dog whistles which not only incited violence, but actually produced violence.  January 6th.  El Paso.  Buffalo.  The Tree of Life Synagogue.  In contrast, most Democrats told voters the only way to defeat Trump and MAGA was at the ballot box.

This was the one issue that clearly differentiated Democrats from MAGA.  Of course, that did not stop Trump supporters such as Senator Marsha Blackburn (TN) and Representatives Mike Collins (GA) and Lauren Boebert (CO) from connecting Biden rhetoric to the gunman’s attempt to kill Trump.  When I first heard this, I chalked it up to MAGA propaganda.  Calling Trump and his plans for a second term an existential threat to America is not on the same level as telling the Proud Boys “to stand down and stand by.”

Except this time they brought the receipts.  On July 7, Politico reported that, during a “private” call with donors, Biden included the following in his remarks.

I have one job, and that’s to beat Donald Trump. I’m absolutely certain I’m the best person to be able to do that. So, we’re done talking about the debate, it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.

It does not matter if the timing of Biden’s words and Thomas Matthew Crooks’ failed assassination is causal or mere correlation.  In an environment of heightened political tension, uttering phrases like “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye,” is unacceptable, exactly the way it was when Sarah Palin posted a map of vulnerable Democrats in Congress with a cross-hairs superimposed over their districts.  Just ask Gabby Giffords.

There are a lot of things about Joe Biden I could forgive.  His verbal gaffes.  An inability to prosecute the case against a second Trump term in a 90-minute debate.  His inability to sway to the music.  His agonizingly slow pace when he walks.  His occasional goofy smile.  But this is different.  His lack of self-awareness to understand, first. there is no such thing as a “private” conference call, and second, that he cannot, under any circumstances, use a metaphor involving lethal force to describe a political campaign.  Forget the issues of age and mental acuity, this is the line in the sand that must convince a consensus among Democratic leaders, donors and voters that Biden is no longer a viable candidate for president.

We all have good days and bad days.  The “Good Joe” was on full display yesterday.  He told the nation, “There is no place in America for this kind of violence.”  And he placed a phone call to Trump last night, wishing him a speedy recovery.  Too bad THAT Biden was not on the July 7 phone call with donors. 

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Men of UNreal Genius

In his victory speech following the 2016 Nevada primary, then candidate Donald Trump thanked those who made a difference during his campaign including a shout out for one demographic of which he seemed most proud.  “We won with poorly educated.  I love the poorly educated.”  I too would love this segment of the voting population if they continuously supported me despite the fact my policies and programs were not in their self-interest.  The best analogy is Trump as Omega Theta Pi pledge master Gregory Marmaland (James Daughton) in “Animal House,” wielding the ritual paddle on initiation night.  One can imagine Trump’s glee as he recalls, “Each inductee, with tears in their eyes, begged ‘hit me again, SIR.'”

However, if you want to understand the difference between “the uneducated” and “the just plain stupid” despite academic credentials, look no farther than page 696 of the Heritage Foundation autocracy handbook, “Mandate for Leadership:  The Conservative Promise,” otherwise known as Project 2025.

Intermediate Tax Reform. The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions. The 30 percent bracket should begin at or near the Social Security wage base to ensure the combined income and payroll tax structure acts as a nearly flat tax on wage income beyond the standard deduction.

This chapter in MAGA’s 900+ page encyclopedia of malarkey was written by William L. Walton, Stephen Moore and David R. Burton.  Walton is a venture capitalist with a B.S. and M.B.A. from Indiana University and life memberships in MENSA and the NRA, which suggests he is probably more qualified to address the need for “smart firearms” than economic policy.  Moore is an economist with degrees from the University of Illinois and George Mason University and senior economic writer for the Wall Street Journal.  According to his Heritage Foundation bio, he is the recipient of the Ronald Reagan “Great Communicator” award “for his advancement of economic understanding.”  That honor will crop up again in this discussion.  Burton is a specialist in “securities law, capital markets, financial privacy, tax matters, and regulatory and administration law issues” at Heritage. He holds a B.A. from the University of Chicago and a law degree from the University of Maryland.  Based on his range of policy responsibility, he is the Jared Kushner of Heritage’s “where’s the loophole” division.

With the best education and real-world experience of these three old, white men, let us see what they actually proposed as tax policy to benefit all Americans.  First, it is not original.  Remember Moore’s Ronald Reagan award for communications.  A two-bracket regressive tax system, with rates of 15 and 28 percent, were established in 1988 by none other than (drum roll) Ronald Reagan.  This supply-side fantasy lasted exactly two-years before subsequent presidents including George H. W. Bush proposed a return to a more progressive rate schedule with additional tiers.  [Note: Moore, et. al., do not mention this former iteration of a two-rate system or credit Reagan for its origin.  At Miami University, where I was a professor, we would not have recognized Moore for his communications skills.  We would have charged him with plagiarism.]

Assuming this is Moore’s first offense, we will put him on probation.  It is more important that we understand how this scheme supports MAGA policy objectives.  In 2018, Trump’s Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross lauded the president’s 2017 tax legislation.  “As Americans filed their taxes this spring, they wrestled for the last time with a system that for decades plundered their paychecks and made American businesses uncompetitive.”  Sounds good.  But remember,  in 2016 Ross reimbursed investors $11.8 million and was fined $2.3 million by the SEC for fee overcharges.   In 2017, he was accused of insider trading after selling his shares in the Bank of Ireland.  In 2018, his partners accused him of siphoning $120 million from WL Ross & Co.  To paraphrase John Houseman, “He made money the old fashioned Trump way, grifting.”

Damn, it is so hard to keep on message.  So let’s give Ross a pass (as would the current Supreme Court) and take a deep dive into that paragraph that lays out the 2025 tax proposal and see whose paychecks get plundered and whose do not.  First, it is important that to understand what remains the same and what changes.

  • In the current system and Project 2025, all taxpayers are entitled to a standard deduction, $29,200 for married couples filing jointing and $14,600 for single filers.  Each year the size of the standard deduction is adjusted based on the Consumer Price Index.  Your gross income minus the standard deduction becomes your taxable income.
  • This tax year, there are seven incremental tax brackets ranging from 10 percent on the first $19,900 of taxable income to 37 percent on all taxable income over $628,300.
  • Under the proposed system there would be two brackets, 15 and 30 percent.  The  higher rate would kick in at the “Social Security wage base,” the point at which workers no longer contribute 6.2 percent of their gross salary to the Social Security trust fund.  For 2024, the wage base is $168,000.

With this information, you can now calculate the tax liability of individuals and married couples with different income for tax year 2024 and what it would be if the Project 2025 system was in effect.  Let me give you a few examples starting with Americans at the lower end of the wealth spectrum.

For a Married Couple Making $50,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $20,800
This year they would pay $2,236
Under Project 2025 rates they would pay $3,120
An additional tax burden of $884

For an Individual Making $50,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $35,400
This year he/she would pay $4,118
Under Project 2025 rates he/she would pay $5,310
An additional tax burden of $1,192

Maybe I misunderstood the objective.  Maybe Project 2025 tax policy is designed to reduce the federal deficit and national debt.  In which case, this seems like a reasonable contribution by lower income families and individuals.  Let’s see how much the wealthy contribute to this goal.

For a Married Couple Making $1,000,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $970,800
This year they would pay $289,665
Under Project 2025 rates they would pay $266,040
A savings of $23,625

Surely the 0.1 percent wealthiest Americans will make up for this.

For a Married Couple Making $5,000,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $4,970,800
This year they would pay $1,769,665
Under Project 2025 rates they would pay $1,466,040
A savings of $303,625

Now I get it.  Project 2025 tax policy is nothing more than an opportunity for Trump to hold a party at Mar-a-Lago for his major donors and tell them once again, “I made you a lot of money today.”  And the uneducated voters he loves so much get screwed again.

But these “men of UNreal genius” are far from finished.  The algorithms I created for the EXCEL spreadsheet to test the impact of the Project 2025 tax proposal provided the means to test the financial costs or benefits for families and individuals at any level of annual income.  And that’s how I found the following anomaly, perhaps the most damning evidence you should not believe anything these idiots tell you.

In the Foreword titled, “A Promise for America,”  Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts writes.

The Heritage Foundation is once again facilitating this work. But as our dozens of partners and hundreds of authors will attest, this book is the work of the entire conservative movement. As such, the authors express consensus recommendations already forged, especially along four broad fronts that will decide America’s future:

    1. Restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.

Okay!  If that is the goal, certainly the tax policy, even it if is biased toward the wealthy, will incent the formation of families.  Wrong!  Consider the following comparison of current tax policy to Project 2025.

For a Married Couple Making $100,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $70,800

This year they would pay $8,236
Under Project 2025 rates they would pay $10,620
An additional tax burden of $2,384

For an Individual Making $100,000/year
Taxable Income for 2024 would be $85,400
This year he/she would pay $14,261
Under Project 2025 rates he/she would pay $12,810
A savings of $1,451

In simple English, here is the message emitting from the brilliant minds of Walton, Moore and Burton.  Want to save $3,800 a year in taxes?  Don’t get married.  Just shack up.  Of course, you might get arrested by the Christian nationalist morality police for living in sin.  But that’s a small price to pay for a $300/month tax break.

Maybe that’s why we all should embrace the uneducated.  They would never come up with anything half as stupid as these guys, all of whom will likely be members of a second Trump administration under Project 2025’s personnel mandate, “Replace expertise and experience with loyalty.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP