Posts tagged ‘republican’

Time for Tea!

national-tea-party

The women over at Smart Girl Politics wrote this and I thought it deserved passing along:

The principles on which our nation was founded seem to be deteriorating daily. Our government, comprised of elected officials sworn to represent us, has abandoned its sovereign duty to the people. Our voices, already muffled by the roar of a liberal media, are falling on the deaf ears of an uncompromising Congress. In an economic crisis created in large part by irresponsible government interference, it seems our government’s answer is more of the same. If big government was the cause, how can bigger government be the solution?

In the 1760’s the British Government began to use taxation as a tool to suppress prosperity and limit the liberties of its people. Much like our own, the British government abused its power and submitted, not to the citizens, but to the special interests and political gain. On December 16, 1773, American colonists decided, as have we, that enough is enough. In a bold act of protest, the Sons of Liberty filled the Boston Harbor with more than 45 tons of East India Company tea.

The Boston Tea Party put into motion the events that would ultimately lead to the American Revolution and on July 4, 1776, our founding fathers would adopt The Declaration of Independence. This document not only announced our independence from Britain, but it asserted our unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In addition to these, the Declaration of Independence ensures our right to protect ourselves from a government that becomes destructive and to alter, abolish, or recreate a government that has ceased to fulfill the duties for which it was created.

In the shadow of failed bailouts that have been squandered away by greedy CEO’s and uncooperative labor unions, our government has passed legislation that will prove to be the largest and most costly expansion of government in history. With trillions of dollars gone and wasted, we have stood and watched the America we love slip away; the America that has flourished in a system of free market capitalism and thrived in a democracy centered around states’ rights, it is our duty to act. We will stand by and watch no more.

This Friday, all across this nation, “we the people” will be invoking the spirit of our forefathers and joining our voices in an effort to drown out the chatter of mediocrity. We will have a Tea Party of our own. In fact, we will have many. We will speak out against the infliction of a debt that will cripple future generations. We will protest the use of fear by our leaders to impose upon us their liberal agendas. We will respond to the threat of socialism that intensifies as wealth is seized and redistributed. We will reclaim our exceptionalism that sets up apart and provides every man, woman and child with the opportunity to achieve the American Dream . We will reject the class warfare and victim mentality that eats away at peace and prosperity. And once again, we will empower the people…and the people will prevail.

Here is the list of Tea Parties scheduled for Friday, February 27th. Look for your city and then try to go out! For more information on the parties look here at The Nationwide Chicago Tea Party site!

Northeast

  • Boston – Friday, February 27, 2009 noon, The Barking Crab Restaurant, 88 Sleeper Street, Boston
  • Hartford, CT – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, State Capitol
  • New York CitySaturday, February 28, 2009, 2:00pm – 3:00pm, City Hall Park, New York
  • Philadelphia – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, Independence Hall
  • Washington D.C. – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 2:00pm White House on the Lafayette Square Park side
  • Pittsburgh***May be postponed due to rain *** Friday, February 27, 2009 12 pm – 1 pm, Market Square

Southeast

  • Atlanta – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm at the Georgia State Capitol Building ~ Downtown Atlanta Washington Street Exit
  • Fayetteville – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, Liberty Point Resolves Marker, downtown Fayetteville, Hay Street
  • Asheville, NC – Friday, February 27 from 10:00 am to 1:00 pm, Pritchard Park, Corner of Haywood St. and Patton Ave.
  • Columbia, SC – TBD
  • Greenville, SC – Friday, February 27, 2009 6:00pm, on the banks of the Reedy River and on the walking bridge just west of Main Street
  • Orlando – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm on Lake Eola across from Panera Bread
  • Tampa – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, Federal Courthouse, 801 N. Florida Ave., Tampa
  • Gainesville FL – Friday, February 27, 2009 2:00pm – 6:00pm, Ale House, 3950 SW Archer Rd
  • Fort Meyers Beach – Friday, February 27, 2009 11:30am – 1:00pm Bowditch Park, 50 Estero Blvd., Fort Myers Beach
  • Sarasota – Friday, February 27, 2009, 12:00pm – 1:00pm, Island Park and Marina Jacks, Bayfront Drive (41) and Ringling Blvd, Sarasota
  • Nashville – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm Legislative Plaza
  • Shelby County Alabama – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, entrance to Eagle Point Neighborhood, Highway 280
  • Jackson, Miss – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:30pm, On the steps of the Capital Building in Jackson

Midwest

  • Cleveland – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm Public Square in Downtown Cleveland, 1 Public Square
  • Chicago – Friday, February 27, 2009 11:00am – 12:20pm at
    Daley Plaza Civic Center, 50 W Washington St.
  • Lansing, MI – Friday, February 27, 2009 12:00pm – 1:00pm, State Capitol bldg
  • St. Louis – Friday, February 27, 2009 11:00am – 12:00pm The Steps of Arch, Wharf Street
  • Springfield, MO – Friday, February 27, 2009, 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm, Lake Springfield Park
  • Kansas CitySaturday, February 28, 2009 10:00am – 2:00pm J.C. Nichols Foundation, 47th and J.C. Nichols Parkway K.C. MO
  • Wichita, Kansas – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:30am – 12:30pm, Farm Credit Bank Building, 245 N. Waco
  • Omaha – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:00am – 12:00pm, Douglas County Courthouse, 16th and Farnam St, Omaha
  • Davenport, Iowa – Saturday, February 28, 2009, 12:00pm – 1 pm, Corner of Brady & Locust Streets, Davenport

Southwest

  • Austin – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:00am – 12 pm, Capitol steps
  • Dallas – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:00am – 12 pm, Victory Plaza at the American Airlines Center
  • Fort Worth – Friday, February 27, 2009 3pm to 7pm at the Cowtown Bar & Grill, 7108 Camp Bowie Blvd, Fort Worth
  • Houston – Friday, February 27, 2009 11:00am – 2:00pm, Fondren Green at Discovery Green Park, in front of Amphitheatre
  • San Antonio – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:00am – 12 pm, Alamo Plaza
  • Oklahoma City – Friday, February 27, 2009, 11:00am – 12:00pm, State Capitol Steps, Oklahoma City
  • Tulsa – Friday, February 27, 2009 11 am to 1 pm, Veteran‚Äôs Park, 21st & Boulder
  • Phoenix – Friday, February 27, 2009, 10:00am – 11:00am, State Capitol, 1700 W Washington St, Phoenix
  • Tempe AZ – Friday, February 27, 2009 noon, Tempe Beach Park, west of the Mill Avenue Bridge

Rockies

  • Denver – Friday, February 27, 2009 10:00am – 12:00pm Colorado State Capitol Building – West side steps 200 E. Colfax Ave.

West Coast

  • Seattle – Friday, February 27, 2009, 12:15pm – 1:15pm, Westlake Park, 410 Pine St. by the big arch
  • Portland – Friday, February 27, 2009 9:00am – 10:00am Pioneer Courthouse Square @ the corner of Broadway & Morrison (in front of the STARBUCKS), 715 SW Morrison St
  • San Diego – Friday, February 27, 2009 9-10 am, Just north of the Star of India on San Diego Bay
  • Sacramento CA – Friday, February 27, 12 Noon, California State Capitol, North Steps, L Street, Sacramento
  • Los Angeles – Friday, February 27, 2009, 9:00am – 10:00am, Santa Monica Pier
  • Orange County – Friday, February 27, 2009, 9:00am – 10:00am, Huntington Beach Pier

February 27, 2009 at 5:47 am 2 comments

Get up get busy!

exercise_cartoon

I have been meaning to post for a while some ways to get involved in politics in your local community. The only way to make a difference and make sure that your voice is heard is to be involved. Be vocal. No one can read your mind or hear when you complain to your friends. Nothing happens if you don’t call or write senators and representatives. You have to speak out and make your voice heard. (in a super civil way of course)

Some quick ways to get involved:

Top Conservatives on Twitter (TCOT) – if you are a conservative minded person and have a twitter account then join us. there is a large growing conservative community on twitter. Look me up ūüôā I am rightwingchick

To go along with that there is an action project page with specific goals, tasks, and objectives to give you easy ways to get involved:
TCOT Action Page more to come on that. There is a specific project that I will post about shortly.

There are numerous other groups online such as – Smart Girl Politics, Team Sarah, Moms in the Right, and really those are just the tip of the iceberg. There are tons of groups trying to band together to make a difference. Strength in numbers.

Then there are local groups to get involved in:
Find your state’s local Republican Group(s) – general groups, women’s groups, etc. There are so many to choose from. Find the one that fits you the best. Do a search for your state and then fiddle around with the options to search for. These groups will often have local based projects that need to be worked on as well. So an impact in your community may be seen there.

Just get involved!

February 2, 2009 at 5:29 pm Leave a comment

Help me pick a book to read!

I want to read something new on our trip this weekend, if I order today I will have it from Amazon before we leave. Gotta love Prime membership.

January 20, 2009 at 9:10 pm 2 comments

What does the party need to do?

So I went to the SVARW meeting today (Silicon Valley Association of Republican Women). It was most interesting. After I found the meeting location, my GPS missed a critical turn to get to the location, I went in and got my necessary name tag and took a seat. After getting my favorite carbs for breakfast I sat down and chatted with the women at the table. This meeting, the first of the year was free for first time guests such as myself, so it appeared that there were a number of us that were interested in checking out the group. From the women I spoke with all were looking for a safe environment to be an openly conservative. ME TOO!

6a00e54eee7f20883400e54fa34ca98833-800wi

So a quick rundown on the makeup. There were somewhere between 80-100 women in attendance. There were a few men (most likely husbands of said members). I quite possibly was the youngest person there, there may have been a few other people in their 30’s but the majority were older than me. But really that is usually the case in most settings I am in. I was young when my first child was born, so I am usually the youngest parent in his class. (young by today’s standards, since everyone is waiting to have children – I was 24 when he was born). Everyone was very friendly and very eager to get involved and make a difference in our society. Seeing ways to impact decisions and government. I really enjoyed the meeting and hope that I will be able to continue to attend.

Now for the topic of the day – “The Republican Resurgence Begins NOW” Dr Charlie Self, aka Dr. History delivered the message for the day and it was most interesting. He was challenging us to imagine what our republic could look like, what it once was, compared to what it currently has become. We have become “people who abandon principles” with “politicians who choose corruption“. Pretty harsh sounding, but true. We as a nation have set aside many basic fundamental things like absolute truth, freedoms, the right to bear arms, etc in favor of allowing more liberties and freedoms to be taken away from the individuals and given to the government. He said, “we need to restore sanity and truth and have a republic left for the next generation.” And that only “attempting self preservation leads to destruction.”

The challenge was to imagine that our country could look like the following:

  • Pro-life could mean making adoption costs affordable and cutting out red tape
  • Parental Responsibility increases, parents are responsible for having their children ready to learn at school. The parent is responsible, not the school.
  • IRS – fixes the tax system
  • Military would be an effective force – not simply a police

Dr. History discussed how Teddy Roosevelt’s presidency shows that it is possible to have business reform without embracing socialist principles. It is possible to take care of the environment while still respecting private property. Foreign affairs can be handled and managed while still maintaining respect of other nations. He then offered a list of things that he feels should be involved in getting the party back in line.

  • respect for all faiths, refuse preference for groups (you know I am big fan of this one. I feel strongly that there is a bias against Christianity)
  • end faith based initiatives, let the public fund, no more strings attached
  • economic stimulus: lower taxes, no fed $$ for bonuses or retreats, hold those in office to higher standards, jail the elite for fraud
  • immigration transformation – become Ellis island again
  • cut federal spending by 10%
  • make military more efficient
  • stress parental responsibility and local government responsibility
  • multiple energy sources – By 2020 we could have a 50% reduction in our dependence if we pursue mulitple energy sources NOW
  • new initiatives to prevent abortions & euthanasia
  • term limits across the board, no one has more than 20 combined years in office. get new people involved. not just the elite.
  • liberty and national sovereignty – we do not need tyranny from dictators at the UN
  • resurgence of freedom in academics – school is to educate NOT indoctrinate
  • irrevocable commitment to Israels right to exist securely

Some other interesting things to note. In 1976 the Republican Party looked lifeless but then by 1980 we had a Republican president. The party is not dead, it is only alive again when not out for party interests but reaffirming the values of the republic. The key for America is going to be to live with our differences, yet find ways to work together.

d-ronald-reagan-quote

It is time to get to work. Will be interested to hear some views on what you think the party needs to do! Anyone?
(you can hear Dr. Charlie Self on the Brain Sussman Show on KSFO Hot Talk 560 AM)

January 14, 2009 at 7:58 pm 2 comments

Republican Women of Silicon Valley

So I am hoping and trying to make it to this meeting this week. It sounds most interesting. I will be curious to see what the demographics of the group is (meaning age range)

header_right_int

Greetings!

Next Wednesday, January 14th,¬† SVARW’s favorite¬†Dr. History returns.¬† ¬†If you listen to the Brian Sussman Show on KSFO 560, you’ve heard Charlie Self¬†introduced as “the¬†doctor with more degrees than a thermometer”.¬†¬† First time guests are FREE for this first SVARW meeting of the year.¬† Bring your friends.charlie
Dr. History Returns for our January Meeting!
Topic:¬† The Republican Resurgence Begins Now”Dr. Charlie Self will inspire and instruct on the future of the Republican Party – and, indeed, our Republic itself. The current confusion open the door to our core message – a clarion call to personal responsibility, family values, fiscal sanity, citizenship that matters and moral and military strength in the War on Terror.FREE for first time guests!¬† Since this is our first meeting of 2009, we want to encourage our members to bring a guest.¬† Men are always welcome!!La Rinconada Country Club
9:00 AM to 11:00 AM
14595 Clearview Drive -Los Gatos, CA 95032
Cost:  $13  includes
Continental Breakfast

Anyone coming . . . .

I am also most intrigued by this group and hope I get the chance to attend something there as well

headerThe next meeting will be:

The Conservative Forum of Silicon Valley Presents:

Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute.

Mr. Kennedy has been with the Institute since 1989 and has written on national security affairs and California public policy issues.¬† His articles have appeared in the Claremont Review of Books, National Review,¬†Investor’s Business Daily and numerous national newspapers.

In addition to his duties as President, Mr. Kennedy serves as Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books and also directs the Institute’s Ballistic Missile Defense project, which examines the missile threat to the western United States and the need for a national missile defense.

Mr. Kennedy is a native Californian and a graduate of Claremont McKenna College.

When:  Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009

Time: Doors open at 6:00 PM, Meeting begins at 7:00 PM

Where: The American Legion Hall

958 Homestead Road

Santa Clara, CA 95050

Cost: CFSV Members РNo Charge

Non-Members – $10 at the door

First time visitors may attend at no charge.

January 11, 2009 at 11:48 pm Leave a comment

Another spiffy poem . . . Barry, Barry Whatcha’ Do-ing

I am so happy to have found out who wrote the excellent Night Before Elections – Katy DuBois. Wanted to make sure to give proper credit now that I know!

barack-obama

She has another poem that she shared with me that I would love to post.

Following my recent poems, “Twas The Night Before Elections ” and “The ‘Bama Pokey”, I swore off writing another. But then, I found I just couldn’t help myself!

Here is another “obnoxious” poem to be sung to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic:

“Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?”
by Katy Zastrow DuBois

We lived through this election
And they didn’t pick our guy-
Instead they picked Obama
Who will make our taxes high!
I guess we’ll give democracy
A big ‘ole fat goodbye!
But Truth keeps marching on!

( Chorus )
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
You’ll take a nation proud
And you’ll top it with a shroud
But Truth keeps marching on!

They had the Panthers at the polls
They had  Acorn on the street
If you run an honest campaign
Then I guess you can’t compete
Integrity from candidates
Will lead to their defeat
ButTruth keeps marching on!

( Chorus )
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
You’ll take a nation proud
And you’ll top it with a shroud
But Truth keeps marching on!

Defense cuts he’s supported
Hurts our military so!
It keeps from them necessities
For combat when they go
The media smoothes it over
So the public doesn’t know
But Truth keeps marching on!

( Chorus )
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
You’ll take a nation proud
And you’ll top it with a shroud
But Truth keeps marching on!

His associates are nasty
And they make me want to gag!
They disrespect our country
And they desecrate the flag
But hush, don’t speak against him
Or your mouth will get the gag
But Truth keeps marching on!

( Chorus )
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
You’ll take a nation proud
And you’ll top it with a shroud
But Truth keeps marching on!

Four years in the future
We will vote him out the door
He could catch a ride with Teddy
( Can we ‘vote out’ Michael Moore? )
He’ll claim ” I couldn’t do it all,
So could I have four more? ”
But Truth keeps marching on!

( Chorus )
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
You’ll take a nation proud
And you’ll top it with a shroud
But Truth keeps marching on!

If you do not want a candidate
That you will just abhor
Please call your local GOP
They need your help and more!
We’ve only lost this battle
BUT WE HAVEN’T LOST THE WAR!
Keep  TRUTH still marching on!

Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
Barry, Barry! What ‘cha do-ing?
We’ll always have our pride
And we’ll never run and hide
We’re TRUTH still marching on!

December 4, 2008 at 5:50 am 1 comment

So the goal is to create apathy?

I was listening to some Rush and reading some blogs and came across this tidbit of information. It appears that there have been paid trolls on youtube, twitter, blogs, etc to create a general sense of apathy or the feeling that it is a lost cause. I have seen plenty of these types of postings and they are all very similar in nature. Stick to talking points and frequently insulting people who have opposing views. Always laying claim that there is a landslide win for Obama. (whoever wins will NOT win by a landslide. I believe this will be a VERY close election)

But here is a comment that was left over at Hillbuzz

Sarah P. writing to the Hill Buzz website responding to their story of how really well McCain is doing with angry Democrats, and the media is not covering.

“Okay, I want to clear my conscience a little.¬† Hopefully you could make a blog post to help some fellow Clinton supporters out.¬† I worked for the campaign–” Obama, “–and I can’t wait for this week to be over.¬† I was doing it for a job.¬† I was not a fan of any candidate, but over time I grew to love Hillary.¬† The internal campaign idea, Obama campaign, is to twist, distort, humiliate, and finally dispirit you.¬† We pay people and organize people to go on all the online sites and play the part of a Clinton or McCain supporter who just switched our support for Obama.¬† We do this to stifle your motivation, to destroy your confidence.¬† We did this the whole primary, and it worked.¬† Sprinkle in mass vote confusion becomes bewildering, most people lose patience, they just give up on their support of a candidate and decide just to block out TV, news, websites, et cetera.

This surprisingly has had a huge suppressing movement in vote turnout issues.¬† Next, we infiltrate all the blogs, and all the YouTube videos, and we overwhelm the voting, the comments, all to continue the appearance of overwhelming world support for Obama.¬† People make posts to the effect that the world has gone mad.¬† That’s the intention, to make you feel stressed and crazy and feel like the world is ending.¬† We have also had quite a hand in skewing many, many polls.”¬† I don’t know how they’ve done that.¬† She doesn’t describe how they’ve skewed the polls.¬† “Some we couldn’t control as much as we would have liked, but many we have spoiled, just enough to make Real Clear Politics look scary to a McCain supporter.¬† It’s worked, although the goal was to appear 13 to 15 points ahead.¬† You see, the results have been working.¬† People tend to support a winner.¬† Go with the flow, become sheeple.¬† The polls are roughly three to five points in favor of Barack.¬† That’s due to our inflation of the polls and pulling in the sheeple.¬† Our donors are the same people who finance the mainstream media.¬† Their interests are tied.¬† Barack then tends to come across as Teflon, nothing sticks, and trust me, there were meetings with Fox News, the goal was to blunt them as much as possible.¬† Watch O’Reilly, he’s become much more diplomatic and fair and balanced and soft towards Obama. It’s because he wants to retain the number one spot on cable news and have access to the Obama campaign.

“Now all the media want access, and they’re expecting more, and that’s why nothing sticks to Obama.¬† The operation is massive, the goal is to paint a picture that is that of a winner, regardless the results.¬† There is no true inauguration draft or true Grant Park construction going on.¬† There will be a party, but we’re boasting beyond the truth to make it seem like the election is wrapped up.¬† Our goal is to continue to make you lose your morale.¬† We worked hard at persuasion and paying off and timing and playing the right political numbers to get key Republican endorsements to make it seem even more like it was over and the world was coming to an end for you all.¬† There’s a huge staff of people working around the clock watching every site, every blog, we flood these sites, we have had a goal to overwhelm.¬† The truth is here.¬† I could go on and on, but you got the picture.¬† I’m saying this because I know Hillary was better for the country, and I now realize this.¬† I was too late by the time I connected to her.

“To me, Barack was just a cool young dude that seemed like a star.¬† I didn’t know him or his policies but now I understand more than I care to, and I realize his interests are more for him and the DNC and all working like puppets with Dean.¬† I always thought a president wanted the better good for the country.¬† The end result I see is everybody dependent on the government.¬† This means more and more people voting for the DNC.¬† This means the future is forever altered.¬† I don’t see this as America.¬† So I’m now supporting McCain.¬† Sarah Palin’s a huge threat.¬† Our campaign has feared her like you cannot imagine.¬† If it seems unfair how she’s been treated, well, it’s because she has had a team working around the clock to make her look like a fool,” meaning the Obama camp has had a team.¬† “This is a big conspiracy.¬† I’m so shocked.¬† We released a little blurb the other day that Obama campaign was already working on reelection and now putting our efforts toward 2012.¬† This was to make it seem like it was above us to continue caring about 2008.¬† Trust me, it’s alive.¬† David Axelrod, Plouffe, very smart, but it’s a sticky, ugly, not very truthful kind of intelligence.¬† It’s not over yet but I think the machine is working.¬† It’s a hill to climb.¬† I’ll be quitting my post on November 5th.¬† My vote will be for John McCain.¬† Fortunately, my position has been a marketing position.¬† I don’t feel I had any part of anything I’d feel guilty for, but I look forward to getting out of this as the negativity and environment upset me.¬† PS, my name is not really Sarah but I am a female and I understand your plight.”

Very curious.

November 2, 2008 at 4:16 pm Leave a comment

Understanding taxes (if that is possible?)

Unfortunately taxes are a necessary part of life. Generally speaking we don’t like paying them. But we do. Every year we file our income taxes – state & local, as well as pay city, county, social security, fica, etc. The list is exhaustive. Our current tax plan but into place under President Bush is set to expire soon so whatever the new President puts into place will affect us all greatly.

First I would like to point out that when talking about the current budget deficit critics are quick to blame the Bush tax cuts for the so-called wealthy for the deficit. In reality this is not the case. Revenue is the highest it has ever been. The cuts on capital gains taxes has brought dramatic increases in federal revenue. Truly. The increase in the deficit has to do with being in a war and government spending having increased by over 30%. It is highly inaccurate to blame the tax cuts for this situation.

Both plans have plenty in them to make you question what is the better choice. As well, there are exhaustive views and commentaries to support whichever view you support. On paper they seem to not have that much of a difference in the overall economic picture, as mentioned in the clip below.

From – How McCain and Obama will change your tax bill.

Under both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain’s tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama’s could add as much as $3.3 trillion.

The reason: neither plan would raise the amount of revenue expected under current tax policy – which assumes all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire by 2011. And neither plan would raise enough to cover expected government costs during those 10 years.

“Distributionally, they’re markedly different. But in terms of their impact on revenue, the two plans are not terribly different,” said Roberton Williams, principal research associate at the Tax Policy Center and the former deputy assistant director for tax analysis at the Congressional Budget Office.

The differences come from how they are put into place and what the ramifications of each would entail.

So here it is:

McCain

  • Keep Tax Rates Low
  • Cut corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%
  • Allow First-Year Deduction, Or “Expensing”, Of Equipment And Technology Investments
  • Establish permanent tax credit equal to 10% of wages spent on R&D
  • Ban Internet Taxes
  • Ban Cell-phone Taxes
  • His most radical adjustment to the tax system which is not being mentioned as much in the tax portion is his health care credit. – “Transforming The Tax Code To Create Greater Equity: The McCain plan transforms the current tax code to provide all American families ‚Äď including the self-employed and the uninsured ‚Äď the same tax benefit, a $5,000 refundable tax credit ($2,500 for individuals) that was previously only available to those with employer coverage. Families can use this credit to purchase insurance of their choice, including keeping their current coverage.”
  • As well by not raising capital gains taxes the wealthy will continue to invest at a time when it is most needed to help our economy. If those taxes are raised the level of investment WILL drop.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, senior economic adviser to McCain, notes that many reports does not take into account the spending reforms – such as eliminating earmarks – that are central to McCain’s strategy to support tax relief and help reduce the deficit.

Overall, we would all continue to do well under this plan.

Obama

  • Cut taxes for 95 percent of workers and their families with a tax cut of $500 for workers or $1,000 for working couples.
  • Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
  • Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of health care and to reward investments in innovation.
  • Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.

Obama proposes a radical change in the tax system to cut taxes to the bottom “95%” of wage earners. Unfortunately this has major implications as well. It sounds good but there is much more to it. 50% of wage earners do not even pay taxes. So while what he says may be technically factual . . . the plan increases the number of welfare recipients, and extends the poverty trap of poor households.

    What it really means is that he is reintroducing a massive increase in the welfare state, costing about $30 billion per year. According to the Center for Data Analysis‚Äô micro-simulation modeling, Obama would increase the number of tax filers who receive a check from government without paying any taxes, including payroll taxes ‚ÄĒ people filing just to receive a welfare check ‚ÄĒ by about 10 million. Where will the $30 billion per year come from? From those who are paying taxes, of course. And indirectly from all of us, when the economy is dragged down by higher tax rates on businesses. – from The FoundryBut it does not stop there, raising business taxes, national health care, etc. There are many facets to this plan that will have a trickle down effect. While taxes may go down for the lower income families, companies that are also hit by tax increases will raise prices, lower salary, cut back on jobs which in turn will all effect the very same people that Obama is out to help.

    Another good article on Obama’s 95% tax plan

To the surprise of some, even though Senator Obama’s tax plan lowers taxes for the bottom four quintiles, marginal tax rates would fall only for the very lowest-income couples. Taking both income and payroll taxes into account, those at the very bottom of the income distribution would see their effective marginal tax rates fall from 27.4 percent to minus 58.6 percent due to proposed changes to the earned income tax credit and Senator Obama’s new “Making Work Pay” credit.

Most low- and moderate-income couples would see their effective marginal tax rates rise, in some cases, significantly. Indeed, some low- and moderate-income taxpayers will see their marginal rates rise to more than 50 percent.

High-income taxpayers can also expect their effective marginal tax rates to rise‚ÄĒto 47.2 percent-under Senator Obama’s tax plan. This increase is caused by rolling back the 2001 and 2003 reductions in the top two tax rates, curtailing deductions and exemptions at high income levels, and potentially raising Social Security taxes. – The Tax Foundation

    Now some commentary:Aside from the overall theory of wealth redistribution, which some may relate to socialist types of theory, that does not help the economy in the long run. There should never be total equality in income. The neurosurgeon and the fast-food worker should not have the same salary. There has always been brackets, or castes if you want to call it that. Equality as a person is not equated to equality in income or possessions. All people are created equal, but it pretty much stops there. We all have different aptitudes and abilities and will work where we are best suited. The driven individual will work hard to become successful and then will be told, “Hey, we need your money to help Tom, he does not have as much as you and you have to share it with him.” That is wealth redistribution. I should not HAVE to give money I work for to someone else because they are not making as much as I am. It does not work.

    The definition of “wealthy” to be $250,000 does not allow for areas in our country where while that sounds like an amazing annual income, it is not. California and New York are two prime examples. This article explains it well, better than I can.¬† – Tax Rates for New Yorkers would top 50% under Obama.

    I was talking to someone yesterday who has valid fear of losing his home under the Obama tax plan since he does make $250 in one of those states. He has a family of five and is scared that he will not be able to afford the mortgage he saved for years just to get. As well I spoke to a mother who has lived in a socialist country and said she does not want to go there either, giving examples of the lack of incentive to the worker because they don’t care anymore. While it sounds good to the supposed 95% of the country the other five pump money into the economy to keep it moving, fund most of the governments revenue already, and are the most positioned to give generously.

    I am in favor of encouraging and rewarding people to work hard. To earn what they have. Not to blindly give more to them to try and make things more. While a plan might sound good on the surface it deserves to be looked into further to see what the actual ramifications and implications are to all citizens. If we are being fair and equitable, you will remember that that upper five percent helps keep our economy and businesses running. Personally I am a fan of the Fair Tax plan. I hope that one day it comes around as a possibility again.

    Look closely at the lines for $111,000 – $226,000 – According to those estimates you will actually fare better under the McCain plan. Curious.

    A final thought –

    Tax studies have shown that when tax cuts are deficit funded and they’re paid for by raising taxes in the future, “the economy is worse off than if you didn’t cut at all,” Burman said.

October 23, 2008 at 5:49 pm 3 comments

Conservative Hollywood – They do exist.

Ok. There are some big names that we know are Republicans. The nice Baldwin, the Governator. But there have to be a few more. And don’t you just wonder if some of the others are closet Republicans anyway? I mean these are the people with most of the money in our country.

Taken from these sources. If you know of any others let me know!

List of John McCain presidential supporters
Hollywood’s Dirty Little Secret

October 22, 2008 at 10:10 am

Fairness Doctrine – not so fair is it.

Until yesterday I had never even heard of the Fairness Doctrine. Then in two separate instances yesterday I heard mention of it, so that must mean I should look into it and see what it is and then see if it is good or bad.

One was in this essay, obviously opinion – Memo to President Obama from 2010 and then again on Red Eye. (yes I was up very late)

So after hearing mention of it twice I decided to look it up. The doctrine was originally implemented to try and make sure that stations were giving opposing views on topics. They did not want stations/channels to impose singular views. That sounds almost reasonable. But is it next to impossible to enforce. Who decides what is balanced?

It is curious to note that when this was put in place there were far less options of what to watch or listen too. As well, the Republicans are against this legislation. It went out during the Reagan administration and they have fought to keep it as such. The Democrats are pushing to have it brought back, Pelosi is a strong supporter. The funny part here is by large the media leans far to the liberal Democrat side so why on earth do they even care? They are concerned about the success of conservative talk radio – Rush type people. I would venture to say the left has far more media outlets than the right so why can’t they just let it be. It does violate free speech and first ammendment rights. AND would all the other channels give a balanced view of the conservative? I doubt that.

McCain does not support bringing this doctrine back, he has actually worked to enact legislation to keep it from returning. Obama does claim to oppose a reinstatement of the “Fairness Doctrine.” But more recently, a campaign surrogate told a C-SPAN TV audience Obama had not taken a position on the doctrine. In addition, a source in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told B&C in July that he could not rule out a push from House Democrats to bring it back, either in this Congress or the next. (broadcasting cable)

And this from the New York Post:
Should Barack Obama win the presidency and Democrats take full control of Congress, next year will see a real legislative attempt to bring back the Fairness Doctrine – and to diminish conservatives’ influence on broadcast radio, the one medium they dominate.
More…

The Fairness Doctrine was an astonishingly bad idea. It’s a too-tempting power for government to abuse. When the doctrine was in effect, both Democratic and Republican administrations regularly used it to harass critics on radio and TV.

Second, a new Fairness Doctrine would drive political talk radio off the dial. If a station ran a big-audience conservative program like, say, Laura Ingraham’s, it would also have to run a left-leaning alternative. But liberals don’t do well on talk radio, as the failure of Air America and indeed all other liberal efforts in the medium to date show. Stations would likely trim back conservative shows so as to avoid airing unsuccessful liberal ones.

Then there’s all the lawyers you’d have to hire to respond to the regulators measuring how much time you devoted to this topic or that. Too much risk and hassle, many radio executives would conclude. Why not switch formats to something less charged – like entertainment or sports coverage?

The FCC discarded the rule because, contrary to its purpose, it failed to encourage the discussion of more controversial issues. There were also concerns that it was in violation of First Amendment free speech principles

So here is what the Fairness Doctrine states: (from wikipedia)

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the FCC’s view) honest, equitable, and balanced. The United States Supreme Court has upheld the Commission’s general right to enforce such a policy where channels are limited, but the courts have generally not considered that the FCC is obliged to do so.[1] The FCC has since withdrawn the Fairness Doctrine, prompting some to urge its reintroduction through either Commission policy or Congressional legislation.

It was introduced in the U.S. in 1949 (Report on Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, 13 F.C.C. 1246 [1949]). The doctrine remained a matter of general policy, and was applied on a case-by-case basis until 1967, when certain provisions of the doctrine were incorporated into FCC regulations.[3] It did not require equal time for opposing views, but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows or editorials.

Under FCC Chairman Mark S. Fowler, a communications attorney who had served on Ronald Reagan‘s presidential campaign staff in 1976 and 1980, the commission began to repeal parts of the Fairness Doctrine, announcing in 1985 that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated the First Amendment.

In one landmark case, the FCC argued that teletext was a new technology that created soaring demand for a limited resource, and thus could be exempt from the Fairness Doctrine. The Telecommunications Research and Action Center (TRAC) and Media Access Project (MAP) argued that teletext transmissions should be regulated like any other airwave technology, hence the Fairness Doctrine was applicable (and must be enforced by the FCC).

In 1986, Judges Robert Bork and Antonin Scalia of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that the Fairness Doctrine did apply to teletext but that the FCC was not required to apply it.[6] In a 1987 case, Meredith Corp. v. FCC, two other judges on the same court declared that Congress did not mandate the doctrine and the FCC did not have to continue to enforce it.[7]

In August 1987, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989.[8] The FCC stated, “the intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of [the Fairness Doctrine] restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters … [and] actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and the degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists,” and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional.

It could really change things if brought back. I like the comparison I read that said requiring balance would be like making a country station play Toby Keith and then play Kanye West. They just don’t go together. You can find what you want to listen to.

Other links:

Why the Fairness Doctrine is anything but Fair.

October 21, 2008 at 4:49 pm 3 comments

Older Posts


Blog Stats

  • 69,852 hits