Sunday, December 21, 2008

Christmas Special - Ponzi Scheme

I'm taking a break from my review of various political parties to discuss current events. We will continue after the new year.

If you haven't heard the news yet, read the story at the following link.
Basically speaking Bernard L. Madoff was arrested in $50 Billion scam he was running that came to a head. He was offering people high returns and then paying them off with future investors. Apparently he ran out of investors to keep up with the returns he was promising and the SEC finally caught him. He said he was basically running a Ponzi Scheme.

For those of you that don't know what a Ponzi Scheme is, the SEC actually defines it for you.

"Ponzi schemes are a type of illegal pyramid scheme named for Charles Ponzi, who duped thousands of New England residents into investing in a postage stamp speculation scheme back in the 1920s. Ponzi thought he could take advantage of differences between U.S. and foreign currencies used to buy and sell international mail coupons. Ponzi told investors that he could provide a 40% return in just 90 days compared with 5% for bank savings accounts. Ponzi was deluged with funds from investors, taking in $1 million during one three-hour period—and this was 1921! Though a few early investors were paid off to make the scheme look legitimate, an investigation found that Ponzi had only purchased about $30 worth of the international mail coupons.
Decades later, the Ponzi scheme continues to work on the "rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul" principle, as money from new investors is used to pay off earlier investors until the whole scheme collapses. For more information, please read pyramid schemes in our Fast Answers databank."

The point of this post is not to discuss this case. The point of this is to open your eyes to a Ponzi Scheme that the government is running that we are all victims of. Many of us willing victims. It's called Social Security. The system depends on population growth and productive members of society to take social security tax from in order to pay out the current recipients of the payments. I guess the only difference is that the government just doesn't promise outrageously great returns. But the government does keep promising to take care of you in retirement with social security and Medicare benefits that keep getting bigger and bigger. Most of my generation assumes the system will go bust before we reach retirement, so in essence, they are promising bigger returns than they can deliver in the long run.

But the American people don't want to privatize the system, they'd like to keep it going as is in hopes that they'll still get theirs. Because the government has always been dependable.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Political Parties - Democratic

Welcome to Part 2 in our series exploring the various positions of the political parties and what I agree with and disagree with. This week we will explore the platform of the Democratic party as found in their platform on their website
I will do my best to abbreviate the positions listed as this is a 59 page document. Feel free to read it in it's entirety if you so desire.

Excerpt from their Preamble
"We believe that every American, whatever their background or station in life, should have the chance to get a good education, to work at a good job with good wages, to raise and provide for a family, to live in safe surroundings, and to retire with dignity and security. We believe that quality and affordable health care is a basic right. We believe that each succeeding generation should have the opportunity, through hard work, service and sacrifice, to enjoy a brighter future than the last."

"Today, we pledge a return to core moral principles like stewardship, service to others, personal responsibility, shared sacrifice and a fair shot for all –values that emanate from the integrity and optimism of our Founders and generations of Americans since."

Jumpstart the Economy and Provide Middle Class Americans Immediate Relief "We will provide an immediate energy rebate to American families struggling with the record price of gasoline and the skyrocketing cost of other necessities – to spend on those basic needs and energy efficient measures. We will devote $50 billion to jumpstarting the economy, helping economic growth, and preventing another one million jobs from being lost."

I'm going to sound really redundant after awhile, especially when you consider all their talk of reducing taxes for 95% of Americans. How are they going to pay for this? How does $50 Billion prevent one million jobs from being lost?

Affordable, Quality Health Care Coverage for All Americans "If one thing came through in the platform hearings, it was that Democrats are united around a commitment that every American man, woman, and child be guaranteed affordable, comprehensive healthcare."

"Ensuring quality, affordable health care for every single American is essential to children’s education, workers’ productivity and businesses’ competitiveness. We believe that covering all is not just a moral imperative, but is necessary to making our health system workable and affordable. Doing so would end cost-shifting from the uninsured, promote prevention and wellness, stop insurance discrimination, help eliminate health care disparities, and achieve savings through competition, choice, innovation, and higher quality care."

I like the idea of affordable health care for everyone, but only in the context of personal responsibility and free market competition. My theory is that the insurance companies have become and overwhelming middleman in the health care business. Providers have to pay large staff to bill insurance companies and are also subject to contract rates with insurance companies. The insurance companies have the leverage in negotiating these rates since they are the ones essentially providing the clientele. The insurance companies in turn have to make enough and pay out little enough to pay their employees and make a profit. Think about the cost of health care when you eliminate this kind of overhead created by a middleman.

In reality Walmart's push to start the prescription drug plan for $4 generics is the right idea. Other pharmacies followed suit. Drug companies aren't going to participate if they aren't making money, and neither will the pharmacies. This type of push ought to be made in provider care as well. In reality, it is available. Patients without insurance can negotiate self-pay rates for procedures with the doctor and the facility. Places like Walmart and other superstores are opening up preventative care clinics in their stores that offer low cost preventative screenings.
Main stream providers could move this direction by essentially running "cash only" businesses and listing their prices for various services. I've also heard of a doctor charging one yearly fee that will cover all visits for the year regardless. It's ideas like this that will revolutionize health care and help to eliminate the bloated middleman system.

That said there is a need for catastrophic insurances for accidents, or a buffet type, choose your insurance coverage. For example, if you know cancer runs in your family, you might opt into a cancer policy for life or at a certain age. But the providers that need to take them are generally specialty providers.

"We must fight HIV/AIDS in our country and around the world. We support increased funding into research, care and prevention of HIV/AIDS."

I disagree with government funding of HIV/AIDS research. I also disagree with government funding of Cancer research and stem cell research. I do, on the other hand, support privatized funding for research of all of these. St. Jude's successfully raises money every year from private donors like you and I. I am not opposed to government funds being used to educate and prevent any disease, but within reason.

"Fiscal Responsibility. As we improve and strengthen our health care system, we must do so in a fiscally responsible way that ensures that we get value for the dollars that are invested."

I would agree, however I think we have to come to an agreement on the definition of "fiscal responsibility."

Retirement and Social Security "We will make it a priority to secure for hardworking families the part of the American Dream that includes a secure and healthy retirement. Individuals, employers, and government must all play a role. We will adopt measures to preserve and protect existing public and private pension plans. In the 21st century, Americans also need better ways to save for retirement. We will automatically enroll every worker in a workplace pension plan that can be carried from job to job and we will match savings for working families who need the help."

How can you possibly pay to match savings for working families who need help? how do you define "needing help." Is there incentive for them to rise above "needing help." This sounds like income redistribution which I am vehemently opposed to. I do support private entities and churches providing help to those who "need help."

"We reject the notion of the presumptive Republican nominee that Social Security is a disgrace; we believe that it is indispensable. We will fulfill our obligation to strengthen Social Security and to make sure that it provides guaranteed benefits Americans can count on, now and in future generations. We will not privatize it."

I would privatize Social Security. I think Social Security is great for everyone if they get to keep what they put in. But they should own each and every penny that they put into it. When you get a chance look at Galveston County's model. This is a link to one of many articles discussing it.

Good Jobs with Good Pay "Democrats are committed to an economic policy that produces good jobs with good pay and benefits. That is why we support the right to organize. We know that when unions are allowed to do their job of making sure that workers get their fair share, they pull people out of poverty and create a stronger middle class. We will strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions and fight to pass the Employee Free Choice Act. We will restore pro-worker voices to the National Labor Relations Board and the National Mediation Board and we support overturning the NLRB’s and NMB’s many harmful decisions that undermine the collective bargaining rights of millions of workers. We will ensure that federal employees, including public safety officers who put their lives on the line every day, have the right to bargain collectively, and we will fix the broken bargaining process at the Federal Aviation Administration. We will fight to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers, so that workers can stand up for themselves without worrying about losing their livelihoods."

I support the right to organize, but I also support the right of any company to refuse to negotiate with unions at any time. Look at the auto bail out now. It is a bailout to support the unions not the auto companies themselves. Unions are a bureaucratic hierarchy that suck money out of the company in the form of dues from the employees. Companies have to be able to cut the fat out of their business to succeed.

"In America, if someone is willing to work, he or she should be able to make ends meet and have the opportunity to prosper. To that end, we will raise the minimum wage and index it to inflation, and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit so that workers can support themselves and their families. We will modernize the unemployment insurance program to close gaps and extend benefits to the workers who now fall outside it."

I disagree with raising the minimum wage. The majority of the people making minimum wage are high school students. If you can't rise above minimum wage, then you probably aren't worth more. Raising minimum wage unnecessarily puts a strain on businesses and subsequently consumers in the from of increased prices for goods and services. Even people working in many of the fast food restaurants are making more than minimum wage. When you raise minimum wage the above unions talk their workers into going on strike because they need to have their wages adjusted to follow suit with minimum wage. So any company dealing with unions are also affected drastically by raising the minimum wage.

Opportunity for Women "We will pass the “Lilly Ledbetter” Act, which will make it easier to combat pay discrimination; we will pass the Fair Pay Act; and we will modernize the Equal Pay Act. We will invest in women-owned small businesses and remove the capital gains tax on start-up small businesses. We will support women in math and science, increasing American competitiveness by retaining the best workers in these fields, regardless of gender. We recognize that women still carry the majority of childrearing responsibilities, so we have created a comprehensive work and family agenda."

Notice the statement "remove capital gains tax on start-up small businesses." Small businesses don't pay capital gains taxes woman owned or not. They pay income taxes. So don't buy into this rhetoric. Next, I believe we are already at a point where men and women are equal in the work place. If women are making less, is it possible it has to do with them leaving the work force for a few years to raise their children? Or if their children are in daycare, are they leaving work more often than men to go pick up their sick kids? I think any kind of absenteeism is fair to consider with men or women.

"We will work to combat violence against women."

I'd revise this to violence against people, not just women. What happened to the mantra, "we are all created equal?"

A World Class Education for Every Child "We must set high standards for our children, but we must also hold ourselves accountable–our schools, our teachers, our parents, business leaders, our community and our elected leaders."

I agree with holding oursleves accountable.

"We will make quality, affordable early childhood care and education available to every American child from the day he or she is born. Our Children’s First Agenda, including increases in Head Start and Early Head Start, and investments in high-quality Pre-K, will improve quality and provide learning and support to families with children ages zero to five. Our Presidential Early Learning Council will coordinate these efforts."

This is essentially free daycare in the form of "education." I oppose funding daycare because when you choose to take on the responsibility of children, you should be responsible for caring for them or paying for their care. And remember free daycare isn't free. So how are they going to pay for this one?

Support Small Business and Entrepreneurship "Encouraging new industry and creating jobs means giving more support to American entrepreneurs. We will exempt all start-up companies from capital gains taxes and provide them a tax credit for health insurance. We will provide a new tax credit for small businesses that offer quality health insurance to their employees. We will help small businesses facing high energy costs. We will work to remove bureaucratic barriers for small and start-up businesses–for example, by making the patent process more efficient and reliable."

Again with the capital gains taxes for start-up companies. They don't pay capital gains taxes so this is an empty statement. However I like the tax credit idea for offering health insurance to their employees. I also agree with removing the bureaucratic barriers, but for more than just the patent process. For all of it.

Real Leadership for Rural America "Rural America is home to 60 million Americans. The agricultural sector is critical to the rural economy and to all Americans. We depend on those in agriculture to produce the food, feed, fiber, and fuel that support our society. Thankfully, American farmers possess an unrivaled capacity to produce an abundance of these high-quality products. In return, we will provide a strong safety net for family farms, a permanent disaster relief program, expansion of agriculture research, and an emphasis on agricultural trade. We will promote economic development in rural and tribal communities by investing in renewable energy, which will transform the rural economy and create millions of new jobs, by upgrading technological and physical infrastructure, by addressing the challenges faced by public schools in rural areas, including forest county schools, supporting higher education opportunities and by attracting quality teachers, doctors and nurses through loan forgiveness programs and other incentive programs. All Americans, urban and rural, hold a shared interest in preserving and increasing the economic vitality of family farms. We will continue to develop and advance policies that promote sustainable and local agriculture, including funding for soil and water conservation programs."

This is fancy talk for farm subsidies which I stated last week that I vehemently oppose. If people can't support themselves on farms and in rural areas, they should go somewhere that they can support themselves.

Restoring Fairness to Our Tax Code "We must reform our tax code."

I agree with restoring fairness to our tax code and reforming it. Nothing that followed supported these statements. I suppose there might just be a fundamental disagreement on what "fair" means. The Fair Tax is the fairest method I've discovered so far.

Revitalizing and Supporting the Military, Keeping Faith With Veterans "To renew American leadership in the world, we must revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace."

I agree with a strong military being necessary to sustain peace.

Allow All Americans to Serve "We will also put national security above divisive politics.... We support the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and the implementation of policies to allow qualified men and women to serve openly regardless of sexual orientation"

I agree. Qualified people who perform and act professional in their jobs should be able to serve in the military as they are in every other job in the country.

Stewardship of Our Planet and Natural Resources "Global climate change is the planet’s greatest threat, and our response will determine the very future of life on this earth. Despite the efforts of our current Administration to deny the science of climate change and the need to act, we still believe that America can be earth’s best hope."

I find it interesting that this party denies science that disproves man made climate change. That said I agree with stewardship of our planet and natural resources.

Children and Families Fatherhood "Too many fathers are missing–missing from too many lives and too many homes. Children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and are more likely to commit crime, drop out of school, abuse drugs, and end up in prison. We need more fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to understand that what makes a man is not the ability to have a child–it’s the courage to raise one."

I agree whole-heartedly with this statement and the need to work towards correcting this. I have a theory that mandatory birth control would fix this, but it generally goes against my strong belief in liberty as well. I don't have a solution but I highly respect the efforts of high-profile people like Bill Cosby and others in this area.

Open, Accountable, and Ethical Government "In Barack Obama’s Administration, we will open up the doors of democracy. We will use technology to make government more transparent, accountable, and inclusive."

"We will lift the veil of secret deals in Washington by publishing searchable, online information about federal grants, contracts, earmarks, loans, and lobbyist contacts with government officials."

"We will put all non-emergency bills that Congress has passed online for five days, to allow the American public to review and comment on them before they are signed into law."

I want you all to watch in the new administration and see just how transparent and accountable they become in these areas. Because I agree with every one of them, but on the last one, if the representatives and senators don't listen to the public before casting their votes, why would we expect the President to? I suppose, if he cares about getting reelected, he'd care. So watch out for this and utilize it if they truly follow through on this.

I leave you with one final thought, with all the ideals they want and without explanation on how they will fund these programs, how do they plan to pay for it and still give 95% of Americans tax cuts?

Sunday, December 7, 2008

Political Parties - Republican

I intend to do a series of posts covering various political parties and where they generally stand on the issues as related to their various websites or perhaps previous candidates. The point of this exercise is to help educate you on the various beliefs of the parties as well as where I stand in comparison to those beliefs. I intend to discuss what I agree with and what I disagree with in an effort identify myself with a party, even if that means creating a new one. This is because independent candidates for president rarely if ever get taken seriously. I will start with the Republican party as that is the party that just lost in a big way. I don't consider myself a Republican, which may come as a surprise to many of you. That doesn't mean I don't agree with some of their philosophies.

In an effort to abbreviate this, I'm going to reference the McCain's presidential website.
However for the official Republican party platform for 2008, feel free to read this.

"Our nation's future security and prosperity depends on the next President making the hard choices that will break our nation's strategic dependence on foreign sources of energy and will ensure our economic prosperity by meeting tomorrow's demands for a clean portfolio." I agree that we have to break our dependence on foreign sources of energy, which means utilizing our own resources. Oil comes from the earth, it's part of the earth. It's natural. It's not going to hurt our earth to utilize this oil. Nuclear war will hurt our earth way more than drilling.

National Security/Homeland Security
"the highest priority for any President is protecting the lives of American citizens, defending their personal freedom, and securing our land and resources." - I agree with this, however I believe National Security and Homeland Security is redundant and has been unnecessarily bloated. The department of defense is sufficient to coordinate this effort. Maybe money saved could be redirected towards the care of our veterans and towards enforcing immigration laws.

Health Care
"the rapidly rising cost of U.S. health care. Bringing costs under control is the only way to stop the erosion of affordable health insurance, save Medicare and Medicaid, protect private health benefits for retirees, and allow our companies to effectively compete around the world. " I'm not really sure what this says. What I believe is that the government is not the answer to health care. People need to understand that health care isn't a right, they need to make it a priority if they don't want to go bankrupt by it. The problem is that people don't want to take responsibility for it because it's expensive. So they moan that they can't afford it, but they sure can afford cable, cell phones, and that new car, etc. It's about priorities. At the very least everyone needs to make a priority for some kind of catastrophic policy and save enough to preventatively see the doctor every other year or so. They have self pay rates. Find out what they are, it might not be as expensive as you think. Find a clinic to go to that offers low cost care. Most pharmacies now have a low cost prescription plan for generic drugs. Companies making big moves like this will help to bring affordable health care to everyone. But people have to make it their priority over cable, cell phones, new clothes, new cars, etc.

To sum it up, his site says "excellence, choice, and competition in American education."
I agree with that but have seen no effort in my state, a traditionally republican state, to make a move towards this. And I haven't seen a federal push for it either. The department of education should go. Education should be left to the states. Perhaps the cost would go down if there wasn't a bloated department of education sucking up valuable dollars that could actually go towards education rather than wasteful administration of it.

Agricultural Policies
"America's agricultural industry is the best in the world. John McCain will expand access for U.S. agricultural producers to foreign markets, providing a great and lasting benefit to American farmers. He will work tirelessly to ensure our farmers receive fair prices for their products. "
I don't believe it is the responsibility of the government to get involved with "fair prices" for corn or any other agriculture. It should be left up to the free market. If a someone can't make money as a farmer, it means he wasn't meant to be a farmer and should look for a new career. I can't make money as an actress, it doesn't mean the government should pay me money because I declare myself an actress if I can't make a sufficient living at it. I vehemently oppose farm subsidies.

"our border must be secure and that the federal government has utterly failed in its responsibility to ensure that it is secure." I agree with this statement, and quite honestly I feel this falls under the realm of national security. Enforcing the laws and rules we have now will take care of much of this problem.

Environment/Climate Change
"John McCain will establish a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mobilize innovative technologies, and strengthen the economy. He will work with our international partners to secure our energy future, to create opportunities for American industry, and to leave a better future for our children." The republicans fail to effectively turn the climate change discussion into something we can all agree on, clean air, clean water, a clean world. McCain took the position that climate change is within our control and backed policies that took on man-made global warming.

My position is that it is arrogant to sell that mere humans can control the global climate. Sure there are temperature cycles, but we ourselves are not big enough collectively to control that. Policies that unnecessarily attempt to control this by taxation, or carbon credits are useless and wasteful. What I do believe is that we been given a responsibility to care for this earth. I believe that it is not our right to tell Brazil they can't cut down trees that are creating jobs in that country. But we should offer to teach them our methods of replanting, if in fact they are not already replanting what they cut down. It is not our right to tell people in 3rd world countries living in the bush that they can't build fires to boil water and cook their food any more than we can tell cows to stop pooing.

Getting in the way of progress in 3rd world countries is doing more to harm the environment than butting out and letting them handle it and offering assistance. For example, malaria is non existent in this country and most other industrialized nations, but it's killing hundreds of thousands of people every year. The U.S. was sprayed long before I was born to get rid of the mosquitoes that were passing it around. Why can't the same be done for them? Just give them all masks to wear during this time. They didn't cover their faces here and people lived.

Home Ownership
"America's families are bearing a heavy burden from falling housing prices, mortgage delinquencies, foreclosures, and a weak economy. It is important that those families who have worked hard enough to finance home ownership not have that dream crushed under the weight of the wrong mortgage." I believe personal responsibility is the right of every family who has worked hard enough to finance a home, meaning it is their responsibility not to get in over their head. It is also their responsibility to work with their lenders if they are in trouble. The banks often made bad lending choices and they should also make efforts to keep to work with clients to avoid bad loans. Neither should come running to the government for pay for their mistakes, they should work towards a solution without government dollars.

The Economy
Generally the republican position has been keep taxes low, small government. They haven't practiced this in years that I no longer believe that they really believe this. I think they use this as a talking point to convince their base to "trust them" to get reelected. Here's the problem I have; take a look at your local state government. What are your republicans doing? Here in Texas they actually passed a steroid testing program for public schools. Are you kidding me?? They are behind much of the "nanny state" legislation that gets passed or at the very least are supporting it. The thing is it's about making sure someone else's kid isn't doing steroids, giving them and "unfair" advantage. Is it really necessary to waste state dollars on this to find a few kids? So I have a problem with "small government" belonging to the republicans because they don't practice this at all. So I'm taking it for my own. I really mean it when I say small or limited government intervention.

Let me sum up a couple of other beliefs that I share with the republicans. Right to carry and constitutional judges. I believe you have a right to bear arms. I think if we all assumed every one we met was also carrying a weapon, we'd think twice about how we treated each other. Criminals would think twice about robbing a place if they assumed that every house and convenience store had a gun to protect them. They don't even want to deal with someone who will fight back which is why they look for weak victims.

Judges should not legislate from the bench, it is their duty to uphold the constitution.

There were a few other topics covered that I chose not to go into, but if you have questions about where I stand on an issue, feel free to ask. Next week I'll attempt to cover the Democratic party.

Sunday, November 30, 2008

My Tax Plan

My tax plan is simple. Many of you may have heard about it by now, and one Republican candidate actually ran with it as a plan he would push for. He was the only candidate on either side offering something legitimately different than the status quo i.e. "tax cuts" or "raising taxes on the wealthy." It is the Fair Tax. I will do my best to summarize here but you can read up on it in more detail at There are a few changes I would like to make to it, but it's a good starting foundation for now.

Basically speaking, it eliminates the income and payroll taxes and replaces them with a national sales tax. There are states now, like Texas and Florida, that utilize this general philosophy on the state level to collect and manage their general revenue. They don't collect income taxes in addition to property and sales tax. What this means at the national level is that you only pay taxes when you consume. You get to keep 100% of your paycheck!! It also means that people that don't pay income taxes now would pay taxes when they consume in our country. This includes illegal aliens, tourists, anyone paid in cash now that doesn't file income taxes.

This is a solution that is beneficial to everyone as it takes care of social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other popular welfare programs that everyone doesn't want to see go away, but no one wants them to bankrupt the country either. The Fair Tax solves this problem since it increases the pool of people paying taxes.

There is one other benefit to the Fair Tax so that basics needs are met by all. All families will receive a prebate each month based on the number of people in your house hold for the amount of tax for the basic necessities of the household regardless of income. Anyone who can't afford more than the basic necessities will in essence pay no taxes unless they consume above and beyond your basic needs. Sorry Christmas presents don't count as basic needs, but with more spending power created from not paying taxes on your needs, Christmas presents might not be so difficult to swing each year.

Oh and there's a bonus, it eliminates the need for IRS (not the need to keep collecting on back owed taxes). But April 15 will no longer be the dreaded tax day, it will be just another day. And before you worry about all those government employees out of work, think of all the jobs that are now shipped overseas to countries considered more of a tax haven than the U.S. is now. With no income and payroll taxes, companies will be bring operations back here and/or move operations over here. So there will be plenty of jobs for them to get, as well as for all the other people who are unemployed.

While free market competiton takes care of the price of goods, one other thing I should mention is that only new goods are taxed. If you buy a used home or a used car, no taxes. If you buy used clothes, furniture, or anything else not new, no federal sales tax. You may still be subject to state taxes, but who cares if you understand this concept, you can make decisions based on this knowledge of when and how much you'll be taxed.

Again for more detailed information, check out It's a valuable source of information. There is also a link on there that tells you which of your Senators and Representatives support it or not.
Once you make up your mind that it's a good thing for our country, write your Senators and Representatives and let them know your thoughts on it even if they support it, but especially if they don't. The more voices they hear on this subject, the more they are likely to take a closer look at it. This isn't a partisan solution in my opinion, it's a win win solution for everyone, except for purist who are opposed to all taxation. It's better than a flat tax as it taxes consumption. So all those rich people buying cars and mansions and clothes and whatever else they buy will now be taxed on their consumption, not their earnings or capital gains as much of it sits in. You basically get to choose when you want to pay taxes or not based on the consumption decisions you make.

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Happy Thanksgiving!!

Here's wishing everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and safe travels!

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Auto Industry Ignorance or Arrogance?

If you haven't heard the news by now, the big wigs all rode private jets to ask congress for bailout money. Because first class is beyond them? I realize their time is valuable, but airports provide sufficient resources for them to work while waiting for their flights.

It seems to be in poor taste to fly in private planes to ask for the money of people who very rarely if ever fly private. Click here to see the report by ABC News.

If these CEOs are running the companies into the ground, we can see why, with refusal to change their executive travel policies. If they can't make cuts to their own perks before asking for tax payer dollars then they shouldn't be running the companies. If they are unwilling to change their policies dealing with unions, then they shouldn't be running the companies.

Government needs to stay out of the auto industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Shut your mouth Michael Moore, you sound ignorant. Sorry he's on Larry king talking as if he knows something about the auto industry and the economy. But of course he didn't mention anything about the unions making concessions or the companies refusing to deal with unions any longer.

Back to I've said it before and I'll say it again. Let poorly operating companies fail. They will either figure out what to do to survive or fail. You can't throw good money after bad and expect to see good results. Sure times will be tough for some people for awhile, but they'll find new jobs either in their industry or somewhere else. Some of them will acquire new skills to get new jobs. When left to their own devices, people usually figure things out for themselves. Even if that means getting temporary help from their families, friends, church, and even government assistance available to them.

If you weren't furious before, you should be furious now. Write and call your Senators and Representatives. They may not listen, but you should always tell them you're view, take note of their vote and hold them accountable when they are up for reelection. Don't let them get away with this. It's our fault if we don't hold them accountable.

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Bipartisanship: Fact or Myth?

This whole election was filled with politicians on both sides of the isle (except Ron Paul I think and I'm sure a few others) talking about the importance of bipartisanship to work through the issues.

These statements came from a bunch of pompous, power hungry politicians on an ego trip. What I think they really mean by bipartisanship is, "it's great as long as your side compromises their morals, values, and beliefs to defect to my side, regardless of thoughtful logic, or what your constituency wants." Some politicians are willing to defect, while some are willing to discuss compromise and are somehow fooled into selling the morals, values, and beliefs of their constituency for "the better good of America." But in reality they are doing it to somehow increase their power or buy undecided votes depending on the race, since they can bank on the majority of their base not paying attention to their actions, thus voting for the name or party they know come election time.

True bipartisanship would be finding the common ground on an issue such as improved education in this country (or am I naive to think that everyone wants that?), and then discussing the various possibilities and researching how those various options work around the world and perhaps in our own country. It would require everyone involved to be open minded to the various solutions and results of research and remain free of non-objective influence by special-interest groups, lobbyists, or their best friend for that matter.

Something tells me this is an impossible ideal since the objective of our government and those running it has become to gain power, influence, and size at all cost by convincing the people that they can't take care of certain things on their own without the help of the government.

Or in reality is the system of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" actually bipartisanship at it's greatest? You know where you talk a bunch of people on the other side to vote your way for a particular issue and promise to pay them back when they need a favor later.

I don't think so, but perhaps you do, and the beauty of living in a free country is the right to have your own opinion and be able to express it. We have the power when it comes to electing our various politicians. Research their beliefs and actions. Make sure you don't give up our valuable liberties in exchange for the government taking care of all your needs. Be careful what you wish for.

In conclusion, as things are, I vote Myth. What's your opinion?

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

More Evidence Supporting School Choice

Since I haven't seen this video talked about on most of the blogs I've come across, for those of you that haven't seen this video clip of a teacher in our country, Ashville, North Carolina, spreading her political opinion to her students, take the time to watch it and be appalled at the hypocrisy of her actions in the classroom to her followup statements. I don't have a problem if current events are discussed objectively in the classroom, but that was not an objective discussion. Nor were her reactions to the students who said they supported McCain.

I know that many of you believe that education is a right not a privilege. In my opinion education is important to the future of our country and its economy and growth regardless of it being a right or a privilege. If it's a right as many people agree on, should it not be your right to choose where you send your child to school with the tax dollars you are already paying? The money should follow the child not the the government school district you live in.

If public education is so great, why are the Obamas are shopping private schools for their girls? Presumably your tax dollars will be paying for their private school education even if indirectly through the salary of the president. I don't know if they have a separated stipend for education for the children or not. Irregardless, public school is apparently beyond their girls. I don't blame them, I'd be shopping private schools too, but every parent should have the opportunity since they are already paying taxes in the form of property taxes through rent or ownership.

It is in the best interest of this country if our children receive quality education at the price we are already paying. So what if some government schools are forced to close down. Free market competition is what has made our country great and prosperous. Education is proof of that, as we are behind much of the world in education. Throwing money after the problem is not the solution. Returning to free market competition is.

Everyone wants to fix health care and poverty in this country. Have any of our politicians and the general public considered the likelihood that education is the solution to health care and poverty? If kids come out of high school with the skills they need to either go to college or get a job beyond a cashier at Walmart or a non-managerial job at McDonald's, they can get better jobs that might offer health insurance, pay part of it, or at least pay more so they can afford to purchase it themselves. Just a thought for those of you that haven't considered this before.

Friday, November 7, 2008

Quotes by James Madison

-"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,they may take the care of religion into their own hands;they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."

-"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations; but, on a candid examination of history, we shall find that turbulence, violence, and abuse of power, by the majority trampling on the rights of the minority, have produced factions and commotions, which, in republics, have, more frequently than any other cause, produced despotism. If we go over the whole history of ancient and modern republics, we shall find their destruction to have generally resulted from those causes."

-"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."

-"A popular Government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance...."

-"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree. "

-"Every man who loves peace, every man who loves his country, every man who loves liberty ought to have it ever before his eyes that he may cherish in his heart a due attachment to the Union of America and be able to set a due value on the means of preserving it."

-"How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation? "

-"It is a principle incorporated into the settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute."

-"I own myself the friend to a very free system of commerce, and hold it as a truth, that commercial shackles are generally unjust, oppressive and impolitic — it is also a truth, that if industry and labour are left to take their own course, they will generally be directed to those objects which are the most productive, and this in a more certain and direct manner than the wisdom of the most enlightened legislature could point out."

-"In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example ... of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness."

-"That the most productive system of finance will always be the least burdensome."

-"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse."

Monday, November 3, 2008

Socialized Healthcare

I wonder how many of you out there really think that national health care is the answer to our health care needs. My follow up question to those of you that think it's a fabulous idea is "have you been to the emergency room lately for stitches, whiplash, sprained ankle or anything of the likes?" Depending on the area you live in, you probably had to wait a long time just to go back to see a doctor. And then once you got back there you probably had to wait some more. The reason being, the ER is filled with people that should be going to a doctor, but the reason they go to the ER is because;

1. The ER cannot turn them away by law
2. Many of them have no intentions of paying their bill hence why they go to the ER rather than a doctor. Because a doctor can ask for payment up front and refuse to see a patient if they haven't paid.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a socialized as you want your medicine to get. And I question the logic in allowing people to get away with not paying their ER bills because they don't care about their credit or they give a false social security number. I question the logic in telling ERs that they must treat everyone that comes into the ER regardless. They ought to be able to tell people with colds to go see their doctor along with other ailments.

But I'm sure those of you for socialized medicine think that doctors should have to treat everyone that comes to them regardless of their ability to pay. Let me tell you what happens under this system. More and more people refuse to pay which means more and more accounts go to collections, many of which are deemed noncollectable, and doctors no longer find it worth their while to stay in business. So they retire earlier, find other lines of work and advise kids not to bother going to medical school because the risks now outweigh the reward. So there are fewer and fewer professionals to treat more and more patients. But now these professionals are also employees of the government. And as the government realizes there are fewer professionals to meet the demand of the health care needs and wants, they start rationing health care.

So that elective radical mastectomy you want to prevent breast cancer because it runs rampant in your family will have to wait until it becomes cancer. Anything now considered elective, will no longer be an option until it threatens your life. So you will have to learn to live with the pain, discomfort, and even embarrassment your condition causes you. And if it does turn life threatening and you are over the age of 55, good luck on getting moved up on the priority list. The reasoning; you've lived a decent long life and are close to retirement so it's better for the government if you die before retirement so they don't have to take care of you after you stop work. They need the younger viable workers with 20-30 years of work left in them to keep working to pay taxes, so they'll take priority over an older person.

But this is what you all want. Because you naively think it's free. Nothing is free. it's only free to the person that refuses to pay taxes. But then again if you don't work to pay into their tax system, I'm sure you'll be moved down on the priority list for care as well. Because what good are you if you refuse to work so the government can take all your money to give you "free" nationalized health care?

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Can't We All Just Get Along???

I've been wondering for quite awhile now, why political issues are so divisive. Do they have to be? I mean candidates seem to focus most of their time and effort towards pointing out what they will do and how disastrous the other person's plan is. Which may or may not be true but in the end it seems that only the group of people who's candidate got elected feel like they get anything out of it.

Why can't we be more diplomatic with each other in our own country? Which is to say why can't we look for common ground rather than focus on where we disagree? Surely we can find some common ground on most if not all issues. Which is what a Lola presidency will work for. It's not about "reaching across the aisle," it's about adjusting perspective and creativity in approaching each and every issue.

Issue One: Global Warming
We get so caught up in which group is right or wrong about whether or not global warming or temperature cycles, is man made. When in reality at the heart of the global warming issue is the environment and being responsible with it. We all can agree that we'd like to breath clean air, and that it's our responsibility to take care of our planet. That said it isn't the responsibility of the U.S. to take care of the entire planet, but we should vigilant to help educate other countries and assist them within reason to help them become environmentally responsible members of this planet. I think we can also agree that using force on other countries for this issue is also unreasonable.

Issue Two: The War
I keep hearing arguments about whether or not we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. The past is the past, we can't change that now. We can argue now about whether or not to pull the troops out immediately or to let them finish their job. But that will just get us mad at each other because we are so hell-bent on being right. In reality I'll bet most of us agree regardless of political leanings that Iraq should be taking on more and more financial responsibility for themselves, for paying the forces we've helped train, for rebuilding their country, and any other expenses they have that we have been or still are paying for. I think we have a vested interest in seeing them be fiscally responsible for themselves and maintaining that in the future so leaving them out to dry isn't in theirs or our best interest either. But they can take on more financial responsibility now and should. I think we can agree on that point.

Issue Three: Oil
We can argue about drilling or not but I think there are 2 points here we can come to an agreement on if we all approach the subject with an open mind. We need to work towards energy independence and stop sending loads of money to the middle east for oil when we could be investing that money into our own economy. 2nd, It's silly that other countries are drilling a mere 60 or 90 miles off of our coast while we just stand there and let them suck what should be our resources out of the ground without any kind of reimbursement for it. From these to points we can start to find solutions that are acceptable to most people again if we will be open minded.

I would say there's a 3rd issue we can agree on, and that is that we don't want to end up paying $5 a gallon or more for gas, but I don't know if that's true or not. Pardon my cynicism.

Issue Four: The Economy
This is such a large topic affected by so many other issues that in order to come to any kind of agreement, it will require everyone to make an effort to read an economics book or two. Take an economics class if you want. My mom said she learned the most and had a better understanding of the economy after her MBA Economics class. She says she had a brilliant teacher who not only cleared things up, but taught her how to think critically about the economy rather than just take the word of every joe schmoe out there touting their agenda. So the agreement we can come to, is that unless we all bother to educate ourselves or get a better understanding about the economy, we will never know how to make our own personal economic situation better. There's no shame in asking questions of people you know that do have a good grasp on economics.

I could keep going but it's time for me to go to the Dog park and campaign. The point is we might ought to change our perspective about how we approach politically charged issues, to work together to find where we agree rather than try and "convert" people to our side. Because if you're so close minded that you think your side is perfect, then how are we ever going to accomplish anything? And if your side really is perfect, how have you not been able to articulate your beliefs in terms that convince everyone you meet to come over to your side?

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Meet the First Member of My Cabinet

Meet Zoe E Katz. Kitty extraordinaire. She is going to head up the Department of Veterans Affairs. As Secretary, her main order of business will be to build up a pet therapy programs at all VA Hospitals and all other facilities providing veterans services.

We are both passionate about the healing powers animals bring to the injured, disabled, and distressed whether through participation in physical therapy or just bringing a kiss and companionship.

Zoe is just the cat to put this plan into action and spread it nation wide and world wide to our various military hospitals around the world. She's a no-nonsense kind of gal and won't let bureaucracy get in the way of getting the job done.

I'm very excited about this choice and the work she will accomplish for the heroes fighting and who have fought for this country's freedom.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Thanks For Saying it John Stossel

This isn't the first time I've heard this. Neal Boortz often says it. But maybe not everyone should vote. Here's a link to the video segment of the story John Stossel did on 20/20. Since more people probably watch John Stossel than listen to Neal Boortz, I'm glad he pointed out the problem with anyone and everyone voting.

In summary it points out the fact that many average people of all ages when randomly asked know little to nothing about our government or politics. And they don't bother to educate themselves before picking a candidate. While Neal Boortz believes certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote (i.e. people receiving welfare, and I'm inclined to agree with that), John Stossel merely points out the fact that maybe it's your civic duty not to vote if you don't bother to read up on the issues and the stand each candidate takes on them and the implications of their position.

No one's asking you to be able to name all 100 senators or all 435 Representative, but you should at least know who your senators are (Mine are John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchinson) and who your representative is (mine is John Carter, the only person that actually bothered to represent me on the bail out bill). Maybe you also ought to bother to learn who's 3rd in line for the presidency. Maybe you ought to have a general understanding of the Constitution. At least look at it once it awhile. Know how to find it so when you hear someone make a claim of constitutionality or unconstitutionality on a particular subject, you can look it up and learn for yourself.

There are many more things I think you ought to have a basic understanding of, like personal responsibility, before voting. But I'm just glad there are people talking about the civic duty NOT to vote.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Food For Thought

Someone sent the following story to me in an email. So you may
have seen it already or maybe not. I don't know if it's a true
story or not, but even in fiction there can be a lesson learned.
It's a metaphor for where they country is headed if we don't do
something about it now.

A chemistry professor in a large college had some exchange students in the class.
One day while the class was in the lab the Professor noticed one young man
(exchange student) who kept rubbing his back, and stretching as if his back hurt.

The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had
a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his
native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install
a new communist government.

In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question.
He asked, 'Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'

The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man
said this was no joke. 'You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the
woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday
to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down
one side of the place where they are used to coming.

When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up
another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You
continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in The last
side. The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to
eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.

Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside
the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They
are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for
themselves, so they accept their captivity.

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening to
America . The government keeps pushing us toward socialism and keeps spreading
the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit
for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops
(CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc.. While we continually lose our freedoms --
just a little at a time.

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Why Aren't We Furious?

When did we as a nation decide it was ok to let our government hijack us and take over? Both candidates had the opportunity to end this campaign by coming out against this bail-out. No one expected Obama to, but McCain, he could have come out against this ridiculous bill and been outspoken against encouraging irresponsibility in this country on a corporate level and on and personal level. This campaign would be over if he had done that. But he didn't. He was too chicken and decided to go with the flow on this one and once again "reach across the aisle." If I hear anymore about "reaching across the isle," I'm going to hack a hair ball. That's not to say they don't need to work together but they aren't supposed to rob us and then try and convince us why it's necessary to take money from us and redistribute it to the irresponsible. On top of that after they pull that off against our will, they keep giving them more money after the fact.

The best thing McCain can say now is that he will stabilize the market by buying back bad mortgages and renegotiating them at fair market value. Well what about the good mortgages that potentially are no longer at "fair market value?" How is that fair to the rest of us. How do I benefit from paying for their "bad mortgages" to be renegotiated while the government (aka you and me) picks up the difference? Why don't you come up with something real that will help the average American? Like the fair tax? You know all about it. That's the most "bipartisan" solution out there and yet you who "reaches across the aisle" can't even publicly suggest this as your tax solution to help the American people.

And yet we joe citizen sit back and do nothing like our hands our tied. Is this what you want America? Do you want the government to take over our banks? Next comes the auto industry, then slowly everything else and before you know it, we are all government employees paying 60%-70% or more in taxes just to support their inefficiency. We better get pissed off. We better not let them take our power away from us. One of the best suggestions I've heard is to vote the incumbent out regardless of party affiliation. Not a bad idea unless the incumbent really has voted consistently in such a way to reduce the size of government and protect the tax payers.

I'd like to suggest starting by voting for me and Riley. If anyone tries to bring up such ridiculous legislation, Riley will show her teeth. If they vote for it she will attack until they change their vote and learn their lesson for the future.

Don't get complacent. You no longer have to choose between the lesser of two evils. Because I'm not evil. I'm tough and firm, and I really will fight for you the tax payer.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Don't Mess With The U.S.A

Being from Texas we have a popular slogan "Don't Mess With Texas." It was developed for a littering campaign and somehow caught on and hasn't gone away.

As President I'd like to take that a few steps further. I don't want other countries messing with or breaching the security of this great country. I don't want anyone messing with legal immigration by coming here or staying here illegally. I don't want anyone messing with or undermining the great pride we have in this country. That said. Free speech is free speech, I don't intend to mess with our freedoms. Just like I don't want anyone messing with, or jeopardizing our freedoms. Freedom of speech. Freedom to choose your religion or to choose not to have one. Freedom to work hard to live the American dream. Freedom to be personally responsible for ourselves and freedom to encourage personal responsibility in others. Freedom to choose your child's education. Freedom to own personal property. Freedom to protect your personal property.

We have all kinds of freedom in this country that people inside and outside of our country try and will continue to try and infringe upon and take from us. Riley and I intend to protect the freedom this country was founded upon and intended for its citizens. We won't hesitate to hold those responsible for attempting to take away our freedom.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Where's the "Thank You" After Robbing Us?

Here's how your representatives either failed you or stuck to their guns.

Luckily my representative stuck to his guns when both of my senators bailed/caved to the corruption of a government high on power. So did Ron Paul. Good for them.

Just know I wouldn't put you tax payers on the hook and try to insult your intelligence by throwing a couple of tax breaks your way. You'd get those tax breaks without being forced to pay $700 Billion against your will. Lola and Riley aren't messing around and won't tolerate that type of economic terrorism.

Oh and don't buy the whole "tax payer investment" rhetoric. You will never ever see any of that money back. You will never get a check in the mail. Even though based on the population of about 300,000,000 people in the United States we should each get at least $2333 back per person. Although that should only go to families that actually pay taxes every year between now and "making that money back." Or should be prorated based on how many of those years those families pay taxes. And we should all get that back with interest. But that's not going to happen. Because they need to fund nationalized health care which by the way they'll still have to raise your taxes to pay for. So a family of 4 that pays taxes every year between now and then would get a check in the mail for at least $9332 plus interest. This is outside of their regular filing.

Have a great weekend because the value of your money is about to take a nose dive. Oh and welcome to the life of Europeans. But that's what 80% of you want right? Because you have no idea what's really going on over there.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

How Your Senators Voted

I might consider moving to Kansas, Wyoming, Alabama, Louisiana, or Mississippi since those are the only states where both Senators listened. The "No Votes" are listed in red below. Your representatives will be at it again so don't forget to keep writing or calling.


Barbara Boxer (D) Yes; Dianne Feinstein (D) Yes.
Sessions (R) No; Shelby (R) No.
Murkowski (R) Yes; Stevens (R) Yes.
Kyl (R) Yes; McCain (R) Yes.
Lincoln (D) Yes; Pryor (D) Yes.
Allard (R) No; Salazar (D) Yes.
Dodd (D) Yes; Lieberman (I) Yes.
Biden (D) Yes; Carper (D) Yes.
Martinez (R) Yes; Nelson (D) No.
Chambliss (R) Yes; Isakson (R) Yes.
Akaka (D) Yes; Inouye (D) Yes.
Craig (R) Yes; Crapo (R) No.
Durbin (D) Yes; Obama (D) Yes.
Bayh (D) Yes; Lugar (R) Yes.
Grassley (R) Yes; Harkin (D) Yes.
Kansas Brownback (R) No; Roberts (R) No.
Bunning (R) No; McConnell (R) Yes.
Landrieu (D) No; Vitter (R) No.
Collins (R) Yes; Snowe (R) Yes.
Cardin (D) Yes; Mikulski (D) Yes.
Kennedy (D) Not Voting; Kerry (D) Yes.
Levin (D) Yes; Stabenow (D) No.
Coleman (R) Yes; Klobuchar (D) Yes.
Cochran (R) No; Wicker (R) No.
Bond (R) Yes; McCaskill (D) Yes.
Baucus (D) Yes; Tester (D) No.
Hagel (R) Yes; Nelson (D) Yes.
Ensign (R) Yes; Reid (D) Yes.
New Hampshire
Gregg (R) Yes; Sununu (R) Yes.
New Jersey
Lautenberg (D) Yes; Menendez (D) Yes.
New Mexico
Bingaman (D) Yes; Domenici (R) Yes.
New York
Clinton (D) Yes; Schumer (D) Yes.
North Carolina
Burr (R) Yes; Dole (R) No.
North Dakota
Conrad (D) Yes; Dorgan (D) No.
Brown (D) Yes; Voinovich (R) Yes.
Coburn (R) Yes; Inhofe (R) No.
Smith (R) Yes; Wyden (D) No.
Casey (D) Yes; Specter (R) Yes.
Rhode Island
Reed (D) Yes; Whitehouse (D) Yes.
South Carolina
DeMint (R) No; Graham (R) Yes.
South Dakota
Johnson (D) No; Thune (R) Yes.
Alexander (R) Yes; Corker (R) Yes.
Cornyn (R) Yes; Hutchison (R) Yes.
Bennett (R) Yes; Hatch (R) Yes.
Leahy (D) Yes; Sanders (I) No.
Warner (R) Yes; Webb (D) Yes.
Cantwell (D) No; Murray (D) Yes.
West Virginia
Byrd (D) Yes; Rockefeller (D) Yes.
Feingold (D) No; Kohl (D) Yes.
Barrasso (R) No; Enzi (R) No.

If you're interested how your Representatives voted
on Monday, it's too big to print here.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Food for Thought, Never to Forget

Check out this article regarding the bail out of wall street from,8599,1845209,00.html
For those of you that don't want to bother reading it, I have copied the last paragraph for your reading pleasure to sum it up. "Let the poorly managed, overly risk-taking financial institutions fail! Always remember that Wall Street and the real economy are not the same thing."

Don't forget people, it's still not over. They are going to continue to try and use your tax dollars to pass some sort of bail out. Keep writing your senators and representatives to let them know you oppose any kind of "loan" or however they want to spin it, with your tax dollars.

Gas prices. Don't get complacent because they are coming down some. I realize they have agreed to let the ban expire on off shore drilling. But let me remind you of a simple fact of why this is so important. Billions of dollars are being sent to the middle east to support our demand for oil. This is money that we will spend regardless, but it is currently helping their economy. Just think what a boost it is to our economy if we stop sending it overseas and start to spend that money in our own economy.

Health Care. Here's a quote that you never ever ever want to forget about when talk comes up of nationalizing health care:

"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!"

P.J. O'Rourke

Just remember nothing is free when it comes to the government. And the only people out there to pay for it is you and me. Be careful what you ask them to take care of because they will likely do it less inefficiently than you could yourself, or someone else for you.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Failing Education

I don't know if you all realize just how bad our education system is. But the fact that politicians and others who have a vested interest in this government bailout to "save the economy," keep touting the mantra, "the average person just doesn't understand what all's involved and just how devastating it will be if we don't provide this bail-out," should be an indication just how terrible things are in public education.

Here's why. The government caused a problem that now they are trying to convince you the average person, that they are the solution to. The sad part is that many people have decided that this must be true. They accept the word of the government rather than question the word of those in our government. This should be scary to most of you come election time. Because many or most of the people won't be voting on substance, they'll be voting on who looks good to them, or who their parents told them to vote for, or who their friend told them to vote for, without ever doing 10 minutes of research on the issues and what and why the candidates take the position they take and what that means if that person is elected.

The government has a monopoly on education. What I mean by that is that all the tax dollars collected and distributed for education, go to government schools. You can't just decide to send your kid to the private school of your choice and expect the government to give you the money they would have paid the public school in your district for your kid to attend. So what happens if you choose to forgo the tax dollars you already pay for your child's education and send him to private school? That money still goes to the government school district you live in.

Then the government teachers teach your kids to become mindless followers and believers in the need for government. If you don't intervene and teach them to question everything, then that is what they will become. They don't question the motives or actions of politicians, they just vote for the one that will "take care" of them. Luckily there are still parents out there that take it upon themselves to continue their kid's education at home. Good for you and keep up the good work.

I believe there are things that shouldn't be taught at school because it is the responsibility of parents to teach their kids their belief system or send them to a school that will instill their belief system. Two topics in particular are sex and religion. The biology associated with sex is fine but birth control vs abstinence should be addressed at home. There shouldn't even be any arguments as to whether or not the government school should teach abstinence or birth control. Stick to biology. Same with religion. They can and ought to offer elective classes on religion just as students should be allowed to form religious clubs if they want to. But it should not be forced on any student who's parent doesn't want that. Likewise that parent shouldn't fight to remove any non-forced religious classes or clubs from the campus.

That said I believe a parent should have the right to choose where to send their child to school, be it a government school, a parochial school, or some other private school offering something they want for their child. Schools should have to compete with each other for students. You know operate in the free market like businesses do. If some schools can't keep up, let them fail. Government or not. They have to offer something there's a market for. The money should follow the child, not the child following the money. Maybe that's why we have such a subpar education system in this country. But that's my solution. Oh and while we're taking the monopoly away from the government, let's dismantle the department of education while we're at it and leave it up to the states to determine how much regulation they want on schools and teachers in their state. You all know just how much money we're wasting at a federal level on departments like this.

Who knows, it just might work. Good teachers might start getting paid more, students might learn to think for themselves, and we might become competitive with the rest of the world again.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Slippery Slope, Smoke-Screen, or Both?

With the recent "drama" of the mortgage industry bail-out in session, I saw some news last night that infuriated me, but it was bed time and this presidential candidate needs her rest. Especially when she's infuriated so she can form rational thoughts to share with you. This wasn't overlooked on talk radio today which we can be grateful for. But I'm convinced 90% of Americans weren't listening or paying attention. But they should be. You all should be. This affects you and the future of this country.

"A bill set to be passed by Congress and signed by President Bush as early as this weekend—separate from the controversial Wall Street bailout plan—includes $25 billion in loans for the beleaguered Detroit automakers and several of their suppliers."
(Click on the quote for the full story from

So not only are we bailing out the poor business and personal practices of banks and their lendees, now the auto industry has their hand out saying "what about us." The hope is that you won't notice since $25 billion is a trivial amount compared to $700 billion. I don't know where congress comes from but where I come from 50,000 smart people could probably retire on $25 billion or be dang close to it. That's a lot of money! If that $25 billion were going to the banks, it would still be unacceptable in my book.

What industry is next? You can't give government money to one and not expect the others not to come pounding at your door.

When will you people get infuriated by this trend by our senators and representatives to increase the size of government so large, that you have no choice but to depend on them? You should be fighting this to your grave if you care about your children and grandchildren. Don't give into their out of control practices. Government interference is what got us into this mess to begin with, how can government interference possibly be better than letting the free market work it out. Granted times might be tough for awhile, but the resiliency of the American people will prevail.

If American auto makers can't keep up with the quality and demand of the foreign auto makers, tough luck. The American people shouldn't be forced to keep them alive. They should figure it out on their own or go away.

If I am elected, any garbage like this making it to my desk will be vetoed. But not before publicly humiliating every single member of the house and senate who voted in favor of it. You can be sure of that. Dog's honor...

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Term Limits - Not Such a Bad Idea

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage." - (Alexander Tyler is given credit for writing this in regards to the fall of the Athenian Republic but can't validate this. It really doesn't matter who wrote, the sentiment and caution is a good one)

For those of you that think America is a true democracy, let me correct you. We are a republic that operates under a representative democracy. Simply put, we don't vote on policy and law, we elect senators and representatives to represent us in Washington and vote "on our behalf." So those of us that voted for them are represented and the rest of us are SOL Don't believe me, look it up. So I guess that's not really a representative democracy either.

Here's the problem with that. There aren't any term limits for Senators and Representatives. Why is that when the office of the president now has a two term limit, it isn't deemed necessary for our other elected officials? Whatever happened to the concept of public service? I'm sure many of them go in with the best of intentions but it seems like after term one or two they start enjoying the power they have and they make votes based on what they feel like making rather than how their constituents would prefer they vote. They could impose term limits on themselves, but they'd have to vote on it and why would anyone vote themselves out of a job? Hence where voting for themselves rather than with constituents' preferences. They vote themselves raises and all kinds of benefits. Why not? If I could vote myself a raise I certainly would.

And this is why we have complacency in this country for how our country is run. The power should be in the hands of the people not in the government. People think they can't change things so they don't educate themselves about candidates, don't bother to vote, or just vote for the name they know. What good does that do? We could essentially kick these people out of office and yet we don't. We keep electing the same ones over and over without bothering to check their voting record while in office. Not one of them ever seems to be held accountable unless they are caught in some "scandal." We have a responsibility to hold them accountable. Just like we have a responsibility to write or call them to voice our opinions to them.

I love how many politicians are "in favor" of term limits and then when that time comes they revise their position to "well if there was a bill to come up I'd vote for it, otherwise I can't do any good if I step down now." Well why haven't you written that bill?

If you limit the amount of time they are allowed to spend representing us there maybe they will actually stick to their original intentions rather than wasting their time trying to buy our votes every election. Which is another trick they get involved in. They will vote a certain way in an attempt to essentially buy votes with your tax dollars. Why do we let them do this? Again, term limits might help put a stop to this practice.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Government is NOT the Answer to Your Problems

Whether you believe in creation or the big bang, government was not there to help the first people on earth gather their food, build their houses, and fix any damage to them after a storm. They worked hard to do this on their own and looked for ways to improve things on their own. How do you think we've come so far? Over time, left to their own devices private citizens have learned how to improve processes and methods to develop technology far beyond the imagination of the first people on earth. All without the help of government.

Families came together to help raise their own, not intrude on other families to insist that it be done one superior way. That's not to say children shouldn't be defended if they are severely injured or sexually abused. But a parent should be allowed to discipline as they see fit. Parents should take responsibility for raising their kids to be productive, responsible, members of society, not depend on the government to do it. And if hard times fall on a family member, the family should come together to help them out. That's not to say they should enable them to be lazy, drug addicts, or something else. But it used to be that families and churches provided the temporary help for their members to help them during the hard times that happen and celebrate with them when they make it past those hard times.

When this is left to the government, it will cost way more than necessary and they will seize your money to help someone you may not care to help whether you want them to or not. When did government become the solution? Everyone should know by now that if left to the government, things like charity, education, food, clothing, etc etc are executed in such an inefficient manner that it should be criminal how much of our hard earned tax dollars are wasted.

History has taught us this over and over and over and yet we still let politicians try to buy our votes by promising us this and that. With our money no less, with the exception of those that don't pay taxes.

We all have choices and we should be expected to live within our means rather than rely on the government to bail us out every time we make a bad decision. The same goes for corporations. They shouldn't be bailed out every time they enter in to bad decisions. And now because they did, responsible tax payers are footing the bill for it. That isn't right. Companies that make bad decisions should be allowed to fail and go away. People that make bad choices should be allowed to fail. If you don't experience failure, how are you going to learn to make better decisions the next time around? And how are you going to reassess your situation to make cut backs to live within your means if you've been taught that it doesn't matter, "big brother" will bail you out?

Personal Responsibility should be demanded of all of us, not just those who take pride in it. You can't change history but you sure can learn from it. Well you should learn from it to change the future.

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Lola and Riley '08

Meet My Vice President

This is Riley. My Vice Presidential running mate. She's tough on security and won't hesitate to take down anyone posing a threat to America. She agrees with me that there is too much wasteful spending in the government and as president of the senate, she would vote against any bills filled with wasteful spending should her vote be needed. She will also use her voice of reason to discourage elected senators from passing bills that will waste the tax dollars of those that elected them.

She's a strong proponent of personal responsibility and will do everything she can to promote the personal responsibility of each and every American, and work to inhibit government interference in their attempts to take personal responsibility for themselves.

Together we want to help teach every American to take pride in setting their priorities straight to rely on themselves rather than the government. One way we plan to do that is to privatize social security. The government will no longer take ownership of your social security. You will own that money and it will go into an account for you to invest. It will still come out of your check every time you get paid, but you get to direct the investment of it, and if you die before you retire, the total balance belongs to you to pass on to your family. Once you reach the age of 50 or the balance is $300,000, whichever comes first, you can have access to it. You can also contribute more of your income to it each pay period if you wish. But the point is you can decide how much risk you want to take or not and you will own your money, not the government.

Another plan we have is to reduce the corporate tax rate to 10%. The United States currently has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. That's not what this country is about. We want America to have one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world to encourage American companies that have sent operations overseas, to bring them back to the U.S. which will provide more jobs to Americans that want to work. This will also encourage other countries to come and do business within our borders. This helps you as a consumer because corporations pass the cost of those taxes on to you the consumers. The lower the cost, the less you have to pay for goods and services as long as you the consumers are prudent and the free market is allowed to operate freely to compete against each other.

We'd also like to replace the income tax, that hard working families pay,with a national sales tax. This is currently known as the fair tax. We propose a few modifications to the Fair Tax to impede government growth and takeover in your daily lives and to encourage personal responsibility rather than discourage it. All you need to know now is that you pay taxes when you choose to consume. Each family will receive a prebate every month based on family size to cover the taxes on necessities like food and clothing. Those who consume the most, pay the most taxes. It also means we will now be collecting taxes on tourists, illegal immigrants, organized criminals, and anyone else not currently carrying their fair share in the tax burden. Feel free to read up on the fair tax and ask me specific questions on what I'd do differently.

Finally, we'd like to eliminate the ridiculous death tax. It's government robbery to take money that has already had taxes paid on it once. We'd like to end that horrid practice.

These are just a few of our proposed economic changes to help stimulate the economy by increasing jobs, increasing the purchasing power of you, and giving back social security ownership to the people.

This Day in History