Politics For Average People

I’m not sure how many people know about the FairTax system, but I would guess it is not many. Through years and years of research and studies, the FairTax proposal would restore the U.S. economy, bring home many jobs, alleviate the current loss of taxes, and further our country in so many ways.

I would like for everyone to check out fairtax.org for more information about the FairTax system. I will be posting several entries about the FairTax proposal, but here are a few unique facts to think about. Once you digest the following facts, take a look at fairtax.org or read The FairTax Book by Neal Boortz and John Linder. This book is an easy read and will explain the FairTax system and the arguments against it!

Did you know that Congress had to pass an amendment to the Constitution to install an income tax? February 12, 1913 marks the day the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified and making it “constitutional” to tax our income!

Did you know that it costs America $265 billion a year to prepare and file tax returns and 6 billion hours to do it?

Did you know it took us 113 days of work to pay for our tax burden? This is longer than any other thing we pay for: (we work 108 days to pay for food, clothing, and housing combined)

I bet you didn’t know that 32.58% of all tax returns paid no tax?

Business decisions made to reduce tax burden versus increase revenue results in an 18% loss to GDP.

There are many more staggering statistics out there about our current tax system. The FairTax is the answer to our economy, our country, and our lives. Look into it and let your congresspeople know you are for this kind of change.

Obama told a group gathered to hear about his flip-flopped ideas of change in Powder Springs, GA that instead of worrying about immigrants learning English, because they will learn English, we should worry about our children learning Spanish.

I have a problem with this. I agree with the fact that we should be learning multiple languages. I learned two languages in school, Japanese and Latin. I chose not to learn Spanish. I do think that students should be pushed to learn about other cultures and languages, but i don’t think we should have to learn a certain language because immigrants won’t acknowledge they speak English.

Some liberals say that we are taking this video out of context. He is talking about the school systems. If he was talking about our school system and what we need to improve it, that is a different story. Instead, he refers to immigrants learning English. This is another issue.

I live in Houston, TX where I am now a minority. As a resident of the US, I don’t think it is my responsibility to learn Spanish so I can read billboards, product packages, and speak to other citizens (oh, wait, are illegals consider citizens?). If the billboard were in Latin, I could read it. What about French?

We are talking about two different issues here. Why must we conform to learning someone else’s language so they have an easier time of becoming a citizen. I don’t see other countries bending for us. In fact, when we can’t speak their language, we are criticized and condemned for it. If you want to be a citizen of the US, you should have to speak English. Period!

The second issue that has been tied to Obama’s speech is the school systems. This should be addressed on separately. I firmly believe we are behind much of the rest of the world when it comes to schools. The more we allow Democrats to decide on legislation, the further behind we will get. I was an over-achiever in school. I took college courses in middle school. The biggest problem I faced was the fact that I was not “average.” I was even told I would have to retake some classes so I could fit in line with everyone else. For the same reason we have welfare and other “average” programs, our school systems don’t reward success.

Instead of dumbing it down, so every kid can pass each grade, why don’t we step it up and force our kids to rise to that level. We want to act like the biggest and best country in the world, but we allow our children to barely read and get through high school. Democratic legislation has tried to penetrate schools, the work force, and just about every other part of life to make sure everyone has a chance. If they can’t succeed, we will just give it to them. I know I have taken this on a tangent, so I will write about this separately.

The bottom line is the more we lose the identity of America, cater to EVERYONE else, the closer we are to extinction as a world power.

Barack Obama doesn’t really know what to say to who when it comes to his policy on Iraq. He has made it more than obvious that he says what he thinks he needs to in order to get elected. He flip-flops according to the response from the press. Obama hasn’t learned how to hold true to some principles while dancing around all of the rest like seasoned politicians do.

Most Obama supporters think he wants to pull out of Iraq completely. He has said, “…that I would bring our troops home in the pace of one to two brigades per month and that that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months.” All of you Democrats: did you see the most important part of this statement? COMBAT TROOPS! How many of Obama’s so-called residual troops will remain? Has any asked that question? Will he even answer it? He doesn’t know.

Another thing most Obama supporters don’t realize or want to talk about: Obama’s voting results on puling out of Iraq. Obama has not been very consistent with pulling out as he talks on the campaign trail. In fact Obama has voted both against the withdrawal of troops from Iraq (on June 22, 2006) and for forcing the withdrawal of troops by cutting off funding for military operations in Iraq (on May 24, 2007 and Nov. 16, 2007). This is odd coming from a presidential candidate that is playing on the Iraq war as grounds for getting elected. What will he do different next?

I’m sure once he gets elected, he will flip-flop again. He has already set us up for it. When asked about how many troops will remain, what kind of counter-terrorist strike force will we have, and other questions like how many trainers and researchers will be necessary, he didn’t have any other answer than, “Those are all issues that obviously are going to be determined by the facts on the ground.” It sounds like he is saying, “Once we start pulling out like I said we would in order for me to win the election, I might change my mind and do something completely different!”

I want to applaud and thank Obama supporters. We must have some ignorant, uneducated supporters out there otherwise I would have nothing to write about!

I ask anyone to please respond! I want someone to tell me I’m wrong! I want a true Obama supporter to bash all of my comments. At least then, I may find out what Democrats and Obama really stands for!

In one of my rants that has nothing to do with politics, I am very upset with the day care my child attends. She goes to one of the better day cares, Primrose, in the area. Primrose is a national franchise, so there are at least local owners. It is very expensive; in fact, it is more than a mortgage payment each month.

I have been getting irritated a little more each holiday that the day care decides to be closed. I understand being closed on a holiday. I would probably not take my daughter to day care on those days anyway, but I am not given the choice. The only reason this irritates me is because they still charge the full weekly rate for those weeks. This week is a good example. They will be closed on Friday, July 4th, but they wanted the regular weekly payment on Monday. They are going to deliver on 80% of the services but want 100% of the payment.

What other industry can you deliver 80% and ask for 100% payment? Apparently, this is a common trend in the child care industry. I understand if I don’t take my child to their facility one day, but when they know well in advance that they will be closed, and they are not giving me any option for that day, I don’t feel I should have to pay for it. The only response I get is, “It’s our policy.” I want that policy for my company.

The biggest reason why this is starting to really tick me off is because I have to pay for whole weeks that my child will not be there. My mother is coming to stay with us for a week 5 weeks from now, and even if I give them adequate notice, they still demand payment for that week. So they can close when they want, and I still have to pay for it. She doesn’t go, I still have to pay for it. I give them plenty of notice, I still have to pay for it! What is going on??? Can someone please explain the rationale to me? Can someone please give me the argument of the day care, because I think this is a bunch of crap!!!

If you have not heard about the threats coming from Rep. James Fagan, a Democrat (you could have guessed that) from Massachusetts, click here to watch the video: MyFoxBoston video.

This is extremely outrageous and cold, but it is not a surprise. Secular-Progessives everywhere are rejoicing his comments. I had to send him an email, and the email is listed below. Please read, especially my example case from Vermont, so you can understand why Jessica’s Law is a good idea.

Dear Mr. James Fagan,

I recently read a story about your comments regarding Jessica’s Law and sex offenders. I’m sure you have received many emails about this, and you won’t even give me the courtesy of a form email in response to mine, but I thought I would express my disbelief and concern for your statements.

At first, I found it hard to believe that anyone could make threats on children as you did. I understand that you must cross-examine a witness, especially if that witness is saying things that may put your client in jail for a mandatory 10-20 years, but you specifically threatened any child that you cross-examine in a sex offender case. I didn’t believe it until I saw the videos, and there you were, “I’m going to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined. That when they’re 8 years old they throw up; when they’re 12 years old, they won’t sleep. When they’re 19 years old they’ll have nightmares and they’ll never have a relationship with anybody.”

WOW!!!! Are you serious??? You want to make an 8-year old throw up?

I completely believe that it is your ultimate responsibility to defend your client to the best of your ability, but aren’t you supposed to do that in all of your cases? Why don’t you threaten the middle-aged men that you cross-examine? You make it sound like you will be extra harder on children.

You know why our politicians are trying to pass such a law as Jessica’s Law? Did you ever heard about the case in Vermont in 2004-2005 when Mark Hulett confessed to raping young girl for 4 years? The wonderful, honorable, and secular-progressive Judge Edward Cashman decided that Mark only needed 60 days in jail and then send Mark to rehabilitation, outside of prison. Is this not ridiculous? Later, after he supposedly learned that the state would treat Hulett in prison, he sentenced him to 3-10 years, and Hulett will probably get our in about 3 years (which will be fairly soon). You do realize he will spend less time in jail than the length of time he was raping the little girl???

THIS IS WHY WHE SHOULD PASS LAWS LIKE JESSICA’S LAW!

There are lenient, ignorant judges that would sentence someone to 60 days who has no problem stealing the innocence from a child. If our children can’t be innocent and free from such outrageous crimes, what do they have to look for? I understand you have kids? What would you tell your child when they were raped and the person that did it will go to jail for 60 days and go to rehab? Why don’t you tell them that you would make them puke at 8 years old and never have a relationship? Then you would not get to attend a wedding for your child, your child would be emotionally scarred, and possible commit suicide. Tell your child that and see what happens!

I know you are a democrat, and I’m sure you are a secular-progressive liberal also. There is no other explanation for your actions. I believe in our Constitution, our Judicial system, and everything involved, including innocent until proven guilty. I would want you to defend your clients properly, but if I lived in your state, and you tortured my child like you say you would, we would have some problems. Why can’t you stand for worthless sex offenders going to jail for the maximum allowed sentence? Why do you have to opt for the lenient side of crime??? Good job, James!

Let Mr. James Fagan know how you feel. Email:Rep.JamesFagan@Hou.State.MA.US and if you want to call him, which you should, here is his number: 617-722-2040.

Good Job, James! Free the sex offenders so they can ruin another child’s life. Oh, wait, you are going to do that for us!!!

I am very upset about the price of gas today, just as everyone else in the country is. I think we need to start drilling in ANWR, the Rockies, and the outer-continental shelf. I think we need a lot of things done now, but one thing we don’t need is a WINDFALL PROFITS TAX!

First point: windfall profits taxes are nothing more than a profit on success. Basically, the idea is an extra tax on a company that makes an unexpected profit. Does this make sense??? Every company can hope for a profit, but realistically, they are all unexpected. You can project, forecast, expect, and so on, but no one really knows if they are going to make money. Also, isn’t the point of being in business to make money? If we wanted to start a business and only make as money as the government told us we could make, we would move to a socialist country (by the way, this is what the Democratic Party would like to see). The last time I checked, a capitalist economy allows people to privately own a business, including its profit. I think a windfall profits tax is against capitalism and everything America is built on!

Second point: did windfall profits taxes work out in the 80’s? One component of the taxes in the 80’s was a 70 percent tax that was levied on the difference between the market price received by oil companies and the average base price of $12.81 per barrel (http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1168.html). 70 percent? Doesn’t this seem like excessive taxation, one of the reasons we revolted over 200 years ago?

Following the windfalls profits tax, the government projected $320 billion in extra tax revenue, but it only ended up with $40 billion. Next, domestic production was decreased by 3 percent to just 6 percent. Now if we all agree with the laws of economics, less demand increases price; more supply decreases price. Is this a good idea, Democrats? Should we really pursue a windfall profits tax, Barack?

I want to pay less for gas, but the Democrats’ solutions are just going to raise prices, decrease production, and delay any real relief.

One of the biggest discussions right now in everything is ANWR. It is supposed to be this pristine, beautiful place that environmentalists don’t want to us to disturb or drill in. I wonder how pristine it is?

I watched a segment on FOXNews, “Hannity’s America,” and a congressman was interviewed about what ANWR really looks like. They actually showed a video clip of the area, primarily where drilling is proposed, and it actually looked like a video of the moon, just flatter. It was nothing but flat, icy, plains of nothing. Why is this such an issue, if there are no pristine environments that would be disturbed? I believe that everyone, for and against, should visit this area. See what is really being disputed. How many politicians that are against drilling in ANWR really what is there?

One person that has been there, Jonah Goldberg, is quoted saying this about ANWR:

“In summer, the coastal plain is mostly mosquito-plagued tundra and bogs. (The roughnecks at Prudhoe Bay joke that “life begins at 40″ - because at 40 degrees, clouds of mosquitoes and other pests take flight from the ocean of puddles). In the winter, it reaches 70 degrees below zero (not counting wind chill, which brings it to 120 below) and is in round-the-clock darkness.”

Now this doesn’t sound like a pristine situation. It sounds like a barren plain that covers a valuable piece of earth containing oil. There is much speculation about how much there, how long it will take, etc. Even it takes 10 years, shouldn’t we start now? When Bill Clinton vetoed drilling in ANWR back in 1995, it stopped drilling and production that we would be feeling now. We must not allow the Democrats to continue screwing things up. Write you representatives and let them know how you feel. Let them know what sacrifices you have made to put gas in your vehicle. Tell them that the Prius is not an option when you have 3 kids.

Luckily, John McCain has changed his stance on this situation, since over 70% of the country is agreement that we should drill. Other Republicans should follow suit, but the Democrats in office will not let this happen and neither will Obama. Since ANWR is really not so pristine, why are we wasting time and delaying drilling?

By now, most people have heard Obama has decided to leave his church in Chicago, Trinity United Church of Christ. He said, “I make this decision with sadness.” He goes on to say, “This is where I found Jesus Christ, where we were married, where our children were baptized. We are proud of the extraordinary works of that church.”

I understand why Obama decided to leave the church, but I don’t agree with it.

First, Obama didn’t sound like he was leaving because he felt he didn’t belong there or agree with Trinity’s teachings. He sounded upset and mad that he had to leave, but it was something he had to do. In fact, if the outrageous remarks by Rev. Wright hadn’t surfaced, I’m sure the Obamas wouldn’t have ever left that church. I don’t like that Obama has basically played a string bet (betting a little to see the reactions, then betting more based on those reactions) all along with the controversy that has arisen with his ties to Rev. Wright and Trinity. He started by saying I don’t agree with what was said. Once he determined that wasn’t enough, and it was hurting him politically, he went further to denounce Rev. Wright, but we all know he only did it for the sake of his presidential race.

Second, I would rather see a candidate stand for what he believes in, and stand behind his church than run away when it is not all peachy. Obama has been involved with Trinity since 1988. I don’t think that we would return to a church week after week for 20 years, if he didn’t agree with the message and teachings. It would be hypocritical of him to sit in a church for that long and not believe in the words taught, and we definitely don’t want a hypocritical presidential candidate, do we? So, he must have believed in MOST of what was said. This is his church. Why didn’t he grow some and stand up for his church? If the church was not guilty of teaching ideals that the country wouldn’t like, why didn’t he just stand up for HIS church and say, “Back Off!” This is small and minute in comparison to things he will have to face as president, but if he negotiates with the wrong leader, and the world doesn’t like it, will he stand up for what he does, or run away like a little girl and hide?

Our current president has made many mistakes in my eyes, but at least he stands behind his decisions until the end. At least he has a set…

I have stumbled across a quote by Sen. Barack Obama, and I think it is only fitting to include it with every blog post about him:

“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.”

– Barack Obama

Did you know the US is expected to spend $86.5 billion dollars on oil in 2008? Did you know that this is 26.5% of the worlds total expenditures for oil? (Here is the numbers and more about the world’s oil spending: http://www.worldoil.com/Magazine/MAGAZINE_DETAIL.asp?ART_ID=3434&MONTH_YEAR=Feb-2008) With so much investment from foreign governments in US companies, primarily US utilities, shouldn’t we look at how we would benefit, and make our country safer, if we started using fuel alternatives?

Why don’t we dig into fuel alternatives? Why don’t use synthetic coal from Montana or invest in ethanol choices? Think about the amount of money we are spending in foreign oil. Why should we give countries that despise us and would love to be able to put a strangle-hold on us because we depend on them to function?

Today, OPEC and the middle eastern countries have said they will not produce more oil. Doesn’t this basically mean, “The US needs more oil. Let’s not produce more to help ruin their economy!” It is obvious that gas prices are the cause of higher food prices and the recession the media has been “warning” us about for months now.

I consider myself a traditionalist and conservative, but I am not sure if I the way i feel about this issue falls in those lines or not, but I think we should spend the money, time, technology, etc. to use our own resources, people, jobs, and everything that is necessary to produce a fuel that can power our country. I know at this point, there is much debate on whether hybrid cars are more cost-effective, save gas, and so on, but if there was a real push to incorporate these type of vehicles, then the demand would go up, fuel costs would go down, and more stations would pop up making this a more feasible alternative. To add to this, wouldn’t it make sense for us to be buying corn-based fuel that put money in American companies instead of middle-eastern companies???

Finally, we have been talking about fighting terrorism for several years now, and everyone has a different answer. One thing I think everyone is overlooking, primarily because it wouldn’t put money in their pockets (and I direct this statement at every politician, no discrimination), is the fact that we have established a great terrorist threat with our dependence on foreign countries to run. Everything we do, including food production, requires oil, which usually comes from some other country. This is a major terrorist threat along with the massive investment in US companies by the same foreign countries and their governments. The power other governments have over our country really scares me…

By now, most people who follow the election trails have heard about Obama’s almost threats against the Tennessee GOP for their video they have created featuring Michelle Obama’s statement, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.”

This statement has been played out by now by most medias, but Obama made an inexperienced mistake by saying, “If they think that they’re going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful because that I find unacceptable, the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family…” Now, Barack, when you send your wife out there to speak for you, campaign for you, and make statements on your behalf, you are throwing her to the wolves. When she speaks for you, she is no different from any other spokesperson on your team.

I am proud of Obama for standing up for his wife and family. Any stand-up guy would defend his family, such as Obama has, but a presidential candidate is in a different world. He should not allow her to campaign for him if he doesn’t want someone to comment on her remarks. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of his inexperience in politics. I am afraid that he Obama is elected president, every time another country or leader makes a comment about him (although he voices his opinion all of the time), he may run to the teacher and tattle instead of handling the situation like a real leader!