Obama's New Flat Tax

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRS Obama Simplified Flat Tax Form

How much did you make last year? $__________________

Send it in.





Thank You

Obama's New Jobs Program

So now we know what Mr. Obama's new jobs program is. Put guitar makers out of business. Specifically Gibson guitars, but if you make guitars, and didn't contribute to the Obama campaign, you may be next. In fact, if you run any business and did not contribute to Obama, you may be next.

According to the Department of Agriculture, food stamps are a jobs program. The Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, actually said the other day, as if he believed it, that every dollar spent in food stamps generates a dollar and eighty-four cents in economic activity. We should be ecstatic then, that the Department of Fish and Wildlife, under the direction of the Department of Justice, swooped in to Gibson Guitar's three plants yesterday, and confiscated all of their ebony and rosewood, idling 1,000 workers. Just think about all that economic activity that will be created when those 1,000 workers get on the food stamp program!

At issue, apparently is the Lacy Act. The Lacy Act says that certain imported items cannot be imported in violation of the exporting country's law. The ebony and rosewood in question are products of India, and even though Gibson has documentation from the Indian government stating the the wood was legally imported by Gibson, and its export from India does not violate Indian law, the Department of Justice apparently knows better than the Indian government what Indian law is, and Gibson is violating it. We should all be happy then, that we have 1,000 potential new food stamp recipients to generate $1.84 in economic activity for each $1.00 in food stamp money they spend.

Following this logic, it is clear that the Obama Administration's new jobs program is to create as many unemployed food stamp recipients as possible so as to create all that economic activity! That would explain the silence about GE sending thousands of high paying avionics jobs to China last week. Just think about all those people who will not be getting those jobs here, so they can continue to receive food stamps and create economic activity. Rejoice in the fact that the Department of Labor will not allow Boeing to expand its plant in South Carolina. That is many more people who are now creating economic activity by remaining on the food stamp program instead of having good, high paying jobs. How fortunate they are in South Carolina that we have such a forward thinking administration! Following this logic to its ultimate conclusion, it is obvious that we should, for the good of the country, all quit our jobs and go on food stamps! What economic activity we would create! Why there would be jobs for everyone. But wait, if there would be jobs for everyone if we were all on food stamps, who would take them? And wouldn't it be counter productive to go to work, when food stamps are what creates the economic activity? Oh never mind that, who cares where the money comes from to provide the food stamps. The government will just print it I guess. Free cheese for everyone!

But who would make the cheese? I guess the government would print that too. Well Mr. Obama said we don't need to worry about that, we are too busy and needn't try to understand such complicated problems. We should just concentrate on raising our families, and doing what we do every day, and let our benefactors in the government worry about such things. Whew, that's a load off my mind.

Of course what the Department of Agriculture is missing, is that in order to give the newly unemployed Guitar worker one dollar in food stamps, it must first be taken out of the hands of an employed taxpayer by the Government. That, of course, means the dollar and eighty four cents in economic activity created in the spending of a food stamp dollar is really only eighty-four cents. If one follows the math on this, one sees that the dollar in food stamps actually costs the economy sixteen cents in activity. To be fair, no one ever accused this administration of having a firm grasp on the principals of mathematics.

Casualties of War

In the ongoing liberal War on Prosperity, the most recent causality is Switzerland. The flight from the dollar and the euro have put increasing upward pressure on the Swiss franc, making their exports more expensive for the rest of the world and pushing some Swiss companies to the edge of viability thus expanding the front to one of the few remaining stable countries in the world.

In our own misbegotten economy we see community banks like the Main Street Bank in Kingwood Tx, and coal operators such as Ronnie Bryant in Birmingham Al, simply give up and close their doors rather than try to negotiate the mountain of regulation heaped up before them by the divisions of anti-prosperity troops in the various departments of poverty that have become our federal overseers.

From hospitals, to banks, from oil drillers to light bulb manufacturers, even solar companies now that their federal taxpayer stolen largess has run out, from car dealers to tanning salons, businesses large and small have taken the brunt of the fire and unless one is an Obama supporter like GE and Lockheed-Martin, or a Union leader, or have a national media outlet to offer for propaganda distribution, one is in the enemy camp and subject to a constant barrage of grenades and mortar fire as the administration pushes forward in it's attempt to subjugate our once great nation to its will.

What is the end game for the War on Prosperity, especially now that public opinion now seems to be tiring of the conflict? As re-election of the Commander in Chief begins to be called into question by even some of those loyalists in the main stream media, how will the Administration and the leaders of the Democratic faction hold on to power and finish their campaign to enslave the rest of us and our children?

This writer hopes his visions of the future are simply paranoia born of the endless onslaught against the freedom and prosperity once exemplified in our founding documents and institutions. So chock the following up to the mindless ravings of a patriot feeling disenfranchised by forty years of ever advancing progressivism. But be aware. Watch for the signs. If you see what the writer is about to foretell come to pass, then take cover, for the end of the greatest experiment in self-governance and freedom is near.

The writer hopes not to be giving aid, comfort, and ideas to the enemy, but it must be stated. One cannot help but observe the growing unrest and rioting in places like Greece, Spain and Great Brittan where those progressives ahead of us have already run out of other people's money to borrow or confiscate. The writer notes that their youth have been lulled into massive unemployment and continual expectation that the necessities of life will be provided for them, without effort or participation on their part. Now that the largess must be curtailed, those youth have decided to simply take, rather than wait for things to be given. Looting, burning and rioting seem to be the order of the day.

With re-election in doubt for the Obama crowd, perhaps the end game in the War on Prosperity is aligned with the youth of Brittan. We have already seen the rise of flash mobs in some of our cities. We are witnessing the encroachment of liberty, ostensibly to protect us from the violence. In Philadelphia a nine o'clock curfew is in place. In San Francisco, access to communication has been suspended on the rail system. In Oakland curfews are being discussed. Flash mobs have turned larcenous in Chicago and Wisconsin.

Is it possible that our great community organizer has plans to use the vast conglomeration of fomenters in his various and sundry organizations like the SEIU, moveon.org, the AFLCIO, Code Pink and others to incite enough riots so he can declare martial law. Once declared either change his fortunes in the election by showing “leadership” or maintain power by scrubbing the elections altogether like Rudy Giuliani tried to do in the wake of 911? This writer's hope is that the answer is no. Yet he cannot help the feeling, nagging at the back of his mind, that as re-election hopes dim, and the Commander in Chief becomes ever more desperate to hold sway at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, just such a turn of events may come to pass. 

The writer wonders if all the weapons from Fast and Furious have been accounted for.

Ah the ravings of a lunatic mind.

President & US Senate Support Slavery of our Children!

That may sound like a provocative headline, and it is, but it is also the truth! Our current debt is $14.519 Trillion. That means my 12 year old daughter's share of that is currently $46,564.00. Add in the current unfunded liabilities of $114,751,918,000,000.00 and her share of the national debt plus unfunded liabilities for Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare is $414,583.72 or $1862.00 per month every month for THIRTY years. On top of that the US Senate and President Obama want to add an additional 2.4 Trillion dollars which, under the McConnell plan, have no spending cuts associated with it, and under the Gang (appropriate name for what they are trying to do) of Six plan nobody knows.

Assuming we stopped borrowing right now, and my daughter could get a job right out of high school making $40,000.00 per year, she would already owe her entire take home salary to the government. She did not vote for these debts. She did nothing to create them, yet there she is at twelve years old owing the Slave Owners in Washington nearly a half-million dollars. You owe that much too!

We are all rapidly becoming enduntured servants of the leviathan we call our government. It has long ago ceased to be a governemnt of the people, for the people and by the people. It has become instead a government of the career politician, for the career politician and his friends, and by the lobbyist and government dole recipient. Unfortunately soon there will be no producers left to feed the insatiable appetite of the gluttonous belly of the political beast in Washington DC.

So yes, the President and the US Senate, by refusing to support the cut, cap and balance plan which passed the House of Representatives last night, and offers a real chance to start to get a handle on our spending problem, are de-facto showing themselves to be in favor of enslaving our children and grandchildren now and long into the future.

It is time to stop the practice of making slaves out of ourselves and our children. It is time to stop NOW. We are the governors of this country, not the lazy, cowardly career politicians in DC. Let them know. Let them know that if they do not free your children from the yoke of bondage now, they will be sent home to labor under that very same yoke themselves. It is YOUR country, YOU can make a difference. You have until Saturday, and then it too late.

Stop the Senate from Handing a Blank Check to Obama!

Well, folks, I am sorry to report that the fix is in. The Senate, in back room dealing, appears to be prepared to hand President Obama a blank check to spend our children's as of yet unearned money any way he pleases, to the tune of an additional 2.5 TRILLION dollars.

I listened to John McCain yesterday on the Sean Hannity show, and he all but said as much! Mr. Hannity was asking repeatedly about cut, cap and balance, and McCain said he was going to fight for it, but then consistently argued for the McConnell plan. He barley gave lip service to cut, cap and balance, and got angry when Hannity pressed him about the McConnell plan. McCain said it was a last resort, but then continued over and over again to argue it's merits. Heaven help us!

In making my calls to Senate offices yesterday afternoon, my impression did not change. Republican staffers with whom I spoke, seemed to be hedging when I brought up the McConnell plan and my opposition to it. The Democrats staffers just gave me the “yeah, yeah I'll pass your message on” routine.

McCain told Hannity that his office had been flooded with calls from seniors who were frightened by the Obamascare campaign. The fact that the Administration could not stop social security checks from going out, even if they wanted to, because of the way the Social Security Administration's computers are programed, didn't get in McCain's way. Our only course has to be action!

If these Senators' offices are overwhelmed with calls from concerned citizens like you and me, we might have a slim chance of beginning to free our children from the slavery and tyranny being foisted upon them by our so-called representatives.

Given the fact that ICE is busily shutting down blogs and seizing domain names, I don't know how long we will have the opportunity to speak in opposition to this Administration's ongoing power grab and usurpation of the rights with which we were endowed by our creator!

I urge anyone who is interested in freedom, in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to call as many Senators as possible and voice strong opposition to Senator McConnell's plan to hand over a blank check to the President, so he can spend as many of our children's hard earned dollars as he chooses! Do it today! Do it now! Time is running out for our beloved nation!

Akaka, Daniel K. - (D - HI)

(202) 224-6361

Web Form: akaka.senate.gov/email-senator-akaka.cfm

Alexander, Lamar - (R - TN)

(202) 224-4944

Web Form: alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Ayotte, Kelly - (R - NH)

(202) 224-3324

Web Form: ayotte.senate.gov/?p=contact

Barrasso, John - (R - WY)

(202) 224-6441

Web Form: barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs...

Baucus, Max - (D - MT)

(202) 224-2651

Web Form: baucus.senate.gov/contact/emailForm.cfm?subj=issue

Begich, Mark - (D - AK)

(202) 224-3004

Web Form: begich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=EmailSenator

Bennet, Michael F. - (D - CO)

(202) 224-5852

Web Form: bennet.senate.gov/contact/

Bingaman, Jeff - (D - NM)

(202) 224-5521

Web Form: bingaman.senate.gov/contact/

Blumenthal, Richard - (D - CT)

(202) 224-2823

Web Form: blumenthal.senate.gov/contact/

Blunt, Roy - (R - MO)

(202) 224-5721

Web Form: blunt.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Boozman, John - (R - AR)

(202) 224-4843

Web Form: boozman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-me

Boxer, Barbara - (D - CA)

(202) 224-3553

Web Form: boxer.senate.gov/en/contact/

Brown, Scott P. - (R - MA)

(202) 224-4543

Web Form: scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/emailscottbrown

Brown, Sherrod - (D - OH)

(202) 224-2315

Web Form: brown.senate.gov/contact/

Burr, Richard - (R - NC)

(202) 224-3154

Web Form: burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Conta...

Cantwell, Maria - (D - WA)

(202) 224-3441

Web Form: cantwell.senate.gov/contact/

Cardin, Benjamin L. - (D - MD)

(202) 224-4524

Web Form: cardin.senate.gov/contact/

Carper, Thomas R. - (D - DE)

(202) 224-2441

Web Form: carper.senate.gov/contact/

Casey, Robert P., Jr. - (D - PA)

(202) 224-6324

Web Form: casey.senate.gov/contact/

Chambliss, Saxby - (R - GA)

(202) 224-3521

Web Form: chambliss.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Coats, Daniel - (R - IN)

(202) 224-5623

Web Form: coats.senate.gov/contact/

Coburn, Tom - (R - OK)

(202) 224-5754

Web Form: coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactsenatorcoburn?p...

Cochran, Thad - (R - MS)

(202) 224-5054

Web Form: cochran.senate.gov/email.html

Collins, Susan M. - (R - ME)

(202) 224-2523

Web Form: collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=Contact...

Conrad, Kent - (D - ND)

(202) 224-2043

Web Form: conrad.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm

Coons, Christopher A. - (D - DE)

(202) 224-5042

Web Form: coons.senate.gov/contact/

Corker, Bob - (R - TN)

(202) 224-3344

Web Form: corker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe

Cornyn, John - (R - TX)

(202) 224-2934

Web Form: cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm

Crapo, Mike - (R - ID)

(202) 224-6142

Web Form: crapo.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

DeMint, Jim - (R - SC)

(202) 224-6121

Web Form: demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactInformation

Durbin, Richard J. - (D - IL)

(202) 224-2152

Web Form: durbin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Enzi, Michael B. - (R - WY)

(202) 224-3424

Web Form: enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=e-mail-senator...

Feinstein, Dianne - (D - CA)

(202) 224-3841

Web Form: feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactU...

Franken, Al - (D - MN)

(202) 224-5641

Web Form: franken.senate.gov/?p=contact

Gillibrand, Kirsten E. - (D - NY)

(202) 224-4451

Web Form: gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/

Graham, Lindsey - (R - SC)

(202) 224-5972

Web Form: lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Em...

Grassley, Chuck - (R - IA)

(202) 224-3744

Web Form: grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Hagan, Kay R. - (D - NC)

(202) 224-6342

Web Form: hagan.senate.gov/?p=contact

Harkin, Tom - (D - IA)

(202) 224-3254

Web Form: harkin.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Hatch, Orrin G. - (R - UT)

(202) 224-5251

Web Form: hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=Email-Orrin

Heller, Dean - (R - NV)

(202) 224-6244

Web Form: heller.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm

Hoeven, John - (R - ND)

(202) 224-2551

Web Form: hoeven.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email-the-senator

Hutchison, Kay Bailey - (R - TX)

(202) 224-5922

Web Form: hutchison.senate.gov/?p=email_kay

Inhofe, James M. - (R - OK)

(202) 224-4721

Web Form: inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

Inouye, Daniel K. - (D - HI)

(202) 224-3934

Web Form: inouye.senate.gov/Contact/ContactDKI.cfm

Isakson, Johnny - (R - GA)

(202) 224-3643

Web Form: isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Johanns, Mike - (R - NE)

(202) 224-4224

Web Form: johanns.senate.gov/public/?p=ContactSenatorJohanns

Johnson, Ron - (R - WI)

(202) 224-5323

Web Form: ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Johnson, Tim - (D - SD)

(202) 224-5842

Web Form: johnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

Kerry, John F. - (D - MA)

(202) 224-2742

Web Form: kerry.senate.gov/contact/

Kirk, Mark - (R - IL)

(202) 224-2854

Web Form: kirk.senate.gov/?p=contact

Klobuchar, Amy - (D - MN)

(202) 224-3244

Web Form: klobuchar.senate.gov/emailamy.cfm

Kohl, Herb - (D - WI)

(202) 224-5653

Web Form: kohl.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Kyl, Jon - (R - AZ)

(202) 224-4521

Web Form: kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Landrieu, Mary L. - (D - LA)

(202) 224-5824

Web Form: landrieu.senate.gov/about/contact.cfm

Lautenberg, Frank R. - (D - NJ)

(202) 224-3224

Web Form: lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/routing.cfm

Leahy, Patrick J. - (D - VT)

(202) 224-4242

Web Form: leahy.senate.gov/contact/

Lee, Mike - (R - UT)

(202) 224-5444

Web Form: lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Levin, Carl - (D - MI)

(202) 224-6221

Web Form: levin.senate.gov/contact/

Lieberman, Joseph I. - (ID - CT)

(202) 224-4041

Web Form: lieberman.senate.gov/index.cfm/contact/email-me-about-an-...

Lugar, Richard G. - (R - IN)

(202) 224-4814

Web Form: lugar.senate.gov/contact/

Manchin, Joe, III - (D - WV)

303 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510

(202) 224-3954

Web Form: manchin.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm

McCain, John - (R - AZ)

(202) 224-2235

Web Form: mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

McCaskill, Claire - (D - MO)

(202) 224-6154

Web Form: mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=contact

McConnell, Mitch - (R - KY)

(202) 224-2541

Web Form: www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=contact

Menendez, Robert - (D - NJ)

(202) 224-4744

Web Form: menendez.senate.gov/contact/

Merkley, Jeff - (D - OR)

(202) 224-3753

Web Form: merkley.senate.gov/contact/

Mikulski, Barbara A. - (D - MD)

(202) 224-4654

Web Form: mikulski.senate.gov/contact/

Moran, Jerry - (R - KS)

(202) 224-6521

Web Form: moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=e-mail-jerry

Murkowski, Lisa - (R - AK)

(202) 224-6665

Web Form: murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

Murray, Patty - (D - WA)

(202) 224-2621

Web Form: murray.senate.gov/email/index.cfm

Nelson, Ben - (D - NE)

(202) 224-6551

Web Form: bennelson.senate.gov/contact-me.cfm

Nelson, Bill - (D - FL)

(202) 224-5274

Web Form: billnelson.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Paul, Rand - (R - KY)

(202) 224-4343

Web Form: paul.senate.gov/?p=contact

Portman, Rob - (R - OH)

(202) 224-3353

Web Form: portman.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm

Pryor, Mark L. - (D - AR)

(202) 224-2353

Web Form: pryor.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe

Reed, Jack - (D - RI)

(202) 224-4642

Web Form: reed.senate.gov/contact/contact-share.cfm

Reid, Harry - (D - NV)

(202) 224-3542

Web Form: reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Risch, James E. - (R - ID)

(202) 224-2752

Web Form: risch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email

Roberts, Pat - (R - KS)

(202) 224-4774

Web Form: www.roberts.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=EmailPat

Rockefeller, John D., IV - (D - WV)

(202) 224-6472

Web Form: rockefeller.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Rubio, Marco - (R - FL)

(202) 224-3041

Web Form: rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Sanders, Bernard - (I - VT)

(202) 224-5141

Web Form: sanders.senate.gov/contact/

Schumer, Charles E. - (D - NY)

(202) 224-6542

Web Form: schumer.senate.gov/Contact/contact_chuck.cfm

Sessions, Jeff - (R - AL)

(202) 224-4124

Web Form: sessions.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Constitue...

Shaheen, Jeanne - (D - NH)

(202) 224-2841

Web Form: shaheen.senate.gov/contact/

Shelby, Richard C. - (R - AL)

(202) 224-5744

Web Form: shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/emailsenatorshelby

Snowe, Olympia J. - (R - ME)

(202) 224-5344

Web Form: snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=email

Stabenow, Debbie - (D - MI)

(202) 224-4822

Web Form: stabenow.senate.gov/?p=contact

Tester, Jon - (D - MT)

(202) 224-2644

Web Form: tester.senate.gov/Contact/index.cfm

Thune, John - (R - SD)

(202) 224-2321

Web Form: thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Toomey, Patrick J. - (R - PA)

(202) 224-4254

Web Form: toomey.senate.gov/?p=contact

Udall, Mark - (D - CO)

(202) 224-5941

Web Form: markudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

Udall, Tom - (D - NM)

(202) 224-6621

Web Form: tomudall.senate.gov/?p=contact

Vitter, David - (R - LA)

(202) 224-4623

Web Form: vitter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Con...

Warner, Mark R. - (D - VA)

(202) 224-2023

Web Form: warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact

Webb, Jim - (D - VA)

(202) 224-4024

Web Form: webb.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Whitehouse, Sheldon - (D - RI)

(202) 224-2921

Web Form: whitehouse.senate.gov/contact/

Wicker, Roger F. - (R - MS)

(202) 224-6253

Web Form: wicker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.EMa...

Wyden, Ron - (D - OR)

(202) 224-5244

Web Form: wyden.senate.gov/contact/

Patrick Henry Revisited

On March 22, 1765 the British Parliament passed a law they will forever regret. It required the colonies in America to purchase paper for all legal documents from England, thereby subjecting them to a tax. This tax extended even to playing cards.

It was not the amount of the tax to which some independent minded colonists objected, but the principal of the tax and its precedent. For the first time, a tax was imposed on the colonists to raise revenue rather than to regulate commerce. This law was the catalyst that eventually led to the American Revolution.

Let us give that some thought in the light of our current situation. The crux of the problem was that the tax was passed over the objection of the people upon whom it was imposed. They had no representation in the British parliament, and when they passed some resolutions in the Virginia legislature which opposed the new tax, the British governor of Virginia disbanded the House of Burgesses (the Virginia Legislature).

It has been said that "he who forgets is doomed to repeat". Our current debt limit crisis is one made of a similar situation. While in theory, we have representation in the body that is itching to again raise taxes, the states house, the US Senate, our representatives there seem prepared to completely ignore the wishes of the majority of the people they presume to represent. In fact, they seem willing to abdicate their responsibility all together, and hand a blank check over to our Spender in Chief in the White House. An act of this horrendous irresponsibility would be akin to King George and his minions disbanding the Virginia House of Burgesses!

The tyranny, however, is more subtle in our situation. The taxes to be imposed, verily already imposed, are taxes upon those whom have ABSOLUTELY no representation to protect themselves from the slavery being foisted upon them, save the representation WE can provide. They have yet to be born, or reach the age of consent. They are our children and grandchildren.

Set aside for a moment, the legislation and regulation which has already been shoved down our collective throats by either last minute, back room negotiations and maneuvering, as is the case with Obamacare, or the mountains of regulation we are forced to abide by without our consent; imposed on us be Executive Edict, or edict of his Czars. Let us turn our attention to the fact that our children and grandchildren already face a mountain of debt they did not create, nor vote for, and whose obligations will extract an ever larger and larger share of the fruits of their labor. If this is not the definition of Tyranny, I don't know what is. We are in effect selling our children into slavery. And for what? So our Dictator in Chief, and his agreeable bobble heads in the Senate can enrich their friends and supporters, and try to cement themselves in the seats of power which insures the slavery will continue? Hundreds of billions to Jeff Immelt at GE, Hundreds of millions to the Labor Unions, and millions and millions more to the lapdog media!

What is the President's response. Blatant outright lies and fantasies that 80% of the public agrees with him, and that he has no responsibility to end the tyranny. I, for one, must agree with Patrick Henry, "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, and my children, give us Liberty....Or give us death!"

Fixing the Deficit All by Myself

In the current debt ceiling and deficit talks, one of the major things missing is talk about growth. If Mr. Obama is so intent on raising revenue, he could do it all by himself. Taxing oil companies seems to be high on his priority list. All he has to do to generate more revenue from both oil and coal producers is to let them produce!

According to Fineberg Research in 2006, the Federal Government collects about $0.47 for every barrel of oil produced in the US. With approximately two trillion barrels of oil proven, but untapped oil, that represents almost a trillion dollars of untapped revenue. The oil isn't being produced due largely to regulation from the EPA and the Obama administration. In addition to the direct revenue from the “evil” oil companies, this untapped reserve also represents thousands and thousands of jobs. These jobs are not just directly in the oil fields, but would be created by supporting the new oil field hires. They all would have more money to spend on consumer items, a boon for the local economies where the oil is located, and a boon for the unemployment rate.

I'm going to lose points with this one, I know, but here goes. The National Marijuana market is estimated to be about 100 Billion dollars per year. It is rather silly to argue about the health risks of Marijuana, when alcohol is perfectly legal and is the third leading cause of lifestyle related deaths behind tobacco and obesity. The revenue derived from legalizing it would be significant, not enough to solve the deficit problem, but again it would create thousands of jobs, and people who work pay taxes. Farmers, farm machinery manufacturers, and merchants would all benefit from its legalization.

Get the NLRB and other regulators to back off. Boeing is trying to create thousands of high-paying jobs in manufacturing, but Obama's NLRB is stopping them. This is a real shame, especially since aircraft are one of our major exports.

Repeal Obamacare and save $1.2 trillion instantly! In addition to the instant savings, this one measure alone would release trillions of dollars in pent up capital. Business would feel more confident about expanding their operations, and entrepreneurs would feel more confident about going into business. The tanning tax alone has already cost 24,000 jobs and closed 3100 small businesses.

Growing GDP by just 5% per year would add $100 billion to the revenue stream, and an unemployment rate of 6% would more than double that!

Yes, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security need to be addressed, soon, and with common sense. But there are solutions to our deficit problems which should be implemented with all due haste, and none of them have to do with changing the depreciation rate on private jets!

Dirty Little Secret About the Budget

The US Government cannot pay it's bills. The credit card is maxed out. The Administration, Wall Street, and many of the Democrats in the House and Senate are begging for a credit limit increase on our collective Visa card known as the debt ceiling.

The Republican party, particularly the Tea Party wing, are insisting on very real budget cuts without tax increases, before they will consider any debt limit increase. In addition, they are demanding an amendment to the Constitution that requires a balanced budget. Why this insistence on cuts and other measures to be sure of lower spending prior to allowing the government to borrow more money? Because the one thing Congress, and especially this Administration, never does is spend less money. The Democrats are telling everyone that the must have tax increases on the “Rich” in addition to spending cuts to begin to bring our budget into balance. The “millionaires and billionaires” must pay their fair share and share some sacrifice they tell us. There are several problems with this statement, however. First of all, they are not really talking about millionaires and billionaires. There isn't enough money there. What they are talking about is wage earners who make over $200,000 per year filing separately, or $250,000 if filing jointly. According to the IRS, in 2008 3.4 million taxpayers reported adjusted gross incomes between $200,000.00 and $500,000.00.

According to the IRS, in 1992, the top 20% of wage earners paid 65% of the income tax. In 2001, when the top rate was 39.5% the top 10% of wage earners paid 64% of the income tax, and in 2008 when the top rate was 35%, the top 10% of wage earners paid 70% of the tax. The threshold for this 10% is an adjusted gross income of $113,799.00 per year. That is not what I would call excessively rich. The interesting thing about this is that the bottom 50% pay 3% of the tax, meaning that the other 40% of taxpayers with adjusted gross income between $33,048.00 and $113,798.00 pay 27% of the total income tax collected by the IRS. The percentage of tax paid by the bottom 50% has been steadily DECREASING since 2001. Federal Revenues have fluctuated from 2.0 trillion to 2.56 trillion in the years 2005 through 2010, peaking at 2.56 trillion in 2007, and dropping to 2.16 trillion in 2010. Spending, however, has steadily increased from 2.4 trillion per year in 2005 to 3.8 trillion per year estimated in 2011. The question we REALLY need to be asking, is where has that extra TRILLION dollars per year since 2008 gone?


The dirty little secret is this, in 2008 we were told that we had to pass a temporary stimulus package of nearly a trillion dollars to keep the unemployment rate below 8%. The money, we were told, would be spent on “shovel ready” projects which would put people back to work. Since then the unemployment rate peaked at over 10%, dropped down to 8.9% and has now risen back to 9.2%. Real economic growth has stagnated at a meager 1.8%, and our national debt has grown to nearly 15 trillion dollars, or 102% of GDP.

The secret is that this stimulus money isn't temporary. While the democrats claim that they can't cut the budget without throwing grandma out into the street, or starving children with autism or some such other gut wrenching evil, the fact is that 861 billion dollars is simply an increase in spending in several programs over the 2007 levels. (data obtained from the Government Printing Office). The level of spending was too high then. Granted some of the increase is in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Unemployment benefits, and those programs must be addressed, but I don't recall too many stories in the national press about folks starving in the streets in 2007. Government spending equals power in Washington DC, and those folks are loath to give up any power, so the spending, and the borrowing from our children and grandchildren continues unabated.

Serious Blog Alert! Our Government's Purse is Full Enough!

Our government does not tax too little, it spends too much.

In response to a “call congress” campaign to voice objection to a debt limit increase without a balanced budget amendment, real significant cuts in spending, and no tax increases, I received several standard “tax the evil rich” responses. In one response, a friend of mine stated that per capita GDP has increased throughout the economic meltdown. While it is true that GDP increased in 2007 and 2008, all be it at a very slow pace, GDP actually dropped in 2009 according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. That being said, this “tax the rich” philosophy beg the questions how much is enough, and who is it that you consider rich? Leaving aside the fact that if you confiscated the ENTIRE wealth of the fifty richest people in the US (many of whom are democrats by the way i.e. Gates, Buffett, Ellison, Bloomberg, Page, Brin, Soros, Perelman, etc.), you get about 650 billion dollars (figures from Forbes Magazine). That is not even enough to make up half the deficit in this year's budget.

The current top rate for wage earners is 35% which cuts in at $379,150.00 of taxable income. My dear friend states that this is the lowest rates have been since shortly after the great depression. The fact is, however, that in 1992, the top rate was 31%. Be that as it may, let's explore this idea of taxing the rich some more. In 1992, the top 20% of wage earners paid 65% of the income tax. In 2001, when the top rate was 39.5% the top 10% of wage earners paid 64% of the income tax, and in 2008 when the top rate was 35%, the top 10% of wage earners paid 70% of the tax. The threshold for this 10% is an adjusted gross income of $113,799.00 per year. That is not what I would call excessively rich. The interesting thing about this is that the bottom 50% pays 3% of the tax, meaning that the other 40% of taxpayers with adjusted gross income between $33,048.00 and $113,798.00 pay 27% of the total income tax collected by the IRS. The percentage of tax paid by the bottom 50% has been steadily DECREASING since 2001. Federal Revenues have fluctuated from 2.0 trillion to 2.56 trillion from 2005 through 2010, peaking at 2.56 trillion in 2007, and dropping to 2.16 trillion in 2010. Spending, however, has steadily increased from 2.4 trillion/year in 2005 to 3.8 trillion/year estimated in 2011. The question we REALLY need to be asking, is where has that extra TRILLION dollars per year since 2008 gone? In 2009, 2010, and projected for 2011, we have spent an EXTRA trillion dollars more per year that we did in all the years gone before. Even under George Bush, who spent money like a drunken sailor, mostly on war toys, we weren't spending at anywhere close to the rate we are now. Were children starving in 2008? Were old people going without food, clothing and housing in 2008? I don't remember that. I don't remember autistic children starving in the street in 2008, do you?

So where did the money go? 28 billion dollars of it went to GE for high speed rail no one will ride. 0.5 billion for cash for clunkers, 10.6 billion for first time home buyers, 9.2 billion for child tax credits (one reason the bottom 50% pay a smaller share of the tax), 186 billion for grants to states to fund pensions, Medicaid and unemployment, 82 billion to the Department of Education and National Science Foundation (shrimp on treadmills program), 25 Billion to the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, the list goes on and on. Of the 2.4 million jobs the administration has claimed to have “saved or created” each job cost $278,000.00 in stimulus money to create or save. That is a fairly expensive way to create and save jobs, which brings me to corporate taxation.

The current corporate tax rate is 35%. When a corporation is creating a budget for coming years, one thing it must take into account is its tax liability. Along with the costs of labor, raw materials, fixed operating costs and the like, they also estimate their tax liability. When a corporation decides how much to charge for its product or service, it must take its tax liability into account. If taxes go up, the price of the good or service goes up accordingly. That means the only thing increasing corporate tax rates, or capital gains rates for that matter, does is pass that tax on to the consumer. When tax rates are unreasonably high in comparison to rates in another state or another country, it provides an incentive for a corporation to move to another state or country. Please take note of the mass exodus of companies from New York, Michigan and California and the gain in Texas. We currently have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, which explains why GE, our President's favorite corporation, moved much of its operations offshore, and paid NO corporate tax in 2010.

With all that said, it becomes clear that we do not tax too little, we spend too much. The only result we will get from raising top tax rates, is that we will shift an even higher burden on to those carrying 70% of the weight now, and diminish economic activity, pushing corporations overseas, and putting increasing strain on an overwhelmingly thin job market. With 9.1% unemployment, and REAL unemployment (including those who have given up looking) over 15%, the last thing that makes sense from an economic point of view is increase the burden on those who are carrying the bulk of the weight now. Anyone who has a sound background in market economics will say the same thing.

Finally, President Obama attacked private jet owners, saying they should lose the tax break that his administration gave them early in his term. This “break” allows a company to depreciate the cost of an airplane, or improvements to an airplane, over a period of five years instead of seven. For those of you without a background in accounting, depreciation is expensing a purchase over a period of time. If a company leases a car, for example, the monthly lease payment is an expense, and is subtracted from the company's income before tax is calculated on that income. If the company purchased the car instead of leasing it, the price of the car, minus it's expected value after seven years, has to be divided by the number of years (seven in this case) and 1/7th of that value is expensed from each year's income before tax is calculated. The only thing changing the length of depreciation for an airplane does is make the company either less likely to buy or refurbish an airplane, or extend the period of time in between such purchases. The reason the depreciation period was shortened in the first place, was to save airplane manufacturing jobs by encouraging companies to trade their planes in faster. Now we want to slow down the turnover of airplanes and put those jobs in jeopardy?

There is no clearer example of this kind of thinking as when George Herbert Walker Bush went along with the luxury tax in 1990. The reasoning was the same. It went like this; “When people are hurting, and need jobs, why shouldn't the rich pay a little more. They are buying yachts and other luxury items, like diamond rings, and we ought to put an extra tax on those items.” Against his better judgment Bush 41 went along with congress on that one. The actual effect though, as one might guess, is that “rich” people quit buying yachts, or bought them offshore. The net effect was that revenues went down, and 200,000 people who worked in the boat building industry lost their jobs. Ultimately it cost Bush the 1992 election.

If you still think “tax the rich” is a good idea, I would encourage you to read anything by Allan Meltzer, Professor of Economics at CMU, Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in Economic Science and Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago, or Ayn Rand for that matter. Rather than take money from the folks in this country who work hard, create business, and create employment for the rest of us just so we can give it to other folks to see what happens when a shrimp gets some exercise, we ought to stop the excessive spending. We should fix our long term problem of unfunded liabilities for Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security in a way that protects our seniors, and insures our safety net exists long into the future. That way we can let business get back to work doing what they do best, which is grow our economy!

Obama Announces Big Changes to AMP up the Future

(MOJ) Pittsburgh PA, June 24th – During his visit to Carnegie Mellon University today, President Barak Obama announced a new Executive Order.* After calling for a "renaissance in American manufacturing that would replace shuttered steel mills with plants producing robotics, nanotechnology and other high-tech advances.” The President said "We have not run out of stuff to make, we've just got to reinvigorate our manufacturing sector so that it leads the world the way it always has, from paper and steel and cars to new products we haven't even dreamed up yet.”

He said, "That's how we're going to strengthen existing industries, that's how we're going spark new ones." Adding, "That's how we're going to create jobs, grow the middle class and secure our economic leadership."

In announcing his new order He noted “We have a congress that refuses to raise the debt limit. They believe that we must cut spending at a time when we have these initiatives that will give jobs to American workers. Congress is blocking our new initiatives and walking out of important meetings.'

“Therefore, I am issuing an executive order today which will extend my authority to be supreme, relegating Congress to an advisory position only.  My new title will be Progress Czar.  We face an emergency in this country, and we must put our people back to work in ways that support our environment, green energy and innovation.  That is what the American people want, and that is what the American people need.  The authority for this order comes from Commerce clause of the Constitution, in order to promote the general welfare, and because congress throws up roadblocks at every turn and on so many issues, all laws from now on will be issued by my office.  There will be no need for a Presidential election in November 2012, because I know the American people want me to continue to lead them and the country forward.”

“John Bryson, as the new Commerce Czar, will be in charge of the overall jobs initiative for our nation.  He will be working with businesses, suggesting how many jobs they will create, and what the wage scale will be.  We realize some parts of the country are doing better than others.  We have identified areas, shown on this map in blue, where jobs need to be created.  The areas shown in red are doing fine, and will need to contribute their fair share to our economy.'

“Our Energy Czar, Seven Chu, working in conjunction with EPA Czar, Lisa Jackson, will be working with the polluters, oil companies, gas companies, coal producers and old technology power plants to bring them into the future.  There will necessarily be some big changes in this area and my Czars will be working with the current managements of these companies to bring them in line with my vision for our future.'

“It is natural for me to be making this announcement at CMU.  The folks here at CMU, working at the forefront of technology, have developed a new, high efficiency stationary energy-producing bicyclogen.  With my wonderful wife Michelle I have initiated a program which will not only supply our nation with green energy, but tackle two other pressing issues at the same time. As you know, job growth has been slightly less than we expected, we have faced headwinds and bumps in the road. The recovery, while strong, hasn't produced the green energy jobs as quickly as we had hoped.  This new initiative solves that problem. At the same time, and as you know, Michelle has been tirelessly working to make our population healthier. She has worked with Walmart, McDonalds, and many other companies to make better choices for the nation's nutrition.  Now she will also be able to help folks tackle their obesity problems in another way, while reducing the number of unemployed and lowering health care costs.  We will be creating thousands and thousands of high paying government jobs for 'green energy creators'.  Michelle will be the new “healthy energy job Czar”. In that position she will be identifying many thousands of over weight, unemployed folks. We will be putting them to work, at high paying, energy producing jobs, riding thousands and thousands of these new bicyclogens, losing weight and generating energy at the same time!'

As I develop new initiatives to move our country forward and Win the Future, I will be assigning Czars to manage every aspect of everyday American life.  It's what the American people want, it's what the American people need, it's what will keep our country moving forward down the path to a winning future.  Thank You!'
*(Satire)

Once in a while I get serious. Sorry about that!

In my seven year tenure as an over-the-road truck driver, I have crossed the border into Canada many times. I have had many good experiences in that country and crossing the border was never a problem.  The rules for US carriers in Canada are reciprocal for US and Canadian companies.  A US carrier may deliver a load of freight in Canada, and pick up a Canadian load destined for the US, but they may not pick up a load in Canada and deliver it in that country as well. If the carrier cannot find Canadian freight destined for the US, the truck must come back empty.

As the result of the North American Free Trade Agreement, we are supposed to have a similar arrangement with Mexico.  In September of  1997, under the Bush administration, a pilot program was implemented to allow Mexican Trucks to enter the US and travel beyond the 25 miles they were limited to previously. This program was similar to the Canadian border crossing program in that Mexican trucks could not pick up loads in the US and deliver them in this country, they had to return to Mexico. The reciprocal part of the agreement allows US trucks to deliver freight into Mexico, and bring freight back.

The program was strongly opposed by James Hoffa, President of the Teamsters Union, US Senators Byron Dorgan, Arlen Spector and others, as well as several safety organizations. In late 2007, Congressman Dorgan led the successful fight to de-fund the program. Using a loophole in the law, the Bush administration was able to continue its pilot program despite several lawsuits, until it expired in 2009. The trucks and drivers were supposed to operate by US safety rules. Drivers were supposed to be able to speak and read English, and they were to meet American medical requirements.  During this pilot program, then Department of Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, finally admitted before members of congress, that many of the drivers entering the US from Mexico could only understand road signs in Spanish.

As far as safety concerns go, the Department of Transportation is schizophrenic on the issue. In early September of 2009 they issued a report saying that more work is needed to insure the safety of Mexican trucks, noting that some states were not reporting convictions, and were doing only cursory inspections. Two days later they contradicted themselves by saying that Mexican trucks were safer than US trucks.

As part of its “be nice to Mexico at all costs” program, the Obama Administration has re-kindled the United States-Mexico cross-border long-haul trucking pilot program. The safety concerns still exist and the Teamsters Union still opposes the program, though in typical anti-truck driver fashion the American Trucking Association has embraced the idea.

Mexican truck and driver safety are only a small part of the issue, however. As it stands now, for freight to come into the US from Mexico, it is brought to the border by a Mexican trucker.  It is then trucked across the border by a driver who does nothing but border crossings and dropped inside a fifty mile radius in a common drop yard.  From there a US driver picks it up and delivers it inside the US.
 
If Mexican trucks are allowed to deliver freight inside the US, it will be at the cost of driver jobs inside this country.  Mexican drivers earn less, so it will be less expensive for the Mexican driver to deliver freight, than for a US driver do it.  The reciprocal part of the arrangement is supposed to combat the job loss problem, by allowing US drivers to deliver freight bound for Mexican destinations. Given the amount of drug cartel violence inside of Mexico recently, it is unlikely that there will be many US drivers willing to venture into that war zone. That means that the majority of the 2.4 billion dollars worth of freight bound for Mexico will be hauled by Mexican carriers.

An even more frightening reason not to allow the cross border program is terrorism.  US Customs estimates that one 18 wheeler crosses into the US every thirty seconds.  With that rate of transit, it is impossible to inspect more than a small fraction of them.  As the law exists now, a Mexican truck must stop and drop its trailer at a drop yard within a 50 mile zone.  If trucks are allowed unfettered access to US highways, a truck loaded with illegals, terrorists, drugs or guns has a much better than even chance of getting across the border unmolested and deep into US territory.  By working with a cooperative freight broker, the paperwork is easy enough to fake. Given the amount of corruption and violence in the current state of Mexico, it is not hard to imagine how it could be done.

Two weeks ago, Mexican officials happened to catch a tractor-trailer loaded with 213 illegal aliens from other Latin American countries.

Congress and the Obama Administration seriously need to re-think this proposal before something a great deal more lethal than illegal aliens comes trucking across our border into the heart of a major American city!