John Edwards Was Right
Apr 14, 2010 Political
We do live in two Americas.
He talked about the America of the haves and the have nots and the rich vs poor meme that the progressive left loves to use in its class warfare diatribes though he seemed oblivious to the fact that he was on the have side in a house that was nearly large enough to shelter half the homeless in New York City. He discussed this idea of two Americas and it seems he was right.
At least according to Phyllis Schlafly who has her own interpretation of the two Americas theme.
According to Ms. Schlafly we are divided into a two class society. Our two Americas in her two class society consist of those who pay for the services provided by the government and those who freeload. About 47% of people now pay no federal income tax and the bottom 40% of those get more back then they paid in through tax credits and other redistribution schemes in the tax code. In other words, the people who pay nothing get money from those who pay for government. Schlafly also notes:
Although all wage-earners help fund their own Social Security and Medicare benefits, only federal income taxpayers pay the costs of running the federal government, and are responsible for paying off our $12.8 trillion national debt and for bailing out Social Security, Medicare, and Fannie and Freddie when they collapse.
So true, so true. Those of us who pay the costs of running the government are also footing the bill for those who do not. To top it off we are sending them some of our money to help them get along. This is a massive redistribution of wealth scheme where the only difference between the recipients sticking a gun in our faces and taking the money and the current system is that the government handles the part of robbing us under threat of punishment by its mob enforcers in the IRS.
It is a nice and neat racket that rivals anything Tony Soprano could come up with. It is also quite convenient because the government gets to use the money it confiscates from taxpayers to bribe those who pay nothing for their votes.
I found this video at Ron Smith’s page at WBAL
Wouldn’t it be grand if we had a system where we stopped the forced redistribution of wealth? In the absence of that, wouldn’t it be nice if those who receive our money had to live by rules we established? Perhaps those getting this money from us could come wash our cars, mow our lawns and clean our houses. At least then we would feel like we got some value for the money we spent.
I would love to see us give up the income tax altogether and tax our consumption. A national sales tax (and not the VAT) would allow everyone to pay in or have skin in the game and it would tax all of us fairly because we would be taxed on what we consume (minus things that should not be taxed like food and shelter). If a person can afford the item then that person can afford the sales tax on the item.
In the absence of abolishing the income tax, we need to at least abolish the income tax system we have, give up on the idea of a VAT and go for a flat tax of 11-15%. Everyone would pay that amount on income so that all people would be paying for the running of OUR government. Maybe then it could really be of, by and for the people.
With any of these taxes we need to have a rule that they cannot be raised without a super majority in each chamber of Congress and that no rule or parliamentary trick can be used to circumvent the super majority requirement.
It is time we got everyone in the game. Joe Biden said that paying taxes was the patriotic thing to do. The 47% need to step up and be patriots like the rest of us.
Schlafly has it right and that is unfortunate because we can be so much better than that. But only when people start fending for themselves and stop living off the government which really means living off the rest of us.
UPDATE: Video added
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: freeloaders, joe biden, Obama, phyllis schlafly, taxes
Constitution Slaughters The Slaughter Solution
Mar 13, 2010 Political
By now anyone with a head and who is not trying to rewrite history over this issue knows that the Democrats are working full speed ahead to pass unpopular legislation in order to take control of our lives by controlling our health care. They want to vote for Obama’s signature legislative item but they are worried about the ramifications of passing unpopular legislation especially in an election year.
It is a double edged sword because they need to pass it now because they will lose too many seats to pass it next year. But if they pass it now they will lose even more seats and Obama will have no future agenda because Republicans will not allow anything he wants to pass. It won’t get considered. This will be the price for ramming legislation through without following the Constitution. I bet then we hear Democrats scream about being left out of the process and how ham handed the Republicans are.
Anyone who complains should be locked in the basement so we do not have to hear them again. This would include Obama.
The most recent idea coming from Democrats is to consider a bill voted on and passed if another piece of legislation is passed. This is a way to avoid voting on the unpopular bill but getting what they want passed.
In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House “deems” the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.
Thus, Slaughter is preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill “passed” once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes. Democrats would thereby avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law! Doug Ross
According to Constitutional Attorney Mark R Levin, this rule is unconstitutional. The House and Senate must vote on a bill and it must be sent to the president to be signed into law. So far, so good because they are voting on a bill but they are not voting on the bill that will become law and they are not voting in accordance with the Constitution:
U.S Constitution, Article I, Section VII, Clause II.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively… [emphasis added]
In ALL cases the bills shall be voted on by Yeahs and Nays. They cannot vote on one rule change and say it means they voted on another bill. Every BILL (singular) must be voted on with yeahs and nays. Our Founders set this up for a reason.
Of course the Constitutionality of something has never stopped Democrats from doing what they wanted but I am pretty sure there will be a lot of legal challenges to any process that does not follow the Constitution and the legal process in accordance with the law.
Note to Democrats, just because you change the rules does not mean the rules adopted are Constitutional.
Here is a link to the US Constitution for those who are challenged in this area. It would be particularly nice if Politicians read this.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out because the left is worried about the interpretation of the Senate Parliamentarian when it should be worried about the Constitution.
Can they use reconciliation to fix a bill that has not been agreed upon by both chambers? Don’t know but they cannot vote for a rule and say it counts as voting for a bill.
The other interesting thing that I see is Joe Biden has a big role in this as President of the Senate. This is the guy who scolded Dick Cheney and cited the wrong part of the Constitution when discussing the role of the VP. Seems that Biden was unaware that the VP has Executive and Legislative responsibility and that this is spelled out in the Constitution (it really helps to read it).
In any event, Biden might get a chance to learn what the VP is allowed to do.
Now it would be funny to see them do all of this only to have it nullified as unconstitutional, or declared not a law because they did not vote on a BILL. They would be back to square one and a lot closer to the election. They would never get another chance and that is a good thing.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, illegal, joe biden, Obama, slaughter, stock market, usurp
Joe Biden Will Hide At A Disclosed Location
May 19, 2009 Political
After 9/11 a special, secure place was built for the Vice President to go to in the event of an emergency so that if something happened to the President he would be safe and ready to take over. The MSM frequently stated that VP Cheney was at an undisclosed location. That was a big joke with the liberals.
Jow Biden is now the VP and if there is ever an emergency and he is whisked off he will not be taken to an undisclosed location, he will be taken to a disclosed one. This is not because anyone wants him to be exposed to harm, it is because Biden is a moron who cannot keep his mouth shut.
When Biden attended the Gridiron Club dinner in DC he told people about the secret place.
According to Clift’s report on the Newsweek blog, Biden “said a young naval officer giving him a tour of the residence showed him the hideaway, which is behind a massive steel door secured by an elaborate lock with a narrow connecting hallway lined with shelves filled with communications equipment.”
Clift continued: “The officer explained that when Cheney was in lock down, this was where his most trusted aides were stationed, an image that Biden conveyed in a way that suggested we shouldn’t be surprised that the policies that emerged were off the wall.” Fox News
Biden’s office is denying the story and saying that Big Mouth Joe was talking about an upstairs room that is believed to have been used by Cheney as an office. How many upstairs offices have huge steel doors? Biden’s description does not sound like any upstairs room I have ever seen.
Neighbors complained sometime after 9/11 about construction (at the VP residence) that included digging deep into the ground which would be more in line with what Biden said than the spin coming out of his office. Why would a second story room have a huge steel door with an elaborate lock, a connecting narrow hallway and shelves of communications equipment?
Biden is so full of himself and thinks he is so wonderful that he feels the need to go around and describe his importance. He makes claims that come from a deeply troubled mind. He is a scatter brain and he cannot keep his yap shut.
Disclosing secrets seems to be a common theme in this administration. Obama releases classified memos and Biden discloses his secret shelter’s location. If something bad happens the enemy will know where to find this moron. Fortunately for Biden if the enemy ever captures him they will pay us to take him back. A half an hour with his yap running would make the most hardened terrorist cry.
Here is a little hint that can help Obama and his peeps keep secrets.
Pretend they are all his birth certificate.
That is one document he has successfully kept under wraps.
What kind of country is this where classified information is freely released and a birth certificate is locked up tighter than Fort Knox?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: birth certificate, classified information, joe biden, Obama, secrets
Biden Compares Economy To 9/11
Jan 6, 2009 Political
Joe Biden has a way with words and what he says often makes little or no sense or is a lie. I think his brain aneurysms have diminished his capacity which is why he tells us of visiting diners that have been closed for years. Maybe it is also why he is prone to so many gaffes.
Joe The VP (elect) spoke with members of Congress and he expressed that the economy was much like the crisis of the attacks on 9/11 and that we are at war. The blustery politician has also said, in the past, that we need to pass the economic stimulus or the economy will tank.
Joe met with House members and here is a recap of that meeting:
Vice-president-elect Joe Biden likened the country’s economic crisis to the attacks of 9/11 Monday in a private meeting on Capitol Hill.
“We’re at war,” Biden told congressional leaders of both parties during their sit-down with Barack Obama in the Capitol, according to two sources familiar with the exchange
~snip~
Biden spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander said Biden “was speaking of how after September 11th, that the Congress came together and worked together for the sake of the country, that the Congress worked day and night to accomplish what was necessary. We did it then and we can do it now.” Politico
Of course Biden’s spokesperson had to step in and tell us what Joe really meant. You know it is political BS when someone else has to tell you what a politician meant.
But let’s look at the clarification. Alexander says that Biden was speaking of how we all came together after 9/11 and worked day and night to do what was necessary. I guess this is her way of saying Joe wants Congress, both parties, to work together day and night to pass the stimulus because it needs to be done and is as serious as 9/11.
Isn’t it amazing that when Republicans mention 9/11 they are fear mongering but the Democrats can use it and they are insightful? Isn’t it amazing that they feel free to say they worked day and night after 9/11 to do what had to be done when most of them backtracked on what was done?
In the aftermath of 9/11 a lot of things took place including the authorization for the use of military force in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. Most of the Democrats voted for it but later said they were fooled and that they were wrong in their votes blah, blah. I know a lot took place after 9/11 but the more defining actions were the ones that put the men and women of our Armed Forces in harm’s way. Sure, we got stuff that makes it tough to use air for travel but that is nothing compared to what the men and women in uniform have endured.
However, these people backed away from nearly every thing they claim was accomplished on 9/11. Obama was not in the Senate yet so he ran around saying he has always been against the war (except when he was campaigning for Kerry. Then he said he supported it). Biden voted for the war as did Clinton and many others. This was one of the biggest things Obama used against them in the primaries and people fell for it.
Now, Biden wants to invoke 9/11 as if the economy is as urgent as 9/11 and that we should all hold hands and work around the clock to do what needs to be done.
If he is comparing it to 9/11 then I say the Republicans definitely should not go for the stimulus package. After 9/11 Democrats voted with Republicans and then when things got rough, said they were tricked or lied to and that they were sorry they voted for the wars. Then they blamed everything on George Bush (the person who fooled them who is also the one they call stupid) and the Republicans. They were able to make that stick. They then proceeded to call the war a failure and said that it was lost. To this day Obama believes the surge did not work.
What happens if Republicans buy into this and things do not improve? The Democrats will say they were fooled or tricked or lied to and they will say they now are against a stimulus and that George Bush led them to believe it was needed and they were only following what he said so it is all his fault and they could not possibly be the ones, lions and tigers and bears, oh my…
They will then say that Republicans led them to believe a trillion dollars in spending was needed and that the whole issue is the Republicans fault.
I say we don’t need the stimulus. Before they spend our tax money they need to go through the federal budget line by line and start cutting, not with Obama’s scalpel but with a meat cleaver.
It is amazing that Biden would invoke 9/11 and what was accomplished when Democrats vehemently opposed the things accomplished when they believed there was political gain involved. Then again, political gain is why they voted to defend America in the first place.
Joe Biden went to the movies the other night and was only noticed by a few people and this was in a sold out theater. I guess he has to find some way to get in the news.
Mention 9/11, that ought to do it.
Then again, most anything that he says is newsworthy because it is often very wrong.
Joe Biden is the gaff-o-matic.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.[/tip]
Tags: 9/11, Bush, democrat, economy, joe biden, republican, war
Lackluster Democratic Debate
Nov 16, 2007 Political
Last night the Democrats held a debate in Las Vegas and though supporters will claim their individual candidate won, the reality is that it was a pretty evenly matched contest. Obama and Edwards lost their nerve and refused to continue their attack on Clinton, Clinton played the woman card again (veiled as it might have been) and the entire field promised to give away the country for votes. Richardson will give driver’s licenses to ILLEGALS, Clinton and Edwards will give free health care to everyone and Obama will make health care affordable for everyone which was actually the smartest of any proposal.
The candidates still wavered on Social Security other than to offer the Democratic staple of taxing the rich (note to candidates, that will not solve the problem) and they were elusive on merit pay for teachers. I recorded the event and watched it late last night but could not make it past the first part. It was nothing more than the same old Democratic mantra of raising taxes, class warfare, and promises none of them intend to keep.
Wolf Blitzer was a puppy dog and walked gingerly around Clinton fearing he would be to harsh. He failed to ask follow-up questions of her, legitimate questions, regarding her change of position on driver’s licenses for ILLEGALS. The questions he threw out were so softball that I would not be surprised if they were furnished by the Clinton campaign.
All in all I saw nothing from any candidate that even looked presidential. Leadership requires people to take positions and be firm on them. None of these people takes a firm stance on anything and last night was no difference. With the exception of a few yes or no answers on ILLEGALS and driver’s licenses (the no Clinton gave was not followed up with a question about her change of position) these people nuanced every answer. When they stayed on target their answers were often preceded with some caveat that left a future way out.
I was impressed with Joe Biden’s command of foreign policy but that is all he brings to the table. Richardson sounded like a used car salesman, Edwards a snake oil salesman, Clinton a screeching owl, and Obama a preacher. Kucinich sounded like a raving lunatic and should be fitted with a straight jacket. Other than Biden’s foreign policy strength these candidates were unimpressive.
There was nothing said last night that brings new light on their positions. They regurgitated their talking points and tried to sell us the same bill of goods as they have been peddling all along.
None of these people is worthy of the White House and we will be in trouble if any of them gets elected.
Others with similar items:
Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, guerrilla radio, 123beta, Right Truth, Stix Blog, The Populist, The Pet Haven Blog, Grizzly Groundswell, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, Gone Hollywood, and Church and State, Ron Smith WBAL, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: class warfare, clinton campaign, Democrats, illegals, joe biden, legitimate questions, Obama, presidential leadership, puppy dog, wolf blitzer