Saturday, September 18, 2010

Trouble Brewing for Republicans and Country

I fear the Republican leadership has not learned the lessons of their losses in 2006. In 1994, the Republicans ran on the Contract with America. They won, they followed through. Their ten bills were all voted on as promised. Not all passed, but they weren't promising passage. They were promising a vote on ten issues that the Democrats previously refused to bring to the floor.

Following completion of the Contract with America, the Republicans slowly grew into a well oiled machine. They also got fat and sassy. They started spending more and more. They were rejuvenated abit with the election of George Bush in 2000 and passed two tax cuts, but their well oiled machine was cracking as evidenced by their inability to make the tax cuts permanent. They then fell into the Washington trap of spending more than they had, despite record revenue coming into the Government and they wandered into the Sex, Drugs and money scandals. They were beat bad in 2006 and again in 2008.

These past two years, they did nothing to improve their position. There are two things that have brought them back. The Democrats gave them a gift that can never be repaid. They passed the stimulus package which enraged the American people. This brought about the Tea Parties. Not Republicans. All the Republicans did was vote no on it. They had no power to stop the Democrats. But the Tea Parties rose up around the country. Cap and Trade (or Cap and Tax) passed the House. Again, against the will of the people. Obamacare passed, again, against the will of the American people.

The Democrats, in effect, created the Tea Parties. As if that's not enough, at Town Hall meetings around the country, Tea Party people, and Americans not affiliated with the Tea Parties, showed up and expressed their displeasure with the Democrats passing these various laws. They were ignored. They were made fun of by the press and they were dismissed out of hand by the Democrats. Rather than listen to the American people and the Tea Parties, the Democrats closed their town hall meetings or stopped having them altogether. The beneficiaries of the Tea Party's? The Republican Party.

Tea Party candidates started cropping up all over the country. Those speaking with the tea parties were backing some candidates and not others. Bob Bennett for instance, was considered getting fat and sassy and arrogant and he was booted out. His replacement, backed by the tea party is likely to be the next Senator. Marco Rubio in Florida was beating Governor Charlie Crist so Crist left the Republican party and became an independent. He's now trailing by double digits.

The Republican Party backed a man in Kentucky. The Tea Party backed Rand Paul. Paul won decisively. And on it went. Senator Boxer is in trouble in California, Senator Murray in Washington, Senator Feingold in Wisconsin and so on.

But two recent events show that the Republicans are acting arrogantly or as elitists. Senator Lisa Murkowski was beaten by Joe Miller in Alaska. Miller is the Tea Party backed candidate. The worst event was in Delaware. Christine O'Donnell beat Mike Castle. As O'Donnell was giving her victory speech, the National Republican Senatorial Committee said they would not back her in the race for the Senate. They backed off the next day and gave her the maximum amount allowed under the law, but their initial reaction was childish at best. How dare the people of Delaware choose someone other than the Republican choice for Senate??

Karl Rove said on Hannity's television show that O'Donnell cannot win. Charles Krauthammer said on O'Reilly's show that she has a one in ten chance of winning and that it was wrong to choose the conservative over the moderate in the northeast.

When did the people become the lap dogs of the Republican party? The Republicans are taking the gift that the Democrats and the Tea Parties gave them and are trying to hand it back to the Democrats. The Republican Party exists because of the American people, not the other way around.

But they don't appear to understand that. Mike Castles goal should have been to defeat the Democrat nominee in Delaware. If the people chose his opponent to defeat the Democrat, then it is his responsibility to back O'Donnell or to leave the Republican Party or to just sit down, shut up and enjoy the retirement. Instead, Castle blamed his loss on Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin. He also refuses to back O'Donnell. Refusing to back her is the same as endorsing the Democrat opponent. Does Mike Castle believe that O'Donnell is not a good enough Republican? Who cares? The people chose her. The people that would have backed him had she not run, decided she was the better choice to represent their interests against the Democrat. I wouldn't be surprised if Castle decides to run as an Independent or as a write in candidate.

Which brings up Alaska. Lisa Murkowski lost to Joe Miller in the Republican Primary. Yesterday, Murkowski decided to run as a write in candidate. She's not satisfied with the choice of the people of Alaska. So she's putting herself back into the race despite the people telling her they wanted Miller rather than her.

Bob Bennett was bitter and let it be known when he was ousted. Castle is bitter and refused to show any class by congratulating the person that beat him out by the will of the people. Murkowski is doing the same thing in Alaska.

Bennett had moved to the left in his Senate career and the people he represented didn't like it. Castle has always been moderate to liberal. Crist is a moderate who actually hugged Obama during the stimulus passing, and Murkowski is a moderate who was not put into the Senate by the people. She was appointed by her daddy and she won an election during the Bush years. Now that her dad is out and Bush is gone, she can't make it on her own, within her own party, so she's trying to force her way in.

The people are choosing more conservative candidates to replace the moderate and liberal people that have been there or in other positions. But the moderates and/or liberals can't face this. The Republican Party is not reveling in the more conservative candidates, they are retreating from them. They are retreating from the people that put them there. They are showing that they believe that they need to fool the American people, then once in office govern the way they want and not the way their voters want them to govern.

If these Tea Party candidates win, and a sizeable amount of them probably will, we could be seeing a battle within the Republican Party over what direction the Republicans take the country. Will the new Tea Party victors have to buckle under to the Republican establishment or will they change the direction that Republicans go and pretty much reinvent how Washington works?

If the establishment portion of the party controls, the Republican victories in November will not last. If the Tea Party Senators and Representatives hold their ground and aren't afraid to stand up to the establishment, we could see many more Tea Party candidates in 2012 and watch the party go more conservative.

If this battle becomes a messy battle that goes on for two years, the Democrats could take over once again and we'll be back to all of the same problems we have today with Democrats running roughshod over the people and the people not being able to do anything about it and the Democrats not even attempting town hall meetings, let alone canceling them.

The Republicans, both the establishment and the Tea Party Senators and Representatives, have an opportunity to set the direction of this country into very prosperous times, both financially and through national security or they can have a playpen fight that leads this country into extremely tough and dangerous times.

Nobody likes to lose, but if you must lose, lose graciously when you've lost. Everybody likes to win, but win with humility when you win. If you lose without the dignity and class, such as Mike Castle, Lisa Murkowski, Charlie Crist, and others you run the risk of destroying more than just your reputation.

Mike Castle didn't accomplish making a point about how good or bad O'Donnell is or isn't. He only proved that he has no respect for the people that he depended on for that victory. He's proven that the best man for the job in Delaware was actually a woman. Christine O'Donnell. Murkowski proved that in Alaska, the best man for the job was a man.

These candidates are supposed to be running to represent the people. Those losing candidates only proved that they were in the race to represent themselves and didn't give a rip about the people.

The Republican Party had best learn that they too are there to represent the people. If they choose to only give lip service to the people until they get in power then represent themselves, they'll only prove that they aren't worthy of holding any decision making positions.

I really like Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer, but the things they said following O'Donnells victory were not only wrong, but stupid. Do they think that Chris Christie, the new Governor of New Jersey is a mistake because he's more conservative? You don't improve an area by replacing liberals and moderates with liberals and moderates. Apparently, the people of Delaware understand it. Why can't Rove and Krauthammer?

If Mike Castle was a shoo in to win in the general election, but he's beat by who the people consider a better candidate, then why isn't O'Donnell considered a shoo in?

I wonder if the Yankees make it through the playoffs and are expected to win handily in the World Series but get beat will Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer then say that it's a mistake?

The Republican Establishment had better grow up quickly and understand the will of the people or they will find they no longer exist. Then God help the country.

The Democrats provided a gift to the Republicans and the American people. If the Republicans really want to give a gift in return, I'd suggest that they take a page from Obama's list of gift giving. Send them a DVD set of classic movies as Obama did for the Prime Minister of Britain. Or maybe a recording of their speeches as Obama gave to the Queen of England. But don't give them the country.

You're welcome to comment.


Thursday, September 16, 2010

Democrats See The Light or Running in Fear?

For the past eight years, all we've heard out of the Democrats is how President Bush passed tax cuts for only the rich. When they are shown charts of what people paid in taxes prior to the tax cuts and following the tax cuts showing the savings those tax cuts did for EVERYONE, they claimed it wasn't true and that only the rich got the tax cuts.

But they are now in danger of joining the ranks of the unemployed. So they have changed their minds, seen the light or admitted their false talking points were false. They are now saying that they want to extend the "tax cuts" for the middle class and only raise the taxes on the rich, although there are now 32 Democrats that are saying they don't want any tax increases on anyone during a recession.

How can you extend tax cuts for those that didn't receive a tax cut in 2001 and 2003? Answer, you can't. Why isn't the press asking them how they could say this after so many years of denying there were any tax cuts except on the rich?

A couple of days ago, I mentioned in the midst of another posting on here that we had $823,000 from the stimulus being used to teach African men how to clean their genitals following sexual activity.

Here in Michigan, we have a Representative named Mark Schauer. He was the only person in the country that claimed to have read the stimulus bill before voting on it. Everyone in the country knew that he was not telling the truth, but he continued to say that he'd read the entire bill before voting on it. Of course, he's a liberal Democrat. If you look at Nancy Pelosi, you're seeing Mark Schauer in drag.

Well, I have a question for Mark Schauer. If you read the entire bill, then you knew that the stimulus bill would pay to teach African men, in Africa, how to clean their genitals. How could you vote for something like this?

You're welcome to comment.


Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Time for the NRSC to go

The Republicans in Delaware spoke loudly and clearly tonight. They chose Christine O'Donnell over Congressman Mike Castle.

As she was taking the stage for her victory speech, the National Republican Senate Committee (NRSC) announced that they would not give her any financial assistance at all. Not one dollar. This was broken by Bret Baier on Fox at about 10:30 pm.

Do these people in the NRSC not understand what's happening out here where the real people live? The Tea Party Candidates are not just giving a good showing for themselves, they are winning! Maybe someone needs to explain to the NRSC what is happening.

The people (remember the people? We are the ones that Congress is supposed to represent) have finally gotten fed up with the Washington Elites. We're not just fed up with Democrats. We're fed up with all POLITICIANS!

For years, a person has been elected to Congress making great claims that sound good when standing on a stage at a town hall meeting or while standing in your driveway asking for you vote, then they get to Washington and feel that they are above it all know better what's best for people than the people do.

This is what gave us taxes many years ago. This is what gave us housing for those that aren't responsible enough to qualify for loans. This is what gave us government interference in all aspects of our lives.

The people have always asked "what can you do? We elect them based on their promises, then they break their promises and serve themselves rather than those they represent and we can't get them out." Then we got the Democrats in the House, the Senate and the White House. Nobody could stop them doing anything. The votes weren't there. The Democrats either had a filibuster proof majority or the Republicans had a couple of Republicans in name only such as Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter. Now, I guess we can add Senator Voinovich from Ohio to that list.

Because of the Democrats and the "Rino's", we have a stimulus package that failed. We have Cap and Tax passed in the House. We have the federal takeover of the health care system which the Democrats don't even talk about during this campaign because they know they screwed the people.

These things have caused the American people to wake up and march in good weather and bad. To hold "Tea Parties" all across the nation. To have Americans that aren't professional politicians to run for office. Not only did it work, but it continued.

Senator Bennett from Colorado is gone. Joe Miller is now the Senate nominee for the Republicans in Alaska. Scott Brown (even though he's likely a Rino) is now the Republican from Massachussets. Gone are the likes of Murkowski, and now Mike Castle.

A perfect example of waste by the Democrats was just put out today. $823,000 was spent from the stimulus package to teach Africans, not Americans, but citizens of Africa IN Africa how to clean their genitals following sex. How in the heck does that stimulate OUR economy? I can see how it could stimulate Africans, although it's not likely their economy that's being stimulated, but how does it stimulate the American economy?

This is what the people have stood up against the past two years. Waste in government. Moronic performance by those in government.

NRSC stands for National "Republican" Senatorial Committee. Whomever is in charge of that committee needs to take a good look at the title for Christine O'Donnell. She is now the "Republican" nominee for the United States Senate representing the state of Delaware.

If you can't do what your title suggests, you might want to consider a new career. I was at a Speedway gas station earlier today. I saw a "help wanted" sign. While I hesitate to suggest any position that means you handle money, it may be your only hope of taking on an honest career because you're certainly failing at the current job.

I don't know much about Christine O'Donnell. I understand she's had some problems in the past with finances and schooling. What that tells me though is that she is an American Citizen that is fed up with Washington as usual. Apparently, the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats at understanding who they are supposed to represent. The PEOPLE.

The PEOPLE elected O'Donnell. If the NRSC financially backed Mike Castle during this primary, then guess what. The scorecard is now, O'Donnell one, NRSC ZERO. If O'Donnell wins in November, her record will be Two to ZERO. If she loses, her record will be 1 win, 1 loss. But the NRSC's record will be ZERO wins, 2 losses.

If that's too difficult for you at the NRSC, I'd recommend that you take a math class. First grade level ought to be good enough, but I'd avoid government schools if I were you. It may take you two years to understand simple math.

Whatever O'Donnells' personal life miscues were, I hope she beats the Democrat nominee without the NRSC and not just by the skin of her teeth, but by an overwhelming margin. If the NRSC hasn't figured out by then that they are irrelevent, they ought to get it after a victory like that.

You're welcome to comment.


Saturday, September 11, 2010

Friday, September 10, 2010

Idiots and Cowards

A Pastor of a chuch in Florida had planned to burn the Koran on Saturday, September 11 as their statement regarding the attacks on September 11, 2001 and apparently included the recent events of the mosque being started near ground zero, the site where the World Trade Center Towers once stood.

Yesterday, he announced that he was stopping the burning ceremony because a local Imam had negotiated a deal to allow this Pastor to fly to New York and discuss moving the mosque with the Imam in New York. He said he had witnesses that the local Imam had said the mosque would be moved.

Within literally minutes of his press conference, the story started falling apart. The deal was less than announced, then it was reported that the Imam in New York knew nothing about it. Then Donald Trump had made an offer to buy out one of the parties that own the building, and so on.

The press then began calling the Pastor, Terry Jones, a crackpot, nutcase, publicity hound, and a few other names. This was CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox. They were all calling this guy a clown that was seeking to get publicity for himself.

Are they right? Could be. But who gave him this publicity? This is a simple answer. The Press. The very people complaining that this guy is an idiot seeking to make a name in the press are the ones that gave him the platform. They turned this coming event from a small church, to a local story, to a national platform, to an international event.

This event, that has not yet taken place, then was picked up by the Muslims around the world. Imagine that, the press reports on someone they now call a crackpot and are amazed that the Muslims around the world are now burning the American Flag and threatening to kill Americans around the world, including here at home.

Don't get the idea that this is just about the idiocy of the press. They were just the beginning. As we moved closer to the anniversary of the attack on this country, the State Department put their embassies around the world on alert.

General Petraeus said that if this burning took place, it would put American soldiers at risk. Hillary Clinton came out and said the same thing. Then President Obama said the same thing.

As if that wasn't enough, the Pastor, according to the press, said that he would consider dropping the plan if someone from the White House or the Pentagon would call him and talk to him. But the idiocy didn't stop there. Defense Secretary Gates actually did call him apparently at the behest of the Obama Administration.

The burning of the Koran was ill-conceived. Like the placing of the mosque near ground zero, it's perfectly legal to do this, but it is not a wise idea. Consider this. You're driving along and you come to a railroad crossing. There are no gates to stop you. The flashing lights are going signifying that a train is coming, but there are no gates for you to drive around. You're expected to do the safe thing and stop when you see the lights. You take a look and think you can still get across those tracks safely before the train gets there. So you speed up to beat the train to the crossing. If you make it, you were right. You had the time. But if you don't make it and you end up hit by the train or you hit the train, now it becomes a matter of you not driving safely and causing an accident.

Putting that mosque up is legal. But it's not sensitive. Burning the Koran is legal. But it's not sensitive. If you want sensitivity from one group, you must be prepared to display sensitivity when you come to that crossroad.

Yet again, the idiocy doesn't stop there. Why is the administration getting involved in this? Like the incident in Cambridge, Massachussets when Obama called the police stupid, without knowing the facts, resulting in the "beer summit" on the White House lawn the administration had no business getting involved.

These radical muslims want to kill Americans. They don't care where, they only care that they kill us. To think that stopping this Koran burning is going to save American lives is not even reasonable. Granted, this story has fired up the muslim radicals and maybe they'd have not been ready to kill on Saturday where now they are more dedicated to the idea, but make no mistake, given any opportunity, their goal is to kill Americans.

With Obama getting involved in this, he's only made it even more of a news story than it was before. Obama showed his cowardice by getting involved in this story. Did he really think that he could stop radical islamists, TERRORISTS, from killing Americans by begging a Pastor of a chuch with 50 members to not burn a Koran?

Usama bin Laden had it right when he said that America wouldn't have the stomach for a long war. We're bombarded daily with reports that Americans are tired of the war. Obama has even set deadlines for leaving Iraq (since past and as predicted the fighting has increased), and for Afghanistan.

The terrorists, whether they realize it or not, have just won a small victory over the American people, the press and Obama. Terror doesn't have to come from an attack where people die. To be successful, they only need to change our reactions, what we do and instill fear in the American people, be it for a long period or a short period. This event has accomplished that very thing.

The administration is now walking on egg shells. They are sitting in fear that something will happen on Saturday. With their record of four attacks (Arkansas, Fort Hood, Detroit and New York) in their first 13 months, they should be walking on eggshells.

This country, the greatest nation in history, is being run by a bunch of cowards. The events in this country are being reported and commented on by a bunch of idiots. As for the people of this country, we have over 350 million people. You're going to have a small percentage of nutballs out there. Maybe this Pastor is one of them. Now we have another in Witchita, Kansas who says he will have a Koran burning, and a Baptist church that protests at soldiers funerals planning the same thing. Another guy in Wyoming who says he'll burn a Koran on the Capitol steps.

The President and his administration, the Pastor in Florida, and the press have turned this into an incident that has the terrorists fired up. Maybe it's good. Maybe it will bring some of these cowardly terrorists out in the open where we can get them. But when we have an administration that is looking to appease the enemy rather than eradicate them, I can't see much good coming from this. Time will tell. Unfortunately, those doing the telling in the press are just as big of idiots as those giving credibility to people they consider publicity seekers. Don't look to Washington for any solutions. The great appeaser will only apologize again for this country.

Obama, the press and these book burners, have caused me to have to warn those I care about, the same warning I gave immediately following the attacks nine years ago on September 11, 2001. Be aware of your surroundings. You should always be aware, but we'll all have to heighten our awareness.

You're welcome to comment.


Saturday, September 4, 2010

Democrats Proposing Tax Cuts? Must be an Election Coming

In December 2008, Representative Louie Gohmert of Texas, a Republican proposed a payroll tax holiday. The economy was falling apart. The election had just passed and in one month, Washington would be in the hands of the Democrats in the House, Democrats in the Senate and the head liberal Democrat in the White House, Barack Obama.

At that point, there was nothing the Republicans could do in the House. In the Senate, they could only filibuster because they had one vote to stop a filibuster. Of course, they had RINO's (Republican in Name Only) Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe from Maine and Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania who were always a danger to cross over and stop any filibusters.

The Democrats proposed a stimulus package. They claimed that we were losing 22,000 jobs a day and the stimulus would stop it. Obama wanted it on his desk by Presidents Day. Without reading the bill, it passed the House, then the Senate. Collins, Snowe and Specter crossed over and the Senate passed the bill.

Gohmerts proposal? It never saw the light of day, despite the idea that it would create 6.2 million jobs.

It's now September. A year and a half following the stimulus. The stimulus hasn't worked. Jobs have continued to disappear. The Tea Party sprang up and have been going on all over the country for nearly two years. Democrats are in deep trouble this election. Even they are admitting that they are about to lose the House and they are even thinking that they may lose the Senate. The "experts" and pundits are saying the Republicans could gain 47-49 seats. Personally, I'll be disappointed if they only take 70 seats away in November.

Now it appears that some Democrats have gotten "religion". This week, Obama is going to speak on the economy. It's been reported that he's going to propose a payroll tax holiday. Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, in the very first paragraph I mentioned Louie Gohmerts plan. A payroll tax holiday.

Will this work? Yes, for a time. But that question can apply in so many ways. The payroll tax holiday, as Gohmert proposed it, will work for a time. It will stimulate the economy. It will create jobs. It will spur the economy on and it will put money back into the markets which is now sitting on the sidelines because businesses aren't putting money in the economy fearing the coming increase in taxes in January.

But there are questions that go along with this proposal. Will they include with this payroll tax holiday, extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone? If not, then it won't work for more than a short term fix. The length of that term is based on how long they put the holiday in for. If it's just three months, it won't do much because people will know that their taxes will go up three months later.

Supposing for a moment that they extend the Bush tax cuts, or even (be still my heart) make the Bush tax cuts permanent, the payroll tax holiday will work, but again, only to a point. It will not be a long term fix unless Congress also cuts spending. If they continue to spend as they are, the tax holiday will eventually dry up. Likely it will be after the holiday is over.

Increasing taxes does not raise revenue for the government. It only stops people from spending money, which reduces economic activity, which means less money being earned by taxpayers, which means less money coming in to the government.

Tax cuts ALWAYS work. President Reagan lowered taxes. That created the longest period of economic growth in history. It also nearly doubled revenue coming into the government. President Bush cut taxes, twice. Those tax cuts generated more revenue to the government and in several quarters, the government took in record amounts of revenue. A record which still stands.

Alas, all good things come to an end. When you cut taxes and generate more revenue, Congress gets excited. They see more money at the ready and they are ready to spend it. We all know that they are very good at spending money. Eventually, those expenditures wipe out the benefits of the tax cuts. We are then left with fighting over how best to spur on the economy. So again, tax cuts are considered, but nobody is talking about what spending they can cut.

If we get these tax cuts, the payroll tax holiday and the Bush tax cuts either being extended or made permanent, the spending will increase and we'll be back in this position again within a couple of years.

There is another aspect to whether the tax cuts, payroll tax holiday or extension of the Bush tax cuts will work. The only reason that this is being proposed is because Democrats are in serious trouble. This is a last gasp attempt to hold on to their seats. It's probably too late, but the Democrats will say that they are showing that they are flexible by putting the final touches on the stimulus in an effort to spur the economy. The plan likely won't be felt until after the first of the year (depending on when the "holiday" starts). However, it will be a selling point for the Democrats in their campaigns to be able to say that they passed the tax cuts.

They may save a few seats, but it's so late in the campaign, that too is unlikely.

The Democrats have proven one thing that we've all known, though. The best chance the people have at getting good government is to survive until two months before the next election. After two years of ignoring the people's desires, they now must depend on those people that they ignored to keep their jobs. If it's campaign season, the hot topic is lowering taxes. I wonder how desperate the Democrats have to get to start proposing a "fair tax".

You're welcome to comment.