As Erick Erickson
pointed out at Red State
– the GOP establishment has a bad record of supporting candidates who talk the talk, but when elected, go along with the flow.
If this sounds cautious, it is. We the People have been falsely led and lied to for too long and our rights and liberties fade away with those who are elected and then refuse to abide by or out rightly ignore the Constitution of the United States. Case in point would be ObamaCare. The general GOP population is for repealing that horrific and costly act; however, they are immediately seeking a replacement. It is wrong because ObamaCare is not only costly and an overbearing government mandate; but it is practicing what is not in the limited powers of Congress or the executive branch to enforce. Which means an alternative will be like Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts “RomneyCare” – just a watered down version of social programs that are not the responsibility of our government, whether it be state or federal.
In our state of Wisconsin, a three-way race is in place for the senate seat of retiring Herb Kohl, who has followed the Obama lead throughout the president’s tenure.
People are glad he is retiring, but who will be chosen to replace him.
is a newcomer in politics who lived in Washington, DC for 24 years and then decided to return to Wisconsin – just to run for office? The GOP establishment like him because he is using his own acquired wealth to run for office. Not much can be found about his true believe on issues, but Club for Growth
stated that Hovde has “no problem with raising taxes” – but the truth meter at Politifact
states this is mostly false
. Hovde’s campaign has been to pledge to reduce individual income tax rates across the board, drop the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent and eliminate the estate tax
. There is no mention of changing the income tax to flat tax, with no deductions, and snipping away the intrusive and abusive power of the IRS.
Once again it proves that most of what is content in negative ad campaigns is false – so voters should ignore them and base their decisions upon the candidate’s record and just what he or she is presenting as a firm policy to address important issues. Issues that are NOT important at this time are condoms and same-sex marriage. Those issues truly infringe upon the rights of citizens and involve government when it should not – but our economic situation requires full attention in order to get America back on track.
It is none of government’s business concerning condoms and marriage.
It is time that candidates and those elected start looking towards the Constitution being the base of all decisions and actions; and starting a program of reviewing past legislation to determine what stays, what should be altered, and what goes in the garbage bin.
It is time to undo the unfairness and intrusion of the income tax system – not just cut back a small percentage and still keeps the progressive rate, which is clearly making the producers in America pay the bill for government’s uncontrollable spending in the name of government providing a handout for the people, at least some of the people.
Those that were thrilled that BH Obama became president in 2004 and now disappointed, disillusioned, and just plain pissed.
Greg Sargent, a columnist for the Washington Post was an Obama fan. In 2004, and it may be because, like too many voters, he was the first “black” president. Everyone who announced they were voting for Obama, I approached them and asked for reasons and the main one was because he would be the first African American (“black”) president. Now if that doesn’t explain why we have misfits in government, I don’t know what could point to it.
Well, Mr. Sargent is finally being honest with himself and his readers, he wrote
at his column but still provides the reader the feeling he is still rooting for Obama:
… the Obama campaign released a very harsh new ad arguing that Romney’s tax plan would raise taxes on the vast majority of Americans to pay for a tax cut on millionaires like himself. . . . Romney released a new middle class economic plan. Romney plan is called: “Mitt Romney’s new plan for a stronger middle class.” It contains ideas we’ve heard before: more access to domestic energy resources; cutting taxes and capping spending; repealing ObamaCare. Mark Hopkins at Moody’s Analytics tells me that it is mostly a set of assertions about outcomesRomney wants, rather than a set of policies on how to achieve them
. . . . Yet the two candidates are roughly tied on the question of who would do a better job on the economy, which brings me to the larger point here. Americans disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy. But if the Obama camp can persuade swing voters that Romneyisn’t the answer to their problems, then perhaps they can neutralize Romney’s natural advantage on the issue — that voters are prepared to grant him the presumption of economic competence as a businessman and generic alternative to disillusionment with Obama
. . . . It’s about creating a framework within which voters can be more easily persuaded that Romney’s policies really wouldbenefit the rich at the expense of the middle class. As Jonathan Chait notes, the revelation that Romney’s tax plan would cut taxes on the rich and pay for it with a middle class tax increase is lethal for Romney because it clarifies this frame
. This is the rawest version yet of the message that Romney’s world view, personal wealth, values and priorities make it perfectly comprehensible that his policies would indeed prioritize the wealthy ’s interests while damaging those of the middle class. If voters can be persuaded of this, it’s Obama’s best chance of hanging on amid a bad economy
Mr. Sargent still misses the point – by not putting the brunt of tax payments upon those that stimulate economy and produce jobs, the wealthy should pay the same percentage everyone else does in income tax – but by the wonders of math and percentages, in terms of dollars they will automatically pay more anyway – and there will be NO loophole deductions, so all people who make the same will pay the same taxes. Get it, Sargent?
The creation of class envy should have went out the window after the Depression; but people have continually fell for it – and why stop it when it continues to work?
The alternate question to voters is why do you vote for the same type of politician who complains about what is wrong, points fingers and comes up with no solution himself (or herself)?
If whatever they, the politicians, are doing isn’t working, why aren’t they looking for an alternative that works instead of the same old bull crap?
They don’t want to lost the power they gained over the People by making them dependent and actually thinking that it is their right to use other people’s money to get by paycheck by paycheck. If they want to be “wealthy” – why not do what is required to become so, even if it just improves your standard of living?
How can anyone put someone else down for being successful? It is childish and demonstrates your limited education and intellectual standing. It also indicates that you believe whatever the politicians and the media tells you. No wonder those in government wants to control the educational institutions. Which brings to mind another abusive power – trade unions – that should NOT be involved with government employment; no private organization should. Government employees should not be making more than the private sector that pays their wages out of their taxes. Think about it. You have difficulty affording health care and other insurances required – while government employees that your tax dollars paying for have benefit packages you wished you had. What’s with that?
That is not class jealousy – it is plain common sense. That government employee is supposed to be the “servant of the People” – yet, how many times have you experienced an attitude they generate that makes you feel like they are doing you a favor? Fees and registrations go up, but customer service dwindles. What private entity corporation would survive under those practices? If you complain, well you will see how bureaucracy works and maybe your complaint filed might get lost. They are in control and they know it. Generally, state fees for licenses, regulations and other services will go up a couple of dollars. When Doyle was governor of Wisconsin, he and his cronies passed a $1 billion tax raise, which means instead of $45 for a title transfer, it now costs $69.50 – and you cannot deal with it at the local DMV, you must go on line or get a form from the county clerk office and then mail it in. Much of the over-the-counter service disappeared, and yet we are paying about 38% more on the average for state fees. Governor Walker did not rescind that or make it a reasonable increase. This is a time when people are wondering how their paychecks are going to cover the continually rising costs. People should not have to decide between buying groceries and paying the mortgage or utility bill. It’s called inflation – cost of living skyrockets while wages remain relatively the same, or people lose their jobs because of the economy crunch.
The thing is that too many voters don’t know who to believe any more – and the political party establishment want to remain in status quo. Like the Founders warned: once power is abused, it is difficult to wrestle it from them.