All The King’s Horses

I’m from Houston, Texas. I’m pretty sure that comes with a requirement to be a die-hard Astros fan and sincerely dislike the New York Yankees (I don’t like to use the word “hate” – I disliked using that word long before it was cool). So, I was largely disinterested when I heard that Yankee shortstop Derek Jeter hit his 3,000th ball, and homered at that.

At least I was disinterested until I heard about the fan who caught the ball.

23-year-old Christian Lopez caught Jeter’s record-setting ball and promptly gave it back to Jeter without any strings attached. He didn’t ask for payment, though he could have sold the ball on eBay and made off like a bandit. At least then he would have been able to get some kind of monetary value to pay the IRS off with.

You won’t believe what came next. The Yankees repaid the fan with season suite seats and a host of autographed Yankee memorabilia, but experts say the value of the gifts is right around $120,000. That would mean he’d owe the IRS around $14,000 – $15,000 in taxes for the goods.

This just highlights a conversation my dad and I had last night about taxes. Right now, we have the Big O and his minions talking about raising taxes to take care of the trillion-dollar deficit. The government is spending money like a drunken sailor on a bender; rather than corral their spending, they’d prefer to raise taxes in the middle of a recession in which people are losing jobs and houses left and right. They’re about to commit fiscal hari-kari all because they can’t give up their socialist ideals long enough to do the smart thing. Urkel himself said recently that “the public is not paying close attention to the ins and outs of how a Treasury option goes. They shouldn’t. They’re worrying about their family; they’re worrying about their jobs; they’re worrying about their neighborhood. They’ve got a lot of other things on their plate. We’re paid to worry about it.” He is saying here that professional politicians know best.

Don’t worry, John and Jane Q. Taxpayer. We’ve got things under control. Your job ends at the ballot box, we’ll take it from here. It’s just too complicated for simpletons like you to understand. Let us do what we’re paid to do and take care of the small things. What’s that? You don’t want to pay taxes that high? Well, you wanted us to do this job. Pay up and let us do it.

Stop right there, homeboy.

It irritates me that we pay so damn much in taxes and we get next to nothing back for it. We pay taxes through our paychecks, and any paycheck that you get on top of the norm (which I do in the form of bonuses every month when I do a particularly good job), they go from taking 22% to taking 45%, sometimes even 50%. Separate from that, our paychecks are automatically hit with taxes for Social Security and Medicare, neither of which were ever supposed to be requirements. Then we get hit for state taxes. Those aren’t the only taxes we pay, but you don’t see most people paying attention to it. We pay sales tax on nearly everything we buy, and there’s a movement to force internet retailers to levy sales taxes now, too. We pay taxes on the bills we pay for water, sewer, electricity, cable, phone, and rent. Homeowners pay a separate tax based on the value of their property, both to state and federal governments.

We even pay taxes just to friggin’ die. Is this really what our Founders had in mind?

Now we have Christian Lopez getting gifts from a sports club because he did something entirely selfless in giving a very valuable piece of equipment back, and the IRS is already salivating. Since when is this acceptable?

The government needs to be cut off. They’re behaving like a trust fund kid on a shopping spree, yet we’re hemming and hawing about cancelling their credit cards. Really? Why is this so difficult? No more endless unemployment benefits. No more duplicate programs (or eighty of the same program across sixteen agencies, half of which have nothing to do with the programs they’re administering). No more healthcare monstrosities that Congress gets a free pass from. You live exactly the way we do and follow the same rules or you get kicked to the curb like the abusive ex that you are.

I have no illusions, however, that we are capable of doing what Thomas Jefferson called our duty and resisting when injustice becomes law. We’d rather feed all the king’s horses than set them free.

Common Sense Conservatism: Taxes and the Size of Government

How much of your income should the government be able to take? Think about your answer as you read the rest of this post.

The first permanent, broad-based federal income tax went into effect in 1913 and placed a 7% tax on the top 1% of wage-earners in the United States. Within five years it had risen to be a 77% tax on the top 6% of income earners. In 1913, Americans paid between 1% and 7% on income over $20,000. However, in 1918 every American paid the tax, and those making less than $4,000/year paid 6%. Once the door was opened to an income tax, the government abused the privilege. For the record, the top tax bracket reached 94% in the mid-1940s. Imagine having to fork over 94% of your income to the government.

So here we are almost a century later, and the top income tax bracket pays 35% with those earning less than $16,750 pay only 10%. However, with the Earned Income Tax Credit, deductions for children and dependents and the ability to write-off health care costs, real estate taxes, charitable donations and other expenses many Americans earning less than $25,000/year pay no federal income tax. Some Americans who pay no taxes actually receive a refund, meaning the government sends them a check simply for being a low-income earner.

The federal government does need revenue in order to pay for the services it provides, and it certainly doesn’t have the ability to earn money of its own. Therefore, it is up to Americans to cover the costs of these services in the form of taxes. Since it is our hard-earned dollars being used by the federal government, there are obviously disagreements on which services the federal government should provide. Many on the Left believe that the government should be a force for good, and use those dollars to help people whenever possible. Those on the Right believe the Constitution outlines the responsibilities of the federal government, and anything outside of those duties should be handled at the state level or through individual choice.

The position taken by many on the Left isn’t a bad one in theory, but where do you draw the line when it comes to helping people? Does the federal government have an obligation to ensure all Americans have access to food and shelter? The answer is “yes,” as we have Section 8 housing and programs like welfare, food stamps and WIC. But how far should the federal government go in taking care of its people? Should the government be providing homes and cars for those who can’t afford them? How about computers with internet access? This is where opinions begin to divide.

Conservatives tend to believe the U.S. Constitution provides a clear-cut answer on the role of government. When our country was founded, the 13 colonies-turned-states created the federal government to handle matters of national interest. They were clear, however, through the 10th Amendment, that the states reserved the right to handle everything else. Matters of national interest include protecting us from foreign invasion, defending us against foreign threats and maintaining a three-branch government including the Presidency and his cabinet, Congress and the federal court system. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to meddle in education, the environment, health care, automobiles, and many other areas where their presence is very obvious today. Those issues were historically handled at the state level, until such a time when they weren’t.

So back to my original question: How much of your income should the government be able to take?

The appropriate answer to that question depends on how much the government spends, because the more it spends, the more you’ll have to pay. Now both liberals and conservatives have good points when it comes to the role of government. It would be great for the government to be able to take care of everyone, but we must remember that they are paying for that care with the hard-earned dollars of working Americans. It would also be great if government was small so that all Americans were free from government intervention in their lives, and can keep more of the money they earn. But we must also remember that there are programs that are necessary and they must be paid for with our tax dollars. We must find ways to address legitimate problems without unfairly hurting others in the process.

Just like the federal government abused their ability to tax Americans in the first half of the 20th Century, Americans are noticing a disturbing trend today. In addition to paying federal income taxes, most Americans pay a state income tax. They also pay half of a 2.9% Medicare tax, and they pay into Social Security, which may not be around in a decade. We are not only taxed on our income, but we are also taxed every time we move. We pay taxes on our property, a home that we own. We pay taxes every time we pay our bills for electricity, water, gas, cable, internet, phone and other utilities. If we want to leave our house, we get taxed on our car in the form of registration fees, inspection fees and of course the gas we use for fuel. If we go to the supermarket, we are most likely taxed on prepared foods and most non-edible items. If we go to the liquor store we are taxed on all alcohol, from as little as $1.50 per gallon in Maryland to $26.45 in Washington State. For everything else we buy, there is a state sales tax between 2.9% and 8.25%, depending on where you live. We are taxed every time we turn around and usually on goods and services purchased with money we’ve already paid taxes on. Doesn’t that sound oppressive to you?

Here’s a simple exercise to show you how crazy this all is:

You are a single person living in California. You earn $34,000 per year, or $2,833 per month. The federal government takes 25% for income tax, 1.45% for Medicare and 6.2% for Social Security. The state of California takes 6.25%. Let’s say you spend a generous $100/week on groceries, which are tax-free. The rest will be spent on utilities, gas for the car and other small purchases. These purchases are ALL subject to tax, which is a double tax. The state sales tax is 8.25%, so let’s use that as a basis. You still have to pay one month’s share of your yearly property taxes and motor vehicle registration fees (roughly $275), leaving you with $943, plus your $400 in tax-free groceries.

You earn $2,833 per month, but you actually receive $1,343 in tax-free profit, a whopping 47% of your income. That means your $34,000 per year only amounts to just over $16,000 per year in your pocket, with which to pay bills. It should be noted, that even with tax rates at this level, the federal government is $13 trillion in debt and our example state of California is bankrupt.

How have we arrived at a point in our lives where we only get to keep 47% of the money we earn, and our state and federal governments are in debt? These numbers are disturbing, and it only gets worse the more money you make! If you earned $82,400 you’d pay an additional 8% in taxes, taking home only 39% of your income.

So is it unreasonable for conservatives to feel there needs to be a limit on how much money the government can take in taxes? Can we really keep creating more programs that rely on our tax dollars?

Today, our national debt sits at $13.4 Trillion. That comes out to be $43,173 per citizen – every man, woman and child in America. That figure does not include our unfunded liabilities including Social Security and Medicare, which totals another $110 Trillion ($355,296 per citizen). Good thing that’s not due yet! It also doesn’t include state debt, which is as high as $16,296 per citizen (New York).

The current administration, and the Democrat-controlled Congress, passed a trillion-dollar health care reform bill which doesn’t go into full effect until 2014, a $26 billion bailout to the states, and a failed $878 billion stimulus bill. They still have plans to pass Cap & Trade ($200 billion/year), a bailout for Fannie & Freddie ($148 billion), and a potential second stimulus bill ($50-$80 billion). Citizens Against Government Waste also identified $16.5 billion in pork in 2010 (and $19.6 billion in 2009), from an administration that promised to reform the earmark profess and cut wasteful spending.

So, how much of your income should the government be able to take? Maybe the better question is: How much should the government be able to spend?

Either way, it’s currently too much. And sometimes the “Party of No” is saying the right thing.

If You Can’t Blame “W”…..

Then just blame Congress.  Obama apparently got the message from poll numbers that suggested Americans were tired of his “blame it on Bush” strategy as a way to avoid responsibility for the nation’s still-unrecovered economy. So, what does the Big O do now?  Throw it off on Congress.

– But before leaving for his ninth presidential vacation, 10 days at a…...secluded estate on Martha’s Vineyard, Obama devoted four minutes in the White House driveway to a special statement on the latest disappointing jobs numbers. (Full text, as usual, can be read on the jump, along with a brief reaction from the Republican National Committee chairman.)

No questions allowed because the president didn’t want to explain why despite the administration’s announced Recovery Summer Program, the jobs numbers have started going backward again after 19 months of promises and $787 billion in alleged stimulation spending. Because, faced with the uncertainty of the economy and the certainty of new taxes after Nov. 2, employers are holding back on hiring.

According to the president, he’s been “adamant” with Congress for months now about a new jobs bill to help small businesses. Obama says this really good bill is stalled in the Senate, where so much administration legislation has been crammed through so effectively by Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Interesting ploy.  Blame it on Congress.  But….hold on now!  One problem.  OBAMA’S PARTY RUNS THE DAMNED CONGRESS!!!

It’s time to man up, Barry.  Face the fact that your idiotic policies have done nothing to pull this nation out of a lingering recession.  While Europe begins to turn things around with surprisingly conservative economic measures, you go the opposite way.  You endorse ridiculous spending measures that bring our deficit into the trillions, and you pursue social(ist) entitlement programs during a time when we can least afford it.  You are about to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, and every new piece of legislation that you hatch with Pelosi/Reid is riddled with new taxes.  All of this during a time of recession.

Don’t blame your failure to pull us out of recession on George W.  And don’t blame things on Congress either.  Your party has more than enough votes to ramrod more crap down the throats of average Americans.  If you honestly think that throwing more money in an inefficient manner at this recession is going to solve the problem, then just tell Nancy and Harry to do it.  Are you scared?  Are they?

How Much Did Sarah Palin Spend on Per-Diem?

POLITICO

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) spent $2,993 in taxpayer money on flowers between June and October. House Majority Whip James Clyburn has a thing for Chantilly Donuts, spending about $265 at the Virginia shop in the past quarter. And Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), a fiscal conservative, decided to give about $2,000 in unused office funds back to the government to help reduce the deficit…..

Pelosi, who has come under fire in the past for spending on flowers, also spent roughly $30,610 in food and beverage and about $2,740 on bottled water, contributing to the nearly $120,531 total from all congressional leadership accounts.

Pro-Choice, but for who?

The hypocrisy coming from feminists and pro-abortion fanatics is astonishing with regard to the Stupak amendment.  The Stupak amendment was passed on Saturday with bipartisan support – just in case the travesty bill known as HR3962 passed (which it sadly did).  Basically, it prohibits the use of public funds for abortion by women.  Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it?

Not according to Planned Parenthood and NARAL.  Tonight on Joy Behar’s show, the ultra-liberal pro-choice host had on a few of these women along with Congresswoman Maxine Waters.  To say these women stretched the truth is a huge understatement. 

When people take advantage of a public option to anything, they succumb to big-government bureaucracy.  It’s always been that way, it always will be.  Who votes for these politicians who support big-government bureaucracy?  Why I do believe it’s the same liberals who are angry about the Stupak Amendment!?

What angered me about Behar’s show (not that I expect journalistic integrity out of her) is how uniformed she herself was as the fanatics proclaimed that women would still be denied abortion if they paid for their own policies.  She, of course, was appalled as the same fanatics continued to blame “anti-choice” members of the House. 

“Paying for their policies” doesn’t grant them that right if they are paying for their policies out of the exchange.  Why?  Because if a woman purchases an insurance policy out of the public option and pays $100 per month for a policy which she would have paid $300 per month for from Blue Cross Blue Shield, this means that two-thirds of her insurance policy is subsidized by the American taxpayer.

It’s the same concept with Section 8 or public housing.  Folks pay a small sum of money – say $150 per month – and the government covers the remaining $600-$800 per month.  In my county, such recipients are constantly put through the most rigorous procedures.  They have to send in pay stubs every month, they get their house inspected every two months, their kids’ clothes are inspected and beds are checked, personal questions about the dating lives of the recipients are asked, etc. etc. etc.  Every aspect of their lives from A to Z is violated.  There is no privacy when you sell out to big government and wear one of their numbers.

What about the “choice” anyway?  Any liberal who complains about this Stupak amendment is a total hypocrite.  What about the choice of taxpayers who have to pay for the bill (considering it passes the Senate)?  Do they have a “choice” of whether or not to pay for it?  Miraculously, Planned Parenthood or NARAL doesn’t seem to mind that, nor do liberal politicians, nor do the voting liberal base.

They selectively apply “choice” and “privacy” to matters that are only important to the radical left-wing.

Here’s a little newsflash for them (and feminists alike): this is only the beginning!  Every aspect of your life is going to be uncovered, there will be an answer to them for everything you do, and they WILL have the control over your life that they have always wanted.

And you know what?  You deserve it. 

You want your precious privacy?  Good!  You might have just taken your first step to being a conservative!

How Kind of You, Mr. President!

Members of Congress and Obama have now moved toward denouncing the emphasis of opposition of this health care reform disaster and affirm their position by reminding us how much they are willing to contribute.

Obama today at a rally said he was happy that ‘people like him’ could pay a little more to make sure that 46 million Americans could have health care. 

It all sounds great now, doesn’t it?

What he isn’t able to avoid though is the fact that there aren’t many ‘people like him’ in the country.  He works for the United States Government!

What’s the difference between working for the United States Government and working for a private insurance company?  How about the fact that making a profit or loss affects CEOs at insurance companies (not to mention millions of middle-class employees) but DOES NOT affect Obama’s salary in the case of the Government?  We’ve seen all Presidents in the past rack up massive debt (Democrat and Republican) and they will still receive generous health care benefits and retirement packages – as will Obama.

Here’s my question: as the Government continues to put its hands further into the auto industry, mortgage industry, and now health care; and more and more CEOs and people making over $250K per year are phased out, how does Obama expect us to believe that the middle class will never have to pay more when less people are going to be there to pay that “little bit more” which he is willing to contribute?

My opinion is that he knows that’s impossible. After this plan is sold to the middle class under the guise of protecting them and we are all forced to a single-payer plan, he will get what he’s wanted all along.  The country will be in so deep that it will never matter once everyone realizes.

This is such an important fight.  I pray that the many articles popping up now denouncing average Americans and their concerns will not dissuade those same Americans from fighting harder in this next month.

Call your Congressman, write them, etc.  Let them know you are saying “No!”

So Much For LOWERING Taxes!

After all the hubbub and noise about Obama cutting taxes for the working class, Obama and his Democrat hordes are trying to deal us a one-two punch that we’d never recover from if they passed. “Oh, but he only raised taxes for the wealthy–we’re getting an extra $13 a week! He’s cutting taxes for us! He’s the new Robin Hood!”

Oh, gag me.

First of all, his proposal for universal healthcare would raise taxes on EVERYBODY. Not just the wealthy. Working-class folks like Philip, Steve and I would all be taxed for the benefits that our employers give us. Private healthcare would be taxed out of existence. Contrary to popular belief, that’s not competition. Wal-Mart may drive their competition out of business with low prices, but they don’t have the power to tax their competitors out of the market. The government does. That isn’t competition, it’s called abuse of power, and it’s wrong no matter which way you look at it. Somehow, some way government healthcare would need to be paid for, and it would be done through taxes.

Second–and Philip brought this up a couple of days ago–CAP AND TRADE. Oh, my God, we’re going to tax ourselves into destitution with cap and trade, and we’re smiling as we do it. Here’s the basics about this farce: it’s better known as Waxman-Markey or HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. It might sound good on the surface, but all bills typically do. They’re intended to do good. But we all know that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this bill would take us straight to hell in a handbasket. You know all those special interests and earmarks that we’re all so upset about? They’re up to their eyeballs in Waxman-Markey, and average American Joes like you and I would pay through the teeth for this ridiculous bill if it passes the Senate. Energy rationing would become more of a reality than it was during WWII.

The idea behind Waxman-Markey is to provide a way to create so-called “clean energy” for use by Americans. The way to it, however, would cost us everything we have. It would require greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced by 83% by 2050, a feat that every expert on the subject admits is herculean. That’s the tip of the iceberg. All the massive energy companies have sold out, seeming to lend credibility to the push for clean energy, making Democrats look at them in awe and say, “oh, how brave–you’re giving up your profits to save the planet!” But there’s more to that, too. No CEO in his right mind would throw his company’s support behind a bill that would cut their legs out from under them without some kind of compensation for their troubles. Their compensation is a full 85% of the rationing coupons, and the CEO’s even admitted in hearings over Waxman-Markey that they’d refuse to support the bill if they weren’t getting such a high number of those rationing coupons.

Recently, emails were revealed from the EPA that showed the reality of global warming and how we need to “save the planet.” In reality, temperatures stopped rising nearly ten years ago. The liberal brown-nosers at the EPA shut down one employee’s research on the subject when that employee revealed just how futile our efforts would be if we passed this sort of legislation. Their argument? “This employee is not a scientist.” Good God almighty–neither were 98% of the nitwits who signed Al Gore’s petition to stop global warming, but how many people took that crap seriously?!? The employee involved is Alan Carlin, and the director of the EPA was caught with his pants down when he said in an email that Carlin’s work would “hurt the office” and that they’d already decided to go forward with “endangerment funding.”

Translation? We don’t care about the fact that there’s evidence that we’re wrong–we want this, and we’re going to ram it down your throats any which way we can.

Cap and trade would result in the loss of millions of jobs, fuel and energy rationing, and only the very wealthy being able to afford their vehicles. Democrats blocked Republican amendments that would have suspended Waxman-Markey in the case of $5-a-gallon gasoline or 15% unemployment rates. Far from reducing our dependence on foreign oil, this bill would lead stateside fuel refineries to import even more in an effort to keep their product affordable for us so they could turn a profit. By 2035, my niece’s family would be paying upwards of $20,000 annually in combined energy usage. The cost of EVERYTHING would go up to balance it out, because businesses will be paying the higher energy costs, too. All that outsourcing of jobs that we’re so pissed about? Guess what? That’ll get worse, too, because it’ll be that much cheaper to hire someone in China or India to do some of our jobs because those countries have sworn they’d never do anything as remarkably stupid as Waxman-Markey.

Everything–farming, manufacturing, retail, EVERYTHING–would be taxed to the brink of destruction by cap and trade. Between lost revenue here at home and losses in the GNP, it would cost us nearly nine-and-a-half trillion dollars. Oh, and low-income families would be hit hardest by the hardships imposed by this legislation.

So much for lowering taxes!

Cap and Trade Sham Passes

I was watching CSPAN today and listening to talk radio.  The House passed the massive energy tax this afternoon by a vote of 219-212.  It is euphemistically known as “Cap and Trade.”  CBO estimates show that this legislation will result in 2 million job losses per year [Correction: The CBO failed to analyze the total economic impact of this legislation on the US economy and, in fact, underestimated the impact.  CBO admissions of job losses led to an outlay in the legislation providing billions of dollars for workers who would lose their jobs under this bill. The studies and statistics on job losses were provided by other sources. An upcoming post will present these studies] Additionally, it is expected to drive up energy bills to the residential consumer by 90%.   And it’s all based on alarmism intiated by false science concerning “global warming.” 

I will speak more on this subject in the coming days, but I wanted to focus on the vote.  There were 42 Democrats who sided with the GOP in an attempt to defeat this bill.  Before you get all giddy – realize that a few of those included leftist nuts like Dennis Kucinich who felt that the bill didn’t go far enough.  Mostly, though, the Democrats were conservatives or Dems in unsafe House seats who heard the message from their constituents loud and clear.  Apparently, the House switchboard melted down with people calling in to voice their displeasure over this legislative piece of crap.  The overwhelming number of calls were reported to be in opposition to this irresponsible sham.

On the other side, 8 “Republicans” sided with the Democrats on this legislation – thus providing them with the necessary margin need for victory.  I will list their names and phone numbers below.  I was listening to Mark Levin while the vote was going on.  He had Reps. John Shadegg (AZ), Mike Pence (IN), Eric Cantor (VA) and John Boehner(OH) on the radio during that time.  Cantor (minority whip) and Boehner (minority leader) both came on after the final vote was counted.  Levin pressed them on the 8 GOP traitors.  Cantor was diplomatic but did note that people would respond via the ballot box.  Boehner, surprisingly, was more incredulous and almost promised that those 8 defectors would hear about what they had done.  The minority leader was as pumped and determined as I have ever heard them.  I was really proud of his response.

This measure will go to the Senate now.  Boehner feels that this legislation will not become law.  But we don’t need to rest on his reassurances.  If more celebrities die shortly before the Senate vote, I might buy into some sort of conspiracy theory.  I’m not sure that Americans were focused on the 1200-page monstrocity and its repercussions.  And this 1200 page bill only merited 3 hours of debate in the House.  A 300-page amendment was introduced at 3:09 am this morning.  I can assure you, that the Senate will operate under the full glare of American voters when their time comes to vote on this. At least they will have time to read it before they cast a vote.

In the meantime, here are the names and office numbers of the 8 RINOs who voted for this garbage.  Our campaign against their reelection begins today.  Feel free to call and express your feelings – especially if you are in their district.  In the coming months – as the primaries ramp up – I will be coming back to these people and feature their opponents.  And I can almost guarantee you that each one will face primary opposition. 

Mary Bono Mack (CA – 45th)  202-225-5330

Michael Castle (DE – at large) note:  Castle is thinking about the Senate race.  I’ll be there for him too.  202-225-4165

Mark Kirk (IL – 10th)  202-225-4835

Leonard Lance (NJ – 10th)  202-225-5361

Frank LoBiondo (NJ – 2nd)  202-225-6572

John McHugh (NY – 23rd)  202-225-4611

David Reichert (WA – 8th)  202-225-7761

Chris Smith (NJ – 4th)  This one saddens me.  But he is toast now.  202-225-3765

Anyone see any pattern above?  Same ole, same ole.

 

Knee-Slapper of the Week

Actually, I think this one outdoes MOST of the laughable plans announced by the Obama adminstration.

First, Obama promised more transparency in government. He promised change. Then he nominated tax cheat Tim Geithner to be Secretary of the Treasury. Then he nominated Kathleen Sibelius to be the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Then he nominated Ron Sims as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Then he raised taxes on the “top 5%” of the earners in America, bringing the highest tax bracket up to 39.6%.

Today, he’s far outdone himself. Put your drinks down…

He and Tim Geithner have just announced a plan to inject $210 billion into the economy by even more taxes on the corporations in America. How? By overturning one of Bill Clinton’s tax laws that gave a break to companies that made some profit on overseas offices–so long as the money made overseas was re-invested overseas and stayed there. The instant it was brought back to US banks it was subject to taxation.

They’re calling this a loophole, and they say they’ll recoup a lot of money by closing it. It’s supposed to create more jobs, ostensibly by not giving that tax break in any way, shape or form to any corporation–PERIOD. There’s just a few problems with this, not the least of which being that it’s hilarious to see Tim Geithner trying to enforce tax laws when he can’t even follow them.

The fact still remains that it’s still cheaper to hire a group of employees in Bangladesh than it is to hire the same number of people to do the same job in the United States. Making those corporations pay more taxes cannot and will not change that fact. The only way to really, truly encourage companies to keep jobs settled right here at home is to offer incentives–i.e. TAX CUTS FOR WHAT LIBERALS DEEM “THE WEALTHY”–to keep those jobs here. When they’re paying the same amount of taxes on both home and foreign offices, yet it costs twice as much to hire me to do a job as it does to hire Sanji Rosgothra in India (name completely fabricated), where do you think the companies are going to want to go?

I talked to a woman last week who complained that she’d called customer service only to be asked a round of questions she couldn’t understand because of the rep’s heavy Indian accent. In the same breath, this woman said, “boy, I’m so glad Bush isn’t in office anymore, Obama’s gonna fix this mess right up!” I had to hang up quickly because I couldn’t help the hysterical laughter that threatened to escape my throat. Sure, the mess started under Bush, but Obama has only made it worse. Now he’s suggesting that we dump even more taxes on corporations during a damned recession as some kind of twisted cure?

I’ll tell you how this will play out: if Obama gets his wish, and this so-called tax loophole is closed, several businesses will pull up stakes in the US completely and move everything to other countries–countries that are more tax-friendly. Still others will outsource even more jobs to make up for their new losses because of the fact that it’s cheaper to hire people overseas. And whether they stay or they go, prices on everything will go up in reactionary inflation because businesses refuse to eat any losses that they can avoid. That’s not just greed; it’s the free-market system at work.

If this is the start of Obama “spreading the wealth,” then I don’t want to know what the next step is.

Don’t Listen to Me…I’m Just a Right-Wing Extremist

I’ve been really busy lately and am now as sick as a dying dog (my friends would argue that it’s my refusal to take a break that’s to blame), but since the local pharmacist is going to take TWO HOURS to fill my prescription for codeine, I’m going to channel the body aches, the fever, the racking cough and the near-migraine into a blog. (I bet it’s nothing compared to Steve’s predicament–being a tax guy who just blitzed the end of tax season!)

So much has happened in the news this week that I’m not sure where to start, but it all ties in. I guess I’ll start where the madness began: the DHS report released on Monday, Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. Unfortunately, I’m not kidding. They actually released this report. Our liberal readers will jump up and down and scream, “they released a report on left-wing radicals in January!!!” Here’s my beef: that report released earlier this year named specific groups, listed the aims of those groups and highlighted specific incidents (such as bombings, break-ins, flooding homes and threatening personal violence) and gave police reports as their sources. The report on “right-wing extremism” does no such thing. It’s very vague. And here’s how it starts off: “the economic downturn and the election of the first African American President present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.” It claims that white supremacist groups are on the rise, and points out “opposition to abortion or immigration” as key indicators of right-wing extremism. Its sources? Not police reports…more like the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has named the American Legion a “hate group” for opposing illegal immigration.

Go read it for yourself. Put down your drink before you do, or you’ll be choking on it. Trust me.

It’s no coincidence that the report was released just days before the massive Tax Day Tea Party protests across the country. It was no secret that this was coming, organizers started over a month ago planning this shindig. The Tea Parties were a throwback to the historic Boston tea party, when American colonists dumped shiploads of tea into Boston Harbor to stop the tea tax levied by the Crown without any say in the colonies. Today, we’re angry about being told that it’s our “patriotic duty” to pay more taxes (don’t give me any of that “it’s only the rich” BS, either, because ALL taxes will rise eventually thanks to the Democrats’ outrageous spending). Yesterday’s massive nationwide protests are the backlash that was inevitable, and all of those registered Republicans who couldn’t stand to plug their noses and vote for McCain showed up with people from all walks of life to send the message that we’re not interested in being taxed to death. The aforementioned report is the Democrat government’s version of a preemptive strike.

Not that they really needed it. The MSM did a remarkable hatchet job all on their own, no doubt in an effort to protect Barkey’s messiah-like aura. Anderson Cooper stooped to the level of sexual innuendo by calling them “teabagging” parties, fat bastard James Wolcott from Vanity Fair put his fingers in his ears like a two-year-old and said, “they didn’t appear on the front page of my newspapers, so I WON’T believe they happened!”, and CNN’s Susan Roesgen whined that it was offensive to call Obama a socialist (this after gushing over a paper-mache effigy of Bush with devil horns and a Hitler ‘stache as an “excellent lookalike”). The message? If we don’t agree with you, we’re going to do our level best to make you all look like the radicals that our Democrat DHS says you are!

Then, today, in an amazing, brazen act of hypocrisy, Obama went to Mexico and held hands with Felipe Calderon (well, not really, but what happened is just as nauseating as watching Bush hold hands with the same Saudi king that Obama bowed to not long ago), declaring–and I do quote–“how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws because even under current law, trafficking illegal firearms, sending them across the border, is illegal. That’s something we can stop.”

This is where Philip goes, “oh, REALLY?”

I’d like to know exactly how Obama plans to do that. He not only refuses to secure the border, he also openly announces a brewing plan for amnesty–all the while accusing those of us who want the current laws enforced EXTREMISTS. How does he intend to pull off this heroic act? Send the National Guard to the border to seal it off with orders to let any “workers” coming North to pass by? How does he think the drugs are getting here? How ’bout we look at something that happened right here in Phoenix. In 1999, Phoenix police officer Marc Atkinson spotted a suspicious vehicle and pulled it over. The three men inside hid around a corner and ambushed Atkinson; an armed American citizen had the cojones to return fire in defense of the fallen officer and hold one suspect for officers responding to the scene. Today, that citizen would be labeled an extremist along with the rest of us.

But not only does Barkey swear to stop the flow of cash and guns South and the flow of drugs North, he yet again repeats the tired, debunked lie that 90% of all of the guns being used by the cartels come from the United States (I’m not gonna re-iterate my point, just read it here). The Arizona Repugnant repeats that lie and instead of “reporting” the story of Obama’s visit to Mexico, it gives a personal spin that makes it reek of a badly-placed editorial. So much for journalistic ethics.

What’s really funny is that in a related piece, the same freakin’ paper points out that a .50-caliber anti-aircraft machine gun was recovered in Mexico, mounted to a truck. Where’d it come from? Not the US, but you wouldn’t know that from the tacit omission by the writer who submitted the garbage for print.

If we can commit $350 million to stepped-up enforcement on guns and drugs on the border, then we can sure as hell start enforcing the immigration laws that our government has, so far, refused to enforce. Guess what? This human cost that you’re pointing out here, Barkey–THIS IS THE HUMAN COST OF IGNORING THE LAW AND GIVING A FREE PASS TO THOSE WHO FLAUNT IT. We don’t need reform. Our immigration laws are the way they are for a reason, and guest workers have the H2-A guest worker visa now to make themselves legal with. Stop bending over for the shamnesty crowd or you become the laughingstock you say your predecessor was.

But don’t listen to me. I’m just a right-wing extremist. I believe in the rule of law, liberty for all law-abiding citizens and LEGAL immigrants and small government that allows me to keep what I work hard to earn.

All the things that spell disaster, right?

Hmph…no pun intended.