What Conservatives Can Learn From Senator Ted Kennedy

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

As we all know by now, Senator Ted Kennedy passed away this morning.

Politically, I agreed with Ted Kennedy on almost nothing. I staunchly opposed his notion of the role of government, his interpretation of the Constitution, and even his behavior on the Senate floor at times. I felt that he strayed far away from the classical liberalism espoused by his brothers John and Bobby. Ted Kennedy's vision of America was not my vision of America.

Be that as it may, Ted Kennedy always held true to his principles, no matter how much any of us disagreed with them. He was a principled big government modern liberal; one who believed in the state and its role in our lives. As wrong as I believe this view is, it was his, and he never strayed from it.

Over the last 20 years, and the last 4 in particular, "conservatives" have done something entirely unprincipled. With a few exceptions, they have ceased to behave like conservatives. Ted Kennedy never stopped behaving like a liberal.

I can probably count on one hand the number of true principled conservative senators who adhered to their beliefs as well as Kennedy adhered to his. Kennedy got things done, and he got them done by sticking to his principles. The fact that I believe those principles were destructive is a moot point. His adherence to them gave him enormous influence over the legislative process in America.

Conservatives should take note. Principles matter. They matter in shaping the nation's laws, and also their execution and application. Had conservatives, particularly those in the legislature, held to their principles the way Senator Kennedy did, the American political landscape would look very different today indeed.


Abortions Will Be Covered In The Healthcare Bill

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Factcheck.org has looked into whether the health care bill will cover abortions.

Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating?

"Despite what Obama said, the House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans."

"As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a "public plan" and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions"

As for the whole story I won't bother copying it to this blog, I'll just let you read it for yourself.


I'm in the process of reading the whole bill for myself as well. That way when someone says, "have you read the bill?" I'll be able to honestly say yes. Of course I'll follow that up with, have you?

By the way, if you see a protester at a Whole Foods trying to get people to boycott here's what you should do:

Walk right up to them and ask, why don't you support free speech?

They'll get into some liberal BS excuses about how they are exercising their own free speech by speaking out against Whole Foods, blah, blah.

Then you say, John Mackey has the right to disagree and speak out against Obamacare if he chooses since he has a right to free speech just like those boycotting Whole Foods do. Remind them that free speech works both ways and the point of free speech is to be able to speak out, especially against government, without fear.

John Mackey is a citizen first and a CEO second. If they don't like what he had to say that's too bad for them. Then put up a no loitering police take notice sign and have them removed from the property. Because they don't have a right to loiter on Whole Foods property.


Deval Patrick Update

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Dear Brandon,

On behalf of Governor Deval Patrick, thank you for your recent email regarding your YouTube question from the Wareham Town Hall. We are currently experiencing technical difficulties. As soon as we have those issues fixed, we'll get the answers posted as soon as possible. Please feel free to contact our office in the future with any further questions or concerns; your comments are always welcome in this administration.

Best regards,
Constituent Services Aide

It's been almost a month. Must be some serious "technical difficulties". I guess he's having trouble finding an advisor smart enough to come up with a good answer.


How I'd Change The Food Stamp Program

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Look, I'm not against helping people who are in need. I do have a problem with the current food stamp program as it's currently run in this country. The biggest problems we face with most government programs are fraud, both by the politicians in charge of the various programs, and by the people who are abusing certain programs and undermining those truly in need of help.

I'm going to take on the food stamp program with this post by submitting to you an idea I had about a year ago on changes we could implement to the program that I think prevents fraud and still helps those who truly need the help.

With the government killing jobs as fast as it can under all of these misguided policies it's no surprise that unemployment and food stamp expenditures have increased all across the country. Unfortunately, when more money gets dumped into a government program with no increase of fraud prevention the fraud always increases. That is one of the major arguments against the health care bill as I've discussed previously. Here's what I would do about food stamps and as always comments are welcome on what you think.

The first thing we should look at is cash benefits. Cash benefits allow a person on food stamps to get cash back when they buy food, like when you get cash back with a debit card. In many cases the cash back given is then used to buy things you can't get on food stamps, like cigarettes and alcohol. I've seen it for myself. Why should the taxpayer provide you with cigarettes or alcohol after they've already paid for your food? If you want things like that then you should have to pay for it yourself.

The next thing we need to look at is the amount of money given to the food stamp program and added to EBT cards. The news stories that usually whine about people not getting enough usually leave out one major factor....kids.

The number of kids you have greatly impact the amount of money you get. I watched a news story on CNN a few months ago, (I'd post the link but I haven't been able to find it through YouTube). They went through the supermarket with a woman, she talked about having to buy mostly store brand products, (so what I buy store brand products), but that wasn't what was important. She mentioned that she had 3 kids and you'll see why that's important in a minute.

When the reporter went up to the register he used a card saying that the amount on his card was $170 for the month and that wasn't much money, I agree. However, the $170 a month figure was for a single person with no kids, in other words the woman they used in the story never had to reveal how much she received but it certainly wasn't the $170 figure they were trying to sell to you. It's interesting that CNN didn't reveal the difference in money you get when 3 kids are added, maybe they knew we wouldn't feel as bad for this woman.

Now here's how I'd solve this problem. Take money completely out of the equation. When you register for food stamps you disclose, and prove, how many kids you have, whether you're single etc. Instead of putting a dollar amount on the card you get a shopping list, like WIC only more specific. You're allowed a list of grocery's based on your needs. We'll be generous enough and make sure you have all food groups covered, including produce and some meat, formula is covered by WIC but if you don't already get formula through WIC then we'll cover the necessary amount of formula you'll need. We'll know how much you'll need through your application for the benefits and the age of your children. The same system will be used to determine other things like how much milk, produce, meats, and dry grocery items you'll need.

No candy, or luxury foods like lobster, shrimp, fillet mignon, sushi, or expensive organic products (like organic milk) will be covered. You'll have to pay for those on your own, remember no cash benefits. I would allow for an average, not huge, birthday cake for any of your children's birthday's. Which again will be known by your application, since every child deserves a cake on their birthday. Since the programs based on items instead of money you won't have to worry about whether or not the prices have gone up. You will have to get mostly store brand items since they are cheaper than the national brands. If you want to complain remember beggars can't be choosers and you should be grateful that you're getting food for free and not starving on the street.

There is one more rule that I'll probably get criticized for at first but hear me out. You're shopping list will not be increased. Remember you're talking items not money so you'll still have the same amount of food regardless of prices. What I mean by no increases is that if you have any more kids then you won't get any more food added to the list. Let me explain before I get attacked for that one:

If you can't afford to feed the kids you have then how is it fair to bring a new child you can't care for into the world? You need to set priorities and take care of the kids you already have before you take on the responsibility of another child. This will assure that someone getting benefits doesn't keep irresponsibly having more children they can't take care of since they won't have to worry about providing for the next child. While the government helps you, you have to do all you can to help yourself. That is the key to getting out of poverty, strong families with morals, hard work, and the will to do for yourself what government can't do for you.

This program would have many benefits. For example, no one will be able to get things like alcohol and cigarettes with the benefits. Also, if you give your card to anyone else to use all they can do is get groceries which will come directly out of your own food supply.

Remember when food stamps weren't on a EBT card. You could get drugs with them and the drug dealer could just use the food stamps for his own food. EBT cards have certainly helped solve that problem but many cashiers don't check to make sure the EBT card is being used by the right person. Under this program it wouldn't matter as much because you let others use your card at your own risk to your food supply.

As long as your children attend school we'll provide the benefits for them through high school until graduation as long as they don't drop out, get charged with a serious crime (like drugs not a speeding ticket), and work part time at least for the summers from age 16 on.

I believe this system would work much better than the one we currently have. It would save money, teach more personal responsibility, teach better eating habits, still provide food for the needy, and eliminate fraud by the not so needy.

Maybe you agree and maybe you don't. I'd welcome any comments you have about this plan. If you think I'm wrong then by all means let me know why. Just remember that a blank check with no oversight causes this.


Whole Foods Market CEO John Mackey Rips ObamaCare

Friday, August 14, 2009

John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc. opines in the Wall Street Journal Wednesday, which unfortunately did not circulate the Web as much as it probably should, so lets get it out there:

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money."

—Margaret Thatcher

"With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of other people's money. These deficits are simply not sustainable. They are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation, or they will bankrupt us.

While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment. Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems. For example, Whole Foods Market pays 100% of the premiums for all our team members who work 30 hours or more per week (about 89% of all team members) for our high-deductible health-insurance plan. We also provide up to $1,800 per year in additional health-care dollars through deposits into employees' Personal Wellness Accounts to spend as they choose on their own health and wellness.

Money not spent in one year rolls over to the next and grows over time. Our team members therefore spend their own health-care dollars until the annual deductible is covered (about $2,500) and the insurance plan kicks in. This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully. Our plan's costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction.

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care—to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter?

Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That's because there isn't any. This "right" has never existed in America

Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments.

Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million.

At Whole Foods we allow our team members to vote on what benefits they most want the company to fund. Our Canadian and British employees express their benefit preferences very clearly—they want supplemental health-care dollars that they can control and spend themselves without permission from their governments. Why would they want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an "intrinsic right to health care"? The answer is clear—no such right truly exists in either Canada or the U.K.—or in any other country.

Rather than increase government spending and control, we need to address the root causes of poor health. This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health.

Unfortunately many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese. Most of the diseases that kill us and account for about 70% of all health-care spending—heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes and obesity—are mostly preventable through proper diet, exercise, not smoking, minimal alcohol consumption and other healthy lifestyle choices.

Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age.

Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society."

Whole Foods is frequently thought of as a great bastion of liberalism. I can say, from firsthand experience, that this is a misconception. Walk into your local Whole Foods Market and you will likely see most of the same type of people you will see in any other supermarket. Maybe Whole Foods shoppers have a higher level of personal wealth, if anything.

But you can't smell the patchouli anymore, either. Someone needs to tell these people who are now boycotting Whole Foods over the opinions of its CEO. The hippies left for the independent health food stores and co-ops a long time ago.

Quite obviously, Mackey outlines a solid free-market based plan that would actually fix health care; unlike the current proposal in congress. What is strange, however is that this is creating "outrage" among Whole Foods' clientele (outrage that I do not believe exists in any kind of substantial numbers). Mackey has been very outspoken about his political views. He is a staunch free-market libertarian, and has spoken out about the destructive nature of unions, stating:

"The union is like having herpes. It doesn't kill you, but it's unpleasant and inconvenient, and it stops a lot of people from becoming your lover."

These views of his date back as far as 1996, long before Whole Foods became a huge company, (it only went public in 1992). So this should be no surprise to the people who are currently boycotting the company.

It is also amusing that they boycott a company that extends health insurance coverage to 89% of its employees; the remainder being mostly people who get insurance from another source, or only work part-time. So to those of you who are boycotting - and are so concerned about health care - where else will you go? What other grocer extends FREE health care to every full-time employee, as well as insuring 89% of its workforce? The boycott is utterly hypocritical.


Some Good and Relevant Quotes

Thursday, August 13, 2009

"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see is a government program." - Ronald Reagan

"Federal aid, encourages the expectations of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character" - Grover Cleveland

"To be on relief for a few months was a boon to be extended by a great government to a patient people. But to be told that you are to be on relief for the rest of your days...is to destroy the hope and, therefore, the morale of the people." - Joseph Ely former governor of Mass.

"The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintigration fundamentaly destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of a sound policy." - FDR state of the union address 1935

"No depression can be ended by gifts, gratuities, doles, and alms handed out by the Federal Treasury, and extorted from taxpayers that are bleeding at every pore." - Thomas Gore former Senator of Oklahoma.


Town Hall Meetings and Protests

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

We've all been hearing about the latest town hall meetings and how it must be some kind of right wing conspiracy. I'm wondering where the outrage was from the left when signs such as this were being used at the protests they supported.

There will always be idiots on both sides who make stupid signs and use nonsense slogans that will be used to show disagreement with current policies and politicians. We must fight the hypocrisy on both sides and when we see something wrong it must be labeled as such. Seeing things in terms of right and wrong as opposed to right and left have become a trademark of what I've been saying in many of the posts that I place here.

While I, and hopefully most of you, support free speech I do think signs like the one here are wrong. I do support the right of people to come up with such signs if they so choose though. Free speech is one of the greatest founding principles of this country. I think it's an outrage when I see stories like this.

The Obama joker graffiti story is another example of a random dope without the ability to get involved in responsible debate just making a fool of himself. I have to ask though, where was the outrage when Bush was depicted in the same way?

We are hearing calls to end town hall meetings since politicians are afraid of "mobs" of angry citizens. Have they not paid attention to their approval ratings in the last few years? People are sick and tired of politicians acting like our opinions don't matter.

The tea parties were demonized, while left wing protest were ignored. The town hall meeting are very important to those of us who care so passionately about our country. It's the best chance most of us get to confront our so called leaders face to face. It's a chance to hear their words for ourselves without any excuse for anything being "taken out of context" by the press.

Town hall meetings have been around longer than the declaration of independence. Yet politicians are so afraid of facing the people they want to stop the meetings. Using a right wing conspiracy as an excuse for not answering to we the people.

As I posted previously I attended a town hall meeting recently and I for one am glad to see so many concerned people getting involved in both national and local politics. My message is far different from the critics. I want people to stay informed and involved. Keep pressure on the politicians, right and left, who choose not to represent us.

Always try to represent the issues through the prism of right and wrong instead of right and left. Right and left politics brought us the blind partisan divide that has led to misrepresenting representatives and a government on pause for the last few years. The answers will always be found with us, not with them, and I for one am proud to be a thorn in the politicians sides.


What My Mother, An Executive Director Of Nursing Thinks Of Obamacare

Sunday, August 9, 2009

My mother is an Executive Director of Nurses and I asked her what she thinks of Obamacare. I wanted perspective from someone who's inside the healthcare industry to tell me what she thinks of this "reform". Here's what I said to her.

"My only question is for you. What do you think of the new healthcare "reform" bill? I think it's a government take over of our healthcare and with these clowns in charge it's bound to be disastrous."

Here's her reply.

"I could not agree more!!! Remember, All these government idiots have their own health care and are covered 100 percent, even after they leave office, for the rest of their lives. So.... how can they possible care about the nations health care when they are exempt!!! If it affected them, you better believe they would be just as concerned as the rest off us americans. But since it doesn't, they feel what the heck, we will try to control it, if it fails they have nothing to lose.

I think it's time for a new revolution and that young americans either take a stand now, or be ready to live in a dictator shipwhere they will be told what to do, how to do it. "Reform Bill?" What reform?? They make it sound like a GOOD thing. Taking away basic rights does not sound like reform to me.Being an Executive Director (DON) you would not believe the incredible amount of "financial waste" I have seen over the years in health care. Elderly hard working all their life who have contributed to social security and Medicare with every pay check they made, unable to get treatment needed. Then we have alcoholics, drug dealers and other "disabled people" who were disabled due to their own demise, not in war or accidents, who get Medicaid (welfare) and demand 10,000 dollar MRI's and other unnecessary test simply because they request it that usually come back negative. DPH says they are entitled to it!!!!

So our government allows it and who pays? We do. The hard working tax payers. Why doesn't the government cap them??? Tell them sorry you were an alcoholic or did so many drugs that now your Kidneys don't work so no dialysis for you. Instead, these people are allowed to come live in nursing homes, get dialysis 3 times a week, have no bills and suck up thousands of dollars every month from the government. Add this up over 10 to 20 years and see how much one of these individuals cost us. Now multiply than by the thousands of Medicaid residents and you will understand just the tip of the iceberg!!! But its what I deal with every day. Reform, No more like total destruction of our health care system. As always, the welfare people will win, we will be screwed and the elected officials will be set for life. "

So let me ask you all something...Would you rather trust this woman, a long time nurse, or Nancy Pelosi?


Sarah Palin's Scathing Assault on ObamaCare

Saturday, August 8, 2009

As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.

We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.

- Sarah Palin


Looks like the gloves are off....


Blaming Republicans For Stalling Healthcare Reform

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

MoveOn.org is blaming Republicans for the fact that they can't get 60 Dems to sign on to health care!! I say have at it moveon. The tanking support for the health care bill has to do with the public who are rightfully weary about the geniuses behind stimulus and cap and trade taking over our health care.

I'm with moveon here, (give me a minute and I'll explain)...If the Democrats listen to moveon then they will be effectively ignoring the public (again) who are showing in poll after poll that we don't want this health care "reform" that the government is pushing. This may pass and lead to many in Washington looking for new jobs after the next election cycle. That's good news for us, the public.

We all wanted economic recovery yet all we got was stimulus. We want health care reform not healthulus. Start with reeling in fraud and waste first then go from there. That's where I'd start reform but what do I know. People like you and I aren't nearly as smart as our politicians, right?.......

Dear MoveOn member,

Why are Republicans holding health care hostage?

More importantly, why are Democratic leaders letting them?

The chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, is refusing to release a bill until he can reach a deal with Republicans—who are ideologically opposed to a public health insurance option and are stalling as much as they can.

And instead of taking the reins, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "gave his blessing" to Baucus' latest delay.
Tomorrow, Senate Democrats are gathering for a special meeting to talk health care. It's the perfect time for your senator, John Kerry, to speak out and tell Sens. Reid and Baucus that allowing Republican obstruction to stop health care reform is just unacceptable.

Can you call Sen. Kerry right away? Ask him to tell these two Senate leaders that allowing Republicans to hold health care hostage is unacceptable.Here's where to call:

Senator John Kerry Phone: 202-224-2742

Then click the link below to report your call:
All eyes are on Baucus's Senate committee this week—the last of five congressional committees that needs to produce a health care bill. For weeks, he's been saying that he'll have a deal any day now, but he changed his tune last week to say a bill won't be ready until after the Senate August vacation.5 He's delaying the entire health care debate.

Why? Senator Baucus says he won't move forward without Republican support on his committee—and his Republican counterpart, Senator Chuck Grassley, has said he'll only move forward if a Republican like Mike Enzi of Wyoming comes along.6

Senator Enzi—who represents less than 0.2% of the American people7 and is ranked one of the most conservative senators in America8—is effectively in control of the Democratic health care effort.

It's patently ridiculous. Democrats have a 60-vote caucus in the Senate, overwhelming public support for real reform with a public health insurance option, and a progressive president on their side. So why are Republicans able to hold up health care reform?

Can you call Sen. Kerry today? Ask him to tell Senate leadership to stop letting Republicans hold health care hostage. Then use the link below to let us know how it went:


Thank you for all you do.
–Nita, Kat, Eli, Matt and the rest of the team

Hey moveon.org all I can say is.............your welcome.


Governor Deval Patrick

Monday, August 3, 2009

I attended a town hall meeting with MA governor Deval Patrick last week, (I'm in the front row to his right). I'm no fan of Deval and was a bit disappointed in not getting picked by him to ask a question. However, before he came out I destroyed the woman sitting next to me in a quick little debate.

I was able to submit a youtube question after the meeting with one of his staffers though. He has yet to post it and I would like to ask for anyone viewing this post for help with something that I'll get to in a minute. I watched a speech from Deval explaining why he needs to raise taxes and reform government. Here's my response to his "necessary" tax increases:

"Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large federal deficits on the other. It is between two kinds of deficits - a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy - or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, produce revenues, and achieve a future budget surplus. The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness - the second reflects an investment in the future." - John F Kennedy.

Remember Calvin Coolidge and the roaring 20's? Well here's a quote from Coolidge back in 1924!!

"Experience does not show that the higher tax rate produces the larger revenue. Experience is all the other way. There is no escaping that when the taxation of large incomes is excessive, they tend to disappear.

I agree with those who wish to relieve the small taxpayer by getting the largest possible contribution from the people with large incomes. But if the rates on large incomes are so high that they disappear, the small taxpayer will be left with the entire burden.

If, on the other hand the rates are placed where they will produce the most revenue from large incomes, then the small taxpayer will be relieved" - Calvin Coolidge

Is Deval going to try and convince us that JFK was a big business conservative republican?!!!


Here's where I would like your help. This Wednesday will be a week since I submitted a recorded youtube question with a Deval staffer at the event. I wish he called on me during the meeting, trust me I tried, lucky him. This Wednesday I would like to flood Deval's office with calls demanding my youtube question. The more people I get to call, the more we'll pressure the release of my question that I feel he may be afraid to take on.

Late Tuesday night I will post another request on this blog for anyone who's willing to call to do so. There is of course no obligation to and plenty of people have already agreed to help me with this. I just figure the more the merrier. Constituent services: (617) - 725 - 4005 Deval's office: (617) - 725 - 4000 I was told it would take 3 days to get online. As of now it's been 5. If he does post it by Wednesday I'll post it here.

I was told to call the Constituent services number, the other is just in case. If he won't post my question relating to long term economic growth then we should ask him another question......why? Thanks for listening.


Dear Conservatives, Stop Promoting the Birth Certificate "Controversy"

Saturday, August 1, 2009

What started out somewhat behind the scenes, mainly in circles of Ron Paul and Alex Jones supporters, has unfortunately made its way into the mainstream. During the 2008 campaign, a few lawsuits were filed against Barack Obama alleging that he was not a Natural Born Citizen, as is the requirement for seeking the nation's highest office. None of these cases were heard, due to there being essentially no base for the claim.

The issue resurfaced a few weeks ago, and it is important to know where it resurfaced.

It resurfaced as a result of Chris Matthews discussing it on MSNBC. Chris Matthews gets a thrill up his leg when he hears Obama talk. Hmmmm...

This was also echoed by other lefty sites and news outlets, including Huffington Post, so, can we honestly conclude that this is something that benefits the left? I think we can. The more these outlets can connect this "controversy" with conservatives, the more we look like the same idiots who think that the Bush administration took down the World Trade Center.

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) today writes:

“Mr. Cantor doesn’t question the President’s citizenship, but he has serious questions about the President’s push for government controlled healthcare, taxes on small business job creators, and a huge energy tax on middle class families. He finds it ironic that those most eager to talk about the President’s citizenship are in fact some of his biggest cheerleaders–whether it’s Chris Matthews or others on MSNBC, the Huffington Post, or camera toting liberal bloggers chasing people through the streets of Washington.”

I think Cantor is spot on here. You can read more at The Plum Line.

Anyone notice you don't see Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin or Jim DeMint buying into this "controversy?"

Not only does this issue make us look like loons, it is a distraction from the Obama Administration's and the Democratic Party's ambitions to destroy the greatest health care system in the world.

We are winning. We are beating Obama and the Democrats on virtually every issue. So lets ignore the nonsense about Obama's citizenship issue. The more we talk about it, the more credibility we lose on issues Americans care about.

So if you hear a conservative talk about that sort of thing, kindly tell them to shut up.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP