Question 3 In Massachusetts Answers And Explanations

I was asked about my thoughts regarding the reduced tax questions Massachusetts voters will be asked on November 2nd, they are questions 1 and 3 on the ballot. I support reducing the taxes, (obviously), but I had to explain why rather than just give a simple answer because people are facing the scare tactics against the reduction of the taxes.

It's worth noting that since the Deval raised the tax from 5% to 6.25% revenues have DECREASED. Throughout history, lower taxes have actually caused revenues to increase rather than decrease but that's not the point here so I won't get into that explanation once again. Here's how I explained why I want to lower the tax.

It's no surprise that we're in a recession. It's also no surprise that politicians are good at wasting money. They are saying that if question 3 passes then we'll have to cut things like education and cops, this is not true. Let's say that revenues decrease and Massachusetts doesn't make as much money with the lower tax rate. That will force the politicians in Massachusetts to think about priorities.

In my last post you saw some of the many ways that the Deval wasted money as governor. If we give them less of our money then they will have to make the kinds of tough decisions everyday folks are making in their own families everyday. They will have to decide what's more important, funding cops and education, or funding "pork" projects which we all know is in no short supply in government. If they cut cops and education funding but they keep all of their own special interest projects and keep hiring their friends for six figure salaries in positions we neither need nor want, then you know where the priorities are with that particular politician. It will not be a question of taxes, it'll be a question of prioritizing necessary spending vs. discretionary spending.

Think of your own family budget for a minute, times are tough, people are losing their jobs, others, (like those on social security), are seeing no increase in wages, and many are in fact seeing decreases in wages. Now, facing such situations what is it most of us have to do?

Well, since we can't vote for our own raises the way congress can, the only way for us to have more money is to spend less, (government should take a hint on that lesson). The New Dealers, (New Deal supporters who are ignorant of just how miserably the New Deal failed at handling the depression of the 30's), are telling us that the government has to keep spending and spend more and more in order to avoid this recession becoming a depression. This quote comes to mind:

"A recession is when your neighbor loses his job, a depression is when you lose yours." - Ronald Reagan

Using that explanation it's clear that many of us are in fact already facing a depression. It's true that the economy is 70% spending. What proponents of vastly increased government spending don't realize is that the economy is 70% consumer spending and it only works if consumer's are spending their own money. This is where lower taxes come in.

Let's get into detail. You're struggling to pay the bills so you look at your spending. You realize that you're going to the coffee shop everyday and spending $2.00 on coffee everyday and $5.00 a day for a sub at lunch.

You realize that if you make your own coffee and bag a lunch then your coffee costs less than .50 and your lunch is well under $3.00, (homemade sandwich, can of soup, granola bar, whatever). You've now cut your coffee and lunch budget to most likely less than $3.00 when it used to be $7.00. You're now saving $28.00 a week and about $112.00 a month. That's just from coffee and lunch everyday.

You start applying that to other areas of your life, you minimize driving as much as possible to save on gas, you rent a movie rather than go to the movies, you make dinner at home and don't go out to eat. You start to realize that those little savings made by cutbacks in everyday life start to add up. The point I'm making is that the key to making more money in a recession isn't necessarily making more, it's spending less.

There's a downside though, when you don't spend money on things like going out to eat and going to the movies etc. then those businesses get hurt by you not spending. The theory behind stimulus and bailout supporters is that if they give you other people's money then you'll go out and spend it at those businesses. The problem with that theory is that they are just creating what I'll call "shadow debt".

It's no different than you using a credit card, only it's uncle Sam's credit card. It's still debt that you can't afford, only since it's other people's money you're spending you don't think of it as debt. The reason that the solution is lower taxes rather than increased government spending is that when you are given more of your own money from lower tax rates the money you are spending is actually discretionary spending money that you actually owned.

That spending money doesn't increase anyone's debt. When you have more of your own money you are more likely to buy that $2.00 coffee, get that $5.00 sub, or go see that movie. That spending will help those businesses but not add to anyone's debt. The increased economic activity from you spending your own money will increase the revenue of businesses and yes, government.

If businesses start making more money off of the people who now have more money to spend they will need more workers to keep up with the increased business, the end result....more jobs. More jobs means more taxpayers, more taxpayers means more revenue. Have I lost you yet? Or are you starting to get how the economy really works?

Let's send a message to the politicians. Vote yes on question 3 and force the politicians to look at the budget the way we have to look at ours. Perhaps they then will truly begin to see what it's really like to live in the real world during this recession. Maybe then we'll be able to gain a bit of respect from the politicians who are supposed to work for us. We've sacrificed enough for their special interests, we've given them enough of our tax money to waste. Let's teach them a lesson and give them a little less.

After all, it's only 3.25 cents on the dollar, (6.25% down to 3%). They always use that argument when talking tax increases. It's only .5 cents here, or a dollar there. Well you know what...I'm tired of being nickel and dimed to death, how about you? Vote yes on question 3 and ignore the propaganda. Propaganda always ignores that which matters most, the truth.

Read more...

9 Days Left, Down With The Deval Part 2

It's a campaign cycle that never seems to end. As soon as we get through one election it seems as though we're right back into campaign season. For many of us the coming election in just a few days couldn't come fast enough. This will be the first major test of the Tea Party movement. This will also be a test of how popular Obama's agenda really is and how real the apparent resurgence of conservatism in this country actually is.

Due to the fact that I'm a Massachusetts conservative my focus has of course been mostly focused on the governors battle between the Deval and Charlie Baker, as well as the battle between Barney Frank and Sean Bielat. We're in the home stretch now so the politicians that are in the most trouble are pulling out all the stops in order to try and get a last minute grip on victory. That makes the ads more frequent and often times more dishonest.

There's one ad that really bothers me in particular though. It's from the Mass Teachers Association. They are trying to attack Charlie Baker for health insurance premium increases caused largely by things like Romneycare, (which, like it's big brother Obamacare, the Deval supports). That's why you don't see the Deval attacking Romneycare. In fact he usually makes it a positive point that "97% of Massachusetts residents have health care". Even though the costs have skyrocketed and the quality of care has gone down. Attacking Charlie Baker and those evil insurance companies is much more convenient.

The Mass Teachers Association is spending lots of money to re-elect the Deval while at the same time the schools are asking parents to provide things like toilet paper and other school necessities. Maybe the unions should stop spending money on campaign ads and start investing in the children the Liberals like to talk about so much.

The Deval likes to talk about all of the jobs he's saving, especially teachers jobs. The truth is that it was you who saved those jobs. Obama gave money to the state with his "jobs bill".

"The legislation provides $10 billion to save more than 160,000 teacher jobs nationwide, and $16.1 billion in Medicaid assistance to states that will save and create 158,000 jobs, preventing layoffs of police and firefighters, according to Congresswoman Niki Tsongas, D-Lowell. Tsongas said it's estimated that 2,400 teaching jobs will be saved in Massachusetts"

So you see, when the Deval talks about all he's done to fund education etc. he's not referring to his excellent leadership skills and money management. He's referring to yet another bailout that the state received. I wonder why unemployment fell in September here. What happened in September?....oh that's right, school started so the bailed out teachers went back to work. The teachers unions, through their ads are now helping to pay him back by attacking Charlie Baker.

Just look at how much money the Teachers Unions have poured into Democrats over the years. Now, after spending all of that money on campaigns they need your help to fund their jobs and pensions. We all have good reasons to be against all of these bailouts and wasteful spending programs. It's a vicious cycle. A special interest group, (like unions), spends money they can't afford to spend on politicians that will serve their interest, then the corrupt politician ignores public opinion and bails out the group that bailed out their campaign. Both parties are guilty, but both parties aren't in power.

Back to the Deval, here are some facts that you aren't going to see in one of the Deval's campaign ads. You may remember some of these facts from when they were fresh news throughout the last 4 years.

Deval Patrick gave a 33%, $1.1 million raise to his staff.

Deval Patrick went on a state hiring spree in the middle of a fiscal crisis – including hiring campaign donors.

Deval Patrick spent nearly $1,200/mo. for a top-of-the-line Cadillac sedan.

Deval Patrick spent over $27,000 in taxpayer money on luxury furnishings for his office before public outrage compelled him to reimburse the state.

Deval Patrick proposed a 19¢ per gallon tax on gasoline.

Deval Patrick raised the state sales tax by 25% during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Deval Patrick hired a $72,000 per year “chief of staff” for his wife.

Deval Patrick pushed to hire Marian Walsh in a $175,000 state job that had gone unfilled for years.

Here's the source.

The Deval hopes you've forgotten all of that when he goes on the campaign trail to talk about what a great job he's doing. At least he cares about the children right? Aren't liberals always talking about "the children". Keep in mind the Deval opposed Jessica's law. It took quite a fight to get a version passed in Mass due to the Deval's opposition. I wonder why the Deval wouldn't use that to make his case for "the children"?

Oh, hold on a minute, I remember, the Deval was a criminal defense lawyer before he became a governor:

"Trial lawyers dislike it claiming their jobs will be far more difficult with plea bargains off the table"

"Even with all these and other arguments in mind, voters of the state of Massachusetts showed great support for Jessica's Law. It wasn't until after hundreds of thousands of petitions were signed and delivered to Beacon Hill, a public calling out by Bill O'Reilly himself, and much media attention, that this bill found its way to the senate"

"It had already been over 3 years since Rep. Karyn Polito had begun pushing for such legislation. One can't help but wonder if the circus hadn't come to town would Deval Patrick have signed on the dotted line?"

For the record, Karyn Polito is running for State Treasurer, you may want to remember that on election day. I know this all makes it look like the Deval cares more about the child rapist than the child victims but that's only because you probably haven't seen all of the Deval's campaign ads about how much he cares about the children. The quote is worth repeating:

"Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are, how you vote tells people who you really are deep down inside." - Zell Miller

Here's another statistic you won't see in a Deval Patrick ad, this one comes from that evil right wing extremist group protectmasschildren.org:

•In 2003 Massachusetts had the third highest rate of child abuse among the 50 states, with 22 out of every 1,000 children being a victim. ~ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

•In 2007 Massachusetts had the highest rate of confirmed cases of child abuse and neglect in the country. The rate was twice the national average. ~ U.S Department of Health and Human Services

Keep in mind this is happening while our wonderful governor is opposing Jessica's law. As if you need another reason not to vote for Barney Frank or Deval Patrick, I have one here.

"Conveniently eight days before one of the most historic elections in modern day America, Barney Frank, in all his pomp and circumstance, will deliver with grandeur a $2M stimulus check to Gov. Deval Patrick for more "shovel ready" jobs."

Last week, President Obama reluctantly told the New York Times, "there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects."

"Here in Massachusetts we're just as tired of Barney Frank as you are and we're tired of him campaigning on giving us YOUR money"

In conclusion, it's now up to each of us, the voters. We have to decide if we want to continue voting for a letter rather than a candidate. Is voting for Barney Frank and the Deval worth it just to remain loyal to the Democratic Party? I know there are a lot of Democrats who don't like the Deval, many of them also know that Sean Bielat is clearly a better candidate then Barney Frank. The race between Sean and Barney wouldn't be so close if there weren't a good chunk of Democrats giving Sean a serious look.

I have stated many times that I didn't vote for John McCain or President Obama in 2008. I'm owned by a set of conservative principles, not a political party. If my party doesn't represent those principles, then I don't represent that party. Perhaps this final quote will reflect something that a lot of Democrats might want to think about.

"I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me" - Ronald Reagan

I've made my case, we won't get another chance to change anything for 2 more years. It's time for you to determine where you stand and make a choice. If you think I'm wrong then by all means re-elect Barney Frank and the Deval, just make sure you ask yourself why they deserve your vote. As for me, the only thing scarier than Michael Myers this Halloween is the possibility of the progressive left maintaining total control of our government after this election.

Read more...

Guilty Until Proven Innocent With Lawyers Turned Politicians

Here we are in the home stretch of the campaign cycle leading up to the election on November 2. I often wonder about how people that aren't tuned in to politics and history really see elections. After all, if you don't pay much attention, either due to anger or frustration, or due simply to a lack of interest, how are you supposed to make the best guess as to who's best for the job?

You get a handful of ads with each candidate either bashing their opponents record, or propping up their own record, (often misleading more than a little bit). This is going to regard the current story about the Chamber Of Commerce and the funding of political ads.

You only get a few chances to truly change the future of our country, good or bad. It's pretty much always been true that most people don't like politicians. That's perhaps never been more true than it is today. Let's start on the Chamber of Commerce story.

You know the charge, the Chamber of Commerce is supposedly funding Republican campaign ads in an attempt to defeat the Democrats, (even though some of the Chamber's ads are in fact for "Blue Dog" conservative Democrats but never mind that). They have no proof but you've probably seen some of the ads, especially this one.

The most fascinating part of all this is that they have no evidence, they just need a topic to run on because the over-regulation, high-tax progressive way of doing things is having the exact results Conservatives have been expecting and warning against. I have a question for the Democrats though...

Where was the outrage and the campaign ads from the DNC for Chinagate during the Clinton presidency?

"Twenty-two people were eventually convicted of fraud or for funneling Asian funds into the United States elections, and others fled U.S. jurisdiction. Several of these were associates of Bill Clinton or Al Gore."

The key word there is "convicted". That means that there was actual proof, (unlike the current charges against the Chamber of Commerce by the Obama administration). Are you starting to see why they hope you stay uninformed when it comes to history? If you don't follow these things then you are easier to fool with a nice little campaign ad. It's a last minute desperate ploy to save the Democrats from what is looking more and more like it's going to be a landslide defeat for the left, we'll have to wait and see.

The Obama administration wants the Chamber of Commerce to disclose all of their donors, (which they have no legal obligation to do). However, it's no secret that the Obama administration has the support of the unions who do things like this. The Chamber of Commerce doesn't want to disclose it's donors because thug union groups out to socialize and destroy this country will send people to the homes of the donors to intimidate them, (which is illegal if you are literally on the doorstep of a private residence).

Need more proof about the unions intentions, you don't have to look any farther than the 10-2-10 rally in D.C. which was organized by the labor unions and CPUSA, (Communist Party USA).

Given what we've seen in the past from the labor unions it's pretty reasonable to keep your donors secret. If Obama has proof then he needs to provide it, if not then he should apologize. He's a lawyer, I thought they believed in innocent until proven guilty? I guess that only applies when the accusations are against the Liberals in the eyes of the left.

Read more...

Defeat The Deval

Last time I took on Barney Frank, now it's time to make a case against Deval Patrick here in Mass. As usual I'm going to use some history in this one. I won't be going back that far though since I won't need to but I'd like to remind you of a few things that I've been thinking about regarding this election cycle for Mass.

The RGA, (Republican Governors Association), has been wasting too much time and money attacking Tim Cahill. Cahill's job is to syphon off enough votes from Charlie Baker to hand the Deval a victory since Deval is in far more trouble than he'd ever admit. I talk to, more like debate, a lot of Liberal Democrats here in Mass. I sometimes have trouble finding Democrats that really like and are enthusiastic about the Deval.

That's very telling and it explains why Tim Cahill is really in this race as an independent, he hopes that Democrats who don't really like the Deval will vote for him rather than Charlie Baker. There's about a 3 to 1 ratio of Democrats to Republicans here as well as the nearly 50% of registered voters who claim to be independents, (many are actually leaning left Democrats who don't wish to be identified by a party label). That makes the math of Massachusetts politics typically work in favor for the Liberals.

When a Democrat falls below 50% here as Deval and Barney Frank have it causes panic for them. This is why President Obama has been here campaigning for the Deval and former President Clinton was here trying to help Barney Frank.

Before we get into the campaign ads there's something you should keep in mind, it's extremely relevant to the Deval's campaign ads....psychology. You'll notice that in every ad by the Deval he always uses this really soft tone. If you happened to catch the debates he does this as well. The tone is not an accident, he's hoping that by talking really soft and sweet it will make him like able and therefore you'll be more willing to fall for anything he sells you.

Deval ran on the catchphrase of "let's get started". Let's take a look at this ad from the Deval's original run for governor. The ad claims to want to challenge the "Big Dig culture on Beacon Hill". Yet all he brought with him was the corrupt windy city, (Chicago), culture to Massachusetts.

In that regard, Massachusetts has already been living with a smaller, though almost identical, version of Barack Obama since the election of '06. It's not shocking to me that these policies aren't working. They didn't work in Chicago, they haven't worked for Massachusetts, and now they aren't working for the rest of the country.

Let's look at a more current ad regarding this years election. Remember, listen to the tone he uses here. So the Deval has received enough federal bail out money to fund the unions, while being against better performing charter schools.

The Deval likes to talk about how Massachusetts is going to come out of this recession better than any other state. He talks about how Massachusetts is a great state for business. I'd like to show you something.

This is from the Chief Executive magazine. Here's the story. You'll notice that Massachusetts gets an abysmal 47th place out of 51, (51 due to D.C.). Now who do you think is more accurate about the business friendliness of Massachusetts? Do you trust actual business leaders or the Deval?

At least Deval cares about his constituents right? Let me remind you of something else from awhile back on this blog. I went to a town hall meeting with Deval in the summer of '09. He didn't pick me for a question, (lucky him as it would've turned into a debate and I probably would have won), but I did get to submit a YouTube question directly with one of his staffers after the event. I asked about taxes and used this quote from JFK:

"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" - JFK

I wanted an answer as to why he keeps raising taxes and thus reducing revenues as JFK seemed to know would happen. The first e-mail I received back was this:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with Governor Patrick. The Governor values your opinions and enjoys hearing from people across the Commonwealth. Please know that your views are always welcome in this administration.

The Governor and his staff strive to review every piece of correspondence in a timely manner. If appropriate, we will forward your message to the appropriate staff member, department or the state agency that can best address your concerns.

If you need an immediate response, please call the Governor's Office at 617-725-4005 to speak with a Constituent Services Aide. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with Governor Patrick. Stay involved and engaged...this is your government!

I gave him another week, then e-mailed for an answer again, that's when I got this answer from the Deval:

Dear Brandon,

On behalf of Governor Deval Patrick, thank you for your recent email regarding your YouTube question from the Town Hall meeting. 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
617-725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact

Technical difficulties, so....you can e-mail me an answer that blames "technical difficulties, but you can't e-mail me an actual answer to my question!! I never got my answer and this was from almost a year and a half ago. Here are the 2 stories that I posted on this blog at the time.

The first one.

The second one.

They can blame Charlie Baker for the Big Dig all they want. The lying Liberal group Bay State Future has ads out attacking Charlie for the Big Dig. Read the history of the big dig and you tell me that the 4 years in the later 90's that Charlie Baker was in charge of some financing qualifies the Big Dig disaster for being his fault.

"After years of extensive lobbying for federal dollars, a 1987 public works bill appropriating funding for the Big Dig was passed by U.S. Congress, but it was subsequently vetoed by President Ronald Reagan as being too expensive. When Congress overrode his veto, the project had its green light and ground was first broken in 1991."

So the Democrats in Congress overrode President Reagan's veto to fund the Big Dig, now that's interesting since Deval Patrick blames it all on Charlie Baker. I don't think there's much else to say since the history of the Big Dig proves that it was the Democrats, not Charlie Baker, who approved of the disaster known as the Big Dig. As usual the Liberals and the Deval's success depends entirely on Massachusetts voters being ignorant on the facts of history.

Unfortunately for the Deval, I'm not one of those people. Every election cycle we must never forget what Democrat Zell Miller said at the 2004 Republican National Convention.

"Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are, how you vote tells people who you really are deep down inside." - Zell Miller

It's time to make a choice Massachusetts. Do you trust the Deval's campaign talk? Or do you look at the results of the Deval's policies?

Remember, it was Deval Patrick who changed the law that the Democrats originally changed back when Mitt Romney was governor. They were afraid that if Kerry won the election of '04 then Romney would be allowed to appoint a Republican in Kerry's place, so the Democratic controlled Massachusetts legislature changed the law so we'd have to vote on it. Kerry lost so it didn't become an issue.

However, then the Deval became the governor and Ted Kennedy died before the Senate got a vote on Obamacare. In one of the most corrupt things ever to occur in politics the Democrats then voted to change back the law THEY ORIGINALLY CHANGED in order to allow the Deval to appoint a replacement for Ted Kennedy.

WITHOUT THE VOTE OF MASSACHUSETTS VOTERS DEVAL APPOINTED PAUL KIRK, (GOOD FRIEND OF TED KENNEDY), KIRK GAVE THE SENATE DEMOCRATS THE 60TH VOTE THEY NEEDED AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

We voiced our anger over Obamacare when we then voted for Scott Brown. The House of Representatives then voted to pass the law as is because they knew if they changed the law in any way Scott Brown would've denied the 60th vote to the Democrats and the health care bill wouldn't have become law.

It doesn't get much more corrupt than that. Remember Massachusetts, Obamacare, which continues to become less and less popular wouldn't have been realized without Deval Patrick. That makes Mass most responsible for the passage of Obamacare.

Let's right a wrong here. Let's forget about being a blue state and show we are a red, white, and blue state. Spread the word, remind people of what you've seen here. Let's defeat the Deval.

Read more...