Saturday, July 18, 2009

Posted By Bobby Eberle On July 16, 2009 at 6:57 am

As the Senate debates the final provisions of a $680 billion defense bill, Democrats are trying to poison the water by adding a hate crimes bill to the package. It's quite obvious that hate crimes legislation and a defense authorization bill have nothing in common and should not be voted on together.

In addition, where is it written that one group, one gender, one class of people are more special and worthy of more protection than another group? Only in left-wing America. Equal protection under the law? Not any more.

The federal hate crimes bill which is sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) has been attached as an amendment by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) to the defense appropriations bill. As noted in The Boston Globe, "Most Republicans oppose the legislation, saying it infringes on states' rights or could lead to the criminalization of religious expressions of opposition to homosexuality."

Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada, has called for a vote, requiring 60 supporters, to move forward on the hate crimes measure. That vote could come as early as today, but timing for a final vote on the amendment was uncertain.

Current hate crimes law applies to acts of violence motivated by prejudice against a person's race, color, national origin, or religion. That would expand under the legislation to include crimes targeting people because of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.

Sen. John McCain spoke out against the move on Wednesday, saying, "Those of us who oppose this legislation -- and it is important legislation -- will be faced with a dilemma of choosing between a bill which can harm, in my view, the United States of America and its judicial system and a bill defending the nation. I don't think that's fair to any member of this body."

One of the main controversies (outside of the fact that the entire premise of "hate" crimes is wrong) is that the new legislation would cover sexual orientation. Religious groups, which teach that homosexuality is wrong, are obviously concerned on what this bill would do to their ability to promote their teachings.

According to a story in the Associated Press:

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and other supporters also stressed that religious leaders or others who voice objections to homosexuality could not be held liable. The bill "does not criminalize speech or hateful thoughts," he said. "It seeks only to punish action, violent action, that undermines the core values of our nation."

So, what happens if some nut-job sits in a church sermon and then goes out and kills someone based on what he heard in church? Without ANY form of hate crimes legislation, that person would be tried for murder. But now, since those on the left feel that a murder charge doesn't send the right message, the criminal would be charged with a hate crime. But then the guy states that he did it because of what he learned in church.... that he was following God's will. Now what?

The bill is bad, and it has no place being attached to the defense bill. If you'd like to contact your senators, just use the link below (link here). No one deserves special treatment or favored treatment. This is America where we should all be treated equally.


Thank you! I've been saying this for years! Some crimes are perhaps more "hateful" than others because of the circumstances, but does this mean that it's really worse? Calling a crime a "hate" crime doesn't change the facts of the case at all. Everyone is special to someone. A person who is dead, isn't anymore dead because they are gay, or elderly, or black, or the method of their death. Dead is dead.

However, the circumstances can increase the penalty. The punishment for committing a hate crime shouldn't be determined until the facts are presented and a person convicted. Once convicted, that's the time to add on the "hate" aspect, and load 'em up, I say. Bury them under the jail, lock 'em up and throw away the key, whatever will keep them out of society is fine by me.

But first, I want them to have a trial that they can't appeal. What I'm saying is, I don't want anyone to go to trial and be given the opportunity later to say that they were convicted because of public sentiment, that they were made notorious or didn't have a fair trial because of the publicity of a "hate" crime.

If they had an unfortunate upbringing and just weren't taught how to treat other people with the respect they deserve as fellow human beings, then society has yet another problem, which can't be legislated, no matter how much Liberals would like to legislate us into robotic beings with the same thoughts as every other person in the world. Liberals seem to want us to "be on a level playing ground" but then want to elevate certain groups to another status. You can't have it both ways.

Either we're all equal under the law or we're not.
FairTax on Twitter

To those who oppose the FairTax, here's the truth, you already pay it! Embedded ... Read More:

Call your state representatives and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!

Friday, July 17, 2009

12 Ways to Tell the Economy Is Bad

12. CEO's are now playing miniature golf.

11. I got a pre-declined credit card in the mail.

10. I went to buy a toaster oven and they gave me a bank.

9. Hotwheels and Matchbox car companies are now trading higher than GM in the stock market.

8. Obama met with small businesses - GE, Pfizer, Chrysler, Citigroup, and GM, to discuss the Stimulus Package.

7. McDonalds is selling the 1/4 ouncer.

6 People in Beverly Hills fired their nannies and are learning their children's names.

5. The most highly-paid job is now jury duty.

4. People in Africa are donating money to Americans. Mothers in Ethiopia are telling their kids, "Finish your plate; do you know how many kids are starving in America?"

3. Motel Six won't leave the lights on.

2. The Mafia is laying off judges.

1. If the bank returns your check marked as "insufficient funds," you have to call them and ask if they meant you or them.
FairTax on Twitter

It's Friday. Did U take a look at the Federal withholdings on yr paycheck? How much better off wld U be if U could keep those $$'s?

Call yr state reps and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!

Thursday, July 16, 2009

by Newt Gingrich
Posted 07/15/2009 ET

News on the economic front has not been good.

When campaigning for his economic stimulus bill this past winter, President Obama and his allies in Congress promised the bill would prevent unemployment from exceeding 8%. Last month, we reached 9.5% unemployment and President Obama conceded it will likely reach 10%.

Worse, the huge increase in our money supply and the mountains of debt being racked up by the Federal Reserve create the ominous specter of an inflationary environment that would slow down our economic recovery.

It’s obvious to all but the most fervent left-wing ideologues that the “stimulus” -- passed in haste by Congress without being read -- has failed.

Of course, this hasn’t stopped the same people who brought us Stimulus One to begin production on a sequel. And with a new 60 seat majority in the Senate and Pelosi’s Puppets in charge in the House, some think another big-government, pork-laden bill that would do little for economic growth and drive us deeper in debt is inevitable.

Bad news, right? Not necessarily. This is actually a moment of enormous opportunity to promote legislation that will result in a real economic recovery.

The Historic Choice: A Real Stimulus Based on Small Business and Entrepreneurs or More Political Payoffs for Politicians and Lobbyists

I’m going to say something that may surprise you -- I agree that Congress should pass another stimulus bill.

However, it should be a bill that would provide real stimulus for our economy.
Conservatives should seize this opportunity to lead a national dialogue over what creates economic growth in America.

It is becoming increasingly clear to the country that the Left’s $787 billion spending bill was not a “stimulus package.” It was, instead, a “politician payoff package” in which the most rapidly spent money went to state and local governments.

Vice President Biden -- out campaigning on behalf of their failed spending bill -- has been quick to point out that the stimulus has “saved” government jobs that would have been cut.

Fair enough, but that money only solved this year’s problems. What about next year? And the years after that? All that the stimulus has done has allowed state governments to delay making the hard spending choices necessary to reform their bureaucracies.

More importantly, the only real measure for the success of an economic stimulus bill should be whether it spurs hiring in the private sector, where the vast majority of jobs in the United States are created. The Left’s spending bill has only increased government control over the country by taking money out of the private sector and putting it into the hands of politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists.

As the big government spending program fails to produce jobs and economic growth, the American people will demand an alternative more likely to succeed. This new conversation over “what should be done to fix the economy” creates an historic opportunity to offer a large, bold, consistent and dramatic economic initiative that would reframe the debate over economic growth and the sources of jobs in America.

Principles for a Successful Real Stimulus

Our alternative vision to the Left’s big spending, lobbyist- and politician-dominated spending bill should have five goals.

First, to build on the 59-21 majority of Americans who believe cutting business taxes will produce more jobs than increased government spending (January CBS news poll). Americans implicitly understand what creates economic growth and a vigorous national dialogue on these terms will expand public support for tax policies that actually create more jobs

Second, to offer tax changes which are big enough and bold enough to work. Even in its current, weakened state, America has a $12 trillion dollar economy. A small tax-cut bill simply does not matter and will be absorbed without any effect.

Third, the specifics of the tax cuts have to be vivid enough that people understand how it will affect their economic security. People will feel more compelled to support a government plan that puts money in their wallet instead of in the hands of bureaucrats.

Fourth, economic freedom should be returned to the American people—and not centralized in Washington. Politician-bureaucrat-lobbyist centered systems inevitably bring about corruption, political favoritism, and increased poverty. For long-term economic health, our small business and entrepreneur-focused, pro-growth alternative must reverse the damages the power driven elites have done.

Fifth, our tax cuts must be paid for with serious cuts in spending and economic growth. Our current economic predicament was, in large part, caused by problems created by excessive debt. As part of our recovery, we have to return to the path of fiscal responsibility and renew a call for a balanced budget.

A Real Stimulus for Our Economy: Tax Cuts for More Jobs, Higher Take Home Pay and Greater Prosperity Through Economic Growth

With these goals in mind, the following tax cuts should be at the heart of our alternative vision that would achieve a fundamental shift from politicians to small business, from lobbyists to entrepreneurs, and from bureaucrats to investors:

A two-year, 50% reduction in the Social Security and Medicare tax for both the employee and the employer. This provision would guarantee that virtually everyone who pays federal taxes (many of whom do not pay income tax but do pay payroll taxes) will have an immediate boost in income and that small businesses will see a dramatic increase in available cash to hire more people or make investments for the future. This reduction would also help the cash flow problems of government at all levels, which also have to pay the employer’s match.

This proposal creates the opportunity for a serious conversation with every employer about how it would increase their income and give them more resources to create jobs. The revenue loss to the trust funds would be transferred from the general fund (a better use for the money than either TARP or the Politicians Spending Act of February).

Permanently match the Chinese capital gains rate, which is zero. This is the rate Alan Greenspan testified in the late1970s was best for economic growth. It is also a relatively inexpensive thing to do in the current economy because people are going to have smaller gains.

Match the Irish corporate tax rate of 12.5%. America has had the highest corporate tax system in the world (if you combine federal and state taxes). Moving to a 12.5% corporate tax rate and combining it with zero capital gains will make America the most desirable economy in the world in which to invest.

Eliminate the death tax permanently. Inheritance is the most powerful accumulator of capital and eliminating the death tax has been consistently supported by over 75% of the American people.

Give President Obama the Opportunity to Keep His Word. Adopt the best of the small business tax proposals announced by candidate Obama in October 2008 and forgotten by the Obama Administration in 2009.

Paying for Prosperity, Job Creation and Increased Take Home Pay: Lessons from the Balanced Budgets of the 1990s

First, let’s be clear that liberal cries about deficits are hypocritical nonsense. In February, the Left passed $787 billion in political payoffs that was pure deficit spending. The Left’s first priority is always to grow government on every front; then they worry about the deficit, which is a liberal code for “tax increases.”

Second, the great lesson of balancing the budget in the 1990s was that you had to have pro-jobs and pro-investment tax cuts to get economic growth. Economic growth means more jobs. More jobs means more people off of welfare, which means they no longer need support from the government and they can start contributing through their own income. The differential in economic growth and the decline in welfare and unemployment expenses was a major part of our ability to balance the budget for four year in a row.

Third, it took a comprehensive effort of rethinking government to get spending under control. Budgeting is ultimately a function of the size and system of government. And government is a function of the kind of country and economy you want. A similar comprehensive rethinking of government in the context of what kind of country and economy America needs should be undertaken.

Fourth, the cost of potential new laws should be estimated -- or “scored” -- based upon information from the real world, from historic experience, and from economists outside government. Historically the Joint Committee on Taxation and Congressional Budget Office have always underestimated the revenue generating power of economic growth and overestimated the revenue potential from tax increases (capital gains cuts in the past have generated vastly more revenue than Joint Tax expected and that is an historic fact).

Fifth, real change will require real change. The following proposals include dramatic even wrenching change for the current bureaucracies, politicians and lobbyists. However those changes will be applauded by most Americans. We need to make it clear we will support Congressmen and Senators willing to stand up to the institutional pressures of Washington who want to avoid reform. They will need to know we’ve got their back.

Offsetting the Cost of the Tax Cut Through Smaller, Smarter Government

The following strategies are some strategies that should be used to pay for the robust tax cuts that are the centerpiece of our real stimulus bill:

1. Capture as much of the TARP money as remains unexpended;

2. Carefully go through the uncommitted portion of the $787 billion politician pay off bill from February and set aside $300 billion to $400 billion to pay for the tax cuts.

3. Incorporate into the bill offshore drilling and other pro energy measures. These would be accurately scored as revenue raisers through more development and from the economic reflow in higher tax revenue through keeping the energy money at home instead of sending it overseas.

4. Sell the private sector assets the government has unwisely acquired during the last year. The economy will grow faster without the threat of government controlled, bureaucratically supervised and politician defined companies. Whatever the value of the government stake in the various companies, put them on the auction block and get them back into the market. This will yield billions in revenue.

5. Have a one time recapture of frozen corporate assets currently held offshore with a one or two year window for returning them to the United States. This has been estimated to produce a substantial amount of revenue for the government.

6. Have a six month amnesty for back taxes to generate voluntary self policing. When tried at the state level this has produced significant resources.

7. The bigger economy with more jobs will take people off of unemployment and off of welfare and will reduce the dependence on Medicaid and other government programs. The resultant drop in the cost of government will be a significant drop in government expenditures offsetting a significant part of the short term revenue loss through the tax cuts (this was our experience in the late 1990s and in this down economy it would be even more true).

A National Dialogue: From Your Kitchen Table to the Halls of Congress

Together we can restart the American economy with bold ideas that put an end to Washington’s political handouts and irresponsible spending.

In the spirit of Margaret Thatcher’s rule -- “First you win the argument; then you win the vote” - it is my hope you can use this strategy memo as the basis for a “kitchen table,” grassroots campaign that will create a national dialogue over the source of economic growth in America: small business and entrepreneurs or big bureaucracies and government handouts.

We should use email, Facebook, Twitter, letters to the editor -- every communication tool we have at our disposal.

The genius of our free market system has always depended upon ingenuity, pro-growth tax structures, smart spending, and fiscal responsibility. Any other path is sacrificing the future for the present.

Together we can return America back to the path of safety, prosperity and freedom.

Your Friend,

FairTax on Twitter

W/ FairTax if your having finance problems, simply reduce yr retail spending and pay less taxes. GET AHEAD!!!

Call your state representatives and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

by Newt Gingrich
Posted 07/08/2009 ET

Two years ago, I wrote a book called Real Change. Today I want to tell you about that book’s successor, how the Obama Administration hijacked “change” -- and how we can take it back.

It all started in the summer of 2007 when part of one of my speeches was posted on YouTube. It was a short, three-minute clip in which I explained the difference between two Americas, one that works and one that fails, by contrasting UPS and FedEx with the federal bureaucracy.

You can see it yourself here. The gist of the video is that UPS and FedEx are so capable and efficient they can track millions of packages in real time. The bureaucracy, on the other hand, can’t locate the 10-20 million people who are in this country illegally. Perhaps, I suggested, we should send them all a package.

The book that was inspired by the tremendous public reaction to this video was Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works.

Real Change Means “the Special Interests, the Bureaucracies, and the Force of the Past Will Not Determine the Course of the Future”

Here’s how I described what I wanted to accomplish with Real Change at the time:

Real change must begin at the individual level, with each person deciding that the special interests, the bureaucracies, and the forces of the past will not determine the course of the future. Real change has to start with families who don’t want to see their quality of life decline even as they work harder to maintain it. Real change has to start with citizens who say to their families, friends, and neighbors that the time has come to insist that their politicians change or they will change their politicians.

We must have been on to something because the presidential campaign that was waged since I wrote Real Change was full of talk about change and promiseds to end business as usual in Washington; to take the nation beyond the bitter deadlock of partisan politics.

President Obama Promised to End the Influence of Special Interests in Washington, Then He Gave 55% of Chrysler to His Union Supporters

The American people clearly voted for change last November. But equally clear is that what we’ve gotten is more business as usual.

Barack Obama campaigned as a new kind of centrist who could bring people together. But as president he’s been a radical liberal, passing his stimulus bill without a single Republican vote in the House.

He campaigned to end the influence of special interests in the nation’s capital. But as president he’s rewarded his political supporters at the expense of economic recovery in the stimulus bill and paid back his union allies at the expense of the rule of law in the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies.

Barack Obama campaigned as a leader who would bring a new kind of politics to Washington. Then he used Chicago-style politics -- twisting arms and offering payoffs -- to pass one of the largest tax increases in American history in the cap and trade bill.

President Obama promised change and failed to deliver. Where do we go from here?

Real Change, Expanded and Updated for the Obama Era

The new, Obama-era edition of Real Change is entitled Real Change: The Fight for America’s Future.

It has all the innovative ideas and practical solutions of the first Real Change, and much more.

The new forward begins with how American taxpayers were exploited with the taxpayer bailouts that began at the end of the Bush Administration. Then it describes how things got worse with the big government, big spending bacchanal that has been the first six months of the Obama Administration.

It describes how our national security has deteriorated faster than I thought it would since the last months of the Bush Administration, despite the spectacular success of the surge in Iraq.

The section culminates in a powerful critique of the Obama domestic and national security policy:

“The Obama-Pelosi-Reid team is the most radical group ever to hold the reigns of American power. Their vision of a high tax, big bureaucracy Washington-centered system dominated by politicians and leading to a secular-socialist future will fundamentally challenge America’s role as a beacon of hope, opportunity and freedom.”

Real Change Is More Than a List of Complaints About the Obama Administration. It’s a Plan of Solutions for America

But Real Change: The Fight For America’s Future is more than a list of grievances against the current administration.

It is a guide, a set of talking points, and a blueprint for how conservative and center-right Americans can reclaim the mantle of “change” in our political debate; how we can, in fact, transcend “change” to bring about real change.

Using Ronald Reagan and the current Tea Party movement as guides, the new Real Change describes how we can’t argue within the current framework of the left and the elites if we want to bring about real change.

If we accept their terms and their premises, the book explains, we “will end up being with the less destructive, less expensive, slower decay wing of a lot of really bad ideas.”

When the Left Takes for Granted the Superiority of Big Government, We Must Argue Forcefully for Free Enterprise

Instead, we have to establish our own terms of debate and argue for bold solutions to the challenges we face.

When the left takes for granted the superiority of big government, we must argue boldly and forcefully for free enterprise.

When they play to their union base with calls for an even bigger bureaucracy, we must remind Americans that the world that works is the world of entrepreneurs.

And when they assert the lowest-common-denominator fairness of government redistribution, we must counter with the moral superiority of individual initiative and success.

America is Still Waiting For Change in Washington

Real Change: The Fight for America’s Future is about these ideas and much, much more. I encourage you to pick up a copy for yourself or someone you care about.

America is still waiting for real change in Washington. It’s time for more than change. It’s time for real change. Let the battle of ideas and solutions for America’s future begin.
FairTax on Twitter

Highly regressive Social Security, and MCare Payroll taxes work against Self-employment. #FairTax

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

FairTax on Twitter

Climbing out of poverty is challenging w/ current tax code, the more you earn the heavier your tax burden. #FairTax

Call your state representatives and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!

Monday, July 13, 2009

FairTax on Twitter

Under a progressive tax code, $1 more in your paycheck can reduce your take home pay by a significant margin #FairTax (via @ChrisGrewe)

Call your state representatives and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!

Sunday, July 12, 2009

FairTax on Twitter

FairTax~When politicians have 2 raise taxes on 100% of American ppl, instead of playing class warfare as they do 2day it 1't be as easy!

Call your state representatives and urge them to press for a FairTax on a state level. This application will prove it's success!
The Moment You Want to Take Back....

A husband and wife are lying quietly in bed reading when the wife looks over at him and asks the question

WIFE: 'What would you do if I died? Would you get married again?'

HUSBAND: 'Definitely not!'

WIFE: 'Why not? Don't you like being married?'

HUSBAND: 'Of course I do.'

WIFE: 'Then why wouldn't you remarry?'

HUSBAND: 'Okay, okay, I'd get married again.'

WIFE: 'You would? (with a hurt look)

HUSBAND: (makes audible groan)

WIFE: 'Would you live in our house?'

HUSBAND: 'Sure. It's a great house.'

WIFE: 'Would you sleep with her in our bed?'

HUSBAND: 'Where else would we sleep?'

WIFE: 'Would you let her drive my car?'

HUSBAND: 'Probably. It is almost new.'

WIFE: 'Would you replace my pictures with hers?'

HUSBAND: 'That would seem like the proper thing to do.'

WIFE: 'Would you give her my jewelry?'

HUSBAND: 'No. I'm sure she'd want her own.'

WIFE: 'Would you take her golfing with you?'

HUSBAND: 'Yes. Those are always good times.'

WIFE: 'Would she use my clubs?'

HUSBAND: 'No. She's left-handed.'

WIFE: - silence -

HUSBAND: ' . . . Shit.'
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley