One of the things that drives me crazy is watching the tremendous amount of ignorance the public has about taxes. I have seen politicians, media, private foundations and my own relatives state as absolute fact things I know the be absolutely false. I try to explain in a rational manner what the truth is and it’s useless. People think “logically.” As one who has had years of math classes I and anyone else in that situation quickly gets burned and receives an “F” for thinking “logically.” It is best to pause and think about things a little more thoroughly.

And so it is in public life. We have so many examples of herd mentality. Herd mentality based on emotion. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were inspired by the feeling that all people should be given a chance at the American dream. Emotionally it really makes sense. Why not? Yes we can! But hundreds of thousands of defaulted mortgages later we all realize, even the most ardent supporter of Fannie and Freddie, that maybe more thought should have went into regulation and oversight.

And so it is with taxes. We now owe 10 trillion in debt. Hell, even I don’t know what that is. $40,000 per man, woman and child? Somewhere around there. And if you look at the direction of the bail outs and congress this total will soon reach $18 trillion. We got to $10 trillion with Republicans. Nancy Pelosi gives every indication that is nowhere near enough.

So if we all acknowledge the problem and want to pay the money back what is the best way to do it? The emotional knee jerk reaction is to raise taxes. Seems logical. Raise taxes and more money will come into the federal treasury. Right? Wrong.

Since classical economic theory back in the early part of the 20th century economist have always known about money circulation. What is referred to as velocity. The faster money goes through the economy the more money people make and the more taxes are collected. Since then the equations have gotten a lot more complex with partial differentials, regression analysis and other mathematics. The principals are the same. The faster the economic activity the more jobs, income and taxes.

So how do we get a faster economy? There has to be some tax rate that allows maximum tax collections right? Yes there is. Arthur Laffer took a simple business principal studied by millions of business

majors the world over. The maximum profit point or maximum revenue point. It the point where the price of your Chevy trucks makes you the most profit. Charge too much and you lose customers. Charge to little and you lose money. It’s not that complex. Disney does it for ticket prices. Walmart does it for their store pricing policies. All business does it. So why when Arthur Laffer does this same thing for government maximum revenues is he ridiculed for “trickle down,” “Voodoo” and other names too discredit his theory?

Because he discovered that the maximum revenue point for tax collections for a economy was about 27% to 30%. That would be federal, state and local taxes combined. He looked at all taxes because that is what we all pay. State income tax, sales, property, sewer, telephone, federal, social security, Medicaid, Medicare, gas, cable, the whole picture. And the picture wasn’t pretty. Currently we pay around 44% of our earnings in taxes. Now it’s easy to see why politicians react stridently against Laffer and his “trickle down” or supply side economics. We are taxed too much and it hurts our economy. It would be a similar reaction if a medical doctor walked into the village hospital and told the witch doctor his method of using leeches to bleed patients was causing infection and anemia. The witch doctor would not be very pleased to hear this news. Politicians don’t want to hear that taxes are too high. And so we get the disinformation and smears.

What is the best tax system? As a Libertarian I support the fair tax for several reasons. First a simple explanation of what the fair tax is. Skip ahead if you are familiar with it. The Fair Tax would eliminate all federal taxes. No payroll, social security, Medicaid, Medicare or corporate taxes. They would all be replaces with a 23% retail sales tax. No IRS, no April 15th, no corporate taxes. This alone would save billions in accounting and compliance cost. Billions that could be spend on more productive uses.

First a sales tax would shift taxes from income to spending. A very critical point for a nation 10 trillion in debt. If people saved they would pay no tax. If they spent they would be taxed. Guess which direction people would go? Savings and investment are more critical now than ever before. Soon our debt will exceed what we owed during the darkest days of WWII as a percentage of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Without dramatically increased domestic savings and investment we will be subject to the whims of foreign power that may or may not be friendly to our interest. What would happen if we get in an international dispute with China? China could tank our economy overnight that’s what would happen. Taxing spending instead of income is a no-brainer for the situation we are in today.

Second a sales tax would eliminate the IRS. Why pray tell does the government need to know what every worker makes? What business is it of theirs? Are we free men? Not in today’s society. Think about it. The government can investigate you for political beliefs or whatever they choose to and all they have to do is make a phone call to the IRS and they know what you are doing 2,080 hours of your life a year. Probe a little further and voilà, tax filing mistakes! Getting rid of the IRS would be the biggest transfer of power from the government to the people since the Declaration of Independence. Politicians cringe at the prospect of this.

Third no corporate taxes. Currently the corporate tax rate is 35%. Now think about it. Who pays that tax? If you ran a business and had to charge 35% for the government what would you do? Raise prices as much as possible. Lay off workers or buy less equipment. Pay fewer dividends or do less research and development. All pretty damaging to your company and to the overall economy. To put it simply corporate taxes are nothing more than additional taxes on you. You pay with lower wages because there is less demand for workers. You pay higher prices for products. You pay by receiving less dividend income for your savings and retirement. Another no-brainer. Get rid of all corporate taxes.

A couple of interesting observations about corporate taxes. First some big corporations like complex corporate tax systems and draconian accounting rules. Why? It keeps competitors occupied and discourages start up companies. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 should be called the No New Competitors ACT because no new company can afford all the compliance hassles of the Act. And when the complex accounting rules are in place where to the big corporations go to get relief? Why congress of course. Congress uses high tax rates and a complex accounting system as a way of getting donations from companies and industries looking for tax breaks and relief. The typical thought process of a bright financially orientated federal legislator is to raise taxes as high as possible and sell the tax breaks to the highest bidder. What is best for the people or new companies never enters their head.

The second observation I would like to point out is if there were no corporate taxes what would happen to all the lobbyist on K Street? 90% of them would pack up and go home. The only remaining lobbyist in Washington would be the ones trying to win government contracts. Anyone want restrictions on lobbyist? Why not get rid of them. Seems like the best solution. Adios Senor Corruption.

For more information please go to fairtax.org.

The second type of tax is the flat income tax. Just like the one Ronald Reagan had in 1986. It was great. It was great for about 2 weeks until the lobbyist started getting tax breaks and rewriting the tax code to its current 66,000 page bible-times-four thing. Does anyone understand it? Flat tax systems work when you keep the tax flat which will never happen in the United States. Russia has a 13% flat tax system. Good luck Russia keeping it that way. We wish you all the best. Something tells me in 10 years it may not be so flat anymore.

And finally we have our whatever you call it tax everything policies. All the levels of government
have taxes for everything. Very inefficient and very damaging to the economy. Anyone run a corporation lately? State taxes, workers compensation, federal taxes, forms, paperwork, accountants, and lawyers. Oh what fun and joy! Not. Makes me want to kick the dog and commit various other acts of violence. Get rid of the layers and layers of useless time consuming work and let business sell whatever it wants to sell. Wow! The economy would be on steroids. Unemployment would be 3% to 4%. The recession would end almost overnight.

In a perfect world all states would have a sales tax like we enjoy in Florida. This is very critical for Florida because we have such a huge “mail box” and billionaire economy. Essentially retires move her and earn low incomes mostly through pensions and social security. Yet a lot of these retires have amassed

substantial wealth through the years. A state income tax would fail to tax most of this wealth. But when Mrs. Retiree goes down to buy her new Lincoln she has to pay sales tax like everyone else. When Mr. Billionaire buys his new yacht he pays the sales tax. This is a tremendous benefit to Florida and has attracted workers to this state ever since I can remember. Generally but not always we have a lower unemployment rate than the rest of the country. Currently the loss of construction jobs has put Florida about even with the rest of the nation.

So when the politicians tell you we need to raise taxes they are either ignorant, stupid or devious jerks who have no compassion for their fellow men and women. Most likely the latter. Most of the idiots get the fisheries and FEMA committee assignments. The game plan is simple for these maniacal power hungry predators. Enslave the people with debt and taxes. Pass out tax breaks to the highest bidder. Get that account in the Grand Caymans. Live well and keep the peasants fighting for the scraps.

Fred Thompson action comittee.

Update from the AP on today’s ongoing outcry for “ousting” the Bad Boy Governor of Illinois.

And then…

Over the last several days we have heard repeated comments about the PERSONAL SACRIFICES that PUBLIC SERVANTS endure while serving. While there are those who are away from their homes and families for extended times while in Washington or in their states capitols, it appears that the benefits far exceed the alleged personal sacrifices they make.

In fact, SIGN ME UP. Those who know me, know that I am great at making personal sacrifices and putting the interests of others before my own. That fact alone should qualify me for that political appointment that will be converted to a Senior Civil Servant position at the end of “the decider’s administration”.  I will then, always, and forever have the most paid vacation days, the best health care benefits, the most paid federal or state holidays, per Diem’s, job security during an economic Armageddon, and the freedom to perform  less than stellar job performance because I am forever secure in my Senior Civil Service position.

My future is bright, my financial security guaranteed. I can plan for the future, visualize my retirement and the second home that will be available through the “foreclosure” market. All of which was made possible while I was personally sacrificing as a political appointee and waiting to become a SENIOR CIVIL SERVANT.

I BEG YOU! Please allow me to make this personal sacrifice and become the much envied yet much maligned public servant. It would mean THE WORLD TO ME!

I bring this to your attention, because truth be known that many of these appointees, and civil servant employees would never make it in the private sector. Believe ME. THEY WOULD NOT. I have known many such “servants” and their less than stellar work ethic startles me. I have been honest with them and suggested that many of them and their associates would be fired during a probationary period for a variety of inadequacies if they were employed in the private sector. THEY LAUGH UPROARIOUSLY! (It might just be a defense mechanism)

My point in this while seemingly sarcastic, is a sad truth about some Public Servants.  Not ALL, but a prevailing number of them.

For your disgust and reading pleasure is an article from thewashingtonpost.com:

Administration Moves to Protect Key Appointees
Political Positions Shifted To Career Civil Service Jobs

By Juliet Eilperin and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, November 18, 2008; A01

Just weeks before leaving office, the Interior Department’s top lawyer has shifted half a dozen key deputies — including two former political appointees who have been involved in controversial environmental decisions — into senior civil service posts.

The transfer of political appointees into permanent federal positions, called “burrowing” by career officials, creates security for those employees, and at least initially will deprive the incoming Obama administration of the chance to install its preferred appointees in some key jobs.

Similar efforts are taking place at other agencies. Two political hires at the Labor Department have already secured career posts there, and one at the Department of Housing and Urban Development is trying to make the switch.

Between March 1 and Nov. 3, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management, the Bush administration allowed 20 political appointees to become career civil servants. Six political appointees to the Senior Executive Service, the government’s most prestigious and highly paid employees, have received approval to take career jobs at the same level. Fourteen other political, or “Schedule C,” appointees have also been approved to take career jobs. One candidate was turned down by OPM and two were withdrawn by the submitting agency.

The personnel moves come as Bush administration officials are scrambling to cement in place policy and regulatory initiatives that touch on issues such as federal drinking-water standards, air quality at national parks, mountaintop mining and fisheries limits.

The practice of placing political appointees into permanent civil service posts before an administration ends is not new. In its last 12 months, the Clinton administration approved 47 such moves, including seven at the senior executive level. Federal employees with civil service status receive job protections that make it very difficult for managers to remove them.

Most of the personnel shifts have been done on a case-by-case basis, but Interior Solicitor David L. Bernhardt moved to place six deputies in senior agency positions with one stroke, including two who have repeatedly attracted controversy. Robert D. Comer, who was Rocky Mountain regional solicitor, was named to the civil service post of associate solicitor for mineral resources. Matthew McKeown, who served as deputy associate solicitor for mineral resources, will take Comer’s place in what is also a career post. Both had been converted from political appointees to civil service status.

In a report dated Oct. 13, 2004, Interior’s inspector general singled out Comer in criticizing a grazing agreement that the Bureau of Land Managementhad struck with a Wyoming rancher, saying Comer used “pressure and intimidation” to produce the settlement and pushed it through “with total disregard for the concerns raised by career field personnel.” McKeown — who as Idaho’s deputy attorney general had sued to overturn a Clinton administration rule barring road-building in certain national forests — has been criticized by environmentalists for promoting the cause of private property owners over the public interest on issues such as grazing and logging.

One career Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize his position, said McKeown will “have a huge impact on a broad swath of the West” in his new position, advising the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service on “all the programs they implement.” Comer, the official added, will help shape mining policy in his new assignment.

“It is an attempt by the outgoing administration to limit as much as possible [the incoming administration's] ability to put its policy imprint on the Department of Interior,” the official said.

In a Nov. 13 memo obtained by The Washington Post, Bernhardt wrote that he was reorganizing his division because the associate solicitors’ original status as political appointees undermined the division’s effectiveness.

“This has resulted in frequent turnover in those positions, often with an attendant loss in productivity and management continuity in these Divisions, despite the best efforts of the newly-appointed Associate Solicitors,” he wrote.

But environmental advocates, and some rank-and-file Interior officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting their careers, said the reassignments represent the Bush administration’s effort to leave a lasting imprint on environmental policy.

“What’s clear is they could have done this during the eight years they were in office. Why are they doing it now?” said Robert Irvin, senior vice president for conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife, an advocacy group. “It’s pretty obvious they’re trying to leave in place some of their loyal foot soldiers in their efforts to reduce environmental protection.”

In an interview yesterday, Bernhardt reiterated that he thinks the move is in the government’s long-term interest.

“I believe these management decisions will strengthen the professionalism of the Office of the Solicitor and result in greater service to the Department of the Interior,” he said. “However, the next solicitor and the department’s management team are free to walk a different path.”

One senior Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters, said an incoming interior secretary or solicitor could create new political positions upon taking office and could shift Senior Executive Service officials to comparable jobs within a few months. As a general rule, career SES employees may be reassigned involuntarily within their current commuting area within 15 days, and beyond their commuting area within 60 days, but they retain their lucrative and permanent government posts. When a new agency head is appointed, he or she must wait 120 days before reassigning career SES officials.

Outside groups are trying to monitor these moves but are powerless to reverse them. Alex Bastani, a representative at the Labor Department for the American Federation of Government Employees, said it took months for that agency even to acknowledge that two of its Bush appointees, Carrie Snidar and Brad Mantel, had gotten civil service posts.

“They’re trying to burrow into these career jobs, and we’re very upset,” Bastani said. “Everyone should have an opportunity to apply for these positions. And certainly career people who don’t have partisan bent and have 10 or 15 years in their respective fields should have a shot at these positions.”

Kerry Weems, acting chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said he discourages political staff from moving into career slots. “It typically doesn’t work out for either party,” he said. Even though Weems is a career staffer, he expects to leave the administration when the Obama team takes over.

Alphonso Jackson, who was HUD secretary under President Bush, warned his political appointees not to try to burrow in when the administration changed. But one of his regional directors objected to that flat-out prohibition, according to union leaders at HUD, and has told his colleagues that he has been promised first crack at a career position.

Staff writers Ceci Connolly and Spencer S. Hsu contributed to this report.

Well! It quite simply does not end. So much for “we the people,” who are not connected or can’t “PAY TO PLAY”. 

So, all you much maligned “servants”, please give us a thought or two and please list your personal sacrifices. I will be the first to applaud and recognize you for such.

STAY TUNED

It has been several interesting days, since Political Bad Boy Blagojevich was arrested for a “political crime spree” that rendered several politicians shocked and awed.   Well!  You say,”shocked and awed”.

Really?

Isn’t that a gross exagerration of what you really felt.

Really?

Aren’t you seriously overstating your reaction?

How could those of us witnessing this, not suffer any of those shocking and compelling reactions?

Those of us who witnessed this via cable news, and are not elected officials, nor are we Federal Prosecutors, thought “so what’s new”?  Why did we not have any of those reactions?   Because it is what we expect. On a regular and ongoing basis. Again and Again and Again.

How would Watergate rate against this? (Suggested by Gov. Blago on Monday, December 8, during an appearance at Republic Window & Door during an employee protest regarding their job loss).

Blago, I suggest you ask former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan or former Special Counsel to the Nixon Administration John W. Dean. They can answer that question for you.

This “stuck as Governor” Bad Boy on a political crime spree makes our days. He inspires us to further our grassroots campaign to end the culture of corruption that is so pervasive in government. When we don’t think we can stand another political spin from the spinners, another ill gotten bailout, another self aggrandizing political statement,  his arrogance, narcissism, and what his co-horts call delusional political reality rears its’ ugly head and the media goes crazy all over again. We thank you!

The spinners start spinning, my head starts spinning, the phones start ringing, the dog barks, and anyone who has ever spoken to this tough guy ”stuck Governor” runs for cover as if they were walking through Baghdad and Blackwater was on patrol.

There is a deafening silence until some artful dodger AKA a high ranking Illinois State official, Senate or House leader throws the media a bone with an artfully prepared statement saying nothing other than that they are  shocked and awed. The tone is set for what should and should not be said, while any and all in the sphere of influence of this man are making and releasing their politically correct and partisan statements. LET’S END THE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND CALL A  SPADE A SPADE. The constituents of Illinois need to immediately call for his resignation AND the Illinois General Assembly must rigorously begin impeachment proceedings. Illinois State Attorney General Lisa Madigan is also preparing to go the the Illinois Supreme Court and have him declared unfit to serve.

 The US Senate Democratic Caucus (50 members)  issued the following letter: (from swamppolitics.com)

December 10, 2008

Dear Governor Blagojevich:

We write to insist that you step down as Governor of Illinois and under no circumstance make an appointment to fill the vacant Illinois Senate seat.

In light of your arrest yesterday on alleged federal corruption charges related to that Senate seat, any appointment by you would raise serious questions.

It is within the authority of the Illinois legislature to remove your power to make this appointment by providing for a special election. But a decision by you to resign or to step aside under Article V of the Illinois Constitution would be the most expeditious way for a new Senator to be chosen and seated in a manner that would earn the confidence of the people of Illinois and all Americans. We consider it imperative that a new senator be seated as soon as possible so that Illinois is fully represented in the Senate as the important work of the 111th Congress moves forward.

Please understand that should you decide to ignore the request of the Senate Democratic Caucus and make an appointment we would be forced to exercise our Constitutional authority under Article I, Section 5, to determine whether such a person should be seated.

We do not prejudge the outcome of the criminal charges against you or question your constitutional right to contest those charges. But for the good of the Senate and our nation, we implore you to refrain from making an appointment to the Senate.

Sincerely,

Earlier in the day, the senior senator from Illinois, Richard Durbin, sent a letter to Blagojevich asking him to step down. It was a reversal for Durbin, who just Tuesday said that such calls were premature, and that Blagojevich deserved a full and fair trial on corruption charges. Although even then, he said that the state would be better off with a new chief executive.

Here is that text of that letter.

Dear Governor Blagojevich:

I am writing to ask you to step down as Governor of Illinois. Beyond guilt or innocence, the charges against you raise serious questions about your ability to carry out your duties as chief executive of our state.

I also ask you not to appoint the next United States Senator from Illinois. Because of the nature of the charges against you, no matter whom you were to select, that individual would be under a cloud of suspicion. That would not serve our state, our nation, or the United States Senate.

Legislative efforts to impeach you or remove your ability to appoint the replacement for the United States Senate have been initiated but those options could take some time accomplish. I urge you to choose the path that will be the most beneficial for the people of Illinois and the nation, and resign immediately.

At this moment, I am the only United State Senator from Illinois and within weeks we will begin the next Congress facing unprecedented challenges. Illinois should not be underrepresented in the Senate during this critical time in our history.

I urge you to search your heart and summon the strength to put your state and your nation above any personal considerations.

Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin

The two errors in Senator Durbin’s request is that first there must be an assumption that he has a pumping heart, and clearly he has no conscience to make a selfless consideration for his state and nation. The appeal was well intended, but stay tuned. I am certain that the Honorable Senator Durbin will yet again have another take on this in a few days as the CLIMATE changes. There must be some sunshine out there. Clearly Gov. Blago thought so on Monday when he invited the world to “tape” his calls both openly and notoriously.

LONG TERM FORCAST: TORNADIC

Public outcry toward Bad Boy Blago and his media friendly wife Lady Macbeth (a media reference) heightens while as public servants they continue to count their personal sacrifices.

No board to be appointed to.

No Secretarial appointment in the new Administration.

No Warren Buffet Foundation to lead.

No SEIU Union to defraud.

Clearly A GREAT PERSONAL TRADEGY at the very least.

I heard one political strategist suggest that if this had been a republican that was arrested, that the Federal Prosecutor and the media would be making a point of emphasizing his party affiliation. Geez, I didn’t think  corruption had a party. I thought it was a state of political being. A characterization. A REALITY, if you will Mr. Spinner. I don’t THINK Patrick Fitzgerald cares about PARTY affiliation when he investigates. Are you suggesting that he does? Some of us don’t give a hoot about what party it is, we care that it happens. REPEATEDLY!!!!

A self serving vote, a tainted dollar, a sold vote, an illegal contribution. It happens! REPEATEDLY!!!

Please all you strategists, review your banter and edit your political “wittisisms” before going on air and exposing us to this idiocy. You look a fool! It irritates CLINICAL THINKERS. We are AWED that you have left personal integrity and decency out of your rhetoric. That you will SPIN THE TRUTH to further your political agenda!  Alas! I am shocked and awed.  

I can deal with the crime spree, I can’t deal with the nonsense by some spinners.

A RANT:

UPDATE: Dec. 15, 2008

UPDATE: Dec. 11, 2008
Since I started this rant the bailout has passed the house. It sucks! We better hope and pray the Senate has more common sense and sends EVERYONE back to the drawing board or we will be revisiting this issue early next year.

My first inclination was an emphatic NO NO NO!

I have a billion questions about this whole situation … I will not list them here since there certainly is not the time, space or bandwidth to cover it all.

After putting a bit of “Clinical Thought” to it all I have decided it is a must on some level.
There is no point in the “blame game” we need to embrace the “fix game”. I looking over the offered solutions and those promoting them it crossed my mind NOT MANY offering solutions have ever run a business.

Come to think of it most would probably fall flat on their faces in the real business world. So they are offering a business solution?
HOW SMART IS THAT?
Let me answer that for you … NOT VERY.

Add to all of that who they are “sleeping with” (lobbyist “payoff” “kickback” “campaign donations”) and we have further skewed solutions.
How about we kick “Politically Correct” aside and call a spade a spade.
That whole can of worms is another article by someone wiser than I coming soon.

Handing over billions with a CAR CZAR to oversee?
Who the heck would want that job?
It will be most interesting to see who has the real wherewithal and guts to step up to that plate.

Anyway so far what I have seen appears to be pouring TAX PAYER MONEY down a rat hole.

What is expected of this program?
Is this a warning shot across the bough of all auto workers?
Get prepared to lose your jobs in 6 mos.?

AUTO MAKERS:

Here are the down and dirty facts … you think you can’t survive on what you make today?
Well how well are you going to survive on zilch?
If you think you can count on the government as a safety net you are sadly mistaken.
If you think you can count on your union you are equally sadly mistaken … both ARE/HAVE/WILL miserably fail you.
Keep in mind YOU ARE BOSS OF THE UNION not vice versa … make your voices heard before you are in some unemployment line while your company/union bosses are sipping mojitos in Dubai.

You want to know why the Banks got bailed out with few questions asked?
The bailers saw their own asses slipping into the great abyss.
Its called VESTED INTEREST!
NOW “Barney Baby”, “Pelosi the Shrew” Dodd and a whole slew of others are safe and can make an example.
YOU AUTO MAKERS ARE IT!

I just ran into the latest Republican Solution (below).
It would be refreshing if both sides of the isle FOR ONCE drop partisanship and hammer out a solution to help get an ICONIC industry back on its feet.

There are no better workers in the world than here in the USA there are just cheaper workers elsewhere. For those who say these American companies can not compete? The naysayers ARE DAFFED!
Perhaps a level playing field would help.

WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), and other House GOP leaders today put forth an alternative to the $15 billion taxpayer-funded auto bailout proposed by House Democratic leaders.

The American Automotive Reorganization and Recovery Plan

Working families throughout our country are struggling to pay their bills and facing economic anxieties not seen in America for generations. Employers are finding themselves torn between staying in business and laying off people over the holidays. Nowhere are these challenges more acute than in states that are heavily dependent on auto manufacturing. It is essential that Washington address these challenges not through taxpayer-funded bailouts that prolong working families’ pain and put taxpayers’ money at risk, but by fixing problems and removing barriers that make it harder for working families to prosper.

Washington has failed this basic test with respect to the American auto industry. Republicans want to make certain that in its response to the resulting crisis, Washington does not fail American taxpayers as well. A responsible plan should do two things: it should protect taxpayers, and it should help auto workers and their families by allowing the Big Three to become competitive again. The Democrats’ plan does neither. Congress should not be stampeded into rubber-stamping a plan that guarantees failure at the taxpayers’ expense.

The Democratic Bailout proposal has three fundamental flaws:

• The only thing crazier than trusting the same management and union officials who got the Big Three into this mess to get them out is trusting a bunch of Washington politicians and bureaucrats – the very same people who ran up a $455 billion deficit last year. American auto workers and their families deserve better.
• If no private investors believe the Big Three restructuring plans are realistic enough to support with their own money, why should we put up taxpayer money? American taxpayers deserve better.
• The Big Three restructuring plan and the Democratic proposal lack accountability. There is no guarantee that once they get taxpayer money the restructuring they promise will occur. Once the taxpayers prop them up once, there will be a big incentive to keep bailing them out – keeping the industry dependent on government aid and further denying American auto workers the security of a viable industry that is back on its feet and ready to compete. American auto workers and their families deserve better.

What We Should Be Doing: The American Automotive Reorganization and Recovery Plan

Hard Benchmarks:

On December 2, the Big Three presented to Congress their plans for restructuring. While the plans included laudable goals, too few details were provided as to how the companies will actually achieve the restructuring and the savings they have promised. In some instances new agreements to achieve the savings would not be entered into for months or perhaps years.

The Big Three must lock in the restructuring they have promised in a matter of weeks, not months or years. Congress should instead establish firm benchmarks and a tight timeline for

restructuring. Such benchmarks will include for example requiring that by March 31, 2009 each company should reach agreement whereby:

• The companies’ creditors agree to a framework to reduce each company’s indebtedness by at least 1/3.
• The UAW holds to concessions already made and further:

o Concedes the elimination of Supplemental Unemployment Benefits;
o Concedes elimination of the Jobs Bank Program;
o Agrees to either reduce company retiree health care obligations or otherwise convert a portion of such obligations into equity; and
o Agrees to reduce wages and benefits to the levels paid by non-Big Three manufacturers.

A Process for Reaching Expedited Agreement, Instead of Nationalizing America’s Auto Companies

Because of the many legal and contractual hurdles to restructuring, the companies are urged to accomplish their restructuring through the use of a pre-packaged bankruptcy or another mechanism to bring all stakeholders to the table for an agreed-upon determination of their future. It is important that these stakeholders reach reasonable compromises amongst themselves. Creating a government bureaucracy or a “car czar” to arbitrarily pass judgment on the thousands of details involved with a restructuring is akin to nationalizing the auto companies.

Interim Financing: Insurance, Rather than a Taxpayer-Funded Bailout

The Big Three may need some form of interim financing as they finalize their restructuring. In normal economic times, if their restructuring plan is considered viable, such financing should be available in the private market. Because of the current credit crisis, limited assistance may be appropriate in the form of insurance, rather than a taxpayer-funded government bailout that replaces private investment. We propose that the government provide insurance, funded by the participants with a modest FDIC-like fee, which would cover up to 50 percent of the losses of new investment in the case of default, helping to unlock immediate private investment (not unlike debtor in possession financing). Such insurance would expire on March 31, 2009. This proposal ensures that taxpayers are protected and provides a powerful incentive for the Big Three to quickly implement their restructuring plans.

Its a start so get your dead asses to work and earn the paycheck and benefits that are way to high for the amount of successful work you crank out for “we the people”.

The PDF is HERE

Yes, I too am a clinical thinker!

My political awareness began in 1960 as a youngster sitting on my father’s lap watching Walter Cronkite report the news during the  John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon campaigns. My father, while not an immigrant was JFK’s age, and like him was an Irish Catholic. There was an immediate connection between my family and the soon to be leader of the “New Frontier”. 

Much in common?

Not so much in common?

My maternal family were all immigrants, having come through Ellis Island. They came here not for religious freedom nor for political freedom, but to the greatest country in the world to give their families a better life. Anything was possible in America. Land of the free, home of the brave. A government ”of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

 I wonder now; given the “state of the union” and the “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” what decision they would make in 2008.    They loved being Americans and their naturalization was the source of great celebration. They voted religiously, getting someone to  interpret for them when they didn’t understand an issue.

 My grandmother’s last vote was in 1996, at 95 years old. She would have considered it a mortal sin not to vote in an election. My mother’s first vote was in 2008 at the age of 86. She who lived through the great depression, through the civil rights movement, (she was a civil rights activist in her stay at home mom sort of way), and had a son serve in the military during Vietnam was thrilled that she cast her first vote ever for the first African American to become President of the United States.

She describes it as the most important thing she could ever have voted for. He gave her hope for the renewal of the America her family had ventured across seas to be a part of. Her reasons for not voting prior to this election are to remain hers.  

Politics were “table topics” in our home and often still are. During the early 1960’s talk was of the beginning of the Peace Corps, Man on the Moon, Civil Rights, Vietnam, Cuban Missile Crisis, and Charles de Gaulle. Today it is hope, change, despair and often followed by a longing for when it wasn’t as corrupt, as scandalous, and elected officials crimes aren’t the breaking news of the day). 

During the 60’s I sat intent on soaking up all I could about American politics and how great America was. I hadn’t even started having history lessons in school yet and I was addicted. I questioned anyone who was willing to listen and began making up my own mind about what their opinions meant to me and to the world.

Smiling politely to all who answered my inquiring mind, I walked away with my own opinions.   I was teased from the time I was very young that I would make a great politician because of the logic of my arguments. I could see the amazement from my parents and family members when I felt brave enough to voice those political beliefs and thoughts.  I became a clinical thinker long before I knew the philosophical differences between a Republican and a Democrat.

 While I have been clinically trained to keep passion and emotion away from my thinking in order to avoid becoming an idealogical conspiratorial thinker, I remain at this time, in this moment,  a clinical thinker that screams at political corruption, partisan politics, partisan political spins that the “spinner” believes I will “blindly see”  as the one, holy, apolostolic truth of their partisan political BS, while they continue to formulate their every press release to further their ideolgical position. Be it left or right, cut the crap, you sound ridiculous when you spin the truth to further partisan beliefs.

After years of being politically active in various local and state campaigns for a variety of candidates, of varied political idealogy, I walked away from that involvement. Until somewhat recently, I have simply kept a “mindseye” on the machine called government. I have ranted and raged about “spin”, corruption, partisanship, self serving elected officials, being considered unAmerican or antiAmerican because of my views on the war.

Called unpatriotic by those who consider my views of the past 8 years just that. I believe in the Constitution of the United States and its preservation. Its’ intent. Its’ integrity. I can now no longer “simply be” and share my rantings with other clinical thinkers. I must lend myself to making a difference through real political activism. To quote a famous movie line, “I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore.” It is time for us to STAND & BE COUNTED, TAKE BACK GOVERNMENT, RENEW OUR HOPE, FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION, and see AMERICA’S GREATNESS RESTORED. 

I believe that:

We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union…must RAISE OUR VOICES!

Another clinical thinker and I know from experience that when we do, we can fall buildings.

Please join the movement to make this country once again “we the people” and a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Join the blog, or contact your elected officials and remind them that you are watching their every move carefully,  that you are prepared to work to unseat them if they fail to serve the public trust as an elected official, that if they cast one self serving vote, accept one tainted dollar, sell one vote, or they act or believe that being a member of Congress exempts them from acting with honor and integrity because their fellow associates will allow this behavior, REMIND THEM THAT YOU WILL NOT.

Well it is happening.
I figured with all of the unrest and questions unanswered it would not be long before someone decided to impeach Obama.

We can thank Bill Clinton and his antics for this precedence.

I was a little surprised it is happening so soon … before he even is sworn in?

Here is a copy of the document people are signing.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama is an admitted illegal drug user and
is believed to have used illegal drugs as recently as November 1999
or more recently. Mr. Obama has maintained contact with other
admitted illegal drug users.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama has maintained regular contact
with known criminals such as Antoin (Tony) Rezko and other
criminal elements in Chicago and Illinois. Mr. Obama has
conducted business with these criminals and received campaign
donations from them. Mr. Obama was compelled to return an estimated $250,000 in
donations related to Tony Rezko.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama has consistently lied about his
contact with convicted criminal Tony Rezko. The Tony Rezko
corruption trial revealed that FBI mole John Thomas helped investigators
“build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former
business partner Daniel Mahru’s Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by
Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005,” according to the February
10, 2008 Chicago Sun-Times.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama has engaged in unscrupulous business
practices, in particular with Mr. Robert Blackwell. Mr. Obama
received an $ 8,000 per month “legal retainer” from Mr. Blackwell
for a total of $112,000 and reported the income through his law firm
in a manner not unlike money laundering. Obama, along with Obama
campaign manager Dan Shomon, procured $ 320,000 in state grants
for Blackwell’s company Killerspin. Blackwell companies contributed
over $ 32,000 to the Obama campaign in 2007.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama used the office of IL Senator to
facilitate the vote rigging in Chicago as chairman of the Illinois Senate
Health and Human Services Committee. Mr. Obama pushed legislation in Senate Bill
1332 to reduce the number of members of the Health Facilities Planning Board
from 15 to 9. Mr. Obama did conspire with Stuart Levine, Tony Rezko and
Rod Blogojevich to rig the committee and was rewarded with campaign
contributions. The new members appointed included 3 doctors who contributed to
Mr. Obama. On April 21, 2004, Stuart Levine explicitly advised Dr. Robert Weinstein,
who is now indicted, of Tony Rezko’s role in manipulating the Planning Board’s vote.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama has engaged in lies and deception
about his past. Mr. Obama lied about his contact level with
convicted criminal Tony Rezko, the amounts and sources of
campaign contributions and encounters with the law. A complaint
has been filed with the Bar Association of Illinois alleging
that Mr. Obama did not answer truthfully all questions on the
application to the bar.

Whereas: Senator Barack Obama has invoked the FOIA in Illinois
when it was politically expedient and ignored or violated the
FOIA at other times. In the Illinois Senate proceedings of
Mr. Obama, in Senate Bill 1416, pleads the importance of businesses
bidding on state contracts having improved access to FOIA data. When
later questioned about his records during his term in the IL
Senate, Mr. Obama gave evasive answers or refused to supply records.

Whereas: The First Amendment provides a right for the people “to
petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Precedents
exist for impeachment and expulsion of a US Senator. Senator William
Blount was impeached by the House on July 7, 1797 and expelled by
the Senate the next day.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, the People, Undersigned,
being citizens of the United States and residents in the Cities and States so
indicated, HEREBY Demand that the Congress of the United States begin
immediate impeachment and/or expulsion proceedings against Senator
Barack Obama.

Addendum: Petition to Impeach Senator Obama

We were urged to add the following information about Senator Obama.
This comes under the topic of lies and deception but also falls under more
serious charges of abuse of power and possible violation of the Logan Act.
Those signing the petition prior to this addendum will be identified.

August 4, 2008

Whereas: As a US Senator, Barack Obama violated the stated intention of
his 2006 Official Government Visa to Africa by publicly propagandizing
for his cousin, Railla Odinga against the US democratic ally of Kenya.
Whereas the stated “mission” of Senator Obama’s Official Visa, according
to the Kenya Office of Public Communications, was to “nurture relations
between the Continent and the United States” he, instead, made public
protest before Kenya citizens to rally against their leadership,
invoking a need for “Change!” and accusing this US allied nation of
“corruption.” In Official Protest of Mr. Obama’s passport abuse and
misconduct, Kenya’s government cited his “extremely disturbing
statements on issues which it is clear, he was very poorly informed, and
on which he chose to lecture the Government and the people of Kenya on
how to manage our country.” Whereas, furthermore, there is no public
record of any sanctions or reprimand by the US Congress of Senator
Obama’s passport violation or campaigning on foreign soil against a US
ally, history has since recorded the broadspread destruction of Kenya’s
economy and large scale loss of life as a result of the violence
instigated by Odinga’s ODM campaign there.

You will find the petition HERE

This morning around 6 am Gov. Rod Blagojevich was handcuffed and dragged off by the FBI being charged with corruption. What kind of corruption? Well for a start trying to sell Barack Obama’s senate seat.

Speaking about the criminal complaint against Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich for corruption. “But as this is a ongoing investigation involving the governor I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to comment on the issue at this time.”

Asked what contact he’d had with the governor’s office about his replacement in the Senate, President-elect Obama today said “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.”

However on November 23, 2008, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Chicago and said:

OPPS: Today we get a “sorry I misspoke” from Axelrod?

So far Obama is not dragged into the middle of this … however the same bad people seem to keep cropping up from the Obama past.

Is this another of those “he was just a guy on the block that I passed on the street” deals?

Never a dull moment.

The whole report here …

Dig Dig Dig and what does one find?
More inconsistencies in what Obama says and what he did.

I have to say “common sense” tells me if you muck around the pen with pigs you probably come out covered in slop.

If this whole situation were not so serious it could be drop dead funny.
I suppose the key question is what shakes out in the wash with Obama … is he involved, oblivious, naive or none?
At least we know the months and years before us are probably going to be very interesting indeed.

Below is a before it all hit the fan report.

Ill. governor meeting with Obama today

By Carol Sowers
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 at 10:39 a.m.

CHICAGO, ILL. — Now that Barack Obama will be moving to the White House, his seat in the U.S. Senate representing Illinois will have to be filled.

That’s one of Obama’s first priorities today.

He’s meeting with Governor Rod Blagojevich this afternoon in Chicago to discuss it.

Illinois law states that the governor chooses that replacement.

There’s already been speculation about his selection…from Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Chicago’s south side who co-chaired Obama’s presidential campaign, to recently-retired state senate president Emil Jones, to the governor himself.

It’s likely the governor will make his decision quickly so the new senator will get some seniority before newly-elected senators take office in January.

Part of the timing depends on when Obama officially vacates his senate seat.

KHQA’s Alexis Hunt is speaking with Illinois Senator John Sullivan today about his thoughts on that replacement process, his time working with Obama in the state senate, and if there’s a chance Sullivan might play a role in the Obama administration. Watch KHQA News at 5:00, 6:00 and 10:00 p.m. tonight to hear what he has to say.

For those of you interested in wading through 78 pages of the Blagojevich complaint
HERE

Yesterday my cousin mentioned a blurb she happened to hear on TV about up and coming comments on the Obama “natural born citizen” SCOTUS ruling .. Keith Olbermann was mentioned. Since I have heard nothing on MSM (main stream media) about this issue I set my DVR to record his show.

The segment started like this:
The idea that Barack Obama is not actually a “natural born citizen” of this country is so ridiculous ….

(you can review the video for yourself below) Olbermann has set the tone so what followed was not much of a surprise.

The point that I found most interesting was a comment from David Horowitz … the comment directly below has comments that came to mind as I was listening (remember I talk to the TV).

Below that you will see the Horowitz comment intact.

“The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive. ”

How about being aware that the “fringe group” is actually a “Loyal American Fringe” (and growing) concerned about the Constitution itself?

“What difference does it make to the future of this country whether Obama was born on US soil?”

WHAT DIFFERERENCE DOES IT MAKE? … that pretty much explains Horowitz’s thought process … loyalty lies not with the Constitution and the intent of our founding fathers.

What matters Mr. Horowitz is … if that person is actually a “natural born citizen” or simply a “citizen of the USA”. One qualifies as President one DOES NOT.

“Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for President trumps all others.”

At this point my jaw is dropping realizing Horowitz does not seem to comprehend how destructive HIS ATTITUDE toward this matter is to the Constitution.

“But how viable will our Constitution be if 5 Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots?”

How viable will the Constitution be if they DO NOT?
How viable it is without “SOMEONE” vetting the worthiness of our most high HEAD OF STATE?

” … It is not conservatism: it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent.”

It is neither. It is LOYAL AMERICA tired to the teeth of those like HOROWITZ, OLBERMANN, HUFFINGTON and a myriad of others foisting their agenda on a population who thinks they are getting nightly news rather than “self interest propaganda“.

“Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation.”

I agree!

“Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election and get over it;”

NO LOYAL AMERICANS do not have to accept someone who is does not meet the specified requirements of the Constitution.

“and get on with the important business of reviving our country’s economy and defending its citizens, and – by the ways– its Constitution.”

There is no more important business than making sure the Constitution REMAINS in tact and the highest office of our land not be usurped by someone “without credentials”

David Horowitz
National Review Online

I am not sure if MSNBC has altered the content or context of this comment to fit their agenda since I was not able to find the original on the National Review Online site. Two things lead me to speculate on this one of them being the tone of Olbermann himself.

EDIT: It was not entact view the whole article HERE.

“The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive. ….What difference does it make to the future of this country whether Obama was born on US soil? Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for President trumps all others. But how viable will our Constitution be if 5 Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots? … It is not conservatism: it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country’s economy and defending its citizens, and — by the way — its Constitution.”

David Horowitz
National Review Online

Arianna Huffington weighs in on the issue stating “I am not a national born citizen”.
Well that was a “no brainer” since both parents are Greek and she herself was born in Athens. So the question remains does Arianna REALLY know what “natural born citizen” means?
Arianna seemed stuck on the line “whether Barack Obama is a “natural born citizen” or not”. To her that was totally unacceptable “its like saying whether the earth is flat or not”.

I found that comment an interesting analogy since we know ONE is NOT and it appears the other is NOT also.

But then it is easy to laugh off the Huffington logic as no logic at all.

Below you will find the whole video clip from the Olbermann show:

Donofrio outlines his argument concisely on his blog in a letter to ABC News:

“The main argument of my law suit alleges that since Obama was a British citizen – at birth – a fact he admits is true, then he cannot be a “natural born citizen”. The word “born” has meaning. It deals with the status of a presidential candidate “at birth”.

Obama had dual nationality at birth. The status of the candidate at the time of the election is not as relevant to the provisions of the Constitution as is his status “at birth.” If one is not “born” a natural born citizen, he can never be a natural born citizen.”