Posts Tagged ‘republicans’

Merry Christmas! We’re all about to get screwed.

December 21, 2012 Leave a comment

notsanta1We here at Why Not Nashville? like to look at proposed legislation and ask “why?”  Too often our leaders propose legislation simply to say they did something and hope their constituents are satisfied, even if said legislation will have virtually no positive impact.  For example, the whole thing about banning assault rifles.  Why?  What’s the benefit?  It isn’t going to do anything about the rifles that are already out there, it probably wouldn’t have stopped the Connecticut shooting from happening, and it isn’t going to do anything about the primary weapon used for shootings, the semi-automatic handgun (which we have a Constitutional Right to own).  Moreover, gun laws don’t keep guns out of the hands of criminals anyway.  In other words, banning assault rifles would have no impact, other than to advance the agenda of the anti-gun left.  Not much of a reason if you ask me.

The fiscal cliff debate is another such example, although its assumed outcome will have a far more practical effect than simply lessening our liberties.  It should be rather obvious to everyone that Barry wants us to go over the proverbial fiscal cliff.  How do we know this?  House Speaker John Boehner was actually going to give Barry what he allegedly wanted: a bill that would permanently fix tax rates for the overwhelming majority of Americans, while ultimately allowing the rates on rich people to go up on January 1.  The conservatives in the House shot this possibility down last night, but Barry had already stated he was going to veto such a bill.  Why would he want to do that?  Because he wants to raise taxes on the top 2%, while Boehner’s bill would only have raised taxes on approximately the top .9%.  But why does Barry want so desperately to raise taxes on the top 2%?  Even the left agrees raising taxes on the top 2% will negatively impact small business.  They also agree it would retard the already tepid economic growth we’re experiencing.  Crap, Barry’s even asking for stimulus money to try and offset the negative impact of the tax hike.  Finally, the tax hike will do virtually nothing to our long term debt and deficits.  In other words, it’s being pushed only to advance the left’s “pro-middle-class” agenda.  It has nothing to do with improving anything, however, which is why I’m glad the “Tea Party” members of the House shot Boehner’s proposal down.

Dead Man Walking

Dead Man Walking

Poorly thought-out, agenda-driven legislation is a bad idea.  Want proof?  Let’s look at budgetary black-hole California, where major cities are going bankrupt, and the Dems running the state have absolutely no idea what they’re doing because their ideology doesn’t match up with reality.  As you may or may not know, Californians voted to raise the state sales tax and to raise state income taxes on “wealthy” people.  The presumed purpose of the proposition was to reduce California’s massive debt.  Contrary to popular belief, however, raising taxes doesn’t always result in raising revenues, especially when the people you’re raising taxes on are already paying more than they should be, and have the resources to flee to greener pastures.

According to the report, personal income tax revenues were ‘$827 million below the month’s forecast of $4.387 billion.’ Sales and use tax receipts ‘were $9 million below the month’s forecast of $1.601 billion’ and the year-to-date sales tax revenue was $8 million below forecast.

Not surprisingly, corporate tax revenues were also down, $175 million below the month’s estimate and year-to-date corporate tax revenues were $441 below estimate.

It’s examples like this that convince me we won’t actually begin solving our fiscal problems until we hit rock bottom.  After all, it wasn’t the California state govt. that voted to raise taxes; it was the friggin’ people.  In other words, there is a large group of people out there who believe we should be raising taxes, despite the ample evidence that doing so will actually make things worse.  Maybe it will take another round of massive lay-offs and a recession to wake people up.  Maybe even that won’t be enough.  The older I get the more convinced I am that there are huge swaths of unemployed people that, despite their protestations to the contrary, are perfectly happy living in card board boxes as long as they have cable, cigarettes, and Wild Turkey.  I don’t get it, but it’s clear that I’m in the minority.  At least there’s still a few House Republicans who refuse to vote for legislation that they know won’t work.


Let it Burn.

November 14, 2012 Leave a comment

America just re-elected a guy who presided over four years of deficits exceeding a trillion dollars.  That’s never happened before (the deficits I mean…we’ve re-elected presidents before).  The White House believes it now has a mandate to raise taxes on the wealthy.  The House of Representatives believes it has a mandate to keep that from happening.  The Senate believes it has a mandate to never produce a budget, which it has failed to do for more than three years now.  Is any of the foregoing true?  Who knows.  I have no confidence in most Americans knowing the difference between the debt and deficits, let alone ways to fix it.

The day after the election, House majority leader John Boehner said he was ready to talk to Barry about reducing our deficits.  He said he was ready to put new revenue on the table through tax reform.  Some of the more pathetic members of the Republican party have even agreed to increase taxes the wealthy, despite overwhelming proof that doing so will have virtually no impact on the deficit, while actually harming the economyBarry’s response to Boehner:

President Barack Obama will begin budget negotiations with congressional leaders Friday by calling for $1.6 trillion in additional tax revenue over the next decade, far more than Republicans are likely to accept and double the $800 billion discussed in talks with GOP leaders during the summer of 2011.

$1.6 trillion.  Where will that come from, you ask?  Well, everyone agrees that eliminating the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000, which is what everyone was arguing about during the debates, will only amount to $824 billion over ten years.  While that’s certainly a lot of money, it’s only half of what Barry is looking for.  Where’s the rest going to come from?  Barry hasn’t told us that yet but I’ll be holding onto my wallet.

All of this is being discussed in an effort to avoid the upcoming “fiscal cliff.”  The “cliff” refers to what our economy is set to figuratively fall off of on January 1 due to the expiration of all the Bush tax cuts, plus a crap-load of automatic spending cuts.  In other words, taxes go up on everyone while spending goes down.  You’ll hear the Dems argue that the Repubs are “holding America hostage for the sake of the rich.”  You’ll hear some Repubs continue to say no to any new taxes, especially without significant entitlement reform, while some other Repubs will panic and say something like taxing the rich a little more won’t be the end of the America.

Who, me?

You know what gets lost in all of the “Bush tax cuts” argument?  The reality that the “cuts” were to everyone’s taxes, and a whole bunch of people were removed from the tax rolls altogether.  Fact is, our income tax system is more progressive now than it was thirty years ago.  The problem, as we all know, isn’t our tax rates; it’s our spending problems.  But hey, what do I know?  I voted for the other guy.

So, given that America has re-elected Barry, and given that Barry and the Dems and their constituents want taxes raised on the wealthy, I say Congress should simply do nothing.  “But that will cause our economy to go back into a recession and it will be terrible.”  I say let it come.  Our economy sucks.  Unemployment sucks.  Our debt and deficits suck.  And you know what?  The guy who was just re-elected doesn’t care.  He has an agenda, and I say let him have it.  You want to increase taxes on the wealthy?  Screw that.  I say raise taxes on everyone, and bring a whole bunch of people who voted for Barry back into the tax base.  Is anyone really serious about spending cuts?  Well, they’re coming up on January 1, 2013…$1 trillion of ’em.

As we speak, there are a surprisingly large number of people signing their names to petitions on the White House’s website, asking the feds to let their respective states secede from the union (the “surprising” part is that so many people are voluntarily giving the White House a reason to monitor their activities).   The left will tell you they’re all just a bunch of bitter-clingers who hate Barry because he’s black.  The reason the petitions were started is because many people see their country running down a path to insolvency and regular real unemployment being above 10% (it’s currently 14.6%), and they want off the train before it gets there.  In other words, the country’s in distress and we don’t have a president who cares.

Not an accident.

Despite what a majority of this country believes, money isn’t infinite, and companies aren’t charities.  About 870,000 Ohio households just received proof of the former yesterday.  Lots of people have been experiencing the latter for four years now.  In other words, the people made their beds.

To all of you who are either undecided or voting for Barry, consider this your Public Service Announcement

October 18, 2012 1 comment

Sometimes, parents try to impart wisdom to their children, based upon their life experiences.  For example, I once told my dad that I was going to be a professional wrestler when I grew up.  He looked at me and said, “Are you retarded?  You’re small, relatively uncoordinated, and cry easily.  The Ultimate Warrior craps bigger than you.”

And I’m about to right now

And then he said, “Son, get yourself a desk job.  The Macho Man will be dead in a few years from unknown causes, and you’ll have a secretary who will tell your wife that you’re in an important meeting when you’re really just in the bathroom.”  And you know what?  He was totally right.

Experience is important.  It’s what makes wise people “wise.”  Why do you think the really good wizards are always old?  It’s because they’ve presumably learned from their earlier mistakes when they accidentally turned the family dog into a dragon, which then proceeded to burn down the entire village.  One can also gain experience via someone else’s experiences.  For those of you attending public schools, this is called History (although your man-hating teacher may have changed it to “Herstory”).

Many clever phrases have been created to remind people of the importance of relying upon one’s experiences, or history in general.  We’ve all heard them, “Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.”  Or, “Insanity is doing the same thing while expecting different results.” Or, “Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.”  All of these phrases mean the same thing: “Hey moron, you already tried that.”  My wife prefers that one.

So, here we are.  Almost four years after a majority of this country elected Barack Obama.  I can remember it now…the hope, the Greek columns, the obviously empty promises.  People bought it though.  Lots of them.  I didn’t.  I knew he came from the Chicago political machine.  I also knew what that meant.  What has Barry given us in the past four years?  Where are we?  Let’s ask MSNBC.  That’s right.  MSNBC:

All snarkiness and bias aside, what would compel anyone to vote for him again?  What has he done in the past four years to lead someone to believe the next four years are going to be better?  Barry’s “jobs bill,” that the left continues to blame the Republicans in Congress for not passing, is just a smaller stimulus.  And whether you want to claim the first stimulus created jobs or not is largely irrelevant.  We were told that borrowing $800 billion would keep unemployment below 8%.  Unemployment just dropped below 8% for the first time last month (and I’ll bet you my lunch it will be back above 8% when the numbers come out in November).  That’s failure by the Administration’s own estimatation.  Obama has no other plan.  He’s had four years.  More people are on food stamps than ever before.  More people are on welfare than ever before.  More people aren’t even looking for work than ever before.  He has failed.

And don’t let the left pull the wool over your eyes here.  “No Congressional cooperation.”  The President had a Democratic House and Senate for two years.  He had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.  He had at least two Republican Senators who were fiscal moderates and social liberals in Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.  Any assertion by anyone that Barry didn’t have the ability to control 100% of government policy for a significant period of time is simply lying.  The fact is, he couldn’t get his own party to go along with him much of the time.

And Barry knows he’s failed.  His party knows he’s failed.  We can see this recognition in their own words.  “We came in at a terrible time.”  “Bush.”  “Republican war against women.” “Romney was a vulture capitalist.”  “Previous Administration.”  “Romney pays too low of a tax rate.”  “Bush policies.”  “Romney doesn’t like that 47% of this country doesn’t pay income tax.”  Does any of the foregoing constitute a plan for the next four years?  Romney has a plan.  He’s repeated it incessantly (Five Points).  Some agree with his math regarding deficits; some don’t.  But at least it’s a plan that everyone agrees will lead to significant job creation.

Are social issues, that the President has virtually no control over anyway, really that important to you?  The left hopes so.  They’re even walking out the multi-cultural triple-team from Hollywood.  All they’re missing is Lucy Liu for ethnic completeness.

All I can say is “Huh?”  Is this election really going to turn on abortion?  Well, at least they didn’t parrot the nonsense about how Romney wants to take away your contraception.  Look, I could sit here and pick apart the absurdity of this ad for pages, but I won’t, because I don’t think anyone who’s undecided really cares.

And it’s not just the economy that you should be remembering as you vote.  Barry is also a serial liar.  He lied when he asserted executive privilege over Fast and Furious documents that he claims he never saw.  He lied when he said he immediately called the killing of our Americans in Libya a terrorist act.  He lied when he offered the stupid suggestion that gas prices were low during the Bush Administration because we were heading into a recession.  What, are prices high now because more people are unemployed and we’re teetering on entering into another recession?  Barry deserves to be hit in the head with a kettle everytime he has the nerve to question Romney’s honesty.

I don’t care what your opinion is regarding Barry’s demeanor.  If you like him so much, have him over for a lively game of Rummikub.

They even look a little bit like the Prez – minus the ears of course.

He’s been a terrible president though.  And it shouldn’t hurt your feelings to accept that.  As my old man said, I couldn’t be a pro wrestler.  Voting for the rich guy doesn’t mean you’re racist, or that you hate the poor, or that you want to cover lady parts with cellophane to keep them from getting involved in pre-marital shenanigans.  It just means you’ve used your, that’s right, experience.  If you do vote for Barry, however, you might just be insane.  And ScarJo still won’t know who you are.

President to help middle class by paying them in fairness. Middle class not sure if it constitutes legal tender.

April 10, 2012 1 comment

Not that Buffett

Every now and then, an issue comes up that allows me to truly gauge the intelligence of the American people.  Well, I’m excited to report that such an issue has arisen: the Buffett Rule.  No, we’re not talking about my personal hero Jimmy Buffett; he’s too drunk to be paying attention.  I’m talking about that annoying old man Warren Buffett, who has allowed his inability to satisfy his secretary sexually financially to quickly absorb as much of my talk radio time as Jesse Jackson and his merry band of hoodie-wearers.  In case you didn’t know, Mr. Buffett, a man worth billions, has made it part of his bucket list to complain about how he pays a lower overall tax rate than his secretary.  This has caused many to offer him the practical option of simply paying more in taxes if he’d prefer.  In fact, he can even pay my taxes while he’s at it. Not surprisingly, the idea of a rich guy asking the feds to take more of his money is something the lefties can’t ignore; especially when all of their other economic plans have been as successful as a one-armed man rowing his boat in a straight line.  So, instead of making an effort to propose an actual budget that could get a single vote in the House of Representatives, our little dictator in chief has asked the Senate to vote on the “Buffett Rule.”

Mr Obama is promoting the ‘Buffett rule’, which would set a minimum tax of 30 per cent on the income of millionaires, as he attempts to establish a stark contrast with Mitt Romney, his Republican challenger and a former private equity executive.

You may be asking why I’m using the Buffett Rule as a barometer of American intelligence.  Well, the last time I looked, a majority of Americans supports the proposition of “making the rich pay their fair share,” even if they can’t tell you what “fair” means.  To put it simply: if anyone is in favor of this proposition, then they obviously sustained severe brain damage.  And to support this point, I’m not even going to make reference to the fact that, while the top two percent already pays a disproportionate share of the total federal income taxes, half of this country doesn’t pay any.

No.  I’m going to focus on a lie that is so blatantly obvious that someone would need to be comatose not to catch it.  What’s the lie, you ask?

Still, throughout his speech, the message was clear: In 2012, Barack Obama and the Democrats are in favor of ‘fairness,’ of having those Americans who can afford to do so pay a bit more in taxes so that the rest of the country can thrive.

How is taking more money from the top 1% going to help the country “thrive?”  It’s a proven fact that the extra money won’t put a scratch, let alone a dent, in the national debt.  And it isn’t like we have a president who seems to care about deficits.  The implied argument being made here is that the middle class will somehow be helped by taxing the rich more.  How?  Well, notably absent from Barry’s plan is a tax cut for the middle class.  And it’s not like the extra money being extracted from the rich is going to be sent to the middle class.  So, how is this plan helping anyone?  That’s right, it’s not.  The Buffett Rule is a political stunt that the president hopes will distract everyone from the fact that his presidency has been less then stellar.

So, are you going to fall for this asshattery?  Of course not.  You’re one of my readers.  But your mom may not be.  So feel free to poke her with a sharp pin to make sure she responds to painful stimuli before giving her a summary of the foregoing.

Closing tax loopholes and lowering tax rates: Finally

June 21, 2011 Leave a comment

Hopefully the next subsidy to die.

The Republicans signaled last week that they were serious about the deficit.  By voting to get rid of ethanol subsidies, which were nothing a gift to corn growers in the heartland, the GOP seems to be stepping up to the plate.  Now, as Paul Ryan promised, they’re moving to reform the tax code, by moving to close tax loopholes that have allowed corporations like GE to pay no taxes.  At the same time, they’re talking about lowering tax rates across the board.  The end result: increasing revenue without raising taxes.  It’s not some genius concept; it’s common sense that was lost long ago with the advent of our increasingly absurd tax code.

The combination of our stupid tax code and subsidies, has created a corporate welfare state that results in market manipulation.  Subsidies of every conceivable kind should be done away with…from oil to solar to agriculture.  No more favors.  If nobody wants to buy a $43,000 Chevy Volt because of its price tag, so be it.

And the tax code?  Burn it.  Give us simple, low rates with no deductions.  All deductions are is a way for the government to play social engineer anyway.  And no, I don’t advocate for a flat tax.  It hurts those who are at the bottom of the pay scale far more than those at the top.  Two or three low, graduated rates would do just fine…but everybody has to pay in.  No more of this “47% of Americans don’t pay any income tax.”

All of this begs the question though: will the Dems go along with it?  They signed onto the ethanol vote because it was strictly a regional issue that few on the left cared about (they don’t care about “fly-over country” after all).  What about ending subsidies for solar, wind, or electric car battery manufacturers though?  I’m guessing we’ll see a much stronger push-back on those.

Of course, none of this makes any real difference if we don’t do something about the entitlements.  Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid continue to absorb every dime of revenue coming into the federal government.  All three of them are essentially ponzi schemes…requiring this generation to pay for the last.  And in the end, ponzi schemes always collapse.

In any event, I’m feeling somewhat optimistic about all of this.  These are the sorts of things we voted for in 2010; and the sorts of things that the GOP failed miserably to accomplish under Bush Jr.  By ending subsidies, we’re automatically decreasing government spending, while at the same time, putting an end to market manipulation.  The government shouldn’t have any involvement in picking winners and losers.  By streamlining the tax code and getting rid of loop holes and unnecessary tax breaks, we will decrease the small businessman’s tax burden, while making GE pay its fair share.  Wow, that almost sounded liberal.  Don’t worry though.  I’m sure we’ll still disagree on what constitutes “fair.”

Shut it all down!

February 18, 2011 Leave a comment

“Elections have consequences.”  Remember that?  It was uttered by none other than our current president, right after he was elected.  What’s he saying now that the election in Wisconsin is having consequences?  Where are all the libs who cried foul on the Senate Republicans using the filibuster so much?  None of them seem to have any problem with the Wisconsin State Senate leaving the state to avoid a vote. 

How about all of those public school teachers who only care about their students?  Oh yeah, they’re shutting down their schools for the first, second, and in some cases, third day.  And some are even bringing their students with them.  Why?  Because they, like most other public employees under the Republican plan, would have to pay half of their pension costs and at least 12 percent of their health care costs, which is still less than the rest of us in the private market.

I want to do anything in my power to raise awareness that this can’t happen,’ said one protestor.

I find the arrogance of these people appalling. Sorry, but there isn’t a secret pot of money sitting around just for you.  Your salary comes from your neighbors.  All of it.  And the idea that taxes should be raised to pay down the state debt is absurd.

The state of Wisconsin, as well as just about every state out there, could function just fine on probably a quarter of the employees they have.  Why?  Because government has absolutely no incentive to be efficient, and as a result, it isn’t.  And no, this conversation does not involve police and firefighters, since a legitimate role of any government is protection of the people.  Otherwise,what’s the point?

Personally, I hope the movement to shrink government results in doing something substantial about our public education system.  And by “something” I mean dismantling it.  It costs too much, is completely unnecessary, and in too many instances, fails to actually graduate well-rounded, educated, and moral kids. 

What’s happening in Wisconsin is historic.  Pay attention.  And remember for all of you that think voting doesn’t matter because both parties are the same: sometimes, elections do have consequences.

Liberals still don’t get it

November 3, 2010 2 comments

Well, it was a long, and glorious, evening.  In case you don’t follow these things, the Republicans took control of the House by winning over 60 seats.  They also took practical control of the Senate, and continued their assault with big gubernatorial pick-ups in various states.  It was, without question, an unmitigated disaster for Obama, liberal Democrats, and especially, the “moderate” Dems who sold their souls to the far left of Nancy Pelosi.  In fact, I can’t decide what was better last night: seeing the results or hearing the pure, unadulterated anger in the voices of the MSNBC election coverage. 

Of course, last night’s results beg the question: why did it happen?  Was it because of how much we luv the Republicans?  Not really.  Was it because of Obama’s policies?  Almost certainly.  You listen to the far left progressives, however, and you quickly realize that they (still) don’t get it.

“Obama didn’t spend enough.”  “He didn’t push single-payer.”  “He didn’t forcefully propel his progressive agenda.”  “The messaging on all the great stuff he’s accomplished was lost somewhere.”  These are the things I’ve been hearing from the left.  They believe the true left will now become more galvanized without the “moderates.”  I think the Keith Olberman’s of the world will quickly come to realize, however, that what’s left of their party doesn’t agree.

Here’s what we learned last night.  Through all the dissatisfaction with the Republicans and their wars and their spending, this country is still a center-right country.  America is different than every other country in the world because we were a democracy from inception.  In other words, personal freedom, responsibility, and opportunity are our culture.  For good or bad, we don’t like big government.  We don’t even like medium government.  And we showed that last night.

The liberals see a stimulus that saved jobs.  The majority of this country sees billions of dollars being taken from the pockets of producers in the private market, some of whom are now part of the 9.5% unemployed, and given to government workers.  Like it or not, government employees work for us, and when they’re pulling down paychecks and benefits and pensions on the backs of the unemployed or underemployed, heads will roll.  Why?  Because we’re not France, and we wouldn’t even know how to be France.

Liberals see legislation that gives everybody insurance.  The majority of this country sees legislation that isn’t going to reduce the amounts they pay for medical care, but will increase their costs elsewhere, as the government will certainly need to subsidize millions of people who still can’t afford it. 

Liberals see Social Security as a safety net for the retired.  The majority sees taxes taken out of their paycheck at gunpoint, money which they, and the economy, could certainly use now, with empty promises that it will be protected for their retirement.   

This is the divide that separates America from Western Europe (and the rest of the world).  We’re willing to pay taxes for the military, police, and efficient government.  We’re even willing to pay taxes to provide for assistance to those who need it.  We’re not, however, willing to pay taxes for Michelle Obama to travel through Spain in style, or Nancy Pelosi to fly on private aircraft whenever she feels like going somewhere, or a Dept. of Justice that selectively enforces federal law, or people on welfare using their government-issued debit cards for psychic readings (I’m looking at you California).  This is especially true when many of the people paying the taxes are having a hard time putting food on the table.

Simply put, last night was a message to our representatives, both Republican and Democrat, to get their acts together.  If the remaining liberals in office don’t want to heed that call, then they may find themselves in an even smaller minority come 2012; which wouldn’t be a bad thing.

%d bloggers like this: