About Me

Name: Mick O.
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

What do the political parties actually stand for?

Let's break it down to specifics. This election is pretty clearly defined. Other than the global warming issue, McCain and Obama are clearly on opposite sides of most of the remaining issues. At first I thought that there was a difference between the parties in that true Republicans stand on principles regardless of win or lose, while Democrats will do and say anything to win. But I'm not sure that is the case now. However, the fact that Democrats won't give up a seat when one of their members is in a coma pretty much says it all. And it's not about the truth, it's about politics. If it were about the truth, then Democrats would say that they agreed with Bush that Iraq had WMDs, but to say they NEVER thought he did and that Bush made it up to go to war is a LIE! Doesn't the truth and character mean anything anymore? Guess not to Democrats.
 
Here are some of the issues and where the parties stand:
 
Democrats (what they are eagerly proposing)
  • Anti-war in Iraq (but they are willing to send troops to Darfur and Tibet to free people)
  • Higher taxes on the rich (though they don't define what that number is so they could be aiming for you)
  • More regulations to reduce global warming (though they never tell you how many jobs would be lost by the regulations or how much money that would cost and how little effect it would make because seemingly no progress has been made)
  • No allowing drilling of oil - pushing conservation instead as a way to lower prices
  • Believe abortion should be legal through upholding Roe Vs. Wade decision (but are terrified to let states make that decision on their own because then people would see where their politicians stand on the issue)
  • Amnesty for illegal immigrants (including giving them voting rights and welfare benefits)
  • Nationalized health care (paid for by taxes - of course there would be no bureaucracy involved with setting this up)
Republicans (what they should do, anyway)
  • The war on terror has kept the US safe from attack for 7 years - strong on security
  • Lower taxes for everyone, smaller government
  • Global warming (if it even exists) has not been affected by all the billions we have sunk into the effort and it's time to admit that the earth goes through normal warming and cooling periods - this is just one of them
  • Drill here, drill now, pay less and build some refineries and nuclear power plants
  • Just the opposite - States should be making the law on abortion according to the will of the people - should not be a federal "law"
  • Close the borders and make business -verify all social security numbers before employing people
  • Leave health care alone other than doing something about frivolous lawsuits against hospitals and doctors

I know McCain is kind of lame on a lot of issues. But true Republicans that are running for house and senate seats are our best hope. Obama is dangerous because people are looking only at the color of his skin and not at the principles he believes in. Very scary.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

2 years of Democrats and look at what's happened? Can we stand any more?

 I have been thinking about what I would write next. As I have pondered the recent problems with the economy, it occurred to me that these issues were not present until Democrats took over both houses of congress 2 years ago. Why has the media not mentioned this?
 
Fact: Because of the Bush tax cuts our economy has been soaring for almost 6 years without much of a blip.
 
Fact: 2006 elections put Democrats in the majority in both houses of congress and things started to come apart.
 
Fact: Gas prices are going though the roof. Everyday at the pump, prices are higher than the day before. It's almost reminiscent of the Jimmy Carter years when going to the grocery store meant so many stickers on a can of soup because the prices were changing hourly!
 
Fact: Of all the candidates, only Obama favors NOT giving the citizens a break from the federal gas tax. In California, the state tax is about 3 times that of the federal tax, and the state is STILL out of money!
 
Fact: Because scientists predict that global temperatures are going to stay relatively low for the next 15 years, they are saying that global warming is taking a vacation whereupon, when the 15 years are up, it's going to ramp up again. Can you believe it? These people who are so worried about the rise in CO2 are the same ones who made us all get catalytic converters for our cars to turn carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide are now complaining... because it worked? These are the same 15 nut jobs who are sitting in a room with the 5 PETA people and a fax machine, churning out our environmental policies!!! And they say Bush and his cronies are running the world. HARDLY!
 
Chuck Schumer is a moron. He recently discounted the gas tax haitus saying it wouldn't do enough and would put our streets, roads and infrastructure in jeopardy. Chucky should come to San Francisco where the streets are so full of pot holes, they are in jeopardy NOW! But where does the money go? To the city council who seems to think it is more important to promote gay marriages and oppose the war in Iraq instead of fixing the potholes. So lower gas prices are not going to hurt anything. These things are already in jeopardy!
 
My point is this. Democrats are always promising to make things better if we just give them more of our money in taxes. Bull!!! They are taking over 50% of our payhecks with all the payroll taxes plus taxes on our phone, gas and electric, cable... and now they want to tax services (in California). Enough is enough. It's time for the TEA PARTY!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why isn't the media telling us about Nancy Pelosi's outrageous statements?

I thought the Democrats were for the seasoned citizens. Aren't they the ones who are supposedly protecting the retirees from the evil Republicans? So why is Nancy Pelosi proposing the following?
 
==============================

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income

Anyone who understands a flat monetary system, our system, knows that most retirement funds lose real value and are not exactly what a person hopes for at the end of their work life. Some are, and those typically go to people in the public sector. We contribute greatly to those through a myriad of taxes.

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so damned stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the speaker of the House is saying. Read below...............

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401Ks and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!

Boy, are we in trouble... This woman is frightening. She quotes..." We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest."

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:  "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'."

This outrageous that anyone would propose taxing seniors to give to the illegal aliens! I hope this is not true, or if it is, doesn't gain any traction, but liberals have given our country to those who do not produce anything and punish those who do. It's time for a change all right. But Democrats are NOT it! We need someone to bring reason back into politics.
 
Next time around, Democrats need to dump Pelosi and get some real leadership with vision! Not a socialist who is bent on destroying what's left of our great country! 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What the media doesn't tell you - liberalism doesn't work!

If liberalism worked, then California would not be in the trouble it is in financially. Take this as an example of what liberalism does when it's tried.
 
True we have a Republican governor, but he is by no means a conservative. He is another John McCain... trying to get along with both sides. And what is the result? More and more debt... and that's without an expensive Iraq war to use as an excuse of where the money is going!
 
Example one of how liberal ideas don't work: People in California are being rewarded with a tax credit for buying the Toyota "Pious" and other hybrids because they save gasoline. They get more miles to the gallon than regular automobiles and SUVs. Sounds like a good idea, right?
 
So what happens is that our little lemmings go out and buy the hype. There are probably more hybrids per square mile in California than anywhere in the US. As a result, not as many gallons of gas are being consumed. Good you say? Not for the tax and spend liberals who are running California. Instead of balancing the budget and doing away with programs that don't work, they need your tax dollars. But now that people are not buying as much gas, they are not getting the tax revenue they were expecting!
 
I am told that there are about $0.45 or more per gallon of gas and with people using less gas, that means less taxes for the greedy government. So what are they discussing now? In a place where we already have some of the highest prices per gallon of gas in the nation, they are talking about adding a new gas tax at the pump to increase revenue!
 
But wait, isn't big oil being blamed for the high prices??? And what about all the ethanol (made from corn) that's being used? I thought oil was the problem? So you're saying that if we went to 100% ethanol we would still be paying the same price for "gas"? That's right. In fact, not only will ethanol cost the same or more than gasoline (because it is so hard to transport), it has side effects.
 
Because corn is used for our food sources, those prices are rising as more and more corn is being used as "gasoline". As it becomes more scarce, prices to feed livestock rise and so this cost is being passed on to consumers when they buy dairy or meat products. Corn is also used in many processed foods, so these are going up too.
 
All this because we want to wean ourselves off foreign oil! That's just one liberal idea that has backfired on the powers that be. I for one can't wait to see what they come up with next!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What choice do we have?

On the Republican side, we have McCain who has constantly voted with the Democrats during his time in the Senate. Now, suddenly, he's talking about Conservative values. Talk is cheap. He has undermined Republicans at every turn, voting against extending Bush's tax cuts, trying to sneak an illegal amnesty bill through the senate with Ted Kennedy, the gang of 14, campaign finance reform with Feingold... and the list goes on.
 
On the Democrat side it is a little trickier. First you have Hillary whose experience in the whitehouse was First Lady... hardly a policy making position. Then you have the health care fiasco that was soundly pushed back. Do we really want more of this socialist agenda? More big government nanny state legislation. But she does have one more term of experience as Senator of New York over Obama... though she has hardly participated in any significant legislation. I don't think "just showing up to vote" qualifies as experience.
 
Obama... what can I say? His followers are like the Beatles with the Maharaji. Star struck and wide eyed. Fainting? It's being called Obamania. Remember Beatlemania? It's like a spiritual revival all over again. And about what? Do any of his followers know where he stands on policies? I do.
 
He's about change. His website says so on the home page... "Change you can believe in". Hitler was a change from the way things had been run in Europe before he rose to power. That's not necessarily a good thing. Don't misunderstand, I am not comparing him to Hitler. My point is that change is not always for the better!
 
Not only that, but he's asking us to BELIEVE in change. Does he really think he can change Washington by himself? Let's see what that change involves, shall we? From the Blueprint for Change:
  1. He's going to end lobbyists... So that means if you band together to support a common cause, your voice will not be heard. Does that mean teachers unions no longer will have a say about education? We'll see about that.
  2. Shine the light on spending... Most people have not been paying attention to how our government wastes money otherwise they would not vote for liberals over and over again. But if you elect him that's going to change, and everyone will become involved. As Dr. Evil would say, "Righttttt....."
  3. Reform the political appointee process... does he realize that Demcrats have caused the president to make decision on appointees thanks to Senate oversight rules? But he's going to change that all by himself? Again, we'll see.
  4. Universal health care coverage... This one scares me the most. And all politicians are guilty of buying into the premise that we need MORE government to fix the health care industry. It's the government regulations that have gotten us to where we are (with the help of outrageous lawsuits) and driven up costs. Can you imagine some bureaucrat, who has absolutely no experience in running a business, managing the nation's health care system? Picture the same people who are running security at the airport. Then realize that they are going to be the same ones running the health care system.

    And it's all going to be FREE???? Services will suffer and wait times to see doctors will increase as every hypocondriac in the country takes your appointment so that you have to wait a year to be treated for a cold. Simplified paperwork. We can't do it for the IRS and our tax forms, but the health care will be different! You're dreaming, Mr. Obama! Washington LOVES paperwork! 

I can't go on. Read it for yourself. It is so broad-stroked and vapid that this column would go on forever... Kind of like this election cycle. But rest assured... Hillary or Obama, it's socialism-lite. They will get away with as much as they can... incrementally if necessary. Look at where we started with the Boston Tea Party and where we are now with taxes. Incremental-ism.

I hold the media responsible for not telling the truth. Instead they push these different problems as something government should fix. We should fix the media... Solution? Castration!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The END of Democracy? We're there!

I was just looking at a website which is very scary indeed. The essence of the article is about radical Muslims taking over and destroying our country, but it also suggests that liberals and their policies are to blame for America's downfall. It says:
 
History has proven that democracies are temporary in nature as it will only exist until the public realizes that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. After that time, they will vote for the politicians who promise the best goodies. I think Obama is the best at this... even better than Hillary.
 
His message is more subtle than hers, but is no less liberal in nature. Hers talks about issues too narrow (as in her Christmas gifts advertisement) to appeal to the general public, while his is more magnanimous and inclusive so that, even if you don't qualify for government benefits, you think you will.
 
So we're there. End of democracy. Too bad too. I am reading a biography of Washington and this was not his vision at all. I think he would be ashamed of what passes these days as statesmen and women... Shame on them.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Socialism for dummies

Glenn Beck prompted this update. Apparently he debated a "pinhead progressive", as the woman described herself, who wanted to discuss the positive aspects of socialism. From what I can tell, Glenn's response was that history has proved that every attempt at this form of government has failed. Although I am not an insider, I gleaned that the woman finally came around... But I am not sure.
Here's the deal. As a recovered socialist from the 60's, I now see the folly of my ways. I was envious of those rich people because of what they had, not because of what they had contributed. In other words, I was a sixties hippie scumbag musician caught up in a hedonistic world of sex, drugs and alcohol, and rock and roll. It was all about my pleasure and screw the rest of the world. But what was my contribution and was I being compensated for it? Probably.
 
At 40 in 1989, I became a recovered alcoholic (I know the popular term is recovering, but the Big Book says recovered) by working the steps of the program and came to believe in 1992 that Bill Clinton was the man to change things in Washington. About 2 years into his term, I realized that a politician could say anything and usually is not held accountable by the media (because they LIE for liberals).
 
That's when I started listening to Rush Limbaugh. I hated him at first and would yell obscenities at the radio before turning it off. My liberal mindset and decisions were being challenged, and I didn't like it. But for some reason I was drawn back to the show, mostly because it aired on my sports channel, and I was probaby waiting for a baseball game.  I am not sure when the light came on; it was probably about taxes and the fact that people voting Democrat was the reason they kept increasing. Sure, they said they would only tax the rich. I was all for that because I was poor. Get those rich guys. Problem is, in the eyes of the IRS, I was also considered rich... only I didn't know it. I mean I must have been because at $22,000 a year I was only taking home about 60% of my paycheck, and I had a daughter to feed and clothe.
 
I have always had a resentment toward the IRS and would like nothing more than to see it abolished and replaced with the Fair Tax, but if politicians can't take money and redistribute to buy votes, what are they going to do??? And Democrats are the worst of the bunch. This doesn't let Republicans off the hook since there are a lot of tax and spend RINOS (Republicans In Name Only) out there, but the Conservative Ideal should be lower taxes, smaller government, less government intervention in our lives and more personal responsibility. If it gets the government out of it, I am for it... in most cases.
 
When people complain about the money we are spending on the military and security, I laugh and say that this is about the only thing the government is spending money on that is justified by the constitution! All this other social spending is just that; socialism. But because the people who are benefiting from government giveaway programs also get to vote, these programs continue into perpetuity whether they work or not.
 
As a socialist I was a hard worker. That's why I thought it was unfair that other people made millions while I only made thousands. And a lot of people who still tout socialism as the way to go are probably hard workers and are looking at it from their vantage point. Let's take one example.
 
I am close to real estate, and I am surprised at the number of liberals who are Realtors. Granted it is San Francisco, but if ever the work  ethic abounds, it is in these people. I often hear them say they are happy to pay taxes to support these programs and that we should pay our fair share. Great. Problem is, I don't agree and we are lumped into those who either don't care, or are happy to send money along to Washington. Because they have a majority of elected officials who agree with them, I am forced to go along with it.
 
But let's take socialism a bit further. What do you think these same Realtors would say if the Federal Government put a limit on what they could make in commission for selling a house. Right now they get 2.5-3% of the sales price. But the Feds could easily say that's too much because it causes housing inflation. In fact, Obama recently blamed Realtors for the current housing mess because they are running up the prices of housing. Can you believe it? Truth be told, buyers and sellers are running up prices because they think the values are there.
 
I almost wish someone would propose such legislation so I could hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth in the San Francisco Board of Realtors. After all, if the Federal Government can go after CEOs and limit their salaries, why can't they go after Realtors who are making a boat load of money on every sale?  Why not decide on an amount per sale to give to the Realtor and give the rest to a fund that provides services to the homeLESS? It's sort of related to real estate, is it not? After all, Hillary Clinton has proposed the Federal Government take the "windfall profits" of the oil companies and put it into an alternative energy fund. So how is real estate any different? Big OIL versus Big Real Estate!
 
So now I come to my final observation. Let's talk about all the jobs where a "tip jar" is involved. Did you know that Democrats and some RINOs decided some time ago that service people had to declare a certain percentage of their wages as tips (whether they earned them or not) and pay tax on that? These are the people who they say they are trying to help. The poor minimum wagers. And who do the poor minimum wagers keep electing? The Democrats and RINOs because when these liberals keep talking about taxing the rich, they do not think they are in that category. But they are.
 
I challenge anyone to look at their paycheck stub, regardless of income. You will find that roughly 50% is taken every pay period for governement purposes. At the end of the year, most of these people only get a small percentage of that back as a refund, if any. In fact, most people end up paying! Now who's RICH? And do you know who's getting that money? Agencies that give services to homeless, unemployed and often illegal aliens who have never paid a dime into the system.
 
But you might say, "it's the compassionate thing to do." Feed a man or woman a fish and you feed them for a day. Teach the man or woman to fish and you feed them for a lifetime. Giving people money is only a temporary fix. If they use it to learn to fish, then I am all for it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »