Conservative U.

Got Your Tea Bags?

Why?

What are you protesting
The contributor to the Letter to the Editor page who advocates participating in a “Tea Party” in Jackson on April 15 in order to “send a message” to the government should ask himself/herself exactly what that message is. As far as I can tell, the message is that people who make the most money are unhappy paying taxes at a rate that is 10 percent lower than the tax rate established by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. If that is not the message they believe it to be, then the people participating in the Tea Party should ask themselves why they are taking off from work to attend a fake grass roots event orchestrated by an organization supported by right-wing billionaires.

The original Boston Tea Party was caffeinated by a very simple injustice: American Colonists refused to be taxed by a government that lacked any popular representation. That was remedied a few years later in a heroic struggle that stretched from Concord to Yorktown.

So, if you'll excuse the mixed metaphor, what's the beef behind today's protests? The Obama administration is cutting taxes for all except the very richest of Americans. Reduced withholding is already showing up in millions of paychecks.

Then again, this rash of tea parties is being organized not only by the pseudo-journalists at Fox News (with Glenn Beck, Neil Cavuto and Sean Hannity actively stoking the flames) but also by FreedomWorks, a conservative lobbying outfit headed by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. I suppose it was Armey's constitutional if morally dubious privilege to have built an entire political career out of defending the wealthy.

But are common folks actually going to dump Earl Grey into Santa Monica Bay because they are outraged, simply infuriated, by the marginal tax rate rising 3% for millionaires?

Or maybe they'll do it for some other reason. The FreedomWorks site says the Tea Party movement began in reaction to President Obama's corporate bailouts and ensuing yawning budget deficits. These same conservatives, however, were mum when George W. Bush erased our budget surplus and put us deep in the red by drunken spending on a pointless war in Iraq and by, yes, granting massive tax rollbacks for the loaded country clubbers who fund the GOP (and Armey's FreedomWorks). Another bothersome detail: The bailouts were also initiated by Bush.

Nobody I know is very pleased with the billions ladled out to teetering banks and corporations. Yet a clear majority of Americans are sophisticated enough to know that these bailouts are a necessary evil and are intended -- unlike the lollipop Bush tax cuts -- not for personal profit but rather as a radical, emergency measure to help Americans keep their jobs, their homes and their retirement.

And while way too many otherwise sane Republicans are actively pandering to the tea-bag battalions, some old-fashioned conservatives are calling out the Teabaggers for their silliness. Writing in Fortune magazine, conservative policy analyst Bruce Bartlett, who has a long anti-tax history, says: "The irony of these protests is that federal revenues as a share of the gross domestic product will be lower this year than any year since 1950. ... The truth is that the U.S. is a relatively low-tax country no matter how you slice the data."

Our country's Founders had this very unique proposal which has led to the peaceful transfer of power for the past 233 years. When those stalwarts dumped tea into Boston those years ago, they were protesting a very real injustice. It was an act of rebellion against unfair taxes and tariffs in which the population had no say in the matter.

Since Obama's election, there has been a great deal of fear in this country. A lot of people were worried about their guns being taken away. This concern about 2nd Amendment rights being violated surprises me a bit. Since the 1980's to 2007, when the War on Drugs began, legislation has been passed that has violated more of our precious rights. These acts violate our 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendment rights. A lot of people aren't too concerned about those rights being taken away, after all, most are to protect those accused of committing crimes.

But see, our Founders were not merely protesting unfair taxes and tariffs. They were also protesting those colonialist who were arrested without charges being named. They were protesting those who languished in prisons and jails for days, months, and years without a trial. They were also protesting the unfair policy of the British government of taking over homes and confiscating property so that soldiers could be quartered.

If you do go to a tea party, why not go further than just than some lame protest against taxes. Why not protest for our other rights to be reestablished? The War on Drugs and other fears have truly fettered our rights. Why not protest against these real threats to our liberty?

Ditto Heads Are Revolting!!

Tyranny!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Baracknophobia - Obey
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Probably my last post until Friday. Chag Pesach Sameach!

Kosher Salt a Threat?

Someone's jealous that Kosher salt receives all the attention.

With Friends Like These

With friends like these, who needs enemies? Secretary of State Rice has announced it is Israel's fault for the peace deal not going through. Olmert calls Bush Israel's best friend forever. Some friends, eh?

The fact that Israel and the Palestinians have not reached a peace agreement and will likely fail to do so by the end of 2008 is "largely due to" political turmoil in Israel, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday night.

"Even though there was not an agreement by the end of the year, it is really largely because of the political situation in Israel," Rice told reporters.

.....

Olmert often speaks of the close personal friendship he has developed with Bush over the past three years. When Bush visited Israel in May, Olmert showered the president with praise, saying, "You're a great person, you're a great leader, and you're a great friend." Though largely unpopular internationally, Bush is loved in Israel, where he is seen as a staunch defender of the US ally.

Some ally Israel has in the US. Never mind the belligerence of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, no peace deal is the fault of Israel.

McCain & Khalidi

Spreading the Wealth: Marxists!!!

Congress enacted a bailout plan a few weeks ago in order to help relieve the financial crisis occurring. Banks no longer trusted one another and didn't want to lend short-term to other banks or if they did lend to one another, the interest rates were prohibitive. So Congress, led by President Bush passed the $700 billion bailout plan, a very large redistribution of wealth.

From my understanding, the money was to help the liquidity of money the banks loan to one another. This is taxpayer money. The economy is such that banks do need to borrow short-term from one another. New details are coming out in which it seems some banks do not appear to be using the money from the bailout as intended.

Some are using the bailout money to pay stockholder dividends. Some of the troubled banks may use the bailout money to pay officers bonuses.

Clearly, we have a situation in which taxpayers money and its redistribution is not being used for the intended purposes. It appears some of the dividends in question will go to pension funds and mutual funds. In other words, our tax money earmarked for the bailout plan is clearly being used to spread the wealth. The wealth is also being spread to the executives of these troubled banks.

This time, the spreading the wealth is going upwards. His tax plan would relieve the tax burden on those whose net taxable income is less than $250,000. Since this spreading the wealth goes to those who make the least money, it is considered unfair by some and has been labeled as 'socialism' and 'Marxism'.

If Obama's tax plan and his comment about spreading the wealth is 'socialist' or 'Marxist', than clearly the bailout plan is as well. This country is just full of evil "Marxists'!!!!

Dancing Maniac

Peyton Place

The new scare word for the desperate McCain campaign is socialism. They base it on Obama's "spreading the wealth" comment when he was explaining his tax plans to "Joe the Plumber". Palin reiterated that stance. In the linked article she states that 40% of Americans pay no income tax. What about the other 60% who do?

I watched Peyton Place yesterday. It was made in 1957 and is set during World War II. It focuses on the people of the small town of Peyton Place. There are the usual characters; gossip mongers, drunkards who abuse their families, the kindly doctor, those that fear change, and many others. In Dr. McSwain's speech at the trial of Selena, he makes a stirring speech on the qualities of helping at one another. He notes that there are people who live in tar shacks on the outskirts of town and that the community needs to help them. Each in the community needs to be more open to the needs of those who live there. He notes that spreading gossip and rumors are destructive. Far from being socialistic, Dr. McSwain's words are based on sound Jewish teaching. We are to take care of the poor among us. Gossip can ruin lives.

Obama's tax plan will help 60% of those that are struggling in these times. For someone making between $20,000 to $50,000 a year. getting an additional refund of around $500 a year will help a lot. Didn't President Bush just send $300 to $600 to most taxpayers in the US? I don't remember too many calling it socialism.

Those whose taxable income is over $250,000 a year will hardly see their finances devastated by a 3% increase.

Bush's tax cuts were supposed to create new jobs. Instead, we've seen more and more jobs going overseas.

"if It Ain't Broke"

The Wall Street Journal has a compendium of who said what in it's article What They Said About Fan and Fred. The problems of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were known 5 years ago as House hearings clearly show. Representative Maxine Waters(D) of California had this to say:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), speaking to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Mel Martinez:

Secretary Martinez, if it ain't broke, why do you want to fix it? Have the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] ever missed their housing goals

Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): I worry, frankly, that there's a tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. . . .

House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:

Rep. Frank: I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . . .

Barney Frank and many other Democrats in the House of Representatives wanted to "roll the dice" instead of fixing a major, major problem. From the words of Representative Barney Frank, it is somewhat mind-boggling that he has received praise in the past few days:

It is the height of irony that in recent days, as the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank gets praise for his role as a key figure in the bailout talks, scrambling to avert the disastrous consequences of Bush Administration policy. Barney Frank is the portrait of congressional complicity, if not outright corruption, in this crisis. The Wall Street Journal closely covered his ties with the corrupt CEOs of Fannie Mae and Countrywide, Franklin Raines and Angelo Mozilo.

Could it be that all those enticing ties Barney Frank had made sure he was willing to "roll the dice" 5 years ago? Who else was willing to "roll the dice"? In Blame D.C. Not New York Democrats Dodd and Obama are shown to be top recipients of the largess of funds from CEO's of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:

Fannie Mae’s fate illustrates the political roots of market failure. In an instance of blatant political cronyism, Mr. Raines, Clinton’s White House budget director, became the CEO of Fannie Mae. Raines exposed the company’s balance sheet to insane risks while deliberately exaggerating earnings to receive astronomical bonuses. Why not? Fannie Mae had an implied guarantee from the US Federal Government – the taxpayers would bail him out. To shore up that promise, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have showered Congress with money for decades and incidentally, Senators Chris Dodd and Barack Obama top the list of recipients since 1989. Sure, Raines was corrupt, but politicians like Frank who shielded him from oversight and regulation deserve ultimate responsibility

Now, the Senate has passed it's version of the bailout, oh excuse me, the rescue package. It includes a provision to increase FDIC insurance. But some in the House want to increase the scope of the bailout.

Something does need to be done. Banks in Europe are facing the same problem. Like the Senate, the governments are acting swiftly and responsibly. They are focused on trying to ease the situation and not add earmarks. It seems they are acting like adults and not spoiled brats like Waters who saw nothing that needed to be fixed and Barney Franks who wanted to roll the dice 5 years ago.

Now, we are faced with a bigger repair job and rolling the dice wasn't a very good option. Perhaps, if tighter controls had been enacted 5 years ago, we would be seeing a economic boom now.

Watching this mess unfold, I couldn't help but hope that there was just one Congressman like Jefferson Smith in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Sadly, no one measured up. McCain came the closest. He did seem willing to make a truly bi-partisan effort to do what needed to be done. Obama seemed to be sitting on the fence until he knew which way the political wind was blowing. Plus, he was one of the largest recipients of contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did her job very well in blaming the Republicans and the latest poll numbers for Obama reflect that. Political expediency at its worst was in action. My question is, can we really afford the "change" Obama keeps speaking about? The Democrats have shown they are more than willing to throw the United States under the bus to gain political power. Pelosi showed that very well on Monday.

News Biases

The same thing happens in most political races. Palin is but the latest example. This video of a Mad TV spoof of Fox news is hilarious:

Saving the World

I've come to really enjoy watching HGTV's My House is Worth What?. Not only are there those who seem to really believe buying a house with interest-only payments in order to sell it at a higher price, there are those who want to "save the world". There was this one couple who spent between $300,000 to $400,000 on making upgrades to their house. Oh sure, they used a soy product to insulate the wine cooler they had installed. They various paints and products that are supposedly green. No mention of solar panels or of solar-powered water heaters.

This couple wanted their home to be worth over $850,000. Was it to further enhance the greenness of their existing home? Was it to install the solar panels necessary to be almost off the power-grid? Was it to install solar-powered water heaters?

No, to all the above. They wanted their house to be worth that much so they could sell this one and then build a totally green house.

They want to "save the world" by bulldozing up more acreage and hauling in green materials from across the country. Sounds like a plan, not.

Air

Republican members are still hard at work trying to come up with a viable energy plan while the Democrats have gone on vacation.

The Democrats seem to hold with this:




It's not too surprising since Barack Obama's plan consists of this:

My Dear, Dear Congress

I see that you have decided to vote yourselves a vacation instead of working out some resolution for the energy crisis we are facing. Queen, oops, should have said Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wants to save the "world" while ignoring what as Americans are facing and will be facing. The current high prices of fuel are not just seen at the gas pump. These higher fuel prices are reflected in the prices of goods we purchase. Saving the "world" while looking into options other than fossil fuels is laudable.

However, the green technology has not reached a point in efficiency and cost-effectiveness. As an American, I would love to be able to place solar panels on my home. However, the cost is prohibitive at this point. The lowest prices I've seen start at $25,000. That's a big chunk of change.

I don't a hybrid car nor do I need to purchase fuel with ethanol. See, my little car already gets great gas mileage. It also makes less of an impact on the environment during manufacturing. It will also impact the environment less when it comes time to dispose of it.

President Bush and you in Congress have made food prices skyrocket with the drive toward using corn and other food products to produce ethanol, Other options should have been addressed. Corn husks, weed grasses, and others should have been looked out more closely.

Your acts over the last few months indicate a certain lack or desire to help your constituents. It is all well and good to want to save the "world". You voted no on the issue of oil being extracted from shale. You still refuse to discuss opening ANWR.

And the only solutions you propose to ease the situation are so-called green ones. Wind farms, solar panels, and other methods are great ideas but at this point in time, they cannot meet current needs. Unless something drastic occurs in the next years, these methods are still woefully insufficient to meet the ever increasing demand for fuel and energy.

Until then, ANWR needs to be opened. It will take ten or more years for oil to start flowing from there. In the meantime, other options for fuel and energy can still be researched and developed. Perhaps in those years, solar panels will be developed to have a higher efficiency rating and hopefully the prices will come down.

Nuclear plants must be approved now. It takes many years to build them. The US is woefully behind the rest of the world in building them.

Perhaps while you guys are on your vacations, you'll reflect that many of your constituents can no longer afford to go on vacation. They can no longer afford the fuel to get there. Perhaps you'll realize that your focus should not be on saving the "world" but on actually helping those who voted you into office.

In other words, quit trying to sneak Kyoto through the back door. Both President Clinton and President Bush realized Kyoto was very bad for our country while not really doing much to save the "world".

Thank you,

A Concerned Citizen

Shiny, Sparkly Things!

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Found one at IMAO that explains Carter's fascination with Hamas:

Primaries

In honor of all the attention is receiving because of the primaries today, I'm pointing y'all to my post, The Democrats Love Us Now!.

There's a lot of people who like Obama. They like his plans for a transparent government. They like his message of hope and change. Hillary Clinton's message is shrill and her derogatory comments about Mississippi have not been forgotten.

Neither has the fact that it is 2 1/2 years after Hurricane Katrina hit and not one major Democratic politician has visited the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Even with all the campaigning by Hillary and Obama, neither has visited Gulfport, Biloxi, Bay St Louis, Pass Christian, Moss Point, Escatawpa, Pascagoula, Lakeshore, or any of the other Coastal cities heavily damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Oh well, the Mississippi Gulf Coast is largely Republican, no need to really see and understand what is needed for rebuilding. Move along, nothing to see here.

There may be a surprise in store for McCain though. There were 5 Ron Paul supporters at the beach urging people to vote for him!

Okay, okay. So McCain hasn't paid the Mississippi Gulf Coast a visit either. But he didn't hypocritically criticize President Bush and as far as I know, hasn't made any derogatory comments about Mississippi. Neither has Obama and I think that may give him the edge over Hillary.

The Democrats Love Us Now!

There has been a dearth of major Democratic politicians who even recognize that Mississippi was hit hard when Hurricane Katrina roared ashore. But that is changing! In Mississippi, the primaries for the Presidential election are to be held next Tuesday. And guess who is showing up?

Hillary Clinton made a campaign stop in Canton, Mississippi. Why with her laser beam eyes, I'm sure she could she the damage from around 200 miles away!. Perhaps she couldn't make it to Biloxi or Gulfport because she was worried about crying or maybe she watched Foxnews to see the reports of the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina!

In her 30-minute speech, Clinton took President Bush to task for his response to Hurricane Katrina, saying the president should not have needed a video from CNN to understand what was happening after the storm.

"The President did not respond to the needs of the people here in Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana... " Clinton said. "We do not yet have the level of response and urgency that a national disaster, which turned into a national disgrace, deserves. I will do whatever I can to make up for lost time as your president.

It is funny how she lambastes President Bush for not immediately hopping on a plane on August 30, 2005 to inspect the damage. Frankly, a visit by President Bush at that time would have pulled valuable resources from ongoing rescue efforts along the Mississippi Coast and in New Orleans. Her message may have sounded more sincere if perhaps she stood on the steps(all that was left) of of McElroy's Restaurant in Biloxi. Or perhaps on the slab where the Seafood and Maritime Museum once stood. Or maybe the vast, empty lot where historic homes such as Grasslawn once stood. Or maybe, she could have just driven along Highway 90 and so the countless slabs and steps that are the only reminders of what was once there before Hurricane Katrina.

More money is needed for rebuilding the Mississippi Gulf Coast and New Orleans. I'll agree with her on that. But she is hypocrite for she has not visited the Mississippi Gulf Coast. She does not know the level of destruction. President Bush was made an honorary citizen for the number of visits he made to Biloxi and Gulfport after Hurricane Katrina hit.

Democratic leaders, including Hillary Clinton herself, were too busy with derogatory comments about Mississippi to bother to see for themselves the monumental task we face in rebuilding.

"I was shocked when I learned Iowa and Mississippi have never elected a woman governor, senator or member of Congress," Clinton told the paper. "There has got to be something at work here. How can Iowa be ranked with Mississippi? That's not the quality. That's not the communitarianism, that's not the openness I see in Iowa.'"

Oh, I see. Mississippi is a repressive and closed off state until she needs our votes. But even this comment wasn't as bad as the one Representative Charles Rangel made.

“Mississippi gets more than their fair share back in federal money, but who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?” Mr. Rangel said.

Hmm. Something seems to be in the water of New York and Washington D.C. It makes New Yorkers hate Mississippi!

Instead of her prickliness coming to see the damage for herself in cities such as Gulfport and Biloxi, she is sending her 'husband', Bill. After all, can't have her crying or possibly swooning over the devastation.

Oh, and Obama is supposed to be making a visit to Mississippi as well.

Thankfully, since McCain is unopposed in the primaries, we don't have to worry about a suck-up visit from him.

Occupied Palestine

One of the narratives most frequently heard for supporting the vile acts of murder attempted murder by Palestinian terrorists against Israelis is that Israel is "occupying" Palestinian land. The charter of Hamas and even the supposedly changed charter of Fatah both proclaim that Palestine will be free from the river to the sea. In other words, both proclaim the destruction of Israel.

Now Palestinians are claiming charges of more "occupied land". This time the culprit is Egypt:

Ahmed Yousef, political adviser to Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, called for the "demolition and removal of the border between Palestinian Rafah and the Egyptian territory and the seizure of thousands of acres built on the border" claiming that the ownership back to the Palestinians.

Youssef claimed in an interview with the Arab channel tonight that "Hamas' destruction of the wall was intended to restore to the Palestinians their land allegedly taken to build a border wall is about 13 thousand acres" and said: "We do not want the continuation of the wall because we do not prefer the existence of any wall between us and deepened Arab" as he said.
...
The Egyptians have also foiled an attempt by Hamas members to raise Palestinian and Hamas flags on top of several government institutions in Sinai's Rafah and el-Arish.

The semi-official Al-Ahram newspaper reported that the attempt to place the flags was seen as a serious "provocation" by many Egyptians.

Since the claims of Palestinians in regards to "occupied land" are always met with little regard to truth, I'm sure Methodists and other church groups will immediately seek to divest from Egypt.

As I'm sure these same groups will seek to divest from Lebanon since the Lebanese attacked Palestinian refugee camps.

Of cousre, they'll need to include Jordan in those divestment plans. After all, in Black September, Jordan expelled such, fine upstanding terrorists as Arafat and other PLO leaders and fought against the Palestinian terrorists in Jordan.

Yeaaaaarrrrrgghhh! Iowa! Phbbt!

Looking at the results in Iowa, all I can say is what is wrong with the Republicans? First of all, Huckabee? He is clueless on domestic and international topics. I hope the good people of New Hampshire have the good sense not to select the Huckster. But what is most troubling to me about the results in Iowa is 10% of the Iowan Republican caucus selected Ron Paul. He received more than Giuliani.

I'm impressed at the Democrats in Iowa. They selected Obama and left Clinton gasping. No matter how you look at it, those 10% points Obama had over Clinton are significant.

I'm not a member of either party. But have voted more Republican than Democrat. The Republican party seems to be moribund. If the next Republican caucuses show the same trends and the Huckster is selected as the Republican nominee for president, I will voting Democrat, even if Clinton is selected.