Third-graders are not welcome

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 23:27:12 +0000

Can we quit calling each other names here?
Erick, et al, I recommend a ban for name calling. Or at least a 3-day suspension. I just read all of Erick’s posting about McCain, and am sick unto death of the lack of discussion and general name-calling on the article.
STOP, NOW!

The sequester has hit, and I haven’t felt it

Sat, 02 Mar 2013 01:06:20 +0000

Did the world end? I guess not. Guess Obama will finally have to “eat his peas”. It is about time.
Just to let him know that I have walked in his moccasins (or whatever the analogy is you’d care to use) my take home pay on the same income (no raise last year due to the wonderful recovery we are having, thank you President 0) was 4 percent less. It is only costing you 2.5 percent. So feel grateful. You again stuck it to me, one of the “non-rich”.

A reflection on Obamanomics

Sat, 29 Dec 2012 14:05:14 +0000

I have been reflecting on what President Obama wishes to gain by his intransigence on raising taxes. It is obvious that he does not like “the rich”, and wishes to demonize them in his words and actions. Even in his speech and his demands during the negotiations last night (12/28/12), he continues to denigrate those who make over $250,000. In fact, he called them “millionaires and billionaires” during his campaign. It is obvious from the failure that John Boehner saw with his proposal to raise taxes on those earning about $1million, that he “has it in” for those making above $250,000.

To digress for a moment. When John F Kennedy [proposed to] cut taxes, he said “a rising tide lifts all boats”. He argued that tax cuts would allow those at the bottom to have their boat lifted as well. This concept can also be applied to poverty.

To merge the two thoughts: During the Obama administration, the average wage of Americans has declined about 8%. If we chase off the high earners, this can be expected to drop even further. So the rising tide of President Obama is not prosperity, it is poverty. To quote another thought, there will not be substantial “trickle down prosperity”. Instead, poverty has begun to trickle upward, and soon will start to flood upward as the increased tax rates that the President wants exact their toll. My conclusion is that the President wants to lift all boats with poverty, not prosperity. That this is accelerating can be seen from this link.

Ohio, please help me understand

Wed, 07 Nov 2012 16:45:05 +0000

In what do Ohioans believe? I thought I knew, but am really confused after last night.

Ohioans dislike the Affordable Care Act. But they re-elected the Senator who gave it to us, Sherrod Brown. I thought that Ohioans liked to keep warm in winter. Yet they voted for a Senator who would not vote for legislation to reconsider/repeal the EPA standards for coal-based systems. A man with numerous other beliefs, like his belief in global warming and that whole suite of things. A man who has voted for President Obama’s deficits every chance he got.

While Brown got the Senate seat, we lost as Senator a young man who has demonstrated his love for Ohio and country, Josh Mandel, a Marine who has gone to foreign lands to fight for what we ask him. A man who promised to fight to return our Senate to fiscal sanity.

Sorry, Ohio, I don’t understand your voting. Can someone who voted this way explain, please?

President Obama, I totally agree with you

Sat, 06 Oct 2012 18:59:50 +0000

On Sixty Minutes last Sunday (9/30/2012) you indicated that some of the campaign ads go too far. President Obama also said that Mr. Romney won the debate because of the number and scope of his lies with which ABC News does not seem to agree. I can agree with you on this Mr. Obama; there were lies told at the debate. However, if I had to give Pinocchio awards for the campaign season, far more of them deal with your lies than those of Mr. Romney.

Cases in point:

You told us today that the jobs news is great. We added the same number of jobs last month as we AVERAGED in 1962 (JFK was President, and the economy wasn’t doing well then. With about 30% larger population, your numbers are horrible, and you look like a liar as you and your water-boys at the media try to make it look like the job market is doing great. Even the Dow Jones is getting tired of the jobs lies and only went up 34 points yesterday on this “great news”.
In the attack on the consulate in Libya, your Ambassador to the UN (Susan Rice) keeps telling us that this was due to some movie, the trailer for which is the only published source. This is not even a credible lie. This is a bald falsehood based on the date that it was done, the presence of RPGs and mortars (even protesting Libyans don’t carry these down the street). You also tell us that they were trying to carry the Ambassador (YOUR PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE) to the hospital, but his body showed that he had been sodomized and the photos made him appear dead. I know that Four Pinocchioes is the max, but this is worth at least five of them, maybe five for each of the two lies.
Yesterday, you told us that Social Security “needs a little tweaking”. If you truly believe this, you don’t have a clue; if not, this is an unconscionable lie . The Social Security Administration tells us that this is not true (adjustments in the range of 27% of benefits is required to make today’s dollars fit in the future), and that it is in serious trouble just like Medicare. Yet you continue to take payroll tax dollars out of the funding for this program. Worth Four Pinocchio’s in my opinion.
You told us Mitt Romney has a $5T tax cut planned for the wealthy. Mr. Romney tells you he has no idea what you are saying. Your source is a liberal group, the Tax Policy Center, a group you call non-partisan, but I cannot find a conservative position on its site. Mr. Romney’s source is Mr. Romney. You could look at the Tax Policy Center site and let me know where they disagree with you which would make them “non-partisan”. But they seem to support you up and down the line. In fact, to claim a group with the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute being the sponsors is “non-partisan” is worth at least a Pinocchio or two.

However, you MUST deal with the image of you as a bald-faced liar, Mr. President. We elected you based upon your promise for hope and change and that having a black President would make us post-racial. However, Candidate Obama is running right now as if you are the Affirmative Action Candidate, have never been President, have no record over the last four years, and, like for a Federal job or a University of Michigan admissions, you get a certain number of points (poll points or votes) for being the affirmative action candidate. Our problem, Mr. President, is that you are rapidly losing “quality” points because you are a liar. You willl not be able to be elected based on affirmative action points only.

My suggestion, Mr. Candidate Obama, is that you get yourself somebody credible out there, like Mr. Sharpton is doing, to cover for you that Mr. Romney is the big liar. It may just be believed by your liberal supporters. I have my doubts about your black supporters, however. I think they are too smart to swallow your Kool-aid.

You can shut off comments, Erick, but not commentary

Sat, 07 Jul 2012 18:35:20 +0000

I don’t understand it. Erick writes a post about maybe needing a third party, and then cuts off comment. As a conservative who has voted Republican for his whole adult life, I don’t like it. There actually are numerous third parties. There are the Libertarian, the Green, the Socialist, the Communist, etc etc etc. None has risen to dominance, because all are fringe parties. In fact, many of their members will cross over to vote for other parties. We saw that sort of in reverse when Republicans went to vote for the People’s Party (or whatever it was called then) and Ross Perot because we disliked George HW Bush, another of the Dinosaurs. The result was (can you say it without retching) William Jefferson Clinton. By moving to a third party, a bunch of Republicans handed the election to the Democrats.

I do agree with Erick that the Republicans in DC have turned into a bunch of faithless jerks led by that liar John Boehner. We need to replace them, if not this year, then in 2, 4, or whenever their term comes up. But, if Erick thinks that he can walk away and not have the Democrats win big (as bad as it is now, remember 2009-2010?) he is either mistaken or despondent. We MUST not be purists, but we must purify from within in a pragmatic manner to form a more conservative party. That way, if a third party arises, it will at least be from the left, and not the right, diminishing the strength of the Democrats and giving Conservatives a voice.

We are working from within, but the gasps of the Republican dionsaurs dying is mistaken for more than it is. The conservatives we have elected have not lost their way, but they are browbeat by the dinosaurs because they think they are alone. We need to continue to support them, make them understand that we will support them, and that we think it is GOOD that John Boehner has to get Democrats to join with him to pass terrible legislation. This cannot sit well with his voters in SW Ohio, and they will eventually replace him. Until then, we need to put young Conservatives into the House, and the Senate, so we have conservatism and youth to outlive the dinosaurs. Erick, I am not young, but I am conservative, and I will support you young guys as you try to clean out the stables. As bad as this clean-out is, it makes the Democrat clean-out look like the Augean stables in comparison.

We instead need to starve the beast. We need to cut off funding for Dinosaur campaigns, and make sure that our conservatives are well-funded. We will only do that by getting good candidates (not fringe people, but conservative ones) to run, get control of our state parties, and starve the beast feeding the dinosaurs. But turning your back is stupid, childish, churlish, and several other names that I could add that would only make you think I am calling you names, not your behavior.

So, Erick, like it or not, I just commented on http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/07/07/maybe-we-really-do-need-a-third-party/. I know I just told the owner that he has no clothes. You are welcome to shut me off if you wish. Then you will look just like the nebbish at Little Green Footballs who did the same thing, not to mention Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, and the rest of the Dinosaurs.

“I like to fire people”

Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:27:16 +0000

I, too, like to fire people. I really liked firing Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Unfortunately, it looks like the new COO of the House (Boehner) and his management team may also need to be fired. I will look to do that in 2012. Further, I think that Harry Reid should be fired as Senate Majority Leader. To do this, I again intend to vote for Josh Mandel for Senate in Ohio. I recommend that other Ohioans do this also. Sherrod Brown’s stance on the stimulus, healthcare, and Anthropogenic Global Warming are three stands that are likely to continue to hurt Ohioans. Finally, I intend to fire Barack Hussein Obama, even if the only choice is Romney. Even if the party were to nominate Paul, Gingrich, Perry, or any number of Repubicans I would hold my nose and vote for this person over Barack Obama. Reasons for this firing include:

The Obamanation called Obamacare
The second Obamanation called Dodd-Frank
The third Obamanation called “stimulus” and its giveaway to states and to union groups
Increases in Medicare under Obamacare amounting to 250% after the 2012 elections (should have been smaller and started while he was in office) contained in Obamacare
Eric Holder and his Operation Fast and Furious lies
Stephen Chu and his bad investments in Green Energy
Lisa Jackson and her leftist over-regulation in the EPA
Van Jones and his nomination to ANYTHING in this Administration
Richard Cordray, the life-long Ohio politician, and his non-Constitutional “recess appointment”
Recess appointment of two NLRB nominees who were not even on his web page of nominations they were so recent
Sonya Sotomajor
Elena Kagan

I think that we should “retire” him to write another autobiography which I can also fail to buy. With these firings, I hope to effect a turn-around in the nation’s economic and personal freedoms.

A suggested open letter to your Congressman, Senators, and Speaker Boehner

Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:32:23 +0000

We are sending this to you in order that you consider the desperate state in which our nation lies, and consider how you, as our elected representative, can change this situation. To start, we are relieved that the “Supercommittee” for which you voted has failed, and we expect you and the others of our party to take on the responsibility to correct the slide to fiscal ruin that this committee could not have stopped. We believe that it is time for the nation to live within the means provided, not to increase the amount of my money which flows into Federal coffers. Our points of view are below.
1. We have seen only the FICA tax reduction affect our taxes in the last 3 years. We believe that change actually damaged the country’s ability to pay for its seniors to retire as they were promised without bankrupting this country even farther. Only when the whole Social Security future is made more certain will we support allowing this tax to be reduced again.
2. There is no reason other than lack of fortitude to allow the stimulus to become part of the budget basis. In fact, budgets for ALL departments, including Defense, should be reduced to the 2006 budget plus 4 percent (that is all that the Labor Department claims has been the inflation amount since then). The budgets of the 2007 Congress and subsequent should be returned to more reasonable levels.
3. Taxes should also be returned to 2006 levels. This “tax the rich MORE” is a red herring. The rich in this country already pay too much taxes, while too many lower-income earners are not encouraged to support our country financially (NOTE: FICA is NOT supporting the general budget and should not be considered as such; reducing it is not in the country’s best interest as we pointed out in 1 above).
4. GE is an example of a company which used the tax law changes since 2006 to influence its behavior and allow it to pay no taxes. We support a corporate tax rate cut, but also suggest that most of the credits and exclusions be stripped from the tax code. Similarly should all price controls such as allowed for sugar be removed from the tax code. Farm subsidies should be capped at $100,000 per corporate entity to prevent excessive subsidy of corporate farms.
5. The taxes which start in 2013 in the Affordable Health Care Act should be stripped, as should the money which was budgeted in that bill in violation of the US Constitution (all appropriations are to start in the House, Article I, Section 7).
6. The requirement that the states fund the increases in Medicaid spending in the Affordable Health Care Act should be considered an unfunded mandate and be stricken, as should any expansion of Medicaid that causes an increase in Federal spending without adjusting it from another source.
7. After these changes are made, general tax rate increases should be considered if these actions are not influencing enough of our economy to regenerate.
8. The nonsense of a balanced budget amendment should be stopped. Instead, a provision should be made that if Congress does not balance the budget, then their compensation is reduced by the percentage of the annual federal deficit related to the GDP. This might help clear some heads.
9. Non-accountable government is bad government as we have seen by the actions of the Attorney General numerous “czars”. Efforts at eliminating the czar-like positions where a person is not given specific duties as legislated by Congress should be stopped. Changing the Freedom of Information Act as proposed by the Attorney General should be abandoned, and exemptions of Congress from Federal regulations should be ended retroactively.
10. Get back to single department appropriations bills.
This is a long list, but you members of Congress should have started on it two years ago when the Republicans became a majority, so I suggest you begin expeditiously. We taxpayers will support you in carrying this out. You will be re-elected if you follow these principles, or will be abandoned by the voters if you choose to abandon these principles. As you may be aware, my wife and I have written to you jointly and separately several times before. In all of these we tend to see you espouse the line of conservatism, but do not get the feeling that you are really listening or maybe believe that the conservatives are “too far right”. My strong suggestion is that you listen and consider adopting the lower spending, lower taxes, less Federal intrusion into our lives. The Tea Party demonstrated in 2010 what happens when representatives do not listen to conservatism. Please consider this in your future votes.

Mr. and Mrs. OhioHistorian