In medical terms, a scalpel is a surgical instrument for cutting that can be wielded destructively to inflict deep and damaging wounds, or can be used constructively to remove scars, strictures and diseased tissue for the benefit of the patient’s health and well-being. In 1961, President Kennedy’s advisors clamored for higher taxes to finance a big-government agenda. But JFK was persuaded instead, in communications with West German Chancellor Erhard, to avoid a high taxes model, such as that which had stunted economic growth in England and other NATO countries. In arguing against his advisors and liberals in his own party, President Kennedy stated:

“Our true choice is not between tax reduction…and avoidance of large federal deficits…It is increasingly clear that…an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget—just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits.”

The Kennedy tax cuts, and later tax cuts under Presidents Reagan and Bush-43 all spurred an extended period of economic and job growth and expansion, increased federal tax revenues, and decreased tax-sheltering and avoidance, increasing the actual tax payments and the proportion of taxes paid by the wealthy. Walter Heller, a Keynesian economist, and one of JFK’s advisors who had opposed the Kennedy tax cuts, admitted in testimony before the Congressional Joint Economic Committee in 1977 that the tax cut paid “…for itself in increased revenues…[because] it did seem to have a tremendous stimulative effect.”

President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers praised the Reagan Tax Cuts; “It is undeniable that the sharp reduction in taxes in the early 1980s was a strong impetus to economic growth.” The Bush Tax Cuts were criticized inaccurately for being “Tax Cuts for the Rich”, but were, in fact, also an across-the-board tax cut affecting equally the rich and the not-so-rich. Ben S. Bernanke, then Chairman, Council of Economic Advisors, noted that the Bush Tax Cuts had undoubtedly contributed to economic growth, which in turn bolstered tax receipts. In the April 16, 2008 Democratic Presidential Debate, Candidate Obama acknowledged that while raising taxes might decrease revenue, he would still insist on tax hikes for “purposes of fairness” (i.e. redistribution of wealth).

 Liberal critics of tax cutting have used static models, with faulty premises and questionable statistics, to arrive at tax revenue estimates they claim prove that cutting taxes reduces tax revenues. Using this model, if the average family’s marginal tax rate is reduced, and its income and all other factors remain fixed, the tax it pays and the government collects, is reduced. Extrapolated to the entire economy, where it is assumed all other factors remain fixed, total tax revenue estimates are clearly reduced.

However, all other factors don’t remain fixed in real life, and this static view of taxes fails to account for growth in the economy producing increased business profits, expansion and job creation, increases in personal income, and a reduction in efforts to avoid paying taxes; all of which increase revenue. All estimates aside, actual IRS data show that cutting taxes does produce increased revenue, almost all of which is from the rich. It should be noted that the converse of this is also true: high taxes stifle economic and job growth, decrease federal tax revenues, and increase tax-sheltering and avoidance, leading to a reduction in actual tax payments and the proportion of taxes paid by the wealthy.

The Obamacrats have taxed and spent their way into Stimulus oblivion, and the economy, unemployment and deficits are only worse. We have a choice. Do we go with Obama for more of the same, hoping for a different result? Or do we choose to cut taxes across-the-board and enjoy economic growth, job creation, increased revenue and lower deficits?

References

Schweikart L and Allen M. A Patriot’s History of the United States, Sentinel, New York, NY, 2004. The Age of Upheaval, 1960-74, Tax Cuts and Growth, p.675.

http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm

http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB124217336075913063.html

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2002/12/Tax-Cuts-Increase-Federal-Revenues

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/13/business/13deficit.html?pagewanted=print

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8

The panelists on Fox News Watch were discussing the WikiLeaks Afghan War intelligence leak, when Judith Miller, one of the panelists, stated that Scooter Libby had similarly leaked Valerie Plame’s identity to the press and had been “convicted of that”. Ms. Miller then went on to talk about the current leaks and additional panelists also contributed their thoughts. After the break, Jon Scott corrected Ms. Miller by reminding her that Libby had not been convicted of leaking information, and Ms. Miller clumsily reversed herself, responding no, he was convicted of obstruction of justice. That a journalist of Ms. Miller’s caliber, experience and particular background in this very case, would make such a seemingly small, but in reality enormously egregious error, casting additional, unwarranted aspersions on Mr. Libby, is inexcusable. There can be no other explanation, Judith Miller hates Scooter Libby.

While I’m glad that Mr. Scott clarified the facts of the Scooter Libby reference by Ms. Miller, I was stunned speechless to hear her make the false statement in the first place. As Mr. Scott mentioned, if anyone knows the facts of the case, it would be Ms. Miller, who covered the Valerie Plame/Iraq-Niger uranium hookup story from its onset, and even did some jail time for not revealing sources. As such, it is unimaginable that Ms. Miller could make such a statement without deliberate intention to mislead and add further insult to the injury Mr. Libby has suffered at the hands of a hostile press and a criminally rogue special prosecutor on a mission to damage the despised Bush/Cheney Administration.

At the outset of his investigation, Mr. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, determined that any leaking of Valerie Plame’s identity by a government official was not a violation of law, and that it was Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of State under Colin Powell, who had leaked Valerie Plame’s identity to the press. Any honorable officer of the court would have shut down the investigation at that point, having completed the special prosecutor duties he had been assigned. But attack-dog Fitzgerald proceeded with his illegal investigation and persecution of Mr. Libby that led to Grand Jury indictments and eventual conviction for making “misleading statements” which, they concluded, caused an “obstruction of justice”.

Mr. Libby was investigated, persecuted, interviewed, indicted & convicted, but he did nothing wrong. His only real crime, in the eyes of his detractors, was being associated with the Bush/Cheney Whitehouse. What Mr. Libby did do, that got him in hot water, was to relate recollections of who he had spoken with and when, in not talking with reporters about a non-crime that he did not commit. Mr. Fitzgerald noted that Libby’s recollections of these non-events were not entirely consistent with the recollections of some of the reporters interviewed, with regard to the exact person, place or time associated with these non-event, non-crimes.

Grasping at straws, Mr. Fitzgerald accused Libby of lying to criminal investigators who were not investigating a non-crime, a lawful act they knew had been committed by Armitage, who was never charged with a crime, and argued that Libby’s “lying” (otherwise known as poorly recollecting; of course it’s always possible that the reporters and not Libby were the source of the inconsistencies) about no unlawful non-event, somehow “obstructed justice”. Knowing well in advance of Libby’s interviews and testimony, that the non-crime criminal investigators were no longer investigating had been committed by someone other than Libby, exactly what “justice” was being obstructed by Mr. Libby? The correct answer is no justice.

If any intentionally misleading statements were made during this debacle, they were made, not by Libby, but by Mr. Fitzgerald against Libby, calculated to bring down condemnation, punishment, humiliation and loss of credibility to the Bush/Cheney Administration by destroying their vicarious whipping-boy. It’s a pity Mr. Libby was unable, through his testimony, to provide any effective obstruction to this gross “injustice”.  Deeply complicit in this travesty, the mindless destruction of a good man for political gain and hubris, are the Lame Stream Media, the special prosecutor, the Grand Jury, the trial judge and jury, the activist courts, the American legal system, the FBI, the State Department and all the people at the time who similarly suffered from the irrational, Bush/Cheney Derangement Syndrome. I indict them all.

The rest of us go on with our everyday lives and our work as if nothing of true import has happened. But as I look out over the horizon, I see a deep scar on the soul of America, once the champion of truth and innocence, and evil is festering just beneath the surface. I shudder involuntarily as the icy north wind blows heavy, black cotton clouds low, down through the valley. It smells like rain. I tuck my hands deeply into my coat pockets, tilting my face against the wind and I head for shelter. Somewhere out there, an innocent man, stripped unjustly of his dignity, reputation and profession, labeled a felon for life, struggles to provide for his family and just get through one day at a time. Have we no shame?

Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution grants the legislature power to levy taxes, borrow money as needed, perform an extensive list of functions & make all laws necessary to carry out their constitutional powers. The list of powers, especially the power to tax & borrow, is virtually unlimited, & stands in direct opposition to the 5^th & 14^th Amendments, which guarantee the right to life, liberty & property & that private property may not be appropriated for public use without just compensation. The current regime is dictating surrender terms of the prosperous, in the socialist-envisioned, class warfare between the taxpayer-class & the tax-consumer-class, by means of forced, redistribution of wealth to achieve “Social Justice”.

Our current income tax is said to be a “progressive” tax, as those with greater incomes pay more taxes. However, a single rate, flat tax, say of 20%, would be an example of a simple, progressive tax: Someone earning a lower income of say, $40,000/year, would pay $8,000 in tax, while someone with a greater income, say $200,000/year, would pay $40,000 in tax–even though the tax rate is the same, the taxes paid by the more prosperous far exceed those paid by the less prosperous. Our current income tax system, including the pending Obama tax hikes, is really a doubly progressive tax: someone earning $40,000/year might pay $4,000 in taxes, while someone earning $200,000/year might pay $120,000 in taxes. Most small businesses would pay income taxes at the higher rate. Facing this exorbitant level of taxation, & considering the tidal-wave of new regulations coming from the Obama Administration, it’s no wonder small businesses are hunkering down, holding onto cash, & putting off expansion, production & job creation.

One of the greatest vehicles for congressional corruption is our income tax code. Special interest groups lobby lawmakers to grant the groups they represent exceptions or reductions in taxation, or special taxes are enacted that are earmarked as pork-barrel funds to these groups. These lobbyists provide either valuable perks (bribes) or campaign contributions (not considered so, but still are bribes) so incumbents can retain their seats in elections, & be available to be lobbied & do additional favors by further modifying the tax code during the next session. Eliminating the temptation to alter the tax code for personal or political gain, would go a long way toward bringing a new, unfamiliar air of integrity to Capitol Hill.

Historically, when taxes have been raised on the more prosperous, revenue actually collected from these folks ends up being considerably less than when they are taxed at lower rates. It seems that, facing a high tax rate, the more prosperous invest more of their money offshore or in tax-free bonds. Subsequently, there is less capital for investing in our country’s economy & for businesses to create jobs & prosperity. The wealthy are also more likely to take advantage of our overcomplicated tax code to avoid paying the high taxes. Those who live outside the law (outlaws: including criminals, drug cartels & illegal aliens), also largely avoid paying any income or payroll tax, while fully utilizing taxpayer-supported social, educational, healthcare & other services. The ideal replacement for our income tax, would convert all of these groups of people that traditionally avoid paying taxes, to full taxpayers.

Disposing of thousands of pages of income tax code, & replacing our income tax with a national sales tax coupled with a sliding-scale monthly rebate based on income (The FairTax), would remedy many of the problems that exist in our current system. The FairTax (www.FairTax.org) would vastly simplify the process of taxation, saving hundreds of millions of dollars & hundreds of hours of lost productivity each year currently wasted on income tax preparation & filing. The national sales tax would be collected by those who currently collect existing state sales tax (retail businesses) when all people buying goods & services in the U.S., even the wealthy with expensive tax attorneys, outlaws & illegal aliens, will participate in paying taxes. The FairTax would also dramatically reduce opportunities for congressional corruption & obviate the need for armies of highly-paid Washington lobbyists.

No discussion of government fiscal responsibility would be complete without addressing the issue of entitlement reform. Almost 75% of annual federal spending is fixed by law and spent on entitlements long before Congress can have anything to do with spending, leaving little more than 25% as discretionary, that is, Congress can say how, only this small portion of the federal budget, will be spent. While most of us still labor under the illusion that our payroll taxes pay into a fund that is preserved to pay benefits to retirees, the hard truth is that payroll taxes go into the general fund & Congress spends the entire amount each year—Medicare & Social Security Trust Fund vaults are empty, except for IOUs from the government. If we fail to constructively reform these entitlements, in a few years there will be no benefits for anyone as the government will be insolvent, broke, with astronomical deficits.

Rep. Paul Ryan has developed a “Roadmap for America’s Future” (which can be found online at www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov), which preserves entitlement benefits unchanged for those age 55 and older, while reforming financing & benefits for those age less than 55, compatible with the survival of these programs & paying off of the deficit by 2060. Any attempt to change entitlement programs, is naturally met with stiff resistance, especially by our seniors. However, seniors should be reassured that, under the Ryan plan, the programs will not change for seniors (those age 55 & older). In addition, all concerned must understand that without entitlement reform, there would be no benefits in several years; only with responsible reform can we assure that these programs have a future.

Anything that further restrains Congress’ almost unlimited, constitutional power to borrow, tax & spend, such as a Balanced Budget Amendment, or procedural measures like requiring a 2/3′rds chamber vote to raise taxes, should be considered. Thousands of honorable candidates for high office, from across the country, who will stand firm & fight for fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government & a free market, need to be groomed, nominated, campaigned for & elected to office. Term limits need to be considered to prevent incumbents from becoming entrenched, professional politicians.

The Seniority System & Party Dominance in regard to power & perks in both chambers of Congress, must be scrapped in favor of each lawmaker, having been sent to Congress to represent his constituents who should receive equal representation with other constituencies, exercises an equal voice & power to get things done, regardless of the majority political party or the length of service in office.

In the end, we may have to amend Article 1, Section 8, to constitutionally restrict Congress’ power to commit these fiscal abuses. These & other fiscal restraint measures, along with necessary, responsible entitlement reform along the lines of Rep. Paul Ryan’s ”Roadmap”, tax reform along the lines of the FairTax & a little good luck, will save us from national bankruptcy & permit us to embark on the road to true fiscal responsibility.

Joseph Farah, author of “The Tea Party Manifesto”, argues that economic issues are the turf of the Left, & the Tea Party movement should steer clear of the debate of these issues, on which the Left knows best. It is shocking that this author, who purportedly supports & admires the Tea Party movement, takes the exact same position of Obama, the Democrats & the RINOs concerning the people in general & the Tea Party specifically:  The little people are uneducated & ill informed, & are incapable of choosing the best policies & candidates. Trust us, the experts in government, to know what’s best for you. It’s this patronizing “Don’t Read the Bill” attitude that led to the Tea Party revolution in the first place.

The claim that economic issues are the turf of the Left, is only partly true. For far too long, the Left has tried to monopolize their tax, spend & regulate ways & attempting to outdo the RINOs in escalating deficits. The Left is known for its expertise in doing all the wrong things concerning economic issues. On the other hand, the Tea Party movement has a lot of good ideas on how to rein in the gigantus of the federal bureaucracy, lower taxes & spending, making government smaller & more efficient, & getting government out of the way of the free market & economic growth. The Tea Party should not give one inch of ground to the Left on economic or any other issues that subjugate the people or rob the people of their freedom.

Author Joseph Farah believes that the Tea Party movement has unwisely limited itself to economic issues, but while other issues are not emphasized, or even much talked about, this movement is about so much more. The Tea Party Patriots, for example, have focused their efforts on Fiscal Responsibility, Limited Government, & a Free Market. However, despite the taboo against other important issues, inherent in this focus, is a strong reliance on the Founding Fathers & the Charter Documents of the United States (including our “unalienable rights” of life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness, although without assurance of equal outcomes, & the 1^st & 2^nd Amendment support for free speech & the right to keep & bear arms), a love of freedom, & a demand that our leaders in government are people of integrity & honor who act accordingly.

The 9/12 Project groups, another part of the movement, is somewhat more vocal about other issues than the Tea Party Patriots, & would add a belief in America as a force for good in the world, a belief & reliance in God, a belief that the family is sacred & the ultimate authority over itself (i.e. NOT the government), a belief in being a nation of laws with no one above the law (including lawmakers & illegal aliens), that charity is an individual, not a collective (i.e. NOT the government’s), responsibility, a belief that Americans have the right & the obligation to speak their mind, even if it is in opposition to the government, & an affirmation that the government works for the people, not the other way around. In addition, people in the 9/12 Project groups, and candidates they support, are charged with developing the values of honesty, reverence, hope, thrift, humility, charity, sincerity, moderation, hard work, courage, personal responsibility & gratitude.

Most in the Tea Party movement believe in a Creator who has granted us “unalienable rights” that government has no right to deny. For many of us, among those rights are the “sanctity of life”, we know in our hearts that abortion is wrong & we are firmly, although sometimes silently, pro-life, & opposed to government funding of abortion. Most of us are pro-family, believe that the traditional family is the basic unit of society, & believe that children should be raised in such a family, with a mother & a father. As such, there is strong support within the Tea Party movement, for the legal definition of marriage being the formal union of one man & one woman. Consequently, there exists strong opposition to “counterfeit marriage” & special “rights” for homosexuals. Many in the Tea Party read the Bible, & remain firm in the belief of its teachings that homosexuality, pedophilia & bestiality are equally, morally wrong & damaging to society.

While there has been an unwritten code within the Tea Party movement, in general, that social issues are not to be discussed, an even greater taboo exists against discussing entitlement reform, which is an essential cog in the machinery of fiscal responsibility, along with tax reform. It is not surprising, as well, that politicians, for the most part, avoid discussions of entitlement reform as such discussion could be political suicide. A good portion of Tea Party people are middle-aged or seniors who have been paying into Social Security & Medicare all their lives, depend on those benefits in retirement, & get very testy whenever people start talking about changing or removing them. If we spoke openly within the movement, about entitlement reform being an integral part of the Tea Party, would we lose the traditional “AARP” voting bloc of the movement?

What other issues are inherently Tea Party issues, but remain issues about which, by consensus, we do not talk? Should the Tea Party remain focused on economic issues, or are there issues, currently neglected, that we need to address? Is there a way to support entitlement reform without alienating our seniors?

The DISCLOSE Act was forged in dark, smoke-filled back rooms, behind closed & locked doors, with Obamacrats & a gaggle of Most-Favored Lobbyists nose to nose as the special interests wrote in carve-outs for themselves, & the Obamacrats added language that hamstrings the opposition. The Obamacrats claim their legislation increases transparency & provides a more level playing field for more fair campaign financing. In reality, the Act does nothing to increase transparency, while skewing the playing field in favor of the Democrats, and creating an unfair advantage for Democrats, while the Act goes on to provide for warrantless, compulsory submission of sensitive, private donor & member lists to the government, exposing vulnerable opposition supporters to government intimidation & persecution.

The President touts the new financial law as ending any further taxpayer bailouts and as a boon to the consumer. In reality, the financial takeover legislation creates more layers of bureaucracy & red tape that dramatically increases cost to any business offering credit or financial services; this increased cost, of course, is passed along to the consumer.

The financial legislation also gives the Administration unrestrained power to determine at its arbitrary & sole discretion, if a business should be declared insolvent or about to be insolvent, to take over that business, & distribute assets to cronies. This has sent a chill over the business community, as it is forced to think twice before donating to the opposition, when doing so could lead to very real dissolution of the business, in retaliation, by Obama’s new, lethal financial weapon.

Obama’s Stimulus Bill is credited by the Administration with “saving or creating” millions of jobs, & breathing new life into a severely injured economy. The Stimulus Bill was advertised as principally funding “shovel ready” infrastructure projects. The truth is less than a third of the Stimulus money spent went towards anything that even slightly resembled infrastructure projects. Instead of saving or creating jobs, since the Stimulus Bill was signed into law, there has been a net extinction of millions of jobs, most of which were losses suffered by the private sector, and the lines of the unemployed have never been longer outside the Great Depression.

Most of the Stimulus money, which was primarily supposed to help the private sector, which had been hardest hit with the Recession, has been squandered, instead, on shoring up government & union jobs & benefits, and wasted on pork-barrel payback to cronies for political support. Obama & his Administration have stumped around the country proclaiming the Recession over & prosperity in view, believing that if they ritualistically repeat the words often enough, they will magically come true. On their way to imaginary prosperity, Obama & the Democrats swallowed whole Keynesian economic theory: if the government could just spend enough billions, the economy would turn around. The Obama-led race to spend money we didn’t have led to an astronomical deficit; the excesses of today will be paid for by the sweat of our grandchildren in the future. This is not the legacy that Main Street Americans want to leave for their posterity.

But the Family on Main Street is still out of work, is upside-down in its mortgage & is unable to refinance despite record low mortgage rates because appraisal value is significantly less than the balance owed, & the Family is fighting foreclosure, owes thousands of dollars in credit card debt at recently raised exorbitant interest rates, has exhausted savings & tapped into retirement accounts for living expenses, & has put off necessary expenditures for major items like a new roof, furnace replacement, auto repair or an expensive, indicated healthcare procedure.

The Small Business on Main Street is not doing much better: The Main Street SB has been through downsizing & belt-tightening, trying to remain profitable in a marketplace where demand has dropped precipitously. The SB has too much debt, at unfavorable rates, production is down and receipts are too little; money is tight, and the SB no longer has a standing line-of-credit with its bank, which it had used on occasion to cover cash-flow difficulties. On some paydays, the SB owners do not draw a paycheck to prevent total depletion of the SB bank account. As the weeks pass by, waiting for business to pick up, turning into months & then years, the SB begins to lose hope, and wonders if it too would soon have to close its doors. The families & businesses on Main Street are living this economy, and they do not buy into Obama’s hype and illusions of economic recovery.

With Obamacare, the President promised “If you like your health insurance & your doctor, you can keep your health insurance & your doctor”. Claims were made by the Administration that government would not get in between the doctor-patient relationship, that there would not be rationing of healthcare nor any “death panels”, that public funds would not pay for abortion, that Obamacare would contain federal healthcare spending & make healthcare & insurance less expensive for the consumer, and that actual savings from Obamacare would help pay down the deficit.

Estimates of the true cost of Obamacare have recently been dramatically revised upward, and this is now shown to be adding significantly to the deficit instead of reducing it. The cost of healthcare & insurance to the consumer has also increased because of Obamacare. Obama has just recess appointed Dr. Rationing & Death Panels as the director of CMS, the agency that runs Medicare & Medicaid, and he is planning on limiting the healthcare anyone can receive, & withholding care when the bureaucracy determines that you’re not worth it; he will get in your face and stand between you and your doctor to interfere with your care.

In other news, public funds provided through Obamacare may be used to pay for abortions depending on the individual states. Also, most people will not be able to keep their same doctor or health insurance, as President Obama promised on multiple occasions. During the Obamacare debate, a majority of the people recognized Obama’s dishonesty & fought passage of the bill. A smaller but not insignificant percentage of the people, took Obama at his word, and passively accepted passage of the bill, patiently awaiting Obama’s promises to be fulfilled. It is rapidly becoming apparent, even to this smaller, more passive group of Americans, that Obama was not being truthful & is not to be trusted on anything.

President Obama & his Administration have been braying loud & proud about all of the good things Obama has done for the country, the economy, small business and the little people across the nation. However, this self-congratulatory trumpeting rings hollow on Main Street where the lack of any Obama accomplishment is glaringly apparent. The Emperor’s procession moved slowly down the central road of town, lined with peasants cheering the Emperor. The Emperor’s advisors motioned for the peasants to admire the Emperor’s new suit of clothes, handmade of the finest silk by the most skilled tailors in the land, and the peasants clucked approvingly. As the procession neared the center of town, a small boy on the side of the road tugged at his father’s sleeve, “The Emperor has no clothes” he said. On hearing this, all the peasants looked again at the Emperor, and realized the boy was right, The Emperor Has No Clothes.

 The DISCLOSE Act is an excellent example of Democrat “transparency”, and is pure, naked political aggression being waged against all Americans. There used to be laws that protected political speech from government’s selective censorship, laws that both the people & the government respected. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in “Citizens United” nullified as unconstitutional Campaign Finance Law restricting free political speech. The DISCLOSE Act was written in direct defiance of the Supreme Court ruling. Democrats claim that the bill enhances the transparency of campaign funding, but the truth is that carve-outs for Democrat supporters means that only non-Democrat supporters will have to put up with onerous red tape & reporting requirements, including the warrantless, compulsory submission of sensitive, private donor & member lists to the government.

With Obama in the Whitehouse, Eric Holder in the Justice Department, Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi controlling the Congress, & Obama packing the Court with ideologue cronies, there is little hope the rule of law or the Constitution will prevail or be respected, until this law can be struck down in another Supreme Court case decision years in the future. President Obama, in his State of the Union address, disrespected the Supreme Court & its recent decision in “Citizens United” which struck down censorship of political speech. The DISCLOSE Act is the Democrats’ open disrespect & defiance of this Supreme Court ruling, it is a direct attack on the 1^st Amendment and it is calculated to repress any voice of the opposition.

The Democrats are so running scared of the next elections, fearful, & rightly so, that they will become a richly deserved part of the nation’s unemployment statistics. Congressional Democrats intended that this bill would give them a distinct advantage in the coming elections. With this unconstitutional bill, those who support the Democrats are free to say anything, tell any lie and make any false charge, while those who support non-Democrats are not similarly free to clarify their positions, answer false charges or expose lies.

In addition, donors & members of groups that contribute to non-Democrats, especially groups that have been determined by Homeland Security to be potential domestic terrorists, like Veterans, Pro-Life Groups, Conservative Groups, Christians & Gun Advocacy Groups, will end up on Administration “Enemies Lists” and be vulnerable to intimidation & persecution by the vengeful Obama government. The Democrats believe that potential donors to opposition campaigns or causes will be discouraged from donating because of this requirement of the Act, leaving the opposition with little of the financial support needed to carry out effective campaigns.

Amnesty is defined as the action of a government by which designated persons or groups who have committed a criminal offense (usually of a political nature that threatens the sovereignty of the country, such as treason, sedition or illegal immigration), are granted total or partial, conditional or unconditional, immunity from prosecution for the specified crime. Even the potential for Amnesty rewards lawlessness, penalizes legal immigrants &  lawful citizens, leads to a dramatic increase in illegal alien immigration, contributes to the deterioration of American sovereignty, culture & language, undermines our socio-economic stability & growth, & destabilizes the American two-party political system. Amnesty law (AKA Comprehensive Immigration Reform) is not the solution; to the contrary, previous & potential future Amnesty is a large part of the problem. Obama is counting on his conviction that Americans are not smart enough to recognize the perils of Amnesty, or even that his proposal is Amnesty.

Mike Lee, Utah Republican candidate for Senator, suggests a return to the original intent of the 14th Amendment where babies born to illegal aliens would not automatically be U.S. citizens and thereby not be able to serve as “anchors” to bring all relatives to the U.S. There is a huge toll being paid for allowing large numbers of illegal aliens in our nation; this cost to U.S. taxpayers vastly outweighs any benefit from work done and taxes paid by illegals. Immigration law mirroring federal statute, such as that in Arizona, becomes necessary with Obama willfully shirking federal obligations to provide border security & protection from violent illegals. Failing to uphold the rule of law, keeping citizens at risk, and holding border security hostage to Obama’s version of Amnesty for political gain, is criminal, despicable & corrupt, & is further evidence of a decaying, morally bankrupt Obama Administration.

The key to a real solution is strengthening & enforcing current immigration law. If proper enforcement prevents U.S. employers from hiring illegal aliens, these jobs will “dry up” and illegal aliens, most of who came here to work, will pack up & go home without further incentive. Those choosing to commit the crime of illegal immigration understand that family separation is an integral part of this choice. However, families should not be torn apart. Rather, as unemployed illegal aliens repatriate themselves, they should be encouraged to keep their families intact by taking them along with. If some industries truly need foreign laborers, programs can be expanded, & workers can apply for temporary, guest-worker status from their home country.

Mike Lee has a reasonable and practical 5 point plan to deal with the problem of illegal immigration:
   
   1. Secure the border.
   2. Enforce current immigration law, including dry up jobs for illegals.
   3. No welfare benefits for illegals.
   4. No more “anchor babies”.
   5. No amnesty.
   
Visit Mike Lee’s website to learn more about Mike’s positions on important issues; I think he makes a lot of sense. Mike has the character, principles & experience needed to help take back our country & get it back on a positive track. That’s why I’m voting for Mike Lee for Senator in November.

http://www.mikelee2010.com/

 Open Letter To Senator Lindsey Graham

Senator Graham, you explained your vote for Elena Kagan, Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, by stating that in the last election, Obama won, and there are consequences of the last election.  While Obama’s election as President gives him the privilege of nominating, as you correctly assert, the win in your last senatorial election in South Carolina, gives you the privilege & responsibility to provide a check & balance to President Obama’s executive powers.  If the President chooses to nominate someone inappropriate to the bench, as he clearly has with Elena Kagan, the Senate has the obligation to deny her confirmation.  The Democrats that voted for Kagan are not excused from this breech of constitutional responsibility, and they should suffer the judgments of their constituents & the nation, but the Democrats have never been inclined to defend the Constitution.  Republicans in Congress have traditionally been the last line of defense for the Constitution and its checks & balances provisions.

Senator Graham, your vote for Kagan’s confirmation, shirking your responsibility to serve as a check & balance in deferring to Obama’s choice for Supreme Court Justice, and breaking that last line of defense for the Constitution that would have been provided by Republicans (who were elected by their constituents to be, act & vote as Republicans, including performing this function), you have failed to fulfill your obligations as a Senator, you have breeched your oath of office, you have been disloyal to Republicans (including your constituents), you have been dishonest with yourself, and you have forsaken the nation.

Senator Graham, your vote for Kagan’s confirmation may be the lynchpin that places on the Supreme Court for life, a person who lacks the character & judgment required, who will be an activist jurist for a secular socialist agenda, who will seek non-Constitution sources, such as international law, with which she will find a basis to support her leftist-activist decisions, who disrespects & will persistently erode the Constitution & the Bill of Rights, who will continue to work to coerce scientific & medical conclusions to her own political will, and who does not believe in & will not uphold “unalienable rights” granted man by his Creator and spoken of in the Declaration of Independence by the Founding Fathers.  Your vote may place this person on the highest court in the land, a person who is unfit for the job and is incapable of recognizing & carrying out the primary, sacred obligation to uphold & defend the Constitution, its Amendments & our “unalienable rights”.

I call on you, and all true Americans in the Senate, to fight Kagan’s confirmation:  Filibuster!

Any decision to continue to support Kagan, to continue to neglect your senatorial obligations and complete your defection from the side of good, truth & light, brings great dishonor upon you; good luck on your new position with the Obama Administration.  Your continued disloyalty to the principles of freedom makes you unworthy to serve in the Senate.  You say that you have great faith in the “consequences” of the last election.  If you fail to correct your poor, misguided, corrupt choices, you will soon become a true believer in the “consequences” of the next election.

It is despicable that Obama wants to present his energy tax “cap & tax” at the highest moment of frustration with the Gulf oil spill, by exploiting the untold losses of $millions in the Gulf area, to use that frustration to help him pass cap & tax.  It is unconscionable that Obama has allowed the oil spill to continue unabated, while holding the Gulf hostage by withholding competent leadership and skillful professionals to effectively take on the oil spill efforts.  Senator Reid (and Obama/Pelosi) will soon launch a drive to pass Obama’s cap & tax scheme.  Reid is fighting for job-killing, oppressive drilling regulations, which include completely banning deep-water, offshore drilling.  Such imprudent & egregious legislation will kill innumerable businesses & jobs, virtually guaranteeing the country will suffer a deep, double-dip (“W” shaped) recession, or worse.

Please do not allow Obama/Reid/Pelosi to further injure Gulf businesses & residents, or damage our economy further by Obama dragging his heels on resolving the Gulf spill in order to exploit this disaster for political advantage.  Forcing passage of the Democrats’ energy bill, “cap & tax”, would dramatically raise the cost of energy to people and businesses, would further stifle the economy and worsen unemployment.  In the mean time, because of restrictive policies on drilling, we get a continually higher percentage of our energy from foreign sources, many of which are not necessarily friends of the USA.  We need to be drilling (safely) everywhere, building nuclear power plants, continuing work on solar, wind, wave and geothermal, developing oil shale lands and continuing the development & utilization of clean coal. 

Building toward energy independence is a worthy goal, as long as the strategy involves an “all of the above” approach:  until solar and other types of “green” energy technology catch up with the demand for power, we should drill wherever oil may be found, extract & refine it so that we no longer rely on foreign oil or refineries.  Nuclear plants should be built.  The use of fossil fuel energy sources should continue, until alternative sources can supply a significant amount of the energy we need each day.  As these green energy technologies begin to account for an ever larger percentage of practical, reasonably priced energy, fossil fuels will be phased out by the marketplace.

Goal # 1:  Become energy independent in 5 years—do whatever it takes to accomplish this; this issue is tremendously important to our national security/defense.

Goal # 2:  Become non-dependent on (not abolish) fossil fuels in 20 years—this must occur only as market forces make the use of fossil fuels irrelevant.  Only when alternative sources of energy are available that sufficiently meet consumer needs & means, will this be possible.

A lot is also riding on battery technology.  Ideally, solar roofs or windmills would charge the battery when they’re active, at the same time providing home power, then when they’re not active (no sun, no wind), the battery supplies power to the home.  Off-grid, you’re essentially dependent on your own equipment & batteries.  Power could be supplemented with a gas, propane or biofuel generator.

On-grid, if your electricity generating methods don’t produce enough electricity to run the home and keep your batteries charged, you draw the electricity you need, and pay for electricity from the local utility grid.  If your electricity generating methods produce more energy than you need, the excess is sent back to the utility grid, and you get paid for this excess energy.

The most ironic thing about cap & trade is that it is supposedly based on the concept that accumulation of “harmful” emissions (such as carbon dioxide), given off as fossil fuels are burned, lead to “global warming” or “climate change” that can be avoided only if the United States adopts cap & trade.  As it turns out, pro-global warming, international ”scientists” overseeing research grants & scientific publications in this field, favored researchers & authors who were proponents of global warming and whose publications were consistent with the prevailing views.

Only work that agreed with these views, that drastic reductions in our collective “carbon footprint” are needed to avoid global warming, could get funding to do the research, or get their articles published.  The vast majority of researchers who received funding for their climate change research, and subsequently had scientific papers peer reviewed & approved for publication by respected journals, reported that their research confirmed the belief that global warming was man-made; there was no room for contrary ideas.  Recently, the EPA issued a statement that Carbon Dioxide (CO₂) is a toxic pollutant that the EPA must regulate.  In point of fact, CO₂ is the main component of each exhaled human breath, is neither toxic, nor a pollutant, but its presence is a normal part of every life.  Trees & plants require CO₂ for life, and must absorb CO₂ out of the air for photosynthesis.

In addition, almost all of the work done on global warming was ultimately based on the same flawed data set, and a great swath of research at the core of pro-global warming evangelism has been discredited.  With the heart of the “man-made caused”, pro-global warming literature, torn out, the remaining reliable articles are inconclusive & contradictory with regard to global warming and climate change.  Since there is no reliable research confirming man-made climate change, global warming cannot be presumed to be a scientific fact at this time.  Government action to set up a cap & trade (cap & tax) scheme would increase the cost of doing business, such that companies will be laying-off another round of workers, would considerably raise the cost of all energy to the consumer, and would irreparably damage almost all sectors of our economy.  In the end, no one believes that cap & trade will lead to lower atmospheric CO₂ levels, so, why is it that the Obama Administration and the Democrat leaders in Congress, are so determined to pass cap & trade?

The answer to that question, is the usual answer to most political questions:  money & power.  Obama’s corporate cronies will be well rewarded.  Obama has already made plans with GE to manage a portion of the program, with Fannie Mae (Franklin Raines, former CEO; and Scott Lesmes, former VP) having recently purchased the software patent needed to process carbon trades.  Others on the list of those who have a financial interest in cap & trade include Barack & Michelle Obama, Goldman Sachs (the largest single shareholder), Mayor Richard Daley, former Vice President Al Gore and a number of other Chicago associates.

The day after the ruling in McDonald v. Chicago, the Chicago City Council passed another law restricting handgun use. No guns can be bought or sold in Chicago, each household can only possess one handgun, and the gun must stay in the house (not even in the garage, porch, back steps, etc.); also, no concealed carry is allowed.

The Constitution says that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. This was established as an individual right by the Founding Fathers, who expected all men to “keep” firearms, meaning to own, possess and retain firearms (even against government confiscation), and to “bear” firearms, meaning to carry firearms and to know how and when to use them appropriately. The Supreme Court recently confirmed the fact that governments (local, state, federal) could not overrule this individual right granted to all U.S. citizens.

The last part of the 2^nd Amendment says that this right “shall not be infringed.”  What part of NOT BE INFRINGED don’t they understand? It is true that a number of infringements, including gun registration & permits for concealed carry have been sanctioned by the courts, despite the fact that infringement on the right to keep & bear arms is contrary to the Constitution and the intent of the Founding Fathers. Why do the courts allow any of what they call “reasonable” infringements on these 2^nd Amendment rights, when the Constitution says there will be absolutely none?

It is gross malfeasance for the Chicago City Council to immediately defy the Supreme Court’s ruling by passing another unconstitutional “gun-right infringing” law. Chicago has one of the highest levels of violent crimes & murders in the nation, all the while having some of the toughest gun-control laws. The facts are that where guns are not permitted by law, law-abiding citizens go unarmed, and are easier prey for criminals (outlaws), who will have & use guns in committing their crimes, because they don’t obey the law. Where law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry firearms, crime rates go down because criminals are less likely to attack someone if they think they might be armed. But Chicago refuses to learn this lesson.

It has taken many years of dedication, of pro-gun-right people & groups, to get to this point where the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld & confirmed the right to keep & bear arms. How much longer will it take before it is confirmed that this right “shall not be infringed” and conformity to this principle is upheld in practice, as well as theory? Will it take another 30 years in the courts at tremendous expense to both sides, to finally enforce the basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution, in writing, over 200 years ago?