Monday, December 27, 2010

Brave New World Of Government Health Care

Do you remember back during the debate on Obamacare when Sarah Palin said it would lead to death panels? The supporters of the government takeover of healthcare went nuts. The said there absolutely would not be any death panels, Sarah was an idiot and had no idea what she was talking about, how could she be so stupid, etc., etc., etc.

I have news: The death panels are already here.

There is a new drug out for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. It has been shown to increase life by an average of four months in such patients. But, the drug is expensive; the treatment for the four months costs about $100,000, or around $25,000 per month.

A Medicare panel is deciding whether or not Medicare will cover the use of this drug.

Now, $25,000 a month is expensive. A person in that situation, however, might think it’s worth it. But the decision of whether such patients get to live for four additional months is not going to be made by the patient and his family, or the patient and his doctor, or even the patient and some evil insurance company. No, this decision is being made by a bunch of nameless, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats buried deep in the Medicare labyrinth. A death panel, in other words. The death panels are a-l-r-e-a-d-y here.

Do you also remember back during the debate on Obamacare when some people pointed out that once the government got control of our health care, they would use that as the reason to take over almost all aspects of our lives? The government’s justification, it was predicted, would be that since the government is paying for our healthcare, the government would assume the right to take whatever steps it feels are necessary to keep us “healthy”, thereby keeping healthcare costs down. Again, the people predicting this were ridiculed and vilified by those pushing the government takeover of health care.

I have more news: This, too, is a-l-r-e-a-d-y happening.

Congress recently passed and President Obama signed into law a $4.5 billion bill that dictates to schools what they can and cannot do concerning food served on school premises. This is being done, we are told, in order to reduce childhood obesity and thus reduce healthcare costs. The bill gives the government the power to decide what kinds of foods may be sold in school lunch lines and in school vending machines. The bill could even limit “frequent” school bake sales and fundraisers that give kids more opportunities to eat brownies and pizza instead of foods deemed to “healthy” by the government.

The way this will work is that the federal government can now impose new nutrition standards on schools. These standards will cover not only what kinds of foods may be sold, but also what ingredients can be used. These new nutrition standards will be written by the Department of Agriculture.

It gets worse. The bill also will limit the number of school bake sales and other school fundraisers that sell “unhealthy” food such as burgers and fries, brownies, cakes, and cookies. Such events could only be held “infrequently” under this new law. Again, the Department of Agriculture is empowered to determine how often such events can be held.

I can just see it. At the “health food sale” before the high school football game, the PTA will be selling bean curd, lettuce, spinach, apples, celery, carrots, V8 juice, and other such goodies. During half time, the concession stand will sell salads, granola, and skim milk. Prominently displayed in both cases will be their federal government permit and foodstuff approval. I’m sure they will make lots of money for their latest school improvement projects.

We have now reached a point where the federal government will determine what your children are allowed to eat in school and how often bake sales can be held. These decisions will not be made by the PTA, local school cooks or nutritionists, school principals, the superintendent, or the school board; these decisions will be made by bureaucrats in the Department of Agriculture.

Did you get that? If you want to have a bake sale, the Feds will be making sure you don’t do it too often. In order to have a bake sale beyond your government decreed limit, you’ll have to fill out a bunch of paperwork and get approval from the Feds. For a bake sale!!!!

This is all in the name of reducing the government’s tab for health care costs, as was predicted.

There will undoubtedly be much more to come in the brave, new world of government run healthcare.

Friday, December 24, 2010

Good Tidings of Great Joy

Isaiah 9: 6-7

"For unto us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be on upon his shoulder, and his name shall be 'Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace'. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the thrones of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore."

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Now The World Is Safe

The mentality of the people pushing nuclear disarmament is that if the U.S. doesn't give up it's nuclear weapons today, the whole world will be vaporized tomorrow by widespread thermo-nuclear war. I continually am amazed at how much sheer idiocy passes for reasoned thought in the public policy forum.

The U.S. Senate yesterday ratified the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia. Under the terms of this treaty, the U.S. will have to reduce it's deployed nuclear delivery systems, but Russia will not have to get rid one. The delivery systems are more significant that the actual nuclear warheads, since a warhead is of no use if it can't be sent to a target. So we have to reduce the number of deployed nuclear delivery systems, but Russia doesn't (because they are already below the limit). Does everyone feel safe, now?

I have a few very significant questions for the nuclear disarmament people:

1. Does anyone in the world have to be worried about being nuked by the U.S. or Russia, the countries signing this treaty?
2. Does anyone in the world have to be worried about being nuked by Pakistan, Iran, or North Korea, who are not covered by this treaty?
3. Now that the U.S. has proved it's righteousness to the world with regards to nuclear weapons via START, how long will it be before Iran stops developing a nuclear bomb? They will now stop, won't they?
4. Now that the U.S. has proved it's righteousness to the world with regards to nuclear weapons via START, will the little maniacal despot in North Korea see the error of his ways and destroy his nuclear weapons (or stop trying to get them)? How long will it be before he does that? He will now stop, won't he?
5. If all of the nuclear weapons in the world vanished this instant, would the slaughter of millions of people in Sudan, Congo, and Liberia stop?

Here is my challenge to the nuclear disarmament people: Comment on this posting with your specific answers to the above questions, one by one. Platitudes and moralizing will not be accepted; only specific answers to these questions will be accepted.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

More Terrorists Attack Attempts In The Last Two Years.

James Carafano, a national security expert at The Heritage Foundation, reported on a news show today that there have been a total of 36 foiled terrorist attempts on the U.S. since 911 (some major, some minor), and that there has been an uptick in attempts in the last two years, and particularly in the last year.

More terrorists attempts in the last two years. Hmmmmm. What changed a couple of years ago that could lead terrorists to increase their efforts in attacking us? Maybe perceived weakness in our national leadership?

Meanwhile, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, said recently that her department in working hard on the threat posed by global warming

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Gingrich and Cuccinelli At Heritage Foundation

At Heritage's President’s Club, Gingrich Calls for New Conservative Revolution

The keynote speaker at Heritage's annual President’s Club dinner in Washington on Dec. 9 and 10, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, did not disappoint.

Gingrich outlined his plan for a new conservative revolution, suggesting 2021 as a date by which America will be re-oriented towards conservative principles. And, the former Georgia Congressman added, “there is no better place than The Heritage Foundation to create a new outline of the conservative movement.”

Speaking to the unique nature of power, Gingrich explored the differences between how liberals and conservatives view the source of power. In the conservative view—the view of the Founders, the view that makes America exceptional—”power comes from God to each one of you personally. You loan power to the state. The state never loans power to you.”

Gingrich explained a plan to teach American exceptionalism to future generations. He demanded that “every student in a school: elementary, high school, and college, if funded by tax dollars, should encounter the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.”

Addressing the controversy over TSA screenings, Gingrich said what should be obvious: “We have to tell the truth about who is trying to kill us and act on that truth… Checking out an 83-year-old nun from Des Moines is not national security. It’s stupidity.”

To watch Gingrich's full remarks, go to

Read more coverage of this year's President's Club meeting, including speeches by Sen. Jim DeMint, Erick Erickson, Heritage President Ed Feulner, and more.

Cuccinelli Calls for 'Federalism in Action' at President’s Club

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli made a rousing case for “federalism in action” and for reading the Constitution as it was written during an address last week to The Heritage Foundation’s annual President’s Club meeting in Washington.

Cuccinelli, who has led the legal charge against Obamacare, said it’s encouraging that states are starting to check federal power–”and that’s exactly what the Founders intended.”

Cuccinelli's legal case against Obamacare, stating that the individual mandate is in violation of the Commerce clause of the Constitution, was recently upheld by a federal judge.

“This is supposed to be a government of limited, enumerated powers,” he said. “It would no longer be such if we lose this case” and overreaches of federal power like individual mandate are allowed to stand.

“The health care fight is not about health care,” he added. “It is about liberty.”

But Obamacare is hardly the only threat to constitutional government and liberty, Cuccinelli argued. Government agencies like the EPA and NLRB are “smothering liberty” with their regulations that micromanage Americans’ lives and overstep the federal government’s authority.

Defeating these assaults on liberty will require conservatives to return again and again to America’s first principles. Cuccinelli cited the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights, which held "that no free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles."

To ensure these principles endure, he argued that conservatives must educate the American people about why the Founders’ principles matter. And, he said, “Heritage is a key player in this.”

“We can fight back,” he concluded. “We can win this battle.”

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Republicans Vote For A Big Tax Increase

The tax deal passed this week in Washington contains an increase in the death tax (a.k.a. estate tax) from the current level of zero percent to 35% in some cases. Many Republicans in the House and Senate voted for this.

The death tax is arguably truly evil. Here's how it works. Let's say you work hard all your life and pay your taxes. You manage to save over the years from what the government doesn't take from you, and you build up a nest egg. Being a frugal and self-reliant person, you save it instead of spending it. Who knows, someday, you may need that money. As a result, when you die, your nest egg is still there. Remember, it's all money left over from the many taxes you paid during your life. But when you die, you will pay a 35% tax on your "estate" (actually, your "estate" will pay the tax, but let's not get into technicalities). So, for example, if you managed to save up $100,000, when you die, the government will take $35,000 of it, if the estate tax is 35%.

Yes, I know that the bill just passed in Congress exempts estates valued at under $10 million; but the push over time will no doubt be to lower that threshold as we continue to hear about making the rich pay their fair share.

There are even more pernicious aspects to an estate tax.

Keep in mind that a person's "estate" consists of everything they own, not just money in the bank. One's estate includes land, buildings, personal property, everything. So when a person dies, the total value of everything they own is added up and that is the amount that would be subject to estate tax laws.

Consider small, family farmers. Many of them are land rich and cash poor. A small farm of two or three hundred acres that has been in the family for generations may be worth a few million dollars due to the increased market price of the land over time, but the farmer's current annual income may very well be modest, since it takes a lot of acreage to make a little money in farming. $200 per acre is considered a standard rate of return for many small farms. So the value of the small farmer's land may be high, but his income will probably be very moderate. When such a farmer dies, his "estate" will include the value of the land, and if it goes over the exemption limit, his heirs would have to pay the estate tax. If the estate hits that $10 million mark that is in the recently passed law, the 35% tax would be levied, which comes to $3,500,000. Since the small farmer almost surely does not have that much money in the bank, in order to pay the estate tax, his heirs would have to sell off a big chunk of the farm (or cough up the money themselves).

So the government is essentially confiscating one's property via the estate tax when they die. Truly evil.

As I said, the current death tax (a.k.a. estate tax) is zero percent across the board, and the new tax "compromise" raises it to 35% on estates valued at $10 million or grater, a hugh increase. Many Republicans in both the House and Senate voted for this tax "compromise" bill. In addition, the stage is now set for the exemption limit to be under continual attack in attempts to lower it, thereby causing more and more people to pay the death tax. Anyone who resists these attempts to continually lower the estate tax exemption limit will be demonized as not wanting the "rich" to pay their fair share. Thanks, Republicans.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Business As Usual In Washington

One commentator said that the Americn people didn't have an election in November, they issued a restraining order. Senator Jim DeMint said that the election results were't a mandate for Republicans, but rather the Republicans had been given a second chance.

It seems as though the Republican leadership still doesn't get it.

The tax compromise recently struck by Obama and the Republican leaders (McConnell and Boehner) is more "business as usual" in Washington. It's as though the election never happened; nothing has changed in their approach.

The tax proposal does leave all current tax rates in place, thus preventing an economic catrastropy come January 1 by raising taxes. But the extension of current tax rates is only for two years. Our fearless leaders are just kicking that can down the road. It does nothing to remove the tax uncertainty on businesses, thus still leaving them reluctant to spend money by hiring. They still have that looming tax increase (in two years) hanging over their heads.

Message to Republicans: You won the election!! People want to see a new approach coming out of Washington, not more of the same old political maneuvering. If keeping tax rates where they are now is a good thing, then it's also good in two years. Fight that battle now, Republicans, while you are fresh off of a big election win; don't leave it hanging out there. The tax rates should be made permanent. Do that, and let the Dems propose tax increases whenever they so desire. "The votes aren't there", you say. Well, in January, they will be.

Next, the current tax compromise extends unemployment payments for another thirteen months by means of borrowed money. There were no offsetting spending cuts. Again, more business as usual. The people let it be known forcefully that they were fed up with out of control deficity spending in Congress, yet only a month later, there they go again.

And the tax compromise is larded up with earmarks in the form of special tax breaks for such vital national interests as NASCAR and Hollywood.!! Unbelievable!!

I recommend that the Republicans come to their senses, quickly. The tax question should be in a bill addressing that alone. Let's have a debate and vote on the tax issue by itself, so the positions on whether or not taxes should be raised will be clear. Have that debate clearly; don't cloud it with other things thrown into the bill. If you can't do that now, then do it in January when you will have a big majority in the House, and increased numbers in the Senate.

If the Republicans continue with "business as usual", they will squander their big election win and probably put themselves into extinction by means of the rise of a third party that "gets it".

Thursday, December 9, 2010

The Nanny-state's Work Is Never Done

The government has been telling us for years about all the things we eat that are not good for us: fried foods, red meat, sweets, salt, etc. As soon as we fix one bad eating habit, we are informed by the government of yet another one. It never stops; we never reach a point where our diet is now OK. Their work is never done.

Here’s the latest effort by the nanny-state to protect us from our bad eating habits. Kids in San Francisco will no longer be able to get a toy with their Happy Meal. The city’s board of supervisors recently banned the inclusion of a toy with meals that they deem to be unhealthy. In other words, Happy Meals as we know them have been banned in SF. Really; I’m not making this up.

The wise solons in San Francisco have decided that those pernicious Happy Meals are killing our children because the meals are so unhealthy, with all of that fat and red meat and, well, lot’s of other bad stuff.

Those evil fast food restaurants go so far as to put toys in those deadly Happy Meals to lure unsuspecting children into wanting them, not caring a whit about the death and destruction being so wrought on the young, all in pursuit of PROFIT. It’s an outrage!!!

It’s as bad as the witch with the ginger bread house who lured Hansel and Gretel in, and then threw them in the oven for dinner.

And you parents are either so dumb about what’s going on or so complicit that you readily take your kids to these fast food places and happily buy them a Happy Meal!! Revolting. You’re a menace to your children, and the government has now stepped in to exercise oversight on you irresponsible parents.

Now that Happy Meals have been taken care of, what’s the next diet danger for kids? All of that “trick-or-treat” candy kids get on Halloween is also wrecking their health --------.

The nanny-state has been busily at work in other areas. They have also been telling us for decades how bad smoking is for our health. In order to combat this national health hazard, cigarette advertising was banned from radio and TV and billboards, warning labels were put on cigarette packs, public information campaigns were conducted, and the rate of smoking went down dramatically. (Except in Asia. Don’t ever go to a meeting in a small room with Korean businessmen, as I did many times. You’ll suffocate due to all of the smoke.)

But here again, the nanny-state’s work is never done. Reducing the rate of smoking wasn’t enough. After that was accomplished, the nannies switched to second hand smoke. In this next phase of the anti-smoking campaign, smoking was no longer a matter of personal choice where one could take the health risks if they so chose. No, we were told that smoking was not only bad for the smoker, but also bad for anyone who happened to be in the vicinity. Smokers became miscreants in the eyes of the nannies, and they had to be controlled, for the good of all. Planes and restaurants had to have “no smoking” sections, to protect the non-smoker from the smoker. And it was done,

But even that wasn’t enough. The nannies then told us we had to ban smoking in planes and restaurants and public building all together. And it was done.

Still the problem wasn’t fixed. Next, entire college campuses and office complexes and shopping malls had to become “smoke free”, to protect passers-by from the slightest whiff of drifting smoke.

The war on smoking is another example of how the nanny-state’s work is never done. No matter how extreme the measures are that are taken in response to some issue, we later learn that it’s not enough; more must be done.

The same is true with gasoline mileage for cars. One may reasonably ask what legitimate right the government has to dictate how efficient the cars we drive must be, but that’s a different issue. The point here is that miles-per-gallon requirements were set for cars, and they were achieved. But, now it’s not enough. We continually hear how congress wants ever more stringent mileage requirements. The problem is never solved. No matter how high the mpg of modern cars is, it’s not adequate. More must be done; mpg must go even higher. Eventually, we must be forced to switch to electric cars. The nanny-state’s work is never done.

I could go on and on. Air pollution: Much has been done over the past decades to clean up the air, but, again, it’s never enough. New boogie-men must continually be found, the latest for the air being CO2 (green house gasses). And you can bet that even if harsh CO2 rules and regulations are put in place, it won’t fix the problem in the eyes of the nannies. Once CO2 emissions are reduced, or if the CO2 boogie-man just goes away, a new air pollution problem will then be found, and the whole cycle will start anew.

How about guns? Alcohol? Same story.

The nanny-state mentality is very dangerous to freedom. These people do not believe in “live and let live”; they believe in “live according to our dictates”.

If the nannies are vegetarians because they think that is a healthier diet, they feel compelled to force everyone else to become a vegetarian also. If they ride a bike to work in order to reduce their “carbon footprint”, then others should do likewise. If they want to use squiggly light bulbs to save energy, then a law needs to be passed forcing you and I to get rid of incandescent bulbs. If they recycle, so must we. Etc, etc, etc.

The lesson here is to be aware of what is going on, and to oppose the expansion of the nanny-state.

Jessee Ring
Nov. 29, 2010

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Obama Finally Gets It On Unemployment And Agrees With Me

You may remember from the primary/convention campaign last spring that I kept saying that government doesn't create jobs, private enterprise does. I said that businesses large and small in a free economy are where jobs come from, and if the government wants to create jobs, it should reduce the tax-disincentive to businesses for hiring by reducing the payroll tax. I said that many times.

After one failed "stimulus" after another, Obama has finally seen the light and now agrees with me. In the tax rate extension deal he has proposed, he included a provision to reduce the payroll tax (albeit temporarily) as a jobs-creation move!!!

If he had listened to me months ago, we could have saved the tax payers all those trillions of wasted "stimulus" which pushed the unemployment up not down. If he had listened at that time, we could have reduced the payroll tax way back then which would have brought unemployment down by now, thus increasing tax revenues, helping the economy, and saving the government money by not having to pay out so much in unemployment benefits (which have also been extended yet again in the tax rate deal). The problem would have been solved by now, if he had listened back then.

But better late than never.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Obama On How To Reduce Unemployment

Today I heard President Obama say that unemployment payments need to be extended, yet again, because it will help the economy and thus reduce unemployment.

Is this man sane?

This is not rocket science; it's actually pretty simple. The way to bring unemployment down is to have fewer people be unemployed. That happens when they get a job - when they become employed. Jobs come from businesses large and small when they hire people. So, to creat jobs and thereby reduce unemployment, we need to create an economic environment wherein businesses can prosper and grow and hire people. Is it really so hard to understand this?

The unemployed need a job, not another handout.

But yet here we have the President of the United States actually saying that the way to reduce unemployment is to keep the unemployed on the government dole for as long as possible.

2012 is coming.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Death Panels Already In Operation

Do you remember back during the discussion on Obamacare when Sarah Palin said that it would lead to death panels? The supporters of the government takeover of health care went nuts. The said there absolutely would not be any death panels, Sarah was an idiot and had no idea what she was talking about, how could she be so stupid, etc., etc., etc.

I have news: The death panels are already here.

There is a new drug out for the treatment of advance prostate cancer. It has been shown to increase life by an average of four months in such patients. But, the drug is expensive; the treatment for the four months costs about $100,000, or $25,000 per month.

A Medicare panel is deciding whether or not Medicare will cover the use of this drug.

Now, $25,000 per month is expensive. A person in that situation, however, might think it was worth it. But the decision of whether such patients get to live for four additional months is not going to be made by the patient and his family, or the patient and his doctor, or even the patient and some evil insurance company. No, this decision is being made by a bunch of nameless, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats buried deep in the Medicare labyrinth. A death panel, in other words.

Just try to get in touch with them to express your opinion, and see how far you get.

The death panels are already here.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Abraham Lincoln’s 1863 Thanksgiving Proclamation

“The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and mines, as well or iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidable engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility, and Union.”
Abraham Lincoln
Oct. 3, 1863

George Washington’s 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation

“Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor, and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to ‘recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:’

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th. day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been able to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.”

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3rd day of October, A.D 1789
G. Washington

Friday, November 19, 2010

A Letter To My Friend Morgan Griffith

Dear Morgan,
Last Spring, you and I were candidates for the Republican nomination to run against the Democrat incumbent for the Ninth District congressional seat. I campaigned against you in that primary campaign, and during the course of that campaign, you and I went to many meetings throughout the Ninth District. I feel that I got to know you.

My friend Morgan, you won that Ninth District primary campaign and became the Republican nominee. Now you have also won the general election and are our new Congressman-elect. I give you my heartiest congratulations; you worked hard, stayed on the issues, and ran good campaigns.

You will be going to Washington soon. I am glad that you and many other newly elected Congressmen will be there on a mission to get our country headed back in the right direction.

Morgan, I hope you won’t think it presumptuous of me to humbly give you some suggestions to consider once you get to work in Washington.

First and foremost, make every decision as though you are planning to serve only one term. Do what is best for the country, even if it is not easy or popular. Follow your conscience, not the vagaries of the polls or political winds. In fact, never look at a poll or a newspaper. Don’t do anything for the purpose of getting re-elected.

Next, be available to us, not the Washington insiders and lobbyists. We want to be able to meet with you face-to-face if we have an issue or concern. This is a matter on which we have had strong feelings over the years.

Do not strive for acceptance by the Washington insiders and self-appointed elites. Shun them. Remain an outsider. If these self-appointed Washington elites ostracize you or worse, wear it as a badge of honor. Remain one of us, Morgan; do not let yourself become one of them.

Similarly, do not curry favor with party bosses. Remember that you work for us, not them. Think not of committee memberships or chairmanships or a better office or other such accouterments of career politicians. Don’t be concerned with getting onto the A-list for Washington social circle parties. Draw your strength from us, the people of the Ninth District.

Listen to Harry Truman’s advice: Walk softly and carry a big stick. That’s good advice for a newcomer to Washington with tough fights ahead; “give ‘em hell, Harry” knew something about that. When necessary, be ready, willing, and able to emphatically say “take a hike” to those who will try to pressure or intimidate you into doing their bidding. My friend, you were not elected because we want someone in DC to” go along to get along”. We’ve already had that, and in this last election we said loudly that we want a new approach. We want you to clean house in Washington. As we discussed at our breakfast meeting before the election, be the Morgan Earp of the posse that the people are sending to DC in January to clean up Dodge. Kick butt and take names.

Remember always the issues that got you elected and our desires on them: no cap and tax – no way, no how; total repeal of Obamacare; stop out of control government spending; reduce the deficit by spending less; reverse an ever expanding, ever more intrusive government; be strongly anti-abortion; win the war on terror; reduce unemployment by stimulating businesses large and small via reduced regulations and cuts in business taxes; extend all the Bush tax cuts permanently; adherence to the Constitution; promote American patriotism; promote traditional family values. We expect bold action on all of these, not nibbling around the edges. Fight hard, and never give up.

Finally, my friend, gird thyself mentally to do battle. It’s going to be a knock down, drag out fight when you and the other newcomers try to right the ship of state. But we have confidence that you are the right person for the job, and that you will prevail.

Now go. We will keep you and America in our prayers. Please let us know how we can help you.

Jessee Ring

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

When Is A Situation Where Taxes Stay The Same Actually A Cut

There is a furious debate going on in Washington now about whether or not to extend the so-called Bush tax cuts beyond their scheduled expiration date of Dec. 31.

There are three possible outcomes from this debate:

Scenario #1. Outcome: Congress does nothing. Effect: Everyone's taxes go up due to the expiration of the lower rates

Scenario #2. Outcome: Congress extends all the current tax rates. Effect: Everyone's taxes stay the same.

Scenario #3. Outcome: Congress extends some of the current tax rates, but not others. Effect: Some people's taxes stay the same, and other people see a tax increase.

In no case is anyone going to get a tax cut. Let me repeat: No one, come January, will pay less tax than they now are.

So why are Republicans letting the left-wing liberals frame this debate as one of whether or not the "rich" should get a tax cut? This is incredible ineptitude on the part of the Republicans. Why do they always let the liberals set the rules for the debate, on everything. Don't the Republicans get the meaning of the last election? Apparently not, so I will tell them: We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore. We are sick and tired of being sick and tired of Washington. We want some new blood in there that will fight, fight, fight for America's first principles. We didn't send you there to join the club; we sent you there to kick butt and take names.

So, Republicans, don't debate phantom tax cuts for the rich. Instead, nail the liberal's pants to the wall by showing how they think that they own all of the people's money. Show how the left wing liberals think that when they deign not to raise our taxes, they have actually given us a tax cut. Expose the libs for what they are: arrogant, egocentric, condescending elitists who think that they are our rulers. Go after them!!

Saturday, November 13, 2010

2012 Is Coming

I have been making this prediction informally for months; now I will make it public. In 2012, Hillary challenges Obama for the Democrat Presidential nomination, and gets it.

Monday, November 8, 2010

Shut up and Listen

President Obama and other Democrat leaders have concluded that the reason they got their clock cleaned in the election is not because the people rejected their policies, but rather because the Democrats communicated poorly on those policies. People just didn't understand how wonderful the policies were. No, it wasn't the policies; it was the message. Now the Democrats plan to continue full speed ahead, but do a better job of explaining things.

Let me translate this for you. Obama and Pelosi and Reid think that all you local yokels out therein in "fly over land" are too stupid to be able to run your own life, so they have to do it for you. And since you hayseeds are so stupid, you also can't understand why their policies are good for you. You're just too dumb to be able to fathom it all.

Now the Democrats are going to do things differently. Henceforth, they will explain things to you on a first grade level so you can, hopefully, understand, and then you will support them and their policies. In addition, once you have been properly explained to, you will no doubt see Obama-Pelosi-Reid as the just and righteous rulers that they actually are. Your job is to shut and listen, and then vote for them.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Radford (VA) Prefers Quality of Voters to Quantity

The Radford City Council with the support of the Radford School Board has recently decided to keep city council and school board elections in May instead of piggy-backing them onto the November elections. One of the major reasons given for keeping these elections in May, even though voter turnout is always low, is because “quality of voters” is preferred by city council and the school board to “quantity”. As it was explained, by holding these local elections in May, only people who are interested and informed will come out to vote, whereas if these local elections were held in November in conjunction with state and national elections, a lot of people might come out to vote for President and other offices, but these people may not be informed on the local issues and races. Quality of voters is preferred to quantity.

Let me translate this for you.

The Radford City Council and School Board are full of elitists who think ordinary people are too ignorant to be allowed to vote for or against them. The local yokels can vote for President of the United States, Congress, Governor of Virginia, the Virginia legislature, and whatever else, but God forbid these hayseeds who just fell off the turnip truck should be encouraged to vote for city council and school board seats. No, no, no. The Radford City Council and School Board are much too important to allow the vast unwashed masses to decide who will serve. Only the educated elites who study local issues intensely and who will make the effort to come out and vote in an obscure local election held in May should be allowed to make this vastly important decision. All you others can go vote for President of the United States, but you’re not to sully our city council and school board elections.

Most observers of the political scene decry low voter turnout as one of the biggest problems in elections. Many proposals have been made to increase voter turnout, such as mail-in ballots, holding elections on Saturday, making registration easier, and others. Regardless of the merits of these ideas, the intent is good: Increase voter turnout. Yet here we have the Radford City Council and School Board taking steps that they fully admit are for the specific purpose of perpetuating a low voter turnout!

The real reason for this is not because of some high minded concern for the civic good, it’s so the elitists on city council and the school board can more easily pack the polls with their cronies and supporters thereby ensuring them a permanent job.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Vast Left Wing Conspiracy

There have been a lot of predictions lately from the chattering class (pundits, news analysts, commentators, political strategists, talking heads, and the like) about big Republican gains in the election next week. I think it's all a vast left-wing conspiracy to suppress voter turn-out among conservatives by building a false sense of security among those folks regarding the outcome of the election. The plan is that if conservatives can be made to feel overconfident and hence complacent, maybe they'll just stay home on election day, since the results are a foregone conclusion.

Don't fall for it!! Get out and vote no matter what on November 2nd!

Monday, October 18, 2010

It's Our Money

The next time you see a picture in the paper of a Congressman giving local officials a federal government check for a water treatment plant or a new fire truck or a senior center or some such thing, I want you to remember one thing: It’s our money.

A lot of people get the impression that if Washington pays for something, it’s free. Local officials and groups are constantly filling out grant requests or lobbying their congressman to get funds for various local projects. If they are successful and get the funds, it seems as though the money is free since it doesn’t come from local budgets. But it’s not free. This is because the federal government doesn’t have any money of its own; the only money Congress has is money that it has previously taken from us in the form of taxes.

So it’s all our money. We are paying for that water treatment plant, fire truck, etc. even if the check comes from Washington.

We would be a lot better off to stop sending so much of our money to Washington and then having to beg a nameless, faceless bureaucrat up there to give us some of it back again. We would be a lot better off to keep that tax money right here at home and let local officials decide how to best use it.

Similar discernment is appropriate when listening to the discussion on federal tax law come January first. That’s when the so-called Bush tax cuts will expire, unless Congress acts to the contrary. The discussion that we hear in the alphabet networks is cast in the context of tax cuts being enacted by Congress if they extend the Bush era tax policy.

Reality is that if current federal tax policy is maintained in its entirety, i.e. the Bush tax cuts are all extended, the result will be that no one will get a tax cut come January 1. What would happen under that scenario is that everyone’s taxes will remain unchanged. Yet in hidebound left wing ideological minds, when taxes remain the same for everyone, somehow it’s a tax cut for the wealthy.

The current discussion on taxes come January 1 is not about cutting taxes, it’s about whose taxes may be increased! Obama and friends want to increase taxes on those making over $250K per year, that segment of the economy that includes many small businesses. He doesn’t tell you that small businesses create over 70% of all jobs in this country. So in an economy where unemployment is stuck at about 9.5%, Obama and the Democrats want to single out that segment of the economy that creates the bulk of all jobs for punishment via a tax increase! Unbelievable!

Another reality is that the vast majority of economists agree that raising taxes on anyone in the midst of a fragile, slowly recovering economy such as we are now experiencing is a very bad idea. Yet somehow this extremely relevant piece of information doesn’t get into the discussion when liberals talk about taxes. The reason is that it doesn’t fit into the their preconceived template on the topic of taxes, so it is simply ignored.

Left wing liberals think that the government owns all of your earnings, and if the government lets you keep some of what you earn, then they are giving it to you. Once again, it’s very enlightening to remember that it’s our money! We worked for it, we earned it, and it’s ours, including the high income earners. The government has no money of its own; it only has what it takes from us in taxes. When the government takes less of our money in taxes, we are simply keeping our own money.
It’s our money.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Jessee Ring Takes On The Roanoke Times

Here is a copy of a recent editorial in the infamous Roanoke Times, and my respsonse to it. Click on the image to see a larger, more readable format of it.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

The Ruling Class Verses The People

The election in November has morphed into something beyond a typical election. This election is no longer about Democrats verses Republicans, or conservatives verses liberals; it has turned into a battle of the ruling elite verses the people.

We hear a lot of talk about an anti-incumbent mood in the country, and that is part of what’s going on, but by no means all of it. There is something much more profound and fundamental taking place.

The first indication was the tea partiers.

I have attended a couple of tea party rallies, and several aspects of them struck me as highly unusual in the world of assemblies of the citizens.

One thing that especially got my attention was the large number of people at these events who said something to the effect of, “I’ve never done anything like this before. I’ve never gone to a public rally or spoken out before, but now I feel compelled to do so.” This is very significant; people who have never before been involved are now actively speaking out, and in large numbers. They feel that the country is heading in the wrong direction, that Washington isn’t listening, and that things are so dire that they cannot remain silent.

There have been many tea party rallies and others that are similar throughout the country, some small and some attracting hundreds of thousands of people. The response from the ruling class has been disdain and arrogance. Members of the ruling class on the Democrat side denigrated the tea partiers, calling them Astroturf, hatemongers, Nazis, etc. Then the ruling class went about its business as usual. Nothing in Washington changed.

The next development was the elections last November in which governors in Virginia and New Jersey were elected after campaigning on the need for a bold new direction in those states. And they didn’t just win, they won big. Governor McDonnell received more votes than any candidate for governor in Virginia ever. The ruling class started to get miffed because their candidates were not being elected.

Then a special election was held in Massachusetts to fill the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy. The unthinkable happened. An unknown by the name of Scott Brown defeated the ruling class’s anointed candidate.

After that came the primary election season, and the populist eruptions were everywhere. Sharon Angle won the Republican primary in Nevada over the party insider who was supported by the establishment. The ruling class turned on Ms. Angle and started ridiculing her. In the general election, she is now running against that paragon of the ruling class, Harry Reid, and polls show the race tied. Still the ruling class has not forgiven her.

There were similar results in South Carolina (Nikki Haley) and Florida (Marco Rubio) where political newcomers defeated party establishment types in a primary election.

In Alaska, it became even more pronounced. Another unknown and political neophyte, Joe Miller, won the Republican primary against a sitting U. S. Senator who, in true ruling class fashion, was appointed to the position by her father, the governor at the time, to fill a vacancy. The ruling class had a fit.

Then in Delaware, the earth moved. Christine O’Donnell, a person who to say was an atypical candidate is an understatement, defeated yet another ruling class crowned prince in the senate primary election on the Republican side. Now the political elites became truly outraged. How dare these commoners reject their directions on who should be the nominee! Who do they think they are? Republican Great High Exalted PoohBah Karl Rove threw a hissy fit on national TV. Pundit extraordinaire Charles Krauthammer pontificated on how stupid the people were being because they didn’t do what he thought they should in the primary. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (the group that tries to get Republicans elected to the U.S. Senate) said they would not support Ms. O’Donnell (and then quickly reversed course and said they would). The various courtiers in the ruling class started yelping about how she was unelectable, fatally flawed, had never accomplished anything, blah, blah, blah.

And now here we are today with about six weeks until election day, and the ruling class still doesn’t get it. After eighteen months of messages being delivered in a variety of manners and in no uncertain terms, they have gone into denial or self-protection mode or adopted an attitude of “let them eat cake”.

It has truly become the people verses the ruling class. Continuing with their elitist ruling class entitlement mentality will have severe consequences for both the Democrats and the Republicans.

Since the Democrats are currently in power in Washington, they risk losing control of Congress and then losing the Presidency.

For the Republicans, the danger of ignoring this movement of the people is more insidious. If the Republican party establishment pays lip service to the peoples’ candidates, or out rightly opposes them, they risk further alienating the people to the point that there may well be a third party formed. If, on the other hand, the party establishment gets behind the peoples’ candidates and they get elected, it will mean the Republicans will have to be ready to take on a new identity and adopt a new mode of governance. Are they willing and able to do that?

Jessee Ring
Sept. 20, 2010

Monday, September 20, 2010

The Sky Didn't Fall - Again

Did you hear the latest on the great Gulf oil spill? It's gone - the oil, I mean. They can't find any more oil in the Gulf, on beaches, on birds, or anywhere. Even the so-called "plume" of oil that was supposedly lurking deep down in the ocean somewhere can't be found. Nothing, no oil, it's all just gone. Shrimp fishing has resumed; everything is going back to the way it was.

This oil leak was billed by the hysterical alphabet networks and government agencies as the worst ecological disaster ever. Nothing like it had ever occurred before. The Valdez spill was a pittance compared to this. Oil was going to decimate the Gulf beaches, marshes, fishing industries, and tourist industry. That wasn’t going to be all; it was going to get worse. Oil was going to flow into the Gulfstream, come around the Florida peninsula, and foul all the beaches along the East Coast. Nothing would be safe. The world would never be the same.

And now it’s all just gone. There’s no comment on this from all of the former chicken littles; their silence is deafening.

On another front, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) recently announced that the H1N1 swine flu pandemic is officially over. To which I say, “Did it ever start?” Here’s another one where the government and media were hysterical about something that was going to run rampant and kill most of us. I’m sure you remember hearing about that last spring. Once the virus had made the “species jump” to humans, we were told, it would likely mutate, and then we would be defenseless. Hundreds of thousand, if not millions, of people would die. It was going to be the black plague all over again, where every night people threw the dead bodies out into the street, and the next morning carts came around to pick them up to be hauled off to the incinerators. With our swine flu, a barely tested H1N1 vaccine was rushed to doctors and clinics. In an apparent effort to inflate the statistics, government rules were issued requiring that anyone who saw a doctor or nurse with so much as a runny nose was counted as a case of swine flu. Even so, the numbers stayed small. The cataclysm didn’t happen. Once again, it was much ado about nothing. No swine flu pandemic, no disaster, no nothing. By the way, all those vaccines are now being destroyed.

Global warming is another one. It’s the same template: Some occurrence will happen that triggers unstoppable disastrous events resulting in the end of the world as we know it, unless the government intervenes in a massive way to prevent it. There is the same institutional efforts to fudge the numbers to prove that it will or is happening. We heard about the world climate data being fudged and doctored, about anecdotal evidence from extreme environmental groups that have an agenda being touted as accepted scientific fact, about dissenting views being squelched, efforts to gin up hysteria (Al Gore et al), etc. And no matter what the weather is, we’re told it’s due to global warming. The polar icecaps were supposedly melting due to global warming, but last winter when we had a very cold winter all over North America including several blizzards, that too, we were told, was due to global warming. It was upsetting the weather patterns, you see. So no matter what happens weather wise, it’s said to be proof of global warming.

This global warming thing reminds me of the “Pinky And The Brain” episode where, one night, their daily “plan to take over the world” consisted of melting the polar ice caps. First, they would buy up all real estate in the world above the fifteenth story in buildings. Then, they would stow away on a space shuttle flight, make their way to the Hubble space telescope, redirect it so that it acted as a huge reverse magnifying glass, aim it at the Earth’s poles, and melt all the ice. The seas would rise to the fourteenth floor, per their calculations. Then all of their real estate from the fifteenth floor up would be worth a bazillion dollars, and they would control the world.

Global warming is Al Gore’s version of this.

Then there was the prediction a few years ago of a great Y2K (Year Two Thousand) meltdown. You remember that one, don't you? The world as we know it was going to cease to function at midnight on Dec. 31,1999 when the date rolled over to DD/MM/00. This "end of the world" scare was going to happen as a result of all the computers in the world malfunctioning because they wouldn't be able to distinguish between the years 1900 and 2000, since they both end in 00. Airplanes would crash, banks would lose track of our money, medical records would be unsearchable, all government functions would come to a grinding halt, etc., etc., etc. Then, year 2000 came, and everything went on as normal without so much as a glitch.

Where are all the oil spill and swine flu doom-sayers now? Have they apologized for their ignorance and promised to be more skeptical and questioning next time, that is, to be real journalist? Are they being laughed off of the public stage? No, they are off to the next scare, which has something to do with hungry bears in Yellowstone Park getting ready to eat people, I think.

Friday, September 3, 2010

Emergency Room Wait Times

I’ve noticed some strange messages on billboards in our area: Hospitals are advertising their emergency room (ER) wait times.
Pulaski Community Hospital and Montgomery Regional Hospital have put up some big signs showing their emergency room wait times, in real time. The big billboards have lights that form numbers indicating the current wait time. The last time I drove by, the sign was showing a 14 minute emergency room wait time. They also have signs telling us that we can text them to get the latest wait time. Yes, you can text in to get the emergency room wait time, kind of like texting the bank to get your account balance.

This is very odd. Why would hospitals advertise their emergency room wait times? Why would anyone care what the ER wait time is?

When I called the hospital administrative office and asked about this, I was told that the reason for doing it is that they know people have choices, and they want to show that they are putting patients first. The person also explained that the wait times shown on the signs are a four hour rolling average.

Let’s think about this. If someone has a medical emergency, does the emergency room wait time matter to him? A person having a heart attack, for example, is not going to say, “Oh, the wait time is too long; I’ll go later, or maybe tomorrow.”

I can imagine the conversation. Husband: “Dear, I think I’m having a heart attack. I have bad chest pain, I’m sweating profusely, and there’s this funny feeling running down my arms to my fingertips. We’d better go to the emergency room.” Wife: “Let me text in for the wait time. Oh, look, there’s a long wait. Can you hold off awhile? We’ll go later when the line is shorter. Or I could check with the other hospital to see what their wait time is, if you want.”

No, you don’t do that; you go as fast as you possibly can.

And once you get there, it’s not “first come; first served.” The emergency room staff decides which cases are the most urgent, and those cases get treated first, while the less critical emergencies may have to wait awhile. I learned this first hand when my daughter was about four years old, fell and cut her forehead, and we went to the emergency room. Even though she had a bad gash, it wasn’t bleeding much, and we were told that other cases were more urgent, so we had to wait. Someone having a heart attack will go right in.

Yes, I know the whole story about the “uninsured” using emergency rooms for their primary care. When little uninsured Johnny has a fever, his parents take him to the emergency room, where all comers are required by law to be treated, no matter what.

And that was one of the major problems with the health care system. The uninsured were using the emergency room as their family doctor, clogging it up with routine cases, and having to wait for hours while the true emergencies were taken care of. Not only was this a problem because of the inefficiency, we were told, it was also a problem because of the expense.

Emergency rooms are very costly, and using them for non-emergencies made that care very expensive, pushing up costs for everyone. It was one of the major problems that was cited as to why we had to vastly overhaul the entire health care system. We had to get those routine cases out of the emergency room, so we wouldn’t bankrupt the system. Obamacare was going to fix all of this.

So, I ask again, why are hospitals, right now, advertising their emergency room wait times?

There can be only one reason. They must think that by advertising their wait time, they can entice more people into using the emergency room, and to use their ER instead of another one. But this only makes sense for non-emergency cases, where people have a choice of going now or later, or not at all.

The inescapable conclusion is that the hospitals putting up such signs are trying to attract as many non-emergency cases to their ER as possible.

There’s a skunk in the woodpile.

Here we have hospitals actively working to make the problem of abuse of the emergency room worse. They are actually promoting it! They apparently want to get as many of the uninsured as possible into their ER.

Then it must not be a problem. Forget everything you heard about the problem of the uninsured and the ER. Now that Obamacare has passed, we learn that it was not true.

Wait, could it be something else? Could it be ----- ? No, it couldn’t be that some of the obscure provisions in the 2400 page byzantine Obamacare bill are having unintended consequences. Maybe buried in there somewhere are some provisions regarding the uninsured that give hospitals a financial incentive for using the ER for routine cases. Could Obamacare have made this problem worse? Is that why we are starting to see those ER wait time signs?

Jessee Ring
Aug. 24, 2010

Monday, August 30, 2010

The Sky Was Falling

Did you hear the latest on the oil spill? It's gone - the oil, I mean. They can't find any more oil in the Gulf, on beaches, on birds, or anywhere. Even the so-called "plume" of oil that was supposedly lurking deep down in the ocean somewhere can't be found. Nothing, no oil, it's all just gone. Shrimp fishing has resumed; everything is going back to the way it was.

This oil leak that was billed by hysterical alphabet networks as the worst ecological disaster ever has got to be the greatest none-event in decades. It's right up there with the Y2K computer meltdown that didn't happen.

You remember that one, don't you? The world as we know it was going to cease to function at midnight on Dec. 31,1999 when the date rolled over to DD/MM/00. This "end of the world" scare was going to happen as a result of all the computers in the world malfunctioning because they wouldn't be able to distinguish between 1900 and 2000 since they both end in 00. Airplanes would crash, banks would lose track of our money, all government functions would come to a grinding halt, etc., etc., etc. Then, year 2000 came, and everything went on as normal without a glitch. It was all "Chicken Little" hysteria.

The great Gulf oil spill was another one. As it turns out, almost nothing was affected.

Where are all the oil spill doom-sayers now? Have they apologized for their ignorance and promised to be more informed next time? Are they being laughed off of the public arena? No, they are off to the next scare, which has something to do with hungry bears in Yellowstone Park getting ready to eat people, I think.

Friday, August 20, 2010

Washington Could Learn From Richmond

When Bob McDonnell took office as Governor of Virginia in January, he inherited a large dollar state budget deficit. Now, a mere seven months later, the state closed out the 2010 fiscal year with a $220 million surplus! It only took the new Governor a mere seven months to fix Virginia’s budget deficit.

How did he do it? Well, he forced the state legislature to get serious about cutting spending. He made it clear that he would veto any budget bill that contained a tax increase. With the economy being what it is and many Virginians struggling financially, McDonnell felt that this is not the time to be increasing people’s taxes. With that option off the table, the legislature had to make hard choices about reducing spending to achieve a balanced budget as required by Virginia’s constitution. The legislature acted responsibly, and state dollar outgo was equated to dollar income without our tax burden being increased.

Meanwhile, in Washington, the White House raised its forecast for the 2011 budget deficit to $1.4 trillion. That’s just for one year; the total U.S. debt ceiling has been raised to $13 trillion. This is all borrowed money, mind you, which will have to be paid back some day.

The U.S. Constitution has no balanced budget provision, so Congress is free to spend more than it has, which it often does. Since Obama took office, deficit spending by the Federal government has gone on steroids.

We have seen a trillion dollar “stimulus”, auto company bailouts, TARP, bank bailouts, cash for clunkers, money being thrown at “green energy”, a remake of student lending that costs more, trillions to be spent on Obama-care, more money for unemployment payments, etc. And there are no signs that the spending in Washington is slowing; the latest episode is a $26 billion bailout to the teachers’ union and others.

You and I have to balance our monthly budget, or else eventually face some serious financial consequences. If our income goes down due to a job loss, pay cut, the poor economy, or any other reason, we have to cut expenses. Sure, we can live off of credit cards for awhile, but if you listen to Dave Ramsey, you know where that leads.

Congress doesn’t have to exhibit the same kind of financial discipline that ordinary Americans do. Congress can just spend, spend, spend with money it lends itself, and let future generations deal with the mess. Congress never goes bankrupt or finds itself talking to collection agencies. Congress just raises the debt ceiling. It’s as if you had a credit card that, whenever you hit the limit, you could just take a pencil, erase that number and write in a new, bigger number, and keep doing this until someday you hand the whole thing over to your children and grand-children.

And now, the very same Congressmen who have been spending money like drunken sailors for the last eighteen months, thereby running up the huge federal deficit, are now saying it’s time to balance the federal budget.

Now it’s time? Not when any of those spending bills were being passed; no, that was not the time to show budgetary restraint by voting against the spending. Now that huge deficits have been run up in Washington, now is the time to balance the budget.

This is like the Captain of the Titanic saying, as the ship goes down, that now we need to go slow and watch carefully for icebergs.

Here is why you are now hearing from the same people who ran up the federal debt to unprecedented levels that something has to be done about it. You will notice that none of these complicit Congressman are saying we have to cut federal spending to any significant degree, even though this out-of –control spending is what caused the deficit. They’re just saying that something has to be done about the deficit. And what might that something be? There are two keys to figuring it out.

The first key fact is that the so-called Bush tax cuts will expire at the end of this year, unless Congress acts to extend them. These were tax cuts passed during Bush’s first term that reduced tax rates for everyone plus reducing the tax on dividend income and capital gains. For political reasons, these tax cuts were put in place with an expiration date, which is Dec. 31of this year. Thus, Congress must act, or taxes on everyone will go up January 1. Some taxes, such as dividend income, will almost triple, regardless of income level.

The second key fact is that Congress has appointed a Deficit Reduction Commission to study the deficit problem and make recommendations on what to do about it. I predict that this commission will not recommend taking a meat cleaver to budget-busting federal spending programs or any such approach, although it may recommend token spending cuts here and there. This is because the commission’s membership is stacked such that it will, no doubt, recommend raising federal taxes significantly.

Some people are even speculating that a recommendation will be made for a federal Value Added Tax (VAT), European style, in addition to the federal income tax. A VAT is a tax imposed throughout the production cycle. For example, consider a wheat farmer. When he buys seed, he will pay a value-added tax on it. After he harvests and sells his crop to the bakery, a VAT will be paid on the grain. When the bakery sells the loaves of bread to the supermarket, a VAT will be paid. And when you buy a loaf of bread, you will pay a VAT.

Note that in both of these cases, the increased taxes will be on everyone, not just the “rich”.

And now for the final piece of the puzzle. Congress talks incessantly about making the “rich” and the “wealthy” pay their fair share, or about raising taxes only on the “wealthiest” people. Beware when you hear this talk. It’s what duplicitous politicians say when they want to lull you into a false sense of security. The dirty little secret of taxes is that the “wealthy” already pay most of the income tax. Data from the IRS shows the following:

Share of Income Tax Burden (2004)
Top 1% in income ------------- 35.6% of total federal income tax
Top 10% ------------- 67.6%
Top 50% ------------ 96.6%
Bottom 50% ------- 3.4%

Taxes on high income people can’t be raised enough to pay for the ballooning government budget deficits. You could take 100% of the income of the “wealthy” and it wouldn’t be enough. So taxes on the middle class are going to have to go up, unless there is a major change of course in Washington.

Anyone who doesn’t think big federal tax increases on the middle class are currently heading our way need only look at recent budget machinations in California.

In case you haven’t been following it (I do because I used to live there), California has been wrestling with a $40 billion deficit. They have gotten that down to $19.1 billion. The California Governor recently proposed cutting spending on welfare, child care, in-home care, and schools to finish balancing the budget. The California state legislature rejected that and came up with a complex tax scheme that includes a state income tax increase for all but the highest income tax bracket. You read that right; the California state legislature is considering a state income tax increase on everyone EXCEPT the wealthy. The reason given is that the state’s current tax structure excessively taxes the top bracket, adding to the volatility of revenue.

Keep in mind that California is truly the land of fruits and nuts, and its state legislature for the most part believes in socialist tax and spend state welfare policies to the extreme. Again, I know this because I lived there for years. If in California they have come to the realization that they can’t tax the rich enough to balance the state budget, and that they must instead increase taxes on the middle class, you know reality has set in.

Washington is coming to the same conclusion, they just don’t want to tell you. Congressmen still prattle on about taxing the wealthy, but reality is setting in. Hold on to your wallet; America’s spending chickens are coming home to roost.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

An Interview With President Obama

I have been wanting to ask President Obama some questions for awhile now, so I recently called the White House and actually got through to him. Here is a summary of the interview.

Q: Mr. President, you promised to keep unemployment below 8%, yet it’s now stuck at around 9.5%. Your response to this situation has been to extend unemployment benefits. Unemployed people don’t need yet another government handout, they need a job. How does extending unemployment benefits create jobs?

A: We need to help these people get through these tough times. My administration is compassionate; we want to help people. These people lost their jobs through no fault of their own. They are worried about buying food and paying the rent. I can’t stand idly by without lending a helping hand. I want to help -----------------.

Q: Yes, but what about creating jobs?

A: I want to create jobs. I am the “jobs” President. We need more jobs. Jobs, jobs, jobs.

Q: If you want to create jobs, why did you shut down drilling in the Gulf of Mexico at an estimated cost of between 40,000 and 100,000 jobs in that region?

A: Well, uh, we must protect the environment. Did you see those birds covered with oil? There must have been - -- a lot of them. I can’t bear to see oily birds.

Q: Then why didn’t you accept help from other countries on day 1 instead of waiting so long, and why didn’t you let Bobby Jindal build those berms to keep the oil from reaching the beaches and the birds?

A: We had to make sure all of the paper work was done. Bobby needed to get those permits; bureaucrats need jobs too, you know.

Q: Well, since we’re back on the jobs issue, if you want to keep people employed, why did you take over Chrysler and General Motors and then force them to precipitously close thousands dealerships at a cost of hundreds of thousands of jobs?

A: We had a crisis on our hands. Swift action was needed; there was no time to worry about details.

Q: Hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost was a detail?

A: We have saved millions of jobs. I am the “jobs” President. Jobs, jobs, jobs.

Q: Now that the crisis is over, have those dealerships been re-established?

A: Umm, no, they’re all permanently out of business now.

Q: f you want to create jobs, why don’t you propose cutting taxes on businesses large and small so they will have more money to hire people?

A: We can’t let those fat cats keep that money. I’m for the little guy. The wealthy need to pay their fair share. I want to spread the wealth around.

Q: But cutting the corporate payroll tax would no doubt spur job growth.

A: We have saved millions of jobs. I am the “jobs” President. Jobs, jobs, jobs.

Q: Mr. President, let’s turn to the subject of taxes. Unless Congress acts, on January 1 the so-called “Bush tax cuts” will expire, thereby increasing taxes on every American who pays any Federal taxes, regardless of income level. What are your thoughts on this?

A: Letting tax cuts expire is not a tax increase; it’s the end of a tax reduction.

Q: So even though everyone will send more money to Washington, it’s not a tax increase?

A: We can’t let those fat cats keep all of that money. I’m for the little guy; I want to spread the wealth around.

Q: But that money is the taxpayers’ money that they have earned, it’s not the government’s money.

A: We need a level playing field. The government should take that extra money and use it to, to, uh, reduce the deficit.

Q: If the government wants to reduce the deficit, why doesn’t it just stop spending trillions of dollars of borrowed money?

A: We had an economic crisis that only government could solve. I needed to spend those trillions of dollars to save the economy.

Q: But the economy is still way down, and many experts say it will recover on its own. In fact, many experts say the massive deficit spending by the government is and will continue to be a drag on the economy. Furthermore, tax increases are the worst thing that government can do when the economy is struggling.

A: Well, uh, I brought the economy back from the brink, and we can’t let those fat cats keep all of that money. We need to spread it around.

Q: Moving along, you recently signed a financial reform bill that did nothing to address the root cause of the financial meltdown: Fannie May and Freddie Mac. Why is that?

A: We can’t let those fat cats on Wall Street go un-punished. Where did they get all of that money, anyway? I’m for the little guy; we need to bring those fat cats down to size.

Q: But then with Fannie and Freddie continuing to do business as usual, the economy is still vulnerable.

A: Fannie and Freddie are big, huge, government bureaucracies run by career politicians and political appointees. They will act appropriately, unlike those fat cats on Wall Street.

Q: Many people are predicting that the Democrats will suffer large losses in the November election. If that happens, will it be a reflection on your policies?

A: I have passed historic legislation that will remake the country. My policies are historic, I’m historic, everything is historic.

Q: But what if the people vote against it all in November?

A: I’m not up for re-election in November.

Q: Thank you Mr. President for taking time out of your busy schedule to talk to me.

A: You’re welcome; call any time.

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Montgomery County Tea Party


We are beginning a permanent long term educational and activity oriented tea party group in Montgomery County, which is long overdue. If any of your supporters from Montgomery County are interested, could you send their email contact information.
Thanks so much.

Frank Symanoskie
If anyone in Montgomery County (Virginia) or nearby is interested, please contact Frank at
Jessee Ring

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste

Now that global warming has been exposed as a hoax, and “cap and trade” has been exposed as a huge new tax on everything that will kill hundreds of thousands of American jobs, the career politicians in Washington have gotten the message, and they know what to do about it: That scam didn’t work, so let’s try again. Only this time, we’ll use the Gulf oil disaster as a convenient way to gin up angst, and we’ll rename “cap and trade” to something that sounds good, like “cap and dividend”, or something real fancy like “Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal Act”, CLEAR for short. Yes, we’ll call it the CLEAR Act; that’ll get everyone on board. Then we’ll make all sorts of outlandish claims about the astonishingly good effects this bill will have. Those ignorant peasants out there in “in between” land will believe it all and go along with it. By the time the true effects become apparent, it’ll be too late. Voila! With this bill and the government run health care bill, Washington will have seized control of virtually every aspect of life in America. Then we wise rulers will be able to make those cretins and miscreants known as the American people live the right kind of life, the kind that we dictate.

Senators Maria Cantwell from Washington state and Susan Collins from Maine have proposed a new carbon tax bill called “cap and dividend”. As they describe it, this bill will cause money to start raining down like manna from heaven onto American families. This bill will unleash economic growth on a scale never before seen. Untold numbers of new, ultra-high paying jobs will be created. There will be massive investments in new technology!! We’ll stop using coal and oil and start using windmills and solar panels, tomorrow. Energy costs will not go up. Things will be right in the world.

All of this economic benefit will happen just because Congress passes a law; every ecological problem in the world will be solved to boot. It will be wonderful!! We’ll have our cake and eat it too. Utopia will have arrived!!!

Why didn’t someone think of this sooner? Thank you Senators Cantwell and Collins; we are so blessed to have such wise, magnanimous, benevolent leaders as you. Your apotheosis will begin immediately. As an encore, I’m sure you’ll solve world hunger, in your spare time.

In describing the bill in a Washington Post article, the good Senators proudly point out that “researchers at the New York University School of Law found that the legislation would generate good, ‘green’ jobs’ ---.” Researchers at a law school? A law school?!!! Not researchers at a technology school or an economics school or the National Academy of Engineering or the National Science Foundation, but at a law school?!!

The Senators also indicate that another benefit of the bill is that it will reduce “emissions in agriculture”. Emissions in agriculture – what is that? It can’t be plants, because plants consume CO2 rather than emitting it. No, they can’t be referring to corn or hay or wheat or tomatoes or any of those things. They must be talking about animals. It must mean that animal emissions will be reduced. That’s it, bovine flatulence! Yes, finally we can rid the fruited plain of the scourge of bovine flatulence. There will no doubt be the bovine flatulence police to enforce this. They will perform a great service to the populace by going around to every cattle farm, large or small, to verify that appropriate cow emission reduction procedures are being followed. If not, your cows will be confiscated and turned over to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) where they will receive tender, loving care, along with the chickens that were rescued after falling off the truck on its way from the chicken farm to the Colonel Sanders factory. PETA will also humanely capture the cow emissions and store them ---- somewhere safe, I’m sure.

Let me makes sure I’ve got my mind around this. At a time when Iran is nuking up, North and South Korea are on the verge of war, we have a disaster of unprecedented proportions in the Gulf that is not under control, the economy is still in the tank in spite of trillions upon trillions in “stimuli” of one sort or another, unemployment is stuck at around 10% and showing no signs of coming down, the situation in Afghanistan is starting to disintegrate, Iraq is tenuous at best; in the midst of all of this, the people running the country are engaging in energy and economic fantasy and worrying about bovine flatulence.

How do these boobs (no pun intended) keep getting elected? Are U.S. Senators really so stupid as to believe that a bill passed by Congress will get us all to economic and environmental Nirvana, or do they know it’s a charade but think we’re too stupid to figure it out?

My head is spinning! I can’t take it any longer. Stop the world, I want to get off!

An attendant drapes a cape over my shoulders and leads me off stage, as I sob. Then, I throw off the cape, run back on stage, grab the mike and get down on my knees, fervently pleading, “Please! Please! Please!” --- more sobbing --- “Please! Please! P-l-eeeee-a-s-e don’t go. America, you know I love you so.” (Apologies to James Brown.)

Washington has turned into a circus and the clowns are in charge. Nancy Pelosi is in Ring 1, Harry Reid is in Ring 2, and Ringmaster Obama is in the center. Robert Gibbs is the barker. There are side shows on energy, jobs, the economy, illegal immigration, and others to come. There is Little Egypt the belly dancer, the Lady Godiva impersonator, Ahab the A-rab with his precision spitting camel, the two headed cow, the five legged sheep, the fat lady, the giant, the dwarf. Step right up, only one thin dime, one tenth of a dollar! Step right up!

P.T. Barnum said that you can fool some of the people all the time, and you can fool all the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time. Let’s hope he was right, come November.

In the meantime, I’m checking out. It’s good-bye cruel world, I’m off to join a real circus. I’ll clean out the elephant stalls. Or they can put me in a cage. Shoot me out of a cannon, I don’t care. Let the people point at me and stare. I’ll tell everyone how that crazy, insane, inane Washington made a crying fool out of me.

It will be my ablution.

Someday I’ll return, and Washington will seem sane.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

The Boys of Summer

People have been playing games that involve a stick and a ball for millennia. Popular legend has it that baseball was invented in Cooperstown, New York in 1839 by Abner Doubleday. This is simply not true. There was a German book published in 1796 that contains seven pages of rules for “das englische Base-ball”, complete with a diagram of the diamond shaped infield. This reference also debunks another myth, that baseball evolved from the old English games of town ball and rounders. Apparently, baseball, town ball, and rounder’s all developed simultaneously.

Baseball is unique. It has a balance and symmetry to it that is lacking, as I see it, in other sports. It is the only sport in which the defense has the ball. Players must play both offense and defense, so they can’t become overly specialized. I'm a purist; I do not believe in the designated hitter. The game should be played the way God intended, with pitchers taking their turn at the plate.

Baseball is extremely versatile. I have played it with my kids in the kitchen using a wadded up piece of paper and our hands. When living in California, I played it with my now older kids in our tiny front yard and the street, with an intervening row of bushes, using a wiffle ball and regular bat. We played on organized Little League teams with uniforms and umpires and everything. Or you can play “one-on-one” baseball. You can play it anywhere, anytime, using anything, and have a blast!

In any event, to me, there is nothing more American than baseball.

It started as a northeastern city game in the mid-1800’s. During the civil war, its popularity spread as soldiers played it in their idle time, and introduced the game to people from all parts of the country.

The first World Series was played in 1903.

I love the mystique around the legendary baseball players and the game’s lore.

There was Babe Ruth, who was one the best pitchers the game had ever seen before he became the “sultan of swat”. A little known fact is that Babe Ruth won two World Series games in his second year in the Major Leagues, as a pitcher. He altered the nature of the game by becoming the first, and one of the best ever, power hitters. Prior to that, hitters were expected to get singles consistently and push runs in. The Babe ignored that precedence and did it his way. Then there was his famous “called shot”, in which he pointed to the right field stands and then hit a home run right there.

There was the unforgettable scene of a dying Lou Gehrig proclaiming that he was the luckiest man in the world.

Ted Williams left professional baseball in the prime of his career to join the military during World War II. He was not drafted, he signed up. He lost four years of prime time, voluntarily. One wonders what his statistics would be if he had gotten those four years in. He became a fighter pilot and literally went down in flames. He tells the story about a decision he made then. His plane was badly shot up and flames were coming out of the engine. If he ejected, he was guaranteed to live, but the pilot would frequently suffer two broken legs in this procedure as the plane’s canopy often didn’t get out of the way in time. So he could eject and be assured of surviving, but risk never playing baseball again. He decided that if he couldn’t play baseball, he didn’t want to live. He took the plane down in flames, landed in a field, and as he was running away, the plane exploded in a ball of fire.

Joltin’ Joe DiMaggio, known as the Yankee Clipper for the graceful way he sailed around the bases, had his famous hitting streak of 52 consecutive games with a base hit that was a national obsession at the time, and a record that has never come close to being matched.

On of my childhood heroes was Mickey Mantle. His father was such a baseball fan that he named his son after the great Mickey Cochran. His father also died at age 36 of a heart attack. Mickey thought he was going to die young also, so he lived the high life. When he was in his sixties, he commented that if he had known he was going to live so long, he would have taken better care of himself.

Mickey replaced Joe DiMaggio in center field for the New York Yankees – some pretty big shoes to fill. As great a player as Mickey was, he never quite lived up to expectations. He was supposed to be Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, and Joe DiMaggio rolled into one. It just didn’t happen.

One reason was that he was not a disciplined hitter. He was always swinging for the fences, even when there were runners in scoring position and a clean single would have won the game. Consequently, because he struck out a lot trying to hit home runs all the time, games that he could have won with his bat were lost.

Another reason Mickey Mantle didn’t live up to expectations was that early in his career, while chasing a fly ball, he tripped over a water spigot used to water the outfield grass. He twisted his knee badly, and it was never the same. After that, before every game, he wrapped his entire right leg in adhesive tape, and he played in constant pain. Players from visiting teams who were unaware of his situation and happened to see what he had to do in game prep were horrified. Catchers noticed that he groaned in pain every time he swung the bat. Still, he became one of the game’s all time greats. Think what he could have done with two good legs.

The hot dog was invented in New York in the 19-teens when a sausage manufacturer wanted to find a way to sell his sausages to people going to or at the game. He came up with the idea of wrapping a sausage link in a piece of bread. The world has never been the same.

A man who didn’t have the money to buy game tickets for his children wrote the song “Take me out to the ball game” for them instead.

And the tradition continues right here in Pulaski with our own Rookie League team. Go out to some games this summer, and think about the long history of the game being played before you.

Monday, July 5, 2010

How Sweet It Is

The first U.S. offshore wind energy project was approved on April 28 by Obama officials who lauded it as a model of renewable energy production. The project consists of 130 wind turbine generators to be installed in Nantucket Sound.

A lawsuit against this project was filed in Federal Court on June 25. Guess who filed the lawsuit. Probably a big, greedy oil company run by evil fat cuts who are bent on destroying the environment in order to line their own pockets, right? No, the lawsuit against the first U.S. offshore energy project was filed by - - environmental groups!! You heard it right; environmental groups are challenging the first wind energy project. They say the project violates the Endangered Species Act by failing to protect birds and whales.

How sweet it is.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Obama vs. Truman

What?! Obama relieves an Army General of command over some indiscreet comments, and now Obama is being compared to President Harry Truman? The community organizer being compared to the man who stood up to the commies in Korea? This is a joke, right?

The effete Ivy Leaguer Obama vs. “Give ‘em hell Harry” Truman? The “ditherer-in-chief “ Obama vs. Truman of “The Buck Stops Here” fame? Obama, the master of political double-speak vs. “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen” Harry Truman. Obama, the America apologist-in–chief, the man who groveled to Iran only to have them laugh at him, the man who begged North Korea to talk to him, vs. Harry Truman, the man who nuked Japan in order to save hundreds of thousands of American soldiers’ lives?

Comparing Obama to Truman because of this one firing of a General incident is laughable. Comical. Ludicrous. Silly. A real howler. Worthy of the laughing dog rolling in the floor.

Can the people making this comparison be serious? Yes, they are, and that tells you all you need to know about the Obama sycophantic cheerleaders in the media.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Jobs, jobs, jobs

Over a year ago, panicked career politicians in Washington hysterically yelled that we had to pass a trillion dollar “stimulus” bill using money we didn’t have in order to keep the unemployment rate under 8 percent. Now, unemployment is stuck at about 10%, and these very same people are telling us that it will stay there for the foreseeable future.

Nothing illustrates better the point that government doesn’t create jobs.

The main reason that the government can’t create sustainable jobs is that, contrary to popular opinion, the government doesn’t have any money of it’s own. The only money it has is what it takes from you and me in the form of taxes. The government can also borrow money, but then that has to be paid back some day, again using our tax money. The government can also simply print more dollar bills, but this causes inflation, which is just another way for us all to pay more for everything. Every dollar the government puts into the economy in the form of spending, it must first take out of the economy in taxes or borrowing or inflation. It’ s a net zero operation.

Private industry creates jobs. Government’s role is to create an environment in which businesses of all sizes can prosper, grow, expand, and hire people. Every tax, every regulation, every piece of paperwork imposed by the government just makes it harder and more expensive for companies to hire people.

The recently passed government health care bill is just the latest example of how Washington increases the cost of hiring people, thereby keeping unemployment high. As a result of this law, employee health care costs are going to go up for all companies. Higher employee costs means fewer employees.

Another way some of Washington’s actions results in higher unemployment is the minimum wage. Every time this is increased, fewer low wage workers will be hired, because it costs more. Mostly, this affects college students and teen-agers, many of whom would be glad to work for less than the minimum wage if they could find such a job. These people are not depending on this low wage as a means of supporting themselves, they just want to earn some extra spending money, some money for college, or to supplement the family income. The teen unemployment rate is currently at an astounding 26.4 percent.

If Washington wants to encourage businesses large and small to hire more people, it should make it less expensive for companies to put someone on the payroll. One of the best ways of doing this would be to reduce the payroll tax, which is a tax on jobs. By lowering this tax, businesses could hire more people for the same total amount, and that would surely encourage then to do so.

President Obama recently decreed a moratorium on new off-shore drilling, at an estimated cost of 40,000 to 120,000 jobs.

The “jobs” bill passed earlier this month by Congress raises taxes by $80 billion on small employers and U.S. based corporations. On January 1, Congress is set to let taxes rise on capitol gains, dividends, and small businesses. All of these increased taxes are sure to stimulate the economy and incentivize hiring, right?

Here is some interesting good news on the jobs front. Chinese firms last year acquired or announced they were starting more than 50 U.S. companies. One, in Spatanburg, South Carolina, will make cylinders used to print labels like the ones around plastic soda bottles. Chinese companies have invested $280 million and created more than 1200 jobs in South Carolina alone.

Some 33 American states, ports, and cities have sent representatives to China to lure jobs to America. The attractions here in the U.S. are lower priced land, reliable and cheap power, and tax credits.

Wait! You mean tax credits, not higher taxes, encourage companies to expand here and hire Americans?

Virginia knows this. It was recently announced that Northrop Grumman, a company I used to work for, will be moving its headquarters from Los Angeles to Virginia, creating 300 new jobs for Virginians. The reason they moved is Virginia’s pro-business climate.

Meanwhile, Congress is gearing up to eliminate the cheap power incentive to foreign companies to come to America. Congress wants to pass “cap and tax”, a huge new energy tax that will dramatically push up the cost of all energy, especially electricity, thus killing thousands of jobs throughout America.