We are being attacked on ALL sides!
February 1, 2012
Your property rights are being assaulted and as shown in a video of the San Carlos, California City Council, despite opposition to turning our governments over to the United Nations, the fat cats have sided with the UN in forcing through Agenda 21 which is a global design on “green” living. This is outrageous. Despite the overwhelming evidence that ICLEI is tied to the UN Agenda 21, these jerks voted to fund ICLEI over the protests of their constituents!
Our politicians have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, and now they have become the enemy. What will it take? Another armed conflict? No wonder liberals are for gun control!
Payroll Tax Extension
December 23, 2011
I am not sure how you feel about Republicans caving on the two month payroll “tax” extension, but I was very disappointed. All along, the House GOP has been on the right side of this issue (including the Keystone Pipeline) even though Conservative talk show hosts, most of them substitutes this week, thought the House blew it politically.
Unfortunately, because Democrats run the Senate along with some squishy RINOS, we are in this mess. (Remember when Republican strategists said it would actually be a good thing that we did not take the Senate in 2010? Bah, humbug.) Yet even Obama himself recently said the extension needed to be for a year, but you will not hear that reported anywhere.
Once again, we are being led by people who base their decisions on polls not conviction. This is what finally got Republicans thrown out after taking the House and Senate in 1995. After several years of not doing what they were sent to do, people had enough and gave Congress back to the Democrats.
The optics must have been bad for Boehner, a career politician, so he decided to cave. Instead we got two more months of lower payroll “taxes” before they have to deal with the issue again. That’s about $40 a week for most people. Wouldn’t it have been better to extend it for a year like House Republicans wanted? That’s $320 ($40 times 8 weeks) the Senate passed versus $2,080 ($40 times 52 weeks)that the House wanted. Why can’t this case be made?
Yet there is a bigger issue that has not been addressed. One of our astute members who runs a business and actually has a payroll pointed something out. The money we are talking about is coming from the EMPLOYEE’s portion of FICA (Federal Insurance Compensation Act, government’s name for Social Security “tax”). Traditionally, employers have matched the amount that employees get deducted from their checks. But as our member explained, even though his employees’ FICA amounts have been reduced (for almost a year already), his employer’s portion has actually gone UP. By his calculations there is a dollar for dollar correlation to the reduction of the employee amount with an increase in the employer amount.
Of course, it makes sense that the money for Social Security needs to come from somewhere. Other than this payroll tax there is no mechanism for funding Social Security. If employees are not paying in then it would make sense Congress would deem that the employer must make up the difference. After all, if the money runs out, the game is up, right? The program would be shown to be the Ponzi scheme that it is.
This legislation can only hurt the long term employment outlook since it is costing more to hire employees. It will also hurt Republicans as people start to feel the 2010 elections were for naught. Therefore, it will be even more important that we elect Tea Party types to take over the Senate whether we win the Presidency or not.
So while it may look like the small increase in people’s paychecks is a good thing, it probably is not whether it’s two months or a year. Make no mistake. The future of our country is at stake in 2012!
FedUpEditor
Occupy Wall Street Like Tea Party?
October 21, 2011
I don’t do much on this site any more…
October 13, 2011
Sorry to have abandoned this site. Most of my time has been spent over on www.TheMarinForum.com.
FedUpEditor
A discussion about black voters
August 18, 2011
Allen West is truly an endangered species; a self-staring black man. Rush today was saying the same thing I have been saying for months. Obama knows he’s got the black vote regardless of what he does. That’s why he’s not spending any time there and instead surrounding himself with white kids and pandering to their parents. He’s lost the white vote.
Could it also be that black voters have very little money to give his campaign? Black leaders like Maxine Watters and Jesse Jackson are taking note, but will they vote Republican? Not a chance. There is no money for them from Conservatives.
It’s true some blacks are self-starters, but most have become takers of the welfare system. These people are dependent on government for their meager existence, and as long as they vote Democrat, it will continue. What they fail to realize is that the little checks they get from the government, and the fact they pay no income tax, it does not mean they are not paying any taxes to Big Government. Right now everything is taxed; from cable to cell service. What about sales tax? How about the government regulations that are sending jobs overseas and keeping our country impoverished? Instead, they want to blame the rich people that they are in their situation, not the liberal Democrats and Republicans who have created this mess.
If you look at our black community, how many of them have cell phones and big screen televisions, tattoos, fancy fingernails, expensive clothes, multiple piercings, etc.? They are already mentally “poor”. Instead of investing in things that can get them out of their situations (like building a business as the Asians and Indians do – think service businesses and convenience stores), too many are spending money on instant gratification and waiting for Obama and the Democrats to stick to the rich so they can get MORE of their goodies.
And how much of this “bling” is purchased on credit? And how many of these credit cards go to collection? And because of our “easy money” policy toward the poor, how much of this debt is being written off or government subsidized? Just like the mortgage bail out, people usually don’t learn from continually being let off the hook. Before I go on, I am not opposed to people being able to spend THEIR money any way they want, but they are spending YOURS and MY money.
And please tell me the name of one person who has gotten rich or moved to the middle class from receiving welfare. When has any tax increase on the rich ever helped a poor person?
Besidesm if the poor only knew how little of the money that goes to Washington for welfare actually makes it back to the people for which the program was designed, they might get the picture. An elected official needs to stand up and tell the public the percentage of money that actually goes to the recipients compared to the percentage that goes to generate the government jobs that administer the program (to buy votes?), pay for the administrator’s insurance, retirement, etc.
THIS IS THE REASON WE ARE IN THIS SITUATION! The golden goose is dying! Just as Socialism (and that is what we have no matter what Democrats say) has died everywhere it’s been tried because eventually we run out of other people’s money.
I know this is generalization, but the truth hurts. Why else would so many poor people turn to selling drugs or other crimes to make money? Because it’s EASIER and faster than going to work and building wealth. After all, not everyone gets caught, right?
- Fedupeditor
What if?
July 28, 2011
I am tired of the same people who have been running the country into the ground telling us, “this is the best deal we can get.” As if compromise is not what has gotten us to this point in history to begin with. Especially when compromise means liberals always getting their way… just not as much as they want.
For example, what if we compromised on slavery? What if we compromised on rape? What if we compromised on murder? What would those compromises look like?
My point is that there is right and wrong. This debt “crisis” is just another example of what is wrong with this country. Raising the debt limit by $2 trillion immediately while cutting spending over 10 years is NOT a compromise, no matter what Boehner or other establishment Republicans say. Never mind the fact that Congress cannot bind another congress to a budget, how is this good for the Conservative movement? I have an answer.
It isn’t. While talk show hosts like Laura Ingraham say we should accept the deal and say, “we win,” she couldn’t be more wrong. If Republicans cave just because we can “get something done”, it will go a long way to pushing a third party. We should hold out for a much better deal or let the country default. It is not the Republicans who are causing this. It is the Democrats, and should be echoed over and over again that this is the case. How many plans has Obama come up with? (Here’s a hint: zero.)
Our country is broke. True, we have taxes (revenue) coming in all the time, but we have over spent years beyond those. The fact that the national debt is well over $14 trillion and soon to be $16 trillion should tell the story. But for some reason, liberals look past that fact.
As I pointed out in a letter to the IJ editor which I sent today, Marin do-gooders love to talk about all the wonderful social programs that government provides. What they fail to understand is that after the money gets to Washington, most of it goes to set up the bureaucracy to manage that program. Very little of that money goes to help the intended recipients. And these middle-class government bureaucrats are the ones who keep voting for the party that perpetuates their jobs. It is vote buying, plain and simple. They do not help the poor as they advertise.
Republicans need to understand that the time for “business as usual” is over. That is why the Tea Party caucus is holding firm in the House and is why they were elected. Just because we have been doing it one way for a long time (for example, slavery), does that mean we have to continue doing it that way? Not when it’s wrong.
- FedUpEditor
Funny if it weren’t so true!
July 14, 2011
QE3 – Why it’s a bad idea
June 12, 2011
After reading a Dallas Morning News article on Quantitative Easing 2 from November, 2010, the fact they are talking about QE3 makes me angry. The old saying is, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” A newer version should be, “Fool me three times, what do you think I am, frigging stupid?” Of course that could be said of Californians by electing Jerry Brown for a third term as governor, but that’s not the topic of today’s post.
Fortunately for us, fhe Fed has announced as late as June 10, 2011, that it will not be implementing QE3, much to the shock of Wall Street. We can all breathe a sigh of relief… for now.
Ben Bernanke, a Bush appointee as Federal Reserve Chairman, has practically decimated our economy with a policy which he continues to promote. Since 2006 our country’s loose monetary policy has been guided by his hand, and what have we gotten for it? High unemployment, a devalued dollar and a stagnant economy. We can blame Obama all we want, and we should for many things that are going wrong in our country, but Bernanke has a hand in this thanks to his poor decisions as Fed Chairman.
As the article in Dallas Morning News points out, QE2 sounds like an ocean liner, but should actually be called the Titanic… The bad news? We all have seats on it. Are we all going down? Time will tell. But here are a few facts.
QE1 and QE2 have done nothing to jump start the economy. Like the Heritage Foundation pointed out (much like my bathtub analogy) taking water from one end of a swimming pool and dumping it into the other end may raise the water level in certain areas for a certain time as it ripples across the surface, but eventually the water level in the pool has not increased. So it is with quantitative easing.
The Fed prints money which we are essentially borrowing from ourselves and using to buy up bonds which have already been issued (monetizing debt) using this newly printed money. Supposedly the bond holders then have liquid capital to pump back into the economy. But since wealth is not being created, the increased money supply only waters down what is already in the economy. If you guess that this makes things cost more, you would be right. Inflation has been with us for a few years, but because energy and food are not entered into the equation, we have gotten doctored economic numbers.
So if QE1 had worked, wouldn’t our economy be humming? Okay, the argument is that our economy is so big it takes time to turn the ship around. So we got QE2 after QE1. How is that working for you? So well that now they are talking about QE3? Watch out for that iceberg!
FedUpEditor
More on NY-26
May 27, 2011
On Wednesday, hour 2 of the Rush Limbaugh show, the host apologized to his audience for not knowing about the New York 26 election BEFORE it happened. As I pointed out when I forwarded Karl Rove’s erroneous piece yesterday, Conservatism did not lose that race, the lack of knowledge that the “Tea Party” candidate was actually a Democrat did.
Let this serve as a warning to all who think we need a third party. If it happens, it will surely give the majority back to the Democrats. Third party voters are essentially Conservative and take votes away from Republicans not the Democrats. In a close race it means the liberal will win without having the majority, and this could well be the Democrats grand strategy for 2012. After all, when the country is in a deep recession (regardless of what the media is reporting) and your message is, “Everything is fine. We will just keep printing money, and all will be well,” the only way to win is by trickery.
This dynamic was illustrated when Perot got into the race which helped get Bill Clinton elected over George H. W. Bush. Now it has been proven again with the election in NY-26. Had there been any light shed on the fact that the “Tea Party” candidate, Davis, was “a liberal Democrat with a history of supporting higher taxes, Obamacare, cap-and-trade legislation, contributing many thousands of dollars to far-left Democrat candidates, as well as endorsing Barack Obama for president”, the Republican candidate would probably have won.
However, reports from people who actually live in that district say the Republican candidate did not articulate conservative principles while the Tea Party candidate did. So in a sense, the Conservative message won. Together the Republican and Tea Party votes would have easily beaten the Democrat.
Harry Reid made one of the most ignorant statements when he said something to the effect that this vote was a clear message from the people of America that they are against making changes to Medicare as we know it. The actual fact was nobody knew about this race outside of NY-26, so how can this be a mandate from anyone on anything?
I guess that’s what you have to say when you were pummeled in 2010 at the polls and want to fool yourself, but it may be seen another way. What this election says is Republicans better get their message out loud and clear what they stand for and what they are against. It is no longer enough to just be not-Democrat. Conservatism had better be front and center in 2012.
The majority of people understand we are in trouble with our social programs; the money has run out. People are becoming aware of the problems with government union wages and benefits which are unsustainable. With tax revenue down, it is magnifying the problem, and about time. Medicare has been broke for years, but the problem has been disguised as a liberal government (of both parties) has propped up the failing system. For years people on both sides have predicted is was insolvent and would eventually collapse. The story that Congress raided the trust fund a long time ago is enough to do another series of articles, but let me leave you with this.
If Republicans think NY-26 is a mandate on anything and run from the tough issues because Harry Reid and the press say it was, it could spell trouble in 2012. What it shows is that Republicans need to step up and address the issues head on. Be the adults in the room. After all, if conservatism wins, the country wins. If liberalism wins, we all lose.
FedUpEditor
North Marin Water District Raises Rates! Surprised?
May 24, 2011
Last night the North Marin Water District in Novato, CA, voted to raise rates, “due to reduced usage.” Let me understand. We used less so they have to charge us more? Why?
Remember, we been in a drought for years. Water districts raised rates because there was a scarcity of water. Remember tiered rates? For years they have been urging us to conserve water. We have been asked to landscape our yards with plants that need little irrigation. Parks have been retooled to use recycled water. Businesses like car washes have done likewise. So we have listened.
However, now that we have an abundance of water from the Spring thaw, our habits haven’t changed. It would seem that with an increased supply, rates would go down, not up. And where is this money going? To pay bloated government salaries, pensions and benefits, not to improve the water quality.
Some people seem to think the solution to deficits is to tax the rich, but how does raising water rates do that? Don’t the poor people of Novato have to pay for their water too?
The ones voting for these rate increases are not the ones paying for them. We are. It’s time to make them get their spending under control.
