POLITICAL PARTY POOPER

WE WON'T BE SAFE WHILE POLITICAL PARTIES ARE LEGAL

Posts Tagged ‘President’

If I were President

Posted by politicalpartypooper on August 13, 2011

I’ve been having discussions with  a number of political people recently.  Let’s say that they’re political junkies.  Many, like me, are avowed Independents.  There are those remaining few who are brave enough to admit that they are a party hack…ahem…Republican or Democrat.  Those brave few are always the few who argue most vociferously for their obsolete ideology.

I can’t really recall one argument I’ve had with an Independent.  Maybe the Hacks are right; we don’t argue because we don’t stand for anything, except maybe fence-sitting.

Perish the thought.  Here’s what I stand for, and here’s what I would strive for if I were President:

* End the Bush tax cuts.  Anyone who believes we can solve our debt problem by cutting spending alone is naive, or reasonably insane.  There is no argument one can make against raising revenues when all we’re talking about is less than four percent in tax rates.

* Reform the estate tax.  Yes, there needs to be an estate tax.  Money “won” in an estate is income…and almost always, unearned income.  Being a member of a wealthy family doesn’t give you a pass to perpetual wealth without taxation.  If I earn $5,000,000 in one year, I get taxed on it.  So should you.  Especially since you probably DIDN’T earn it.  America wasn’t built on inheritance, and Capitalism isn’t based on inherited wealth.  It’s not a death tax; it’s an income tax.  We’re not taxing the dead guy.  We’re taxing the income that the living recipients receive free of charge or labor.  Husbands and wives, of course, would pay no estate tax, as our government views the rights of the surviving spouse to be an equal owner of the estate, and still living.

* Extend Congressional Terms to four years, and limit the number of terms to two.  No more career politicians.

* Reduce Senatorial terms to four years, and limit the number of terms to two.

*  Write a Free Trade Equity Act.  Simply put, demand that in any trade agreement that our nation makes or currently holds, an equal number of jobs have to be created between the two parties.  If American factories move overseas and create 1000 jobs in that foreign nation, that nation must reciprocate in kind.  No deviation is to be allowed.  Free Trade isn’t free if the results are as lopsided as they have been for the last twenty years.

* Write an Amendment to the Constitution that guarantees the Bill of Rights only to Natural Persons.  Corporations may be an assembly of natural persons, but they aren’t a natural person in and of themselves, and therefore, do not have the same rights that Natural Persons have; such as Free Speech.  This ought to end the debate about whether corporations or special interests (such as unions) can contribute big money to our campaigns.  While the people within those corporations or special interests may have an individual vested interest in the outcomes of elections and deserve their voices to be heard, the  entity of corporations and special interests do not have vested interests and shall have no voice in our system of government.  The Bill of Rights pertains to the individual, not to groups of individuals.  The right to worship as one sees fit, for example, is an individual right, not a corporate right.  Individuals have the right to organize according to their method of worship, but the organization itself has no say, no free speech with regards to our system of government.  Our Founders didn’t write a Corporate Bill of Rights; they wrote a natural person’s Bill of Rights, and defined what that Natural person is within it.

* A Tax code that is simple, equal, and fair, without loopholes for the wealthy.  What that tax rate may be would need to be determined, but whatever it ends up being, no one except the very poor would escape its full effect.  If we can find a rate near 17-19% that helps us maintain our budget and our social programs, that would be optimal.  But for the time being, if that rate needs to be one or two percent higher to help us pay down our debt and balance our budget, I think most Americans will be accepting of it.

* A program of employment for the long term unemployed.  We cannot pay unemployment benefits perpetually without return.  Our nation has massive infrastructure deficiencies, and employing the long unemployed toward this end would go a good way toward solving this need, while paying a fair wage and giving the newly employed a sense of contribution to their society.

 

To be continued

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

What We Need is a Line Item Veto

Posted by politicalpartypooper on March 14, 2010

Today’s topic is a Line-Item-Veto.  Every President since Ron Reagan was asked for such power, and thirty years after Reagan first asked, we still don’t have it.  Why?

An interesting question.  Let’s explore that.

Why, indeed, do we still not allow our President to veto individual items of a bill?  I think we all know what items would be vetoed; it’s doesn’t take a constitutional scholar to know that the first thing any sitting President is going to attack is the pork attached to almost every bill.  Like$4.5 Million for wood utilization research. This research has cost taxpayers $95.3 million since 1985.  Ummm, don’t we pretty much already know what we can and cannot use wood for?  Then there is the defense department’s $3.6 Million for “intelligent decision exploration”, a head shaker if ever I’ve seen one.

There’s the annual $9.5 Million for Corridor “H”, West Virgina’s Senator Robert Byrd’s personal highway, which just sort of ends in the middle of nowhere.  Can I?  Can I?  Can I call it the Highway to Nowhere? How about $9.5 Million for Bikepaths and trails?  I have one of these right across the street from my home; it’s a maintenance nightmare, and the people charged with its upkeep are the first to admit that.  Why not just make a Bike Lane on our already paved streets, which have maintenance crews already provided by municipalities and counties? Anyone?

The biggest question by far is, why are these projects Federally funded?  The idea that a Senator from Wisconsin can request Federal dollars for a pet project, which in the end benefits only people from Wisconsin seems unconstitutional to me, especially since none of these projects is a matter of national defense, safety, health, or education.

Why don’t we have a Line-Item-Veto?  Because despite what your representatives say every election cycle, they love Pork.  They love it, love it, love it.  It’s their favorite way to payback campaign contributors, and to “earn” votes for the next election.  Pork is basically state election bribery, and it makes challenging and winning against an incumbent more difficult.  Yet pork remains one of our nation’s sorest subjects amongst citizens, with wide agreement amongst the Right and the Left. Why do our elected officials continue to ignore us on this?

If we gave our Presidents Line-Item-Veto authority, much of this pork would disappear, and for a President unwilling to get tough with Pork-barrelers, his approval of line item pork projects would make him an owner of them, along with its sponsor.  Nothing like owning wasted taxpayer dollars, right?  Let’s get to it.  Let’s make these guys ask for their pork honestly, instead of allowing them to sneak it on the ass-end of a bill.     Ω



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s Foreign Policy Palin By Comparison

Posted by politicalpartypooper on September 2, 2008

Yeah, catchy title and all, this post promises to be a dud, so I won’t keep you hanging for the punch line real long.  Obama has no foreign policy experience, and neither does Palin.  For that matter, when it comes to being an executive, McCain and Biden have zero experience as well.

Wake up!  You only get executive foreign policy experience BY BEING PRESIDENT!

Get it?

(still loving the title?)

Obama is running for President, Palin for Vice President; why is there even a comparison being made?  One is trying be the executive, while the other is on the ticket as a distant assistant/trainee type of thing.  There’s no comparison.  Obama can be an immediate success, or an immediate threat.  Palin is the future, maybe.

In review, none of the four candidates have any executive foreign policy experience whatsoever.  This is a non-issue, and the two sides are looking absolutely foolish.  You know what a fool is, right?  He’s the guy pontificating about things he has no experience in.  Looks like we have four guilty parties here.  Let’s let ’em know that we know that.

Okay, this post is over.  I know, it sucked, but you’re going to have to search the internet long and hard before you’ll find a better title, right?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »