Posts Tagged ‘taxes’

Did You Hear Our Propaganda Today?

June 16, 2012

I thought I would share the latest prearranged installment of campaign double speak.  The email below, written and approved many days in advance, arrived at 6:30 pm, shortly after Obama’s speech in the important swing state of Ohio.

Filled with the usual and customary emotional trigger words and short on specifics, it makes its expected “appeal” to one’s emotions and would not be complete without an appeal to get into your wallet!  It’s a typical fundraising letter, filled with hysteria, fear and empty promises they can’t live up to.

From David Axelrod and the Obama campaign.
“Keep this message at the top of your inbox”
Did you hear the President today?

This is a make-or-break moment for middle-class Americans — and anyone who cares needs to watch the speech President Obama made in Cleveland today.  (the clear implication is that if you don’t or haven’t watched their speech propaganda, then you don’t care about the middle-class! Why single out “the middle-class”? What happened to the “general” welfare?)

In this election, we face a choice between two fundamentally different visions of how to grow the economy. The path Mitt Romney and his Republican allies want to take us down is exactly the one that led us to the 2008 crisis. We have to reject those policies and embrace the President’s vision of growing the economy, not from the top down, but from the middle class out. (one has to believe that both candidates want to actually grow the economy.  Neither candidate’s plans, actions, or historical evidence is proof that they do.  Obama and Romney have proven their clear willingness to grow government ever larger and ever more comprehensive, taxing and spending more and more, not less and less.  Equally poor serfs is always the game of tyrants.)

The choice couldn’t be clearer on the issues most important to ordinary Americans:  (really? ordinary Americans? Or just collectivists and progressives?)
– Better Education: We need to invest in good teachers and help more students go to college and get job training — not pack kids into classrooms and slash scholarships. (central planning has ruined education since the early 60’s but yet the proposed solutions are to intervene, borrow and spend even more? The answer is the exact opposite. )
– More, Cleaner Energy: We need to invest in promising new sources of energy to create a market for innovation and good jobs of the future — not go back to relying on foreign oil. (not go back to foreign oil? Stop shutting off our own oil production and we wouldn’t rely on others)
– Leading Through Innovation: We need to invest in our best scientists, researchers, and entrepreneurs so they innovate here — not cede new ideas to countries like China and India. (ideas and research do start here and plenty of them but onerous federal regulation will drive out the manufacturing to less onerous countries).
– Job-Creating Infrastructure: We need roads, bridges, ports, and broadband technology that attract businesses that will create jobs here — not more pet projects and bridges to nowhere.  (pet projects like Solyndra?)
– Fair, Simple Tax Reform: We need to reward businesses that create jobs here instead of rewarding outsourcing, and must ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share again — not sacrifice investments critical to the middle class. (what about the poor? Don’t you care about them anymore? First they came to help the poor and now we have poverty.  Now they want to help the middle-class?)

This economic crisis didn’t start in 2008.  For more than a decade before, we knew things weren’t working the way they should.  We saw costs for everything from health care to education rising faster than wages.  Good-paying, middle-class jobs were becoming harder to find, as more and more companies moved production overseas. (Oh yes, I remember. The Democrats helped pass CAFTA and NAFTA that wiped out our textile jobs here at home and many were union jobs.  Are we being taken again?)

The other side’s solution was the same then as it is now — massive tax cuts benefiting mainly the wealthy, rolling back regulations on risky behavior for Wall Street and banks, and slashes to services that the middle class depends on, like Medicare, education, and job training.  A decade ago, Bill Clinton left a record surplus.  But the last administration put two wars, two huge tax cuts, and the Medicare prescription program on a credit card, and handed President Obama a trillion dollar deficit and a raging economic crisis. (and Obama thinks more taxing of the rich, more regulating of markets, bailing out banks and business with borrowed money, expanding Medicare, education and job training, more debt, more borrowing and printing, more wars and an all powerful central government will fix all our ills?)

Incredibly, Romney and his allies want to go back to those same, disastrous policies: budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy and free rein for Wall Street to write its own rules.  We tried Mitt Romney’s failed formula for most of the last decade.  It benefited a few, but exploded the deficit, crashed our economy, and devastated the middle class.  It didn’t grow our economy, create good jobs, or pay down our debt — it did the opposite. And it won’t work this time around either: Independent economists confirm that Romney’s plan wouldn’t cut the deficit, or even create a single job now — in fact, it could slow growth and push us back into recession. (you mean the same one’s that didn’t call for an Audit of the Federal Reserve fraud when you guys were in power? Are you calling for an Audit today? NO, you are not! There is so much garbage in this paragraph I’d have to write a book to correct it)

Today the President laid out a very different vision, one where everyone — no matter who you are, where you’re from, or how big your bank account is — pitches in (how’s this “pitching in” thing gonna work?) together to rebuild the foundations of our country and economy.  Instead of another $250,000 tax cut for millionaires, Obama believes we should pay down our debt (he is demanding we do the opposite) and invest in the things we know we need to grow the economy (government is a bad investment) and strengthen the middle class.  That means restoring and upgrading our crumbling infrastructure, investing in education, paying down our debt responsibly, and yes, asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more.  This approach requires tough choices and shared sacrifice — exactly how we built the American economy in the first place. (no, it was not built on any such nonsense. It was built on freedom, production and wealth.)

As supporters, it’s on us to get this message out there.

Watch the President’s speech, and share it with your friends, family — heck, share it with everyone you know. There’s even a helpful printout you can download and pass around:



More than 2 million people like you power this campaign. (no, it’s Goldman Sachs and Wall Street that dominates your administration)
If you can, please donate today. (to your own demise)


Are You Considering Newt Gingrich? Consider This!

April 22, 2012

Some facts you should seriously consider before you decide with whom you will side!

(original credit)
by Bill Evelyn on Thursday, June 16, 2011

Newt Gingrich served in Congress from 1979 to 1999 and served as Speaker of the House from 1995 – 1999. Newt is credited with welfare reform and the Contract with America. Newt led the charge to impeach Bill Clinton. Newt voted for H.Res. 611 Impeach Resolution Amendments for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Newt also voted against the Brady Hand Gun Bill.

This paper focuses on Newt’s participation in the Housing market collapse and subsequent financial morass our nation finds itself.

Newt Gingrich entered the US Congress in January of 1979 from the 6th District of Georgia. Gold was $200 per ounce; gold in January 1999 leaving office was $287.00 per ounce. Yet, this does not tell the entire story. Today, gold is $1,650 per ounce as a result of massive Federal reserve issuing of dollars causing the value of the dollar to collapse against the value of gold.

For example, with a salary of $18,000 dollars a family could buy 90 oz. of gold in 1979. Today with a salary of $18,000 you can only purchase 10 oz. of gold (1/21/12). This inflation has destroyed our retirement savings and ruined our ability to be independent, because many families are being forced into poverty with the subsequent housing collapse. This short analysis illustrates Newt Gingrich’s complicity in the failed policy of the past 20 years.

Questions that I feel Newt needs to answer:
Do you believe; “Fannie Mae is an excellent example of a government institution fulfilling its mandate while functioning in the market economy?”
Do you believe the Federal Reserve has maintained its charter to stabilize the value of the dollar?
Do you believe Fannie Mae is constitutional?
Would you vote YES now for the Fair Housing Act?
Would you vote YES now for H.R. 3768 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act (FDICA) Did you know the Christopher Dodd (D-CT) Amendment was included in FDICA?
Would you vote YES now for H.R. 5334 Housing & Community Development Act 1993?
1988 – Roll Call #697, June 29, 1988 – H.R. 1158 Fair Housing Act- Newt Gingrich YES for this law.
1. Modifies the definition of a discriminatory housing practice to include acts of interfering, coercing, threatening or intimidating a person in the exercise or enjoyment of his/her rights as protected by Sections 804, 805 and 806 of this act.
2. Provides HUD with the ability to initiate complaints. In essence, HUD can now set up stings to find evidence that mortgage lenders and banks are discriminating against blacks and Hispanics. Prior to this law a complaint must have been filed by that person believing they were being discriminated against.
1991 – Roll Call #416, November 21, 1991 6:04 PM – H.R. 3768 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA)- Newt Gingrich voted YES for this law.
The House passed this bill with a little known amendment inserted by Christopher Dodd (D-CT). The amendment expanded the federal safety net increasing the likelihood of taxpayer bailouts. Walker F. Todd an assistant general counsel and research officer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland uncovered the obscure amendment. Prior to this law only commercial banks, members of the Federal Reserve System, could access emergency funds from the central bank. The amendment to FDICA increased the availability of Fed assistance to included investment banks and insurance companies. Dodd’s constituents include most of the nation’s large insurance companies. “Moral hazard” – Access to emergency capital made bank managers less likely to exercise caution.
Thus in 2008 (TARP) the Fed rescued AIG and banks all over the world at the detriment of United States taxpayers. When Walker F. Todd tried to raise awareness Congress wanted no discussion of the expanding safety net and its costly implication for taxpayers. The Fed is printing money, inflating the dollar, and destroying the savings of American citizens.
1992 – Roll Call #366, August 5, 1992 2:53 PM – Housing and Community Develop Act (CRA) – Newt Gingrich voted YES for this law.
In 1992, President George H.W. Bush signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The Act amended the charter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reflect Congress’ view that the GSE’s “have an obligation to facilitate the financing of affordable housing for low-income and moderate-income families.” For the first time, the GSEs were required to meet “affordable housing goals” set annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and approved by Congress.
Establishes within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, managed by a presidentially appointed Director, who shall ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the enterprises) and their affiliates are adequately capitalized and operating safely. Authorizes the Director to require financial reports from the enterprises in addition to quarterly and annual reports required under specified Acts. Grants the Secretary of HUD, except for specified authority of the Director of the Office, general regulatory power over each enterprise. Requires the Secretary to require each enterprise to obtain the Secretary’s approval for any new program before implementing it. Amends the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act to prohibit the Secretary from merging or consolidating the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, or any of its functions or responsibilities, with any function or program the Secretary administers. Authorized Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) to issue Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CDO’s) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issue and guarantee pass-through securities; Ginnie Mae only adds its guarantee to privately issued pass-through’s backed by government-insured (FHA and VA) mortgages. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have issued CMOs for some time; the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began to issue CMOs in 1992; and Ginnie Mae initiated its own CMO program in 1994. The CRA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the relationship between Wall Street and the Federal government caused the financial meltdown in 2008. Bankers were forced to make loans to low income people that could not repay those mortgages. In order to cover that risk CDO’s were sold to unknowing investors, banks and insurance companies, and eventually this bubble burst causing the meltdown we are living with now.
Fannie Mae was created in 1938 by FDR to bail-out banks with bad mortgages. Freddie Mac was created in the 1960’s to compete with Fannie Mae. All during the 1980’s Republican legislators tried to privatize fully Fannie and Freddie. In the late 1980’s Jim Johnson a politically connected Democrat was appointed Chairman of Fannie Mae. Jim Johnson has a very different perspective. He strong armed lawmakers to ensure Fannie was never fully privatized in order to maintain the ability for the federal government to bail-out Fannie. In doing so, interest rates on Fannie’s mortgage offerings could be set lower, because of the implied exception of taxpayer bail-out. No wonder Jim Johnson was a good friend of Angelo Mozzilo of Countrywide Mortgage.
Jim Johnson fought hard to ensure that Fannie remained tethered to the federal taxpayers. He was instrumental in getting FDICA passed into law and the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act 1992 Title 10 of H.R. 5334. It ensured HUD maintained its oversight and thus was tethered to the taxpayers. It also provided Fannie with a new mission – provide affordable housing to low income
Jim Johnson geared up to spend $1.0T to be spent on affordable housing between 1994 and 2000. This money would finance 10 million homes for low-income families. Fannie boasted that they would bring new flexibility to the loan underwriting process. Jim Johnson used Fannie Mae partnership offices nationwide. In doing it cemented its relationships with members of Congress in order to protect Fannie.
In Feb 1995 Johnson traveled to Atlanta to launch the new office focusing on creating new mortgage products for first-time homebuyers and low- and moderate-income consumers. There to celebrate the Fannie Mae commitment was none other than Newt Gingrich a supposed big proponent of reduced government size.
Gingrich said; “Fannie Mae is an excellent example of a former government institution fulfilling its mandate while functioning in the market economy.”
The problem with this statement; Fannie Mae is still being bailed-out by the taxpayers. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have received $317B in bail-outs and it’s not over. Jim Johnson massed a $21M fortune in salary and bonuses as Chairman of Fannie Mae. Your savings and purchasing power has fallen 650%.

Occupy Demands… Reflection!

February 10, 2012

By: Gary Hardee
Date: 2/10/2012

While there is much to awaken to  within the entangling web of the GSO enterprises, the best cure is complete transparency into the records. The information will reveal the likely corruption which on the surface seems to be motivating at lease a certain segment of the protests known as the “Occupy – whatever” movement.

History has given us ample evidence to be suspicious of such “spontaneous” protests. Many have proven to have been an orchestrated ploy known as “pressure from above and pressure from below”. Other astute meisters of revolutionary parliamentarianism know it as the Pincer Strategy. The goal of this strategy is to give its backers power that they could not otherwise get.  The desired result is usually some form of new or revised law that ostensibly solves the “crisis”. A crisis usually brought on by the very backers of the protesters or movement. Few have the time or inclination to expose the players in the scheme. Ninety percent of such “spontaneous” activities are not that at all! This pattern can be easily confirmed by looking at the results of earlier orchestrations. Collectivism and the growth of power into the hands of government are the usual results, as I said, ninety percent of the time.

The Occupy demands are all over the board! It is the proverbial glass of fresh milk that has been unsuspectingly poisoned with arsenic. Much of it tastes good but the bad part will kill you.

Most of these demands simply build more laws, more rules, more controls, more costs to the taxpayers, more burdens to pay for their enforcement and thus more collectivism. Any person who – in an almost knee-jerk fashion – calls for another law, agency, commission, study, program, entitlement, subsidy or even a tax break are witting or unwitting participants in the growth of collectivism. Pass another law and government grows. Repeal a law and government shrinks. It’s that simple. But I digress…

“Occupy” seems justly concerned over greed and the over-the-top intimacy between lawmakers and influential non-governmental entities – usually big corporations, decrying the intimate game of back-scratching referred to as “corporatism”.  However, no one should confuse “corporatism” with “capitalism”. They are opposites!

The endgame of corporatism on this scale has no objection to achieving Monopoly Capitalism, the cornering of markets by limiting competition. It is a division of collectivism and is used by certain businesses for the benefit of certain businesses and to the detriment of those that are not part of the game.

Real capitalism on the other hand does not have politicians using force to take money from one person and give it to another. Nor does it seek protection from competition in the market place. It is a free exchange, free choice system governed only by the unfettered choices between one who has something that another that might like to buy.

Is it a perfect system, devoid of inherent shortcomings? Of course not, but it beats tyranny hands down every time! With collectivism comes inevitably corporatism just as the so-called War on Poverty of the ’60s has seen its ranks swell way beyond its purported purpose and goal. These are the inevitable outgrowths of collectivism not capitalism!

But it is the private sector that pays the final bill while competing with those on the other end who spend it.

The Supreme Court made a rightly reasoned ruling some time ago that said essentially, “What the government subsidizes, it has a right to control.” In other words, once our money gets in their hands and they decide to “give it out”, strings will understandably come along with it. So, when we subsidize our government with our money, shouldn’t our strings also be attached? Perhaps we should expect, no demand, transparency and openness? Should we the people ever allow our government to go into closed-door “Executive Session”?

It is we, who pay the price of government through our taxes. It is we that fund government operations and it is  we who control their livelihood, not the other way around. Without our money there can be no corruption in government!

George Washington warned us long ago with these invaluable words: “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. And like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!”

%d bloggers like this: