Trouble for the Auto Industry Bailout

Reports indicate that there is less confidence that the auto indusrty bailout will be passed. Many Republicans and some Democrats question whether the bailout bill will use taxpayer's dollars effectively. The Bloomberg article Democrats Back Off Prediction of Automaker Bailout Approval describes the latest version of the bill.

The Democratic proposal would let the president appoint a so-called car czar to oversee industry restructuring, and give taxpayers stock warrants equal to 20 percent of the loans. It would prohibit the automakers from paying dividends and owning or leasing corporate jets, and pay and bonuses would be limited.

This, however, does not address the inherent problems with these businesses. Preventing the "paying dividends and owning or leasing corporate jets, and pay and bonuses" addresses none of the major problems with these companies. A limit on excesses misses the basic fact that these are failed companies, who can't garner loans from anyone other than Congress. The only check or change that this bill implements is 'a car czar'; the powers of which Chairman Barney Frank tried to explain...

‘Head-Knocking’

Frank told reporters today the bill would give the car czar “a great deal of head-knocking ability” with “a lot of the powers that you would get in bankruptcy.”

The official would have the power to veto participating automakers’ plans to invest abroad, Frank said. Lawmakers want to ensure the companies don’t “take American taxpayer dollars and expand in other countries rather than here, or shut down a plant in America while expanding a plant elsewhere,” he said.

Because Bush and President-elect Barack Obama are unlikely to agree on a czar, Obama will likely replace Bush’s pick as soon as he takes office, Frank said. The Bush administration has said the official should come from the Commerce Department.

So this 'car czar' a likely member of the Commerce Department will be apparently appointed by President Bush then replaced by the future President Obama, and he shall be granted 'head knocking abilities'.

Chairman Frank went on to state that the auto industry will likely need to be granted more money in the future, something Speaker Pelosi has also stated. This does not instill confidence that this bailout will be anything but a waste of money.

A few basic questions for lawmakers...

How will this money fix the failed business policies of the auto industry?

How many bailouts and/or how much money will be paid to the automakers total?

What's wrong with bankruptcy?

What are the requirements for being granted a government bailout?

This is still not an rational solution. Ask your representatives not to support this bailout bill, and make them at least answer the basic question, 'how will this money fix the problems that the auto industry faces?'

Contact Your Senator

Contact Your Congressman

---

Continued Problems with the Automaker Bailout

No to Auto Bailout Part 2

Yesterday's article Oppose the Auto Bailout was not intended to be anti-union or anti-auto company, it's simply the opinion of an old fashion cheapskate. If the government is going to spend taxpayer dollars they need to ensure that those funds are not being wasted. There has been little effort to explain why pumping money into failed businesses will fix that failed business model. Voters should contact their lawmakers and let them know they will hold them responsible if they give automakers billions of taxpayer dollars only to see those business collapse in the future.

Contact Your Senator

Contact Your Congressman

Similar sentiments we're expressed by Senator Mitch McConnell (R - KY).

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Tuesday regarding proposed auto legislation:

“The auto industry is vitally important to our nation’s economy and it is vitally important to my home state of Kentucky. This is not in dispute. The question before us is how to reverse the decline of some of these auto manufacturers after decades of complicity between management and labor.

“I understand congressional Democrats sent a revised proposal to the White House late last night. We will reserve our judgment until we see the latest text. But the proposal we saw yesterday afternoon fails to achieve our goal of securing the long-term viability of ailing auto companies.

“I want to support a bill that revives this industry. But I will not support a bill that revives the patient with taxpayer dollars yet doesn’t secure a commitment that the patient will change its ways so future help isn’t needed.

“To do so would be a betrayal of the millions of hardworking taxpayers who are not at fault for the troubles in the auto industry. And it would be unfair to the millions of Americans who depend on these companies.

---

No Auto Bailout Part 2

No To Auto Bailout

RedState.com has posted a couple pieces on opposing the government bailout of the auto industry. The first by Representative Michele Bachmann opposes not just the auto bailout, but the concept that Washington should be spending tax payer money to prop up failed businesses. The second article by Francis Cianfrocca discusses how contract renegotiations with the United Auto Workers union need to be included any proposed bailout as failure to so will result in the eventual failure of those companies with or without a bailout. Excerpts below.

One main reason the auto bailout is facing such opposition is that there has been no attempt to explain why pumping money into a failed business will fix that business. If these company continue on their current path this bailout will simply prolong the time before before failure, and will result in simply wasting a huge sum of tax payer dollars.

For those who oppose bailing out the auto industry, folllow the links below to contact your Senators and Congressmen to let them know that you do not support this bill, and that you will hold them responsible for wasting your money.

Contact Your Senator

Contact Your Congressman

---

No More Bailouts by Rep. Michele Bachmann

Washington needs to stop handing out your money like its Monopoly money. Each dollar is hard-earned and the men and woman who worked so hard for it deserve more respect from their government than to be treated like an ATM. Our economy grew strong on the backs of Main Street; from the ideas and sheer sweat of innovators and entrepreneurs flush with the American spirit. Risk-taking is part of that adventure. But when government guarantees against failure, risk and reward becomes meaningless. Eventually, that will crush our economy- and that eventually may not be that far down the road.

The Critical Missing Piece in the Automaker Bailout by Francis Cianfrocca

There will be no significant cost-cutting or pain imposed on the UAW in the restructuring of the domestic auto industry, unless it happens right now, this week.

The UAW must agree to a labor-cost structure that, in Sen. Corker’s words, is no higher than that faced by foreign (“transplant”) automakers who assemble vehicles in the United States. The union must agree to very painful concessions on wages, healthcare, work rules, and retiree benefits.

Gettelfinger, playing to the galleries, has assured lawmakers that he will indeed be open to doing whatever he can to seal the deal. Among other things, he’s signaled willingness to end the so-called “job bank.” You know, that’s where an automaker closes a production facility that no longer makes sense, but continues to pay the workers full wages and benefits to play video games all day, for years into the future.

But what Gettelfinger has pointedly not said, is that he’s willing to re-negotiate the contract that the UAW currently has with the automakers. In short, he’s not preparing to compromise at all, or to ask his people to take any real pain.

---

Oppose the Auto Bailout

Sheridan Folger: John H. Sununu To Lead NH Republicans!

Sheridan Folger: John H. Sununu To Lead NH Republicans!

Posted by
Mad
at
3:03 PM

I am happy to report folks that after a hiatus of over a year John H. Sununu will once again step into the political arena.

READ THE REST HERE

Thank you BS 08

NOTE: This is cross-posted at LRC

Hello readers of LRR/BS 08-

Just wanted to say thank you to all of the readers who made this blog successful. While we didn't get the results we wanted, we sure gave it out best shot, defending conservatism and promoting freedom and liberty to America.

While Barack Obama may not be our first choice for President, I urge you all to give him the respect that our commander in chief deserves. Over the last 8 years, the amount of disrespect shown to our President has been unthinkable. And I believe that this has hurt America.

Thanks again to the readers and the folks at LRR and BS 08 for letting me share my views with the blogsphere.

Until the next election, I urge you to check out the George Mason College Republican Blog for more post and commentary. Also, I am in the talks to create a blog to focus on the politics of Virginia's 8th Congressional District. If you are interested in VA or Northern VA politics, please check out the GMU CR blog, as well as the new blog (link coming soon).

Thanks again, and I wish you all the best-

Not Jim Moran

Sheridan Folger: Your Impact, Give Yourself A “Thank You”, I’m Giving You One.

Your Impact: Give Yourself A “Thank You”, I’m Giving You One.

I wanted to take the time to sincerely thank any and all of you out there that participated in this election cycle. I thank those that were with us from the start, those that joined us in the end and everyone in-between.

I am saving my comments and thoughts regarding the outcome of the election, the future of our cause etc for a later post. This is simply a straight forward THANK YOU.

(for the record when I say we throughout this post I’m talking about YOU!)

In the past two years I have been lucky enough to meet folks all across this nation from every conceivable ethnic background and walk of life. I’ve communicated with you via, phone, internet, TV, Radio and even in person. Overall I am better off for it.

Often throughout this process doubts were present. Doubts about our abilities, or focus,

Our agenda, our purpose, our impact and practically everything else. I can assure you from the bottom of my heart there is no doubt.

For those that questioned our impact and all of the aforementioned let me just give you a bit of info to digest.

Collectively we posted 345,621 blog posts. (related to the mccain campaign etc) That is the most accurate number I have (and trust me I’ve done my best to keep close track) however I am quite certain the number is higher. Our first month in operation we increased McCain’s over-all online presence by 524%. It never fell again. We had articles, stories etc picked up by the Main Stream Media, TV, Print and Radio etc that otherwise never would’ve appeared there. Often we completely took over tracking sites such as Technorati, Wonkosphere and several others . . .we retained a strong presence on all throughout.

THANK YOU.

Before we lost the ability to directly track our contributions (as of January of 2008) we had contributed $116,000.00 dollars directly to the McCain campaign. Since we only grew and put forth stronger numbers and efforts from that point on I can safely assume that number rose dramatically. We also raised $4309.64 for various conservative/republican candidates around the country directly through slatecard, Along with another $3625.00 for candidates above and beyond that.

THANK YOU.

Over 64,400 people from around the country clicked on our link to make phone calls on behalf of the campaign. Many of us held phone banks periodically in our homes, made calls on our own or went to HQ above and beyond that.

THANK YOU.

Many of us were interviewed by or asked to write for or speak to the Main Stream Media,

Including FOX news, NBC, CBS, Columbia News Journal, Medill News, Hundreds of collegiate and high school news services, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, Dozens and dozens of radio programs, the BBC (many times) and the list goes on and on.

THANK YOU.

When the campaign was low on resources WE WERE THERE. In the NH primary we literally put 500 boots on the ground. These volunteers did everything a paid campaign normally covers. We single handedly won the NH primary for McCain which of course resulted in his attaining the nomination of the party.

When McCain began the no surrender tour it was from our ranks he pulled the veterans and volunteers, many of us road on that tour with him when he need us.

THANK YOU.

We contributed THOUSANDS of dollars directly out of pocket to cover expenses of our efforts, to help others etc. (I will not give the dollar amounts to protect those that wish to remain private etc).

THANK YOU.

We traveled around the country to battleground areas and areas in desperate need of additional support, typically on our own dime.

THANK YOU.

When the campaign was lacking in signage we took up the cause. We raised money for signs around the country. We shipped over 3000 signs in a two month period to states, areas that needed them. We shipped them in most cases without charging the receiving party. Often we even covered the shipping charges. Not including all of the stickers, hats and pins we sent out.

The campaign on numerous occasions implemented ‘our’ ideas and took ‘our’ advice.

(had they done it a lil’ more often perhaps we would’ve won . . . lol)

We also ran 21 Television commercials in KEY battleground areas around the country thanks to direct donations from YOU!

THANK YOU.

We created ‘groups’ in every state on facebook, google and other platforms. (over 800 affiliated groups, most set up by us directly!) From these groups 15 individuals were directly hired by the campaign (several others had offers and turned them down, but continued to volunteer anyhow!). Of those 15 directly hired 2 were at our request, 8 at our suggestion. One of these folks became part of McCain’s official personal advance team another one of Sarah Palin’s handlers.

The google groups (which ended with 745 members) were utilized directly by the McCain campaign for several months and we received several written messages thanking us for that use and the amazing results they achieved when using them. Often they found their ‘area’ leaders or boots on the ground folks directly from those groups. They stated that they always had a positive response and that every time they reached out via that avenue those folks ALWAYS showed up for them.

THANK YOU.

We had an amazing force of numbers and effort. Our contact list grew to over 700,000 during the course of this campaign. AMAZING! That is just staggering! That is from members of our various sites/blogs/groups/subscriptions etc. Millions upon millions of ‘hits’ and ‘visits’ to our sites,blogs,platforms. Hundreds of thousands of readers (sometimes for one blog). . . you truly reached the masses my friends.

THANK YOU.

Now I could go on and on boring you with details and numbers but I won’t. I just wanted to make sure you had at least a slight idea of the tremendous impact you had. We may not have won, but ultimately our accomplishment was astounding. We impacted the process. We insisted our voice be heard and succeeded. NEVER forget that.

The ‘battle’ may be over however the war rages on. The war for the heart and soul of our country has begun. Don’t start whispering now, do not hang your heads in shame, or storm away in anger and frustration. The sun came up on November 5^th, I saw it.

I am proud of what I did for the past three years. I am proud of all you have done. I am proud of the McCain family and am honored to count them among my friends, just as I do many of you.

So once again I offer you my most heart-felt and deepest thanks. I wish I had the time and energy to list and thank you all by name . . . I can not. Before I end however, I would like to give a special thanks to just a handful folks that went far above and beyond their call of duty . . .(there are many more, but bare with me)

Kathy Morrisson, Michael Schuyler, Brad Marston, Jeff Vath, John Barnhart, Bill Smith,

Branden Folger, Samantha Folger, Brad Hansen, Andi Card, Debra Aldinger, Yomin Postelnik, Jean Avery, Andrea Snell, Ian Droste, Sharon Caliendo, Oliver Ditch, Jonathan Tallman, and many many many many more.

More important than our own ‘feelings’ or even more important than congratulating the new President-elect is to give our advice on how our nations needs to be guided.

It is our duty as citizens, it is our obligation to our country to press on and do so. The democrats and Obama may indeed not listen, however we may still benefit our nation by speaking up.

As promised -- LGTR is still here and in the battle for conservative ideals and principles. Thank you for all your efforts getting ready for the 2008 election.

LGTR also values you, your friends and others who are in this fight and commend yours and their efforts. Starting immediately, LGTR will begin work towards taking back control of the Congress in 2010. Ronald Reagan told his supporters upon the election of Jimmy Carter, that the time would be ripe for a major change in four years because America cannot abide socialism for long and to prepare immediately. The same effect happened with the Clinton Administration who lost control of Congress.

Invite your friends to turn their present negative reactions to the election into something positive by joining this LGTR FaceBook Group http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://letsgetthisright.com .

And also opening an account on the LGTR web site http://letsgetthisright.org

Also remember you can form groups on the LGTR website and start communicating and preparing for the future by addressing conservative values and principles right now.

Again . . . THANK YOU,

Sincerely,

Sheridan B Folger

3pm Election Update HOLY SH%$

VOTER FRAUD HERE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE!

Hot Air: Voter fraud in Minneapolis?

Tough Day In Baxter County?

Townhall: Philly Man Tells CNN He Voted "A Couple Times"

BREAKING NEWS - Lawsuit Being Filed Over NH New Voter Registrations

By Ethan Kendrick

Now Hampshire’s News and Politics Blog

Tue, 11/04/2008 - 3:22pm

http://www.nowhampshire.com/content/breaking-news-lawsuit-being-filed-over-nh-new-voter-registrations

The New Hampshire Republican State Committee is filing a lawsuit against the New Hampshire Secretary of State, William Gardner, claiming that Republican election officials are purposefuly being kept away from new registration tables. Both Republicans and Democrats appoint election officials to ensure that neither party tries to tamper with votes or registration.

The photo above shows election officials over pre-registered check-in tables in Hampton this morning.

- more information to come shortly -

Sheridan Folger,

2:00pm Est LIVE ELECION UPDATE. WTF!??!

BLOG: RedState: Voting twice in Philly

Why you should vote for me by Senator John MCain

"Obama vs. McCain: What the Next President Will Mean for Day Traders"

NEWS: NBC: Drama With Some Local Voting Machines

Christian Conservative election coverage

RED STATE: Suppressing the Vote in Lancaster County

VIDEO: Malkin: Billy club-wielding security guards at Philly polls

Newsbusters: Voter Asks CNN Why They Haven't Reported Black Panthers in Philly

Sheridan Folger,

Inspiring Video

To all undecided voters and skeptical Republicans, 

Watch this video and see how generations have been inspired by our last three Republican Presidents. It is a very touching video that reminds people how great it is to be a Republican.

Important Conf Call and Items Of The Day.

Conference Call to Discuss Why Seniors, Americans of Faith and the Business Community Should Vote McCain for President - Tonight and Mon. night at 7:3

1 or 2 Blue States McCain Could Win

The State of the Campaign

Minutes For McCain-Palin

McCain Kudlow Interview - Keep Taxes Low Help the Economy

Excerpt from An Interview with Senator McCain by Larry Kudlow

McCain: Well, I try to talk about them more often. A lot of the people that come, frankly, are people that are having trouble staying in their homes, keeping their jobs, etcetera. But I think it goes back to all this business of Sen. Obama’s view of “fairness.” When Charlie Gibson said, why would you want to raise capital-gains taxes when you know it will decrease revenue? And he said in “fairness.” And he told Joe the Plumber — Joe the Plumber got the message through better, what we’ve been trying to do this whole campaign. [Obama] wants to “spread the wealth around.” That takes from the investor class. That takes money from one group of Americans and gives it to another.

Now that signal has been very clear. And I think people ought to pay attention to it, because it’s been tried before in other countries, and policies of other left-liberal administrations. It doesn’t work, and it’s bad for America. We want to encourage the investor class, and that means capital-gains and dividend taxes are low.

Kudlow: You’ve just unveiled a new tax cut on capital gains. Can you tell us about that? Because in some sense, that’s probably the most important investor class tax.

McCain: It’s the most important in many respects, Larry, and we want it low and we want it lowered. Every time — there’s one tax that there’s no argument about, that every time it’s been lowered since Jack Kennedy, we have seen an increase in revenues. Now, why anybody would argue, as Sen. Obama does, that we need to raise it, even if it’s — of course, the amount needed to raise it is varied with whatever poll he’s taken — but the point is that we want to lower it and keep it low and encourage investment, especially now in America in these difficult times.

Kudlow: But senator, what is — the current law rate is 15 percent.

McCain: Yeah, yeah.

Kudlow: You’re taking the cap-gains rate down to what?

McCain: First down to 10 percent, I would like to see it, and gradually even make it lower. Look, why should we tax people’s gains twice? Why should we tax them twice, okay? They make an investment, they should be able to get their returns on their investment. And capital gains is obviously — low capital-gains tax is probably the greatest incentive for investment that we have in America today. And so, look, I’ll be glad to listen to smart people like you, Larry, but the worst thing we can do is tell people we’re going to raise it, and that, obviously, would chill investment in America, right?

Promises of Redistribution and Spread the Wealth

David Harsanyi's article If It Redistributes Like a Duck... looks at Obama's plans to change the fundamental structure of the American economy by focusing tax codes on redistribution of wealth.

Obama is the first major presidential candidate in memory to assert that taxation's principal purpose should be redistribution.

The proposition that government should take one group's lawfully earned profits and hand them to another group -- not a collection of destitute or impaired Americans, mind you, but a still-vibrant middle class -- is the foundational premise of Obama's fiscal policy.

It was Joe Biden who said (not long ago, when he still was permitted to speak in public), "We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people." The only entity that "takes" money from the middle class -- or any class for that matter -- is the Internal Revenue Service. Other than that, there is nothing to give back.

And who knew we needed such a drastic renovation of an economic philosophy we've adhered to these past 25 years (yes, counting Bill Clinton's comparatively fiscally conservative record)? Despite a recent downturn and with all the serious tribulations we face, Americans have just lived through perhaps the most prosperous and peaceful era human beings ever have enjoyed.

From 1982 until now, every arrow on nearly every economic growth chart -- every health care chart, every chart that matters -- points in one general direction, and that's up.

Obama, who, it seems, is running not only for president but also for national baby sitter/accountant/daddy/icon, ignores this success and claims he can "invest" (will that euphemism ever go away?) and disperse your money more efficiently, smartly and fairly than you can. How could any American accept the absurdity of that position?

---

Promises of Redistribution and Spread the Wealth

Media's Bias At Unprecedented Levels

Diane West of Townhall.com writes in her article Media's O-Colored Glasses Blank Out Leftist Truth about a very disturbing element of this election cycle. The media has abandoned its responsibility to vet candidates, and have instead ignored a myriad of radical associates of Senator Obama's and dubbed them 'off limits' or 'dirty tricks'. The reality is that if an average person had the associations that Senator Obama has they would be classified as a security threat, and likely wouldn't even be able to attend events like the Democratic convention. It has been noted elsewhere that Senator Obama couldn't even be cleared to be his own Secret Service agent because of these associations. However, the media doesn't care, they are campaigning for their favorite candidate and these issues are dubbed off limits by the most biased media coverage in modern US history.

At the beginning of Obama's life, for example, there was "Frank," Obama's boyhood mentor who appears in his 1995 memoir "Dreams from My Father." Accuracy In Media's Cliff Kincaid has identified "Frank" as Frank Marshall Davis, a known Stalinist in a Soviet-sponsored communist network in Hawaii. But Obama obscures Frank's identity in his book, even, as Sean Hannity has reported, going so far as to drop passages about "Frank" from the more recent, recorded version of the book. Why? The media never asked.

Later in Obama's life there was Mike Klonsky, an unreconstructed Marxist and erstwhile leader of an honest-to-goodness Maoist splinter group in the United States. Klonsky, like his buddy, ex-Weatherman William Ayers, spreads Marxism through education "reform." As the National Review Online's Andrew C. McCarthy reported, Obama directed nearly 2 million foundation dollars to fund Klonsky's ideas in the 1990s. More recently, Klonsky wrote a "social justice education" blog on the official Obama campaign Web site -- at least until a blog named Global Labor and Politics pointed this fact out. Klonsky's musings were summarily scrubbed from the campaign Web site in June. Why? The media never asked.

And so it goes. The assorted radicals -- from ACORN to Ayers, from anti-white Jeremiah Wright to Saudi-adviser Khalid al-Mansour to former PLO associate Rashid Khalidi -- who have peopled Obama's ideological passage from rising leftist to post-ideological cipher, have been lost in the blur to a media focused solely on their own prize: Obama in the White House.

Such focus has created a drastically blinkered journalism, particularly in these final weeks. Take the fact that the supposedly "post-racial" Obama once funded Afrocentric, race-focused education programs supported by Jeremiah "G -- - D -- - America" Wright. That was a juicy blend of hypocrisy and extremism (dug up by Stanley Kurtz), but the media just averted their eyes.

Or how about good, ol' William "America Makes Me Want to Puke" Ayers, whose own relationship with Klonsky (the Maoist mentioned above) goes back to the days of the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society)? Obama worked closely with Ayers to fund radical programs (such as Klonsky's) in Chicago, endorsed Ayers' work, and launched his political career in Ayers' home. This is the ideological and literal bomb-thrower Obama brushed off as just "a guy in my neighborhood." But the media saw nothing to it -- not even a piece of Obama's questionable pattern of collaboration with a series of people best described as unregenerate leftists.

---

Media's Bias At Unprecedented Levels

401K's in Jeopardy

Retirement funds, particularly 401K's, are at risk. As previously mentioned in the article Democrats Discuss Taking Over People's 401K's Democrats are looking to eliminate the tax break for 401K's and to subsidize a takeover of these savings plans. Investment New reports in their article House Democrats contemplate abolishing 401(k) tax breaks point out the problems with this plan.

"From where I sit that's just crazy," said John Belluardo, president of Stewardship Financial Services Inc. in Tarrytown, N.Y. "A lot of people contribute to their 401(k)s because of the match of the employer," he said. Mr. Belluardo's firm does not manage assets directly.

Higher-income employers provide matching funds to employee plans so that they can qualify for tax benefits for their own defined contribution plans, he said.

"If the tax deferral goes away, the employers have no reason to do the matches, which primarily help people in the lower income brackets," Mr. Belluardo said.

US News and World Report has also written articles on Democrats plans to target 401K's and retirement plans if they obtain control of the presidency and congress...
Why Democrats Will Target the Investor Class in 2009

Would Obama Dems Kill 401K Plans?

---

Hat Tip other bloggers covering this issue...

Smart Girl Politics Kiss Your 410K Good Bye

Ms Placed Democrat Obama's 401K Plan is Nothing More Than a Junk Bond

Say What You Really Mean Under President Obama Kiss Your 401K Goodbye, Your Net Pay Shrinks, And The Constitution Will Be Walked On Like It's His Daily Exercise Routine.

---

401K's in Jeopardy

Democrats Take Aim At Investments and Savings

US News and World Report is reports in their article Why Democrats Will Target the Investor Class in 2009 that a Democrat run government will target a government take over of savings and investments for political expediency. It should be noted that the 'investor class' includes people who put thier savings in IRA's and 401K's. This isn't the super wealthy, this is most often responsible middle class Americans that save for retirement and other needs. This not only threatens people's savings it is more evidence that a government fully controlled by the Democrats will result in a dramatic lurch to the left as thes are plans for more big government control.

1) Hike Investment Taxes. Obama wants to raise capital gains taxes even though he has kinda, sorta admitted that it might be bad for the economy and might actually decrease tax revenue to the government. For now, he's talking about raising the highest cap gains rate by one third to 20 percent, though earlier in the campaign, he floated pushing it as high as 28 percent, a near doubling. (Recall that Democratic presidential contender John Edwards wanted to raise it as high as 40 percent, a move that was applauded by liberals who want investment income to be taxed as onerously as labor income.) With the next administration facing a trillion dollar budget deficit—maybe more—there will certainly be pressure to raise taxes to higher levels than now being suggested.

2) Eliminate 401(k)'s, IRAs, and other retirement plans. Democrats in the House are now talking openly about the longtime liberal dream of repealing the tax advantages of putting money into a 401(k) plan or other tax-advantaged retirement account. "The savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should," said Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington at a recent hearing, according to an industry trade paper.

Indeed, House Democrats recently invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research, to testify before a subcommittee on her idea to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of the popular retirement plans. In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" with a 3 percent real return.

Not only would removing the preferential tax treatment of these vehicles raise investment taxes by $100 billion a year and affect Americans making less than $100,000, it would surely prompt many Americans, already shell-shocked by the market's recent losses, to flee stocks. All this ignores the fact that there are trillions of dollars in American retirement accounts, and abandoning the higher-returning stock market at a probable bottom is classic financial foolishness. If you believe long term in the American economy, then you have to believe in the stock market. If you don't, then you have to admit the government won't be able to afford its promises anyway.

3) Replace private capital with public capital. But wouldn't a weak stock market hurt the economy by making it tougher to raise investment capital and lessen the return on risk? Surely, it would. But Obama is planning hundreds of billions of dollars of government "investment" in cutting-edge technology, particularly in the energy and healthcare sectors. One specific example: Obama wants to create something called a "Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund" and invest $10 billion a year in emerging energy technologies. Now, the private VC industry is already pouring billions into alternative energy, but Obama thinks that's not enough and wants Uncle Sam to get in on the action at taxpayer expense. Interestingly, a new study by the University of British Columbia looked at the performance of the Canadian government's venture capital efforts. It found that government venture capital isn't nearly as successful as private venture capital.

---

Democrats Take Aim At Investments and Savings

Democrats Discuss Taking Over People's 401K's

If you don't think an Obama, Pelosi, Reid run government would result in a dramatic swing to the left, read US News and World Reports article on congress' discussion of takng over people's 401K's. 401K's are not 'rich people' savings plans they are middle America's retirement and savings plans, and Dems are looking to make them into 'government created' accounts. Would Obama, Dems Kill 401(k) Plans?

I hate to use the "S" word, but the American government would never do something as, well, socialist as seize private pension funds, right? This is exactly what cash-strapped Argentina just did in the name of protecting workers' retirement accounts (Efharisto, Fausta's Blog). Now, even Uncle Sam isn't that stupid, but some Democrats might try something almost as loopy: kill 401(k) plans.

House Democrats recently invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research, to testify before a subcommittee on her idea to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of the popular retirement plans. In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" for every worker. The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have to save 5 percent of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3 percent return. Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

Hat Tip to Smart Girl Politics original article Kiss Your 401k Goodbye!

---

Democrats Discuss Taking Over People's 401K's

Obama's Tax Plan and Income Redistribution Hurts the Economy and the Middle Class

Senator Obama's tax plan is packaged as tax cuts for the middle class when in reality there are numerous tax increases on the middle class and on small business owners. Senator Obama's tax policies are similar to those of Herbert Hoover who raised taxes, implement isolationist policies, and drove the American economy into a massive depression. Senator Obama claims that his tax policies that give a government check to people not paying anything in income taxes are done in the name of fairness. However, the economic depression that his policies would likely trigger is fair to no one. Investor's Business Daily lays out the problems with the Obama 'spread the wealth' tax plan in their article Investors Flee From 'Change' Obama Hypes

These tax credits are devised to phase-out based on income, which will ultimately increase marginal income tax rates for middle-class workers. In other words, as you earn more, you suffer a penalty in the phase-out of these credits, which has the exact effect of a marginal tax rate increase. That harms, rather than improves, the economy.

With the bottom 40% of income earners not paying any federal income taxes, such tax credits would not reduce any tax liability for these workers. Instead, since they're refundable, they would involve new checks from the federal government.

These are not tax cuts as Obama is promising. They are new government spending programs buried in the tax code and estimated to cost $1.3 trillion over 10 years.

Obama argues that while these workers do not pay income taxes, they do pay payroll taxes. True, but his planned credits do not involve cuts in payroll taxes. They are refundable income tax credits designed to redistribute income and "spread the wealth."

Meantime, Obama has proposed effective tax increases of 20% or more in the two top income-tax rates, phasing out the personal exemptions and all itemized deductions for top earners, as well as raising their tax rates.

He wants a 33% increase in the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, an increase of 16% to 32% in the top payroll tax rate, reinstatement of the death tax with a 45% top rate, and a new payroll tax on employers estimated at 7% to help finance his health insurance plan. He's also contending for higher tariffs under his protectionist policies.

Finally, he would increase corporate taxes by 25%, though American businesses already face the second-highest marginal tax rates in the industrialized world, thus directly harming manufacturing and job creation while weakening demand for the dollar.

Obama argues disingenuously that his tax increases would only affect higher-income workers and "corporate fat cats." But it is precisely these top marginal tax rates that control incentives for savings, investment, entrepreneurship, business expansion, jobs and economic growth. While he wants to tax the rich, the burden will fall on the poor and the middle class.

Obama's Tax Plan and Income Redistribution Hurts the Economy and the Middle Class

Obama A History of Socialist Policies/Beliefs

From Fox News - Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth

A 7-year-old radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.

The interview -- conducted by Chicago Public Radio in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law professor at the University of Chicago -- delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when "dispossessed peoples" appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal.

In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a "redistributive change" in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical," Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.

"It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.

"And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way -- that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted.

"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that," Obama said.

---

Obama A History of Socialist Policies/Beliefs

Sheridan Folger: LTC Allen West Special Guest On LGTR Radio

Join Us With Our Special Guest LTC Allen West and host Sheridan Folger.

If you have questions you would like asked of LTC West please message executivedirector on LGTR or send an email to executivedirector2@letsgetthisright.com

10/29/2008
9:00 PM
60 Minutes

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/letsgetthisright

Call-in Number: (347) 945-6189

LTC Allen West has lived his life in service to America. In 2004, when it was time to retire from more than twenty years of service in the US Army, he brought his wife and two young daughters to Broward County, Florida, where he taught high school.

He then returned to Afghanistan as an advisor to the Afghan army, an assignment he finished in November 2007. Born and raised in Atlanta, Allen West received BS (UT) and MS degrees in political science (KSU).

He also holds a Master of Military Arts and Sciences from the US Army Command and General Staff Officer College in political theory and military history and operations. "Education is the great equalizer," he says. "With a good education, any child in America can live his dream."


Join us in supporting this Great American!


Regards,

Sheridan Folger

Shared with the My Fellow McCain Victory 08 Bloggers at
84 Rules,Adam J Schmidt,Agkyra,Agora politikos,Ahwatukee Musings,America For John McCain,Americas Best Choice,Armchair Everything,ARRA News Service,Asian Americans For McCain,Asymmetric,AzaMatterofact,Basils Blog,
Blue And New,Blue Grass Red State,Blue Star Chronicles,Born Again Redneck,Brainster,BroadSideoftheBarn,But I Am A Liberal,California For McCain,Campaign2008VictoryA,Catskill commentator,Chas' compilation,coleCurtis-The McCain Monitor,College Republican Federation of Virginia,Conservative For Change,Curtis Schweitzer,DC Republican,Deomocrats & MediaSpin Vs. Facts,Democrats For Sale,Election 2008,Election Night HQ,Elyery Landavazo,EvangelicalsForMcCain,Falling Panda,Faultline USA,Frog Blog Of Louis la Vache,Generation X Dad,Georgians For McCain,GOP Convention Blog,Hoosiers4McCain,How I Lost My Heart,Il rumore Dei mie Venti-RDM20,Independent Jim,Iraqi For John McCain,Johnny Miller blog,Lee Volger's Political Points,Les Recettes de Louis la Vache,Liberal Republican,Liberalstein Political Limozeen,Libertas01,
M-J in the Republic,MacPac08,The Mad Irish Man's Conservative Consortium,The Mad Irish Man On TownHall.com,
Marathon Pundit,Mass For McCain,McCain Blogette,McCain Blogger Resources,McCain Blogs,McCain Jewish Coalition of Illinois,McCain Mondays,McCain Online Volunteer,McCain States,McCain Talk,McCain Volunteer,McCainHQ08 Yahoo Group,McCainiac,McCainocrats,McCainVictory08,Metaxupolis,
Michael Johns,Missourians for McCain,Moms for McCain,My vast right wing conspiracy,MyMcCainBlog,Myth Debunker,New Jersey for John McCain,New Mexico for John McCain,NH4McCAIN,NJ for McCain,NY for McCain,Official McCain Blog,Ohio for John McCain,Oklahoma for John McCain,Only Electable Conservative,PA Educators for McCain,Pajama Pack,Pardon My French,Partisan American,Pennsylvania for John McCain,Pink Flamingo,Pirate's Cove,Politico Mafioso,Porter County Politics,Primary Cuts,Provocateur,Purple People Vote,Real World Libertarian,Reality Bytes,Right Wing Nation,Right Wing Sparkle,Rudy Supporters for McCain Blog,Rudy Supporters for McCain Yahoo Group,San Francisco Bay Daily Photo,Sanity 102,StandUpForMcCain,Steve Maloney GOP,Thought Stew,Todd Biggs,Tree Hugging Republican,Unite McCain Campaign,Vets 4 McCain,Vets For McCain,Virginia 4 McCain,Voting McCain 08,watersblogged!,Why McCain?,Wisconsin4McCain,With Both HandsSheridan Folger,

Stand Up for Western Pennsylvania

Congressman John Murtha is just out of touch with his district and America. Please send him home to think about it. Elect William Russell!

Let's get This Right

Watch Out Georgia

Jim Martin voted for what was the largest tax increase in Georgia's history. And Martin voted to increase his own taxpayer funded expense check by 27 percent -- which amounted to a pay increase that he could spend on himself.

Georgia - Let's Get This Right!

Dear New Hampshire

As Governor, Jeanne Shaheen created New Hampshire's first statewide property tax, and also proposed a sales tax. Shaheen also agreed to support an income tax.

Let's Get This Right

We're Not All Like Al Franken

John Ratzenberger, Pat Boone, Stephen Baldwin, Robert Davi and Victoria Jackson speak out against Al Franken.

Let's Get This Right

IBD: Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism

Investor's Business Daily's article Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism is definitely worth a read. An exerpt follows...

During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're launching this special educational series.

"Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism.

In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

---

IBD: Barack Obama's Stealth SocialismIBD: Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism

McCain the King of the Comeback

As the media tries to call this race over, it's worth noting that not only is this not the first time that the media has declared the McCain campaign dead. It is also worth noting that Senator McCain's underdog role is nothing new to him, and he has a penchant for pulling off upsets just as he's being counted out. In fact his odds in this race are remarkably good compared to other challenges he has faced in his life...

Now, as he presses against the strongest political headwinds in many, many years, he’s trying to follow his own advice. Looking back to the early days of the campaign, John Weaver told me that McCain, politically, was “facing a Category 1 hurricane” when he began his race. Now, Weaver says, “it’s a Category 5.”

Despite it all, McCain pushes on, propelled by a drive most people just don’t have. I remember traveling to Iowa in the fall of 2007, after McCain’s campaign meltdown had left him in dreadful financial straits. We were going to the farthest reaches of northwest Iowa, near the Minnesota border. McCain was staying in a Holiday Inn Express in the middle of nowhere — when you walked out the door, the smell of fertilizer got your attention pretty quickly — and he was traveling around in a minivan because his bus had broken down. He spent his days talking to small groups — sometimes really small groups — in diners and pizza joints.

He was 71 years old at the time, wealthy, with a safe and senior spot in the Senate and a career that few, if any, public servants could match. On top of that, his campaign had blown up in an explosion of mismanagement and bad feelings that had many political insiders and journalists writing its obituary. And yet there he was, plugging away, every day, animated by something that is unique to his character.

And why shouldn’t he feel that he can overcome just about anything? This is a man who has dodged death — real death, not political death — many times. There’s more to the story than his enduring five and a half years as a prisoner of war — just look at the fuzzy old black-and-white film of McCain on July 29, 1967, leaping off the refueling probe of his jet after it had been struck by a missile on the deck of the USS Forrestal. It was one of the worst disasters in Navy history, killing 132 men. McCain, miraculously, walked away from it. On one of those trips around Iowa, sitting in the back of his bus — after his campaign found one that worked — McCain described the days after the Forrestal fire. He was at a meeting in which the commanding officer asked if anyone would like to volunteer to transfer to another carrier, the USS Oriskany, which had itself undergone a fire, although a less serious one. Describing himself as if he had been an outside observer, McCain said that he saw his hand go up to volunteer when he could have sought out a less dangerous assignment; on that day in Iowa, 40 years later, he still seemed a little surprised by what he had done. But off he went, and it was from the Oriskany that he took off on the mission that led to his capture and imprisonment, events that would inform so much of his subsequent political career.

The lesson is that McCain is always searching for something new to overcome. Of course he would rather not be facing quite so many political adversities at once, but he is a man who, if he makes it out of one scrape, puts himself in position for another.

And now, he’s doing it again. “How many times, my friends, have the pundits written off the McCain campaign?” he asked a crowd in Wisconsin on October 10. “We’re gonna fool ‘em again. We’re gonna fool ‘em one more time.” A few days later, in Virginia, McCain described the forces arrayed against him and declared, “My friends, we’ve got them just where we want them.” People in the audience laughed. But in some sense, deep inside, McCain meant it.

From National Review John McCain Against the Wind

---

McCain the King of the Comeback

Obama A History of Socialist Policies/Beliefs

From Fox News - Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth

A 7-year-old radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.

The interview -- conducted by Chicago Public Radio in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law professor at the University of Chicago -- delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when "dispossessed peoples" appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal.

In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a "redistributive change" in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical," Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.

"It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.

"And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way -- that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted.

"And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that," Obama said.

---

Obama A History of Socialist Policies/Beliefs

Sheridan Folger, Brad Marston McCain Super Saturday New Hampshire

McCain - Super Saturday

Okay. So I thought I would be live blogging our Mini-Super Saturday. Unfortunately we ran behind schedule almost from the start.

I got to Stratham, NH about 9:30 in the morning and met Eric Maurer, Field Director in Rockingham County as well as Let's Get This Right and McCainVictory08.com members Ashley, Ray and Connor. We spent an hour making phone calls and then hit the road to Exeter for some door belling for McCain-Palin, John Sununu and Jeb Bradley.

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE REST!!

McCain-Palin Events/Poll Update

I wanted to report to you that the McCain/Palin campaign is having a great week in Manchester and across New Hampshire. On Wednesday, thousands of New Hampshire voters came to St. Anselm’s College to hear Senator McCain speak. Even better, Rasmussen just released a poll that shows us within the margin of error in the state of New Hampshire! I encourage you to view the poll results here: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_presidential_election

There is no doubt that New Hampshire is still in play, and we need your help for the next nine days. Our Get Out the Vote (GOTV) effort is key to winning this state, and it will only be successful if we can count on dedicated Republicans like you. The work we do in New Hampshire these next nine days could very well determine what happens these next four years.

Voter contact is the key to winning this election, so I encourage you to visit one of our Victory Offices to make some phone calls or to go out knocking on doors. Our Manchester Victory office is located at 250 Commercial St., Suite 3007 in the Wambuec Mill Building. Our hours of operation are 9am until 9pm, every day from now until the election. If you’re interested in helping, feel free to contact me at 603-369-2202, or just come by the office. If you’re not close to Manchester, then you will be pleased to know that we have several other regional offices throughout the state, listed below.

I look forward to working with you these next 9 days to make sure we elect all of our good Republican candidates in New Hampshire and want to thank you again for all your work on behalf of the Republican Party.

Who Should Confront the Iranian Time Bomb - Obama or McCain

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: With the presidential election upon us, many people are also focused on the economy. However, we know from history that we will be able to correct our economic problem even if it takes longer than our American tendency to want instant solutions for everything. However, because of the economic crisis, many voters are ignoring the most significant issue that our next president is directly responsible to address. That issue is the very real global threat to America's very survival. Since confronting this threat every day is not part of our personal daily routine and responsibilities (until it is too late), we tend to be myopic and look at the "me things."

If inexperienced or burdened down with domestic and economic cares, voters may not comprehend or may even forget the bigger picture -- surviving the very "real" foreign enemies that literally hate our culture, democracy, traditions, freedoms, religions, materialism, and way of living. In fact, they hate us (i.e., you). In our daily bickering over small things, we tend to ignore the big dangers because we can we do nothing about them individually.

To put "just one" of the threats into perspective, consider an article in the October issue of Imprimis published by Hillsdale College that addresses Iran. The article was adapted from a speech by Michael Ledeen. Michael Ledeen is the Freedom Scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a contributing editor at National Review Online. Previously, he served in the White House as a national security advisor and in the Departments of Defense and State. He is author of more than 20 books, including The Iranian Time Bomb. His articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the American Spectator, International Economy, Commentary, and the Washington Times.

The article is too long to quote here so I encourage you to visit and the read the article online. However, below are Lendeen's closing words which highlight just one of the many countries whose government leaders hate America and who wish our demise as the principle leader of the 'free world":

"The bottom line is that Iran is our principal enemy in the Middle East, and perhaps in the entire world. It is also a terribly vulnerable regime, and it knows that—which is why it makes up stories about airplanes and missiles that it doesn’t have. As for the question of nuclear weapons, it seems hard to imagine that Iran does not already have them. Iranians are not stupid, and they have been at this for a minimum of 20 years in a world where almost every major component needed for a nuclear weapon—not to mention old nuclear weapons—are for sale. A lot of these components are for sale nearby in Pakistan. And if the Iranians do have a weapon, it is impossible to imagine that, at a moment of crisis, they will not use it. The point is, we have an implacable enemy which has no intention of negotiating a settlement with us. They want us dead or dominated, just as our enemies did in the 1930s and ’40s. You can’t make deals with a regime like that.

Our choices with regard to Iran are to challenge them directly and win this war now, to do so only after they kill a lot more of us in some kind of attack, or to surrender. There is no painless way out, and the longer we wait, the greater the pain is going to be."

So, who is best to challenge Iran and other enemies of our Nation - Obama or McCain? The most critical and therefore, important issue is not "change" but survival -- how will America continue to physically exist as a country and a democracy with guaranteed individual freedoms and rights. Who will be the best president to protect us from our foreign enemies (even while we continue our internal domestic bickering over almost everything)?

Do we pick Obama - a younger inexperienced (i.e., non-experienced) smooth talking candidate who is an anti-traditional family values advocate and unfortunately already has a past full of bad choices and savory associations? Following the mantra of "Change" is not the answer because the issue is then "change from what and to what" and importantly, the consequences of the "change." Change can mean a lot of things. We have recently experienced a lot of negative economic change which can be directly associated with Obama's associates in and out of Congress. And how can a person who voted "present" verses "yes or no" on a majority of his votes in the Illinois and US Senates be prepared to address the most important issues of our time? Voting present is not good enough when dealing with threats to America. Obama promises talk and compromise and appears willing to concede ground to our enemies (i.e., using an appeasement approach).

Or, do we pick McCain -- an older but scarred and proven warrior who is the straight talking man who is called a maverick for taking consistent stands and speaking the truth even within his own party? An experienced candidate who understands the threats to our country from outside our borders. A man who served his country in war and understands the pain and suffering. A man who while addressing the enemy understands compassion and forgiveness towards those who even tortured him. McCain is willing and able to clearly detail to our enemies (those who wish us harm and / or even destroy us) the limits of our tolerance and a clear understanding of the consequences for pursuing further aggressive acts, actions that threaten America.

The American people have voiced poll after poll their continued negative opinion of the present Congress lead by Democrats and have given the Democrat leadership the lowest ratings in history. It is from this pool of Democrats that a junior inexperienced member has come forth to be their candidate for president. Not a person who stood on principles against his own failing political party leadership but instead pandered for items he wished and voted absent or present on the other issues. If Obama were to become president, he will be again supporting these same failing "tax and spend" liberal leaders: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. And then who will save us from our enemies?

McCain Good for Business and Good for the Economy

Often times pro business even pro small business policies are looked upon with disdain as can be seen in Senator Obama recently comments criticizing Senator McCain for caring more about Wall Street than Main Street. However, this is a myopic view of the economy. Pro business policies create jobs, pro business policies help grow the economy. Putting the breaks on an already sagging economy with increased taxes does nothing for the American worker exept make life harder. CNBC notes that small business owners recognize that McCain Understands Small Business Owners

The following is a statement from American Small Business League (ASBL) President Lloyd Chapman: One look at Senator John McCain's website will tell you, this is a man that knows and cares about America's 27 million small businesses. He knows 56 percent of all Americans work for small businesses. John McCain is a small business guy through and through.

Time also reported on the 300+ professional economists that back McCain. Conversely the Union Leader disusses how Senator Obama's tax plan does not add up in their article It doesn't compute: Obama's tax plan a ruse.

Numerous organizations, including the Associated Press, have noted that Obama's proposals spend hundreds of millions of dollars more than his tax hikes raise. What is less well known is that Obama's tax plan itself sends out of Washington far more than it brings in. Obama's campaign twice admits that in the wording of the tax plan.

According to the plan, "his tax relief for middle-class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000." That sounds like he's giving a net tax cut. But much of what he calls "tax cuts" are actually cash payments to low- and middle-income Americans. Ultimately, he sends out of Washington hundreds of billions of dollars more than it takes in.

In other words, Obama promises more in benefits to low- and middle-income Americans than his plan can finance with his tax hikes on "families" making more than $250,000 a year. And note the word, "families." Even though Obama says that no "family" making less than $250,000 a year will see a tax increase, in fact his plan raises taxes on individuals making $200,000 a year or more.

The bottom line is that Obama is not being honest about his tax and spending plans. It is impossible -- impossible! -- for him to finance his giveaways by taxing only those making $250,000 or more. He will have to raise taxes substantially on people making much, much less than that.

Senator Obama's plans to "spread the wealth" are anti-growth measures done in the name of fairness. However, there is nothing fair about halting economic growth. There is also nothing fair about punishing success.

---

McCain Good for Business and Good for the Economy