Bush Deficit Continues to Grow

Like I was sayin… blame that other guy.

Six months into the Obama administration and Democrats continue to push the deficit on Bush.  A great post over at Conservative Patriot HQ puts some of the facts out there.

Recently, Steny Hoyer told a group of UVA grads how Bush handed Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit.  However, the chart in the article shows otherwise.

Since Obama has taken office, the deficit has quadrupled to over $1.85 trillion according to the CBO.

The other point is that the democrats have been in charge of congress since 2006.  It is congress that sets the spending limits and the budget.

It will be interesting to see who they blame for the deficit next year.

The Audacity of Troop Pullouts

Like I was sayin… do as I say not as I say.

Senator Obama made a big splash with is overseas trip this summer.  He made several anti-free market speeches and even met with military and political leaders in Iraq.

It should be no secret to anyone that Senator Obama favors a speedy withdrawal of US forces from Iraq as he has said so publicly of the last few years.  However, apparently what he does behind the scenes is quite different.

In an article today in the NY Post, Amir Taheri details Obama’s lobbying the Iraqi government to delay an agreement troop withdrawals until after the US elections.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zerbari:

He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington.

The article goes on to detail that:

Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn’t want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America. The reason? He fears that the perception of US victory there might revive the Bush Doctrine of “pre-emptive” war – that is, removing a threat before it strikes at America.

I find it hard to believe that an American presidential candidate would seek to derail Iraqi security negotiations for his own political gain, but then again, some people will do anything to gain power.  This is the type of thing that the candidate of change has been preaching against.

Once again we find our politicians saying one thing, but then doing another.

It’s Time to Soak the Rich

Like I was sayin… sometimes less is more.

You have been hearing it all the time lately.  John Edwards spoke of two Americas and Barack Obama is promising to make the rich “pay their fair share” of taxes.

Recent data from the IRS shows an interesting way to make this happen.  In 1990, long before the dreaded Bush tax cuts that allowed millions of Americans pay less in taxes to a bloated government, the top 1% of earners only paid 25% of the taxes.  Since the Bush tax cuts, what do you think they pay now?  21%? 19%? 15%?  In 2005, the total share of the tax burden on the evil 1% has changed from 25% in 1990 to 39% in 2005.  That’s right, since the tax cuts, the top 1% has seen their tax burden increase.

Ah, but surely the tax breaks must have gone to the rich as we hear our democrat leaders declare all the time.  Perhaps the top 5% got all the tax break…  Well, in 1990, the top 5% paid 44% of the total tax burden and in 2005, they paid 60%.  You are reading that correctly.  The top 5% of earners pay 60% of the taxes.

Surely the poor got soaked in all this because the media and the democrats keep telling us that is what happened.  However, the bottom 50% of earners paid only 2.9% of the taxes which is the lowest percentage ever.  That means that the top 50% of earners pay 97.1% of the taxes.

It seems that when you cut taxes across the board, “the rich” end up paying more of the total tax burden.  I for one say we stick it to them again by another round of tax cuts.  Heck, let’s really show them by cutting taxes across the board AND cutting spending.

Recession? What Recession?

Like I was sayin… it’s all in the numbers.  The results for first quarter GDP growth came out today indicating that the economy is not in a recession.

Although the results were weak, the 1st quarter posted a 0.6% gain in GDP  which is the same results for the 4th quarter of 2007.

For several months, the media has been proclaiming that we are in a recession.  This is echoed by those politicians that would benefit from the U.S. economy being in a recession.  Several weeks ago, presidential hopeful Barack Obama accused Bush of being oblivious to the fact that we are in a recession and that he was pushing policies that would do nothing or make it worse.  Seems now that his statement that everybody knows we are in a recession was somewhat inaccurate.

The economy is far away from some of the stellar results between 2003 and 2006 and could very well move into a recessionary period in the 2nd and 3rd quarters.  I for one am hopeful that this doesn’t happen or at least hope for it to be a quick and shallow one. 

McCain Calls for Tax Holiday

(April 15, 2008 ) – Like I was sayin… I can use a few more holidays.  GOP presidential candidate John McCain is calling on congress to have a gasoline tax holiday from Memorial Day to Labor Day.

The proposal would eliminate the 18.4 cent per gallon federal tax on gasoline and the 24.4 cent per gallon on diesel fuel.  He also called to release oil from the strategic Petroleum Reserve to further ease gas prices.  The democrat party will most likely be against it either because they will call it reckless or they will say it doesn’t go far enough (you heard it hear first…).

Note also that the democrats also have outlined a proposal to increase the gasoline tax by 50 cents.  However, they won’t push for it until after the elections.

The announcement came as part of McCain’s detailing some of his economic plan.  Some of the other details are as follows:

–Raise the tax exemption for each dependent child from $3,500 to $7,000.

–Require more affluent people — couples making more than $160,000 — enrolled in Medicare to pay a higher premium for their prescription drugs than less-wealthy people.

–Offer people the option of choosing a simpler tax system with two tax rates and a standard deduction instead of sticking with the current system.

–Suspend for one year all increases in discretionary spending for agencies other than those that cover the military and veterans while launching an expansive review of the effectiveness of federal program.

Note that both Senators Clinton and Obama are for reducing the child tax credit from $3,500 to $3000 as part of their massive tax increase they refer to as “elimininating the Bush tax cuts”.

Voters need to keep in mind that the economic plans of the candidates impact them by either lowering their tax bill or increasing it.

It will be interesting to see how many people come out against lowering gas prices by eliminating the tax temporarily.

Attacks in Iraq Continue to Decline

(November 19, 2007) – Like I was sayin… if we don’t pull out soon, things will continue to get better.

 Today I was reading an article in the NYT indicating how the attacks in Iraq continue to decline.

According to the article, since the “surge”, Iraqi forces casualties are down 40% and civilian fatalities are down 75% over the last few months.  Other news stories point to a continued decline in U.S. caualties.  I for one would like to see this continue.  The sooner things become stable in Iraq, the sooner our troops can come home.  I am shocked by the number of people who get upset by good news from Iraq (see my post about Clyburn).

I would imagine however, with this news, you will begin to see further calls for U.S. forces to pull out now from the”please don’t let this thing work out” crowd in congress who would rather see America fail and gain a political win for THE PARTY than see things improve.

Bush Signs Surveillance Bill

(Aug6, 2007) – Like I was sayin… you can be against everything.

This weekend, Bush signed the Protect America Act of 2007 (S 1927), which continues the practice of listening to communications between U.S. citizens or others and suspected terrorists.

This comes as a blow to the “against anything Bush” crowd, who would prefer America to have its hands tied (at least as long as Bush is in office) in the fight against terrorism.  The headlines all proclaim ‘warrantless wire-taps’ and tell you how Bush is listening to your phone calls.

The bill itself does allow intelligence agencies to monitor the conversations of suspected terrorists that come through the U.S., however, not everyone knows what the bill allows, but are just against it.

The following are the key points of the bill as indicated in an AP article:

Expands the administration’s powers to eavesdrop, without a court order, on foreign suspects’ communications passing through the United States.  – - Note that it says foreign suspects communications PASSING through the U.S.  When somebody in Asia calls Osama in Pakistan, it doesn’t mean that the call isn’t routed through U.S. networks.  Foreign calls are often routed through the U.S.  This gives us the ability to listen in on those calls. 

Requires new wiretaps to be approved by the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, not just the attorney General.  – -  This adds new people in the oversight role.

Requires a court-issued warrant when a U.S. resident is the main target of surveillance.  – - Still against the bill?  It DOES REQUIRE A WARRANT when a U.S. resident is the target of surveillance.

Requires Congress to reconsider the law in six months. – - Being that the current bill was about to end, something needed to be done quickly.  This allows congress time to endlessly debate this in time for the next election cycle to start up…

There is always a balance that needs to be preserved when considering our liberties between our liberties and security.  However, you need to educate yourself whenever you see news headlines as we are now.  Just because somebody tells you what the bill does, it doesn’t mean that what the bill does.  Before speaking out against or for something, you need to read it for yourself.

Gonzales Told the Truth

(July 30, 2007) – Like I was sayin…  you need to get to the details.

Here is an interesting post refering to a New York Times article.  It sort of echos a theme I had earlier about Gonzales saying the trip to the hospital was about another program and the dems saying that it wasn’t.  This article indicates that it was about a program other than the TSP.

I imagine the Dems will still want to investigate and investigate all the while other real issues go unaddressed.  There is blood in the water and they are looking to score political points as usual.

Is the Surge Working?

(July 30, 2007) – Like I was sayin… the news can’t be all bad.

 If you look hard enough, you can find good news from Iraq.  Its not the there isn’t any good news, its just that it is hard to find as the media trumpets every IED, car bomb, and fatality.

I was shocked to find this article from the New York Times.  The article says that it is important for Americans to understand that we are making significant military progress since the surge.  You can also find news like this in other blogs and here too.

The political landscape in Iraq is still fairly bleak, but the surge wasn’t to address political issues directly.  The surge was to send the necessary troops in to secure Bagdad and other areas.

Other important changes are the changes in attitude about Al Qaeda and Moktada al-Sadr’s Madhi Army as the population becomes tired of the constant violence perpetrated by the terrorists.

So with the surge having positive impacts in Iraq, are the ‘get out now folks’ pushing to snatch military victory out from under America?  I believe that it is far more important for America to win than to score a few political points.

Keep this article in mind when you hear people like Harry Reid (D!) declare Iraq ‘a lost cause’ and that we should pull out now.

Bush Takes Away Right to Protest the War, Just Like Clinton did?

(July 25, 2007) – Like I was sayin… sometimes you need to check the facts.

 There are a lot of posts recently about executive order 13438 signed by Bush on 7/17.  Everybody is saying that it takes away your right to protest the war and we need to impeach Bush now….

The order, actually freezes the assets of anybody commiting acts of violence to disrupt the stability of Iraq, or provides matterial support, or helps those people get around the freezing.

The same language can be found in an executive order signed by Bill Clinton in 1995 in regard to the mid-east peace process.

 So, don’t take everything you read on some blogs as the truth.  Do a little research or check this blog from time to time.

Although I disagree with several of the points of people protesting the war, rest assured that you still have the right.