Why Tax Cuts Work…

I’m sick and tired of the tax cut argument.  They work.  I’m going to explain in very simple terms why they work.  Most conservatives are going to understand this very easily…liberals might have a tougher time and I understand that because they can’t get the word “greed” out of their head for more than two seconds to read this.

 I’m going to use simple numbers.  Not just for the readers sake, but for my own as well while writing this piece.

Let’s say the investment tax rate is 50%.  First of all not very many people are going to invest with this higher rate because the risk of investing can be great and now even if you win, half of your money goes to the government.  But let’s say there are 2 people that decide to invest.  Doesn’t matter what amount they invest with let’s say they both equally make 100 dollars in profit.  The tax rate is 50% so the government takes 50 dollars from each of them and collects 100 dollars total while both of the investors keep 50 dollars a piece.  So people keep less money at these rates and the government doesn’t collect as much as it could have in revenue and I’m about to show you why.

 The tax cuts work because of percentages and incentive.  At a 50% rate the incentive to invest is low.  Meaning less people will invest.  This is where the beauty of tax cuts takes hold.  Let’s say a republican President(a true republican conservative) gets elected and lowers the rate to 35%.  Now the incentive to invest becomes higher.  Now let’s use a conservative(mathematically not politically) figure and say now 4 people want to invest rather than just 2 because of the new rates are attractive to investors.  All 4 investors each make 100 dollars profit a piece.  Now the tax rate is 35% so 35 dollars from each of the 4 investors profits(35% of 100 dollars is 35 dollars) is equal to 140 dollars of revenue for the Government.  Not only that, but each investor keeps 65 dollars of their investment.

To recap:  With the lower rates and more incentive the government collects more in revenue and the investors keep more money to invest more or build more in the way of jobs and business.

Under the 50% rate the incentive is lower so the government does not collect as much nor do the investors whom do actually invest keep as much.  Not only that, but I would argue that the higher rates actually help the rich and hurt the poor.  At a higher rate who can afford to invest?  The super rich because they have the capital available to actually make money on their investments.  The poor or middle class do not have the capital to make a sizable enough profit to increase their incentive toward investment on the higher rates.

Once again with 2 investors at a 50% tax rate the government collects 100 dollars in revenue and the investors only keep half of their profit.

With the 4 investors at a 35% tax rate the government collects 140 dollars in revenue and the investors keep 65% of their profit.  This is why tax cuts work.  Percentages and Incentive.

The First Step to Nowhere…

It’s often argued mainly by conservatives that we are headed toward socialism on our current path.  It makes a good argument and for the most part I agree with it and I have my reasons for believing the warnings.  The constitution becomes more and more crumbled as many more serious socialist leftists walk all over it for power.  If everyone abided by the constitution you have to wonder if there even would be political parties in general.  The democrat party champions its stance as being “for the little guy” and I ask where in the constitution does it say to favor the “little guy?”  It says to respect personal liberty and with that we understand personal responsibility.  They aren’t supposed to legislate to favor any group of people as they define said group. 

Well the question is how.  How are we headed in this direction?  There are many theories and I think the most common I hear is lack of education.  There is a lot of validity to that and I certainly won’t argue against it.  Our current public school system is a failure and no not to any fault of the teachers.  It’s more due to exactly what I’m talking about and that is a socialist approach to education.  Couple government inefficient control along with “feel good politics” and our educational system once the envy of the world is failing our future generations.  So no I won’t argue that our educational system needs to be fixed and is at least in part a cause of our slow road to socialism.  However there had to be a starting point that led us to these awful policies in education. 

There is also an argument that it starts in a similar fashion to todays progressive movement reaching for Utopia.  It’s really nothing new as many throughout history have attempted to create a Utopian society.  Now without question the thought of a Utopian society is so ridiculous and delusional that anyone whom thinks that will work must be a fan of Barack Obama.  How is utopia possible when it can only exist in the eyes of men who rule?  By the definition of freedom, one’s utopia can be anothers nightmare or in a liberals case that nightmare being America.  A perfect society is impossible yet so many attempt to achieve it.  Some view that as noble.  However, I view that as tyranny.

 The point I’m trying to get to is that some start on a road to socialism by trying to achieve a Utopian society.  However this is not a first step in my opinion because you need a tool to unite the masses to that idea.  The liberals in government in order to get the vast majority of people on their side needs an enemy and no I’m not talking about a foreign enemy.  I’m talking about an enemy they have to create in our minds.  An enemy that goes beyond common education.  It feeds off the envy of those who have little as well as focusing their attention away from themselves and towards a common feature.

Socialism or Communism came to pass in Russia for various reasons.  Of course they had a tyrannical style of government in the autocracy of the Tsar.  There were the failures of Nicholas the second in world war one.  Also there were an envious state of the wealthy.  The de facto leader of the revolution was Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin.  It’s worth noting that the new republics split up as a result of the downfall of the Russian Empire absolutely despised capitalism.  As these republics united under one party that would become the Communist Party of the Soviet Union there was born what was called a set of  Bolshevik Initial Decrees.  These decrees as they grew in the future years included:

• minimum wage
• worker’s hours
• nationalization of banks
• abolishing classes and civil ranks
• nationalizing external trade
• nationalization of sugar industry
• nationalization of private railroads
• nationalization of large-scale industry and railway transportation Enterprises
• social security for working people
• abolishing private property Rights on Archives of Russian writers, composers, painters and scientists, preserved in libraries and museums
• universal labour conscription
• wage regulations
• running of factories by elected workers committees(unions)

When looking at these decrees you have to wonder if the communist government is here already.  However, I believe the first step is class warfare.  I believe liberals in government use the rich as a common enemy of the masses.  The idea plays on the emotion of men of all educational backgrounds.  It plays on their envy of what others have accomplished.  History has shown us that class envy leads to revolution and revolution is a change in constitution or government.  As liberals have created this enemy in the minds of the masses they are viewed as heroes for taking from the accomplished to give to what they call the “entitled.”  Class envy also creates a hatred towards the most free economic system in mankind’s history which is capitalism. 

The liberals under the guise of patriotism have used the tool of class warfare to create angst against not only capitalism, but the history of America as well through our capitalist system which is representative of freedom.  They have used and skewed the founders words to aide them in accomplishing these deeds.  With the history of America being tarnished the founding document becomes more and more subject to change from it’s original intent.  Norman Thomas a socialist leader in America once said:

“The American people would never vote for socialism. Under the name of Liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.”

As it stands and through the common views of the liberals and socialists of the past they have their plan.  As they execute their plan the public becomes the ”tools of the ambitious” as Thomas Jefferson once said.  Ideas such as: watering down education; creating a victim mentality; Entrenching their power by taking from some what is rightfully theirs and giving to the “unfortunate” are all part of the process as it’s being ushered in by those same tools these policies help create.  Politicians will be called heroic and statesmen for doing so.  However, to be a hero you need to conquer the enemy.  Step one is creating that enemy and this time they have chosen their own citizens.

Inspired to Tyranny…

I often wonder to myself based on the new movement towards Barack Obama what passes as inspiration in today’s world?  Empty rhetoric on the surface of policy ideas that would even make the likes of FDR and LBJ cringe.  When I hear many give their reasons for supporting this man I realize the blatant ignorance of what this country was founded upon amongst these people.  This man proposes some of the biggest nanny state ideas ever proposed in government.  Apparently, he inspires the weak minded.  The weak willed.  The weak in general.  Apparently, he also inspires the selfish whom feel it’s OK to have big brother take from your neighbor and give to you what you didn’t earn.  This is called “inspiration” in today’s world.  Thomas Jefferson refers to this kind of dependency:

“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition. “

How far we’ve come from the likes of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.  These were men whose works were true inspiration.  Their works inspire the best in us.  Their works inspire morals and principles toward our neighbors.  We have gone from “Give me liberty or give me death!” to “I will give you free health-care!” as a guide to the fire that awakens our spirits.  The founders made no secret of their intentions with this government.  They disputed quite often over the procedures in which this government would operate, but they all had the common goal of protecting individual liberty.  They left no question as to what the role of government needed to be in our lives, but apparently according to many of the masses that has changed.

 Some would argue that the constitution is subject to change because of the changing times.  Many of the laws and lessons of the past no longer apply today.  Well I say they are wrong.  Do the principles of success change with time?  Does the idea of freedom change with time?  Does the desire for absolute power change with time?  Are Christians all of a sudden looking elsewhere besides the Bible for parables, lessons, and morals because those lessons no longer apply to today?  Apparently society in large numbers is demanding that government take care of their needs.  I think this calls for a Thomas Jefferson quote because this as relevant today as it were over 200 years ago.  He says:

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”

With too much liberty we have the abilities to correct these problems ourselves as to how we see fit.  With too little liberty we have no say in the matter and any outcry we make is interpreted as more big government solution by our leaders.  I’m hoping for a leader to promise me that they will do whatever they can to lessen the scale of government inside the boundaries of the constitution as it was written and ratified by those state representatives of whom had just fought off a tyrannical regime for true freedom.  They offered only one promise to the people.  That they would be free to manage and govern their own lives within the limits of the freedom of others around them.  To them that was the dream for which they were fighting and sacrificing.  There is no confusion in these concepts.  Thomas Jefferson says:

“On every question of construction [of the Constitution], let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

The founders gave us vast amounts of interpretations and writings for us to understand exactly what their intent was when they created the constitution.  They warned us of the signs of of a tyrannical government.  Yet today many of us seem to ignore the warnings of battle-tested men and rather pay heed to the complacency of indecision.  Our master will take care of those decisions for us even if only the few cry for milk.  At what point did we start looking to one man for answers instead of the wisdom of millions governing their own lives?  With freedom comes responsibility and with responsibility comes the acknowledgement that we were created with abilities that stretch beyond the answers of the imperfect governing the imperfect. 

Consequences Be Damned!

When we think of the greatness of this country there are two rules of thought.  Some compare this country to what a utopia is in their own minds.  Others(mainly conservatives, but you don’t have to be to understand this basic common sense) compare America to the rest of the world.  We also consider the fact America has been a beacon of light and example to the rest of the world for over 200 years.  Through our founders dying wishes they wanted to see a country of a free people that were naturally pushed to self governance because they know this was the only way they could be free.  They knew this from experience.   They knew this from trial and error around the world.  They knew their history.  So today we must look back not only to their history, but to our history that was at their time the future. 

The saying goes history always repeats itself.  Sad part is that’s true and it shows how unbelievably ignorant we can be as a people.  When I see a groundswell of even my own friends flock to socialist ideas I have to wonder what is to be of our great nation.  They want answers they say.  They want solutions.  They’ve even warmed up to the idea of sleeping under the dragon’s wing.  Our founders may have fought and died for future generations to be free, but I wonder if they could ever picture a time where the men and women of this great country would crawl on it’s hands and knees in a rush just to call someone else master.  I can think of no greater ignorance than to live on your knees praying to the almighty government.  A government not so merciful as the God they attempt to destroy.

You probably think I am overreacting.  It’s all about the common good.  It’s all about the good of society.  Each of us sacrificing what we don’t need for the good of those around us.  Well, is it about the good of society or ones interpretation of what society should or should not be in general?  I see many of my friends try to assure me that Barack Obama does not wish to completely hand us over to socialism.  Of course, they use different words but that’s the meaning of their interpretation whether they know it or not.  They are willing to go along with it as long as it’s a slow death rather than a quick one.  Willing to eat from the hands of our master at a slower pace until we reach the point of no return.  I, for one, refuse to go along with it and will fight it at any cost.

There is America and then there is everything else.  Fascism, Socialism, Communism take your pick.  I know some are saying “but Cory, Fascism is an extreme Right wing ideal..not leftist” and you would be wrong.  There isn’t much difference between any of them.  Many describe Fascism as corporate takeover.  Well they would have to explain to me why millions upon millions of Marxists in the 1930’s became Fascists.  Kind of interesting to see millions of people believing in working class rule would switch to a corporatist ideal.  It’s not very debatable that communism is the far left(or socialism), but I would argue that Fascism is as well.  Mussolini himself was a socialist before the party threw him out over his support of world war one.  He then eased into a fascist transition and oh by the way Hitler was a great admirer of his philosophy.  You probably think I am getting off point, but I’m only furthering the point that there is America and then there is everything else. 

These fascist governments offered many of the things that these liberal politicians are promising as of right now in this historic election.  Fascism in Italy included ideas such as:

1. Lowering the minimum voting age to eighteen, the minimum age for representatives to twenty-five, and universal suffrage including women
2. The abolition of the Senate and the creation of a national technical council on intellectual and manual labor, industry, commerce, and culture.
3. End of the draft.
4. Repeal of the titles of nobility.
5. A foreign policy aimed at expanding Italy’s will and power in opposition to all foreign imperialism’s.
6. The prompt enactment of a state law sanctioning a legal workday of eight actual hours of work for all workers.
7. Minimum wage.
8. The creation of various government bodies run by workers’ representatives(unions).
9. Reform of the old age and pension system and the establishment of age limits for hazardous work
10. Forcing landowners to cultivate their lands or have them expropriated and given to veterans and farmers’ cooperatives.
11. The obligation of the state to build “rigidly secular” schools for the raising of “the proletariat’s moral and cultural condition.”
12. “A large progressive tax on capital that would amount to a one time partial expropriation of all riches.”
13. “The seizure of all goods belonging to religious congregations and the abolition of episcopal revenues.”
14. The “review” of all military contracts and the “sequestration of 85% of all war profits.”
15. The nationalization of all arms and explosives industries.

Hitler’s Germany wasn’t far off.  Notice anything familiar when comparing these policies with the policies of the liberal left today?  You should.  They are nearly identical every single one of them.  Why do we regard these dictatorships in history as evil and then turn to the same exact policies as answers for a free society?  We are repeating history once again.  In the name of tired cliches such as “get things done” we are trading our freedoms in for government handouts.  These policies are the visions of men in power not the results of a free society.  The visions of those men are to shape society as they see it.

Doing for the common good of society is a noble concept.  However the only answer is to let society move with the trends of a free public.  We are deciding to turn over those decisions to men ruling over men and these ruling men refuse to abide by the founding document of the country they serve.  This is irresponsible on all sides.  This is why as I wrote earlier that the founding fathers were strict believers in self governance.  It’s not perfect.  It’s not easy, but it’s freedom.  I wonder at what point will we wake up and realize that there are consequences to the actions of giving too few too much power over our lives.  I wonder when we will discover the attitude of confidence in our own God-given abilities.  Abilities that will be suppressed by a strengthening fiat if we are not careful.  As many as there are strong and true to the founders warning there will always be those that walk down the path to the master’s answers.  Consequences be damned.

A Lesson in Greed

This is really a response to the likes of John McCain and Mike Huckabee when they attack companies and CEO’s as “greedy”.  When it comes to our economy or any capitalist economy the term greed gets thrown around a lot.  It gets thrown around by the masses.  I can forgive that because many haven’t studied some very basic economics.  What’s more troubling is when a politician uses the term.  This, of course, is a term most used by liberals.  To be honest I’ve come to a cross in the road.  On the one hand I would like to believe that these people are just ignorant.  I would feel better about them being ignorant, but that’s still a scary thought considering they are our leaders.  On the other hand they know better yet are CHOOSING to be ignorant.  As a good friend of mine says “willful ignorance is not a badge of honor”.

However, I want to get back to the meaning of greed.  Everytime prices go up many assume it’s greed by the company.  I heard on Sean Hannity’s show a caller call in to say “the economy is so bad because of food prices rising” and I got an email from a family member saying something to the effect of “if companies were less greedy our economy would be stronger”.  It then started to hit me that I wanted to write a piece about some foundational concepts of a free market economy.  The basic foundations of a free market economy are prices and supply and demand.  It’s as simple as that.  However, first I think Thomas Sowell best describes the fear of greed when he says

Just as primitive peoples tended to attribute such things as the swaying of trees in the wind to some intentional action by an invisible spirit, rather than to such systemic causes as variations in atmospheric pressure, so there is a tendency toward intentional explanations of systemic events in the economy, when people are unaware of basic economic principles.

What this means is that people automatically assume it must be some unprovable factor of greed as an intention for higher prices rather than changes either in government law or else supply and demand.  In a competitive free market it’s very, very difficult to be greedy as far as prices go because someone WILL find a way to undercut your prices or else people will leave on their own and find some alternative.  People’s responses to prices are what create both shortages and surpluses.  When a price is high on a product then people are less likely to buy that item and that will create a surplus of said item.  As the surplus grows the price goes down and then people become more attracted to the purchase.  As more people buy this item at the lower price it creates a shortage.  This the role of prices, but it goes even deeper.

We have to remember that every cost of doing business is pushed to the consumer.  That’s just common business principle.  Whatever the add on to the individual product is the profit.  I mention that because the prices that we see at the store aren’t the only prices that are a factor.  Assuming there is no government mandated price controls we have to figure in certain costs such as: labor; bills to run machinery, electricity, water etc etc; maintenance; transportation; in the case of food there’s ingredients; and of course taxes.  These prices are all subject to change that will affect the cost of the final product we see on the shelf.

For instance with the prices of energy going up as well as gas prices it’s no surprise that transportation and common bill prices would go up.  The consumer will see this change in the final product.  Of course as we know energy is also a world commodity subject to price change based on supply and demand.  As these rules affect the underlying costs it will directly effect the cost of production which causes prices to go up and down on the final product.  This is called fluctuating prices.  Fluctuating prices based on supply and demand which as I mentioned earlier is determined by the public response to prices help the producer determine what society wants and needs.  There are other variables that I haven’t gone into in this piece(such as the evil known as government controlled prices), but I wanted to cover some very basic fundamental economics.  If you still want to believe it’s greed then that’s your right, but I would encourage those people to consider that there are many underlying variables that effect the prices that we see on a daily basis.

Live to Fight Another Day…

I have many fellow conservative friends.  Some of us have never met individually, but we talk on occasion.  I’ve really met some very good, young conservative minds in the last few months.  I’m grateful for that because I love to see other people’s perceptions on what it is exactly that we fight for in the ways that we can fight in our busy lives.  The common denominator in all of this is that we love our country and feel conservative philosophy is the chosen path of what the founders had intended.  It really isn’t about anything else other then that and those principles hold true universally to any challenge we face or will face in the coming generations. 

As anyone knows I am no fan of John McCain.  I don’t even much care for him as a person.  I respect his military service, but that will not be and has never been a determining factor in how good or bad of a President that will make him.  I don’t know why that is even a determining factor for voters to be quite honest.  I still view him as a country club republican and will never be able to truly sell himself as a true conservative.  The argument now is he’s “conservative enough” and that he has to prove his conservative credentials to the base.  I’m sorry, but if you’re a conservative you don’t have to prove anything especially after having a quarter of a century in congress.

Trust me country club republicans annoy me almost as much as liberals.  Liberalism can be both ignorance for the well intentioned and also an enemy of the founders vision for this country.  It has shown itself as such through many years now.  However those who embrace many of it’s ideals in the name of republicanism or conservatism can be just as damaging if they get their way.  Reaching across the aisle to work with democrats seems like a noble idea, but only when you take our values to the table and fight for them as a pasionate American knowing that it is the right course for this country.  That doesn’t entail standing beside them on issues that we as conservatives know are wrong for the country and then calling it “getting things done”.  I have to be honest I am sick and tired of that cliche.

However we as conservatives whom claim to stand on principle really need to think twice about whom we wish to vote for in the fall.  I feel we need to vote for John McCain even as much as we disagree with him.  I feel we have the obligation to hundreds of thousands of our brave men and women to give them the best commander in chief available and that’s John McCain when it comes down to a race between he and Obama or Clinton.  Isn’t one of our principles to stand behind the troops?  Make any case against McCain all you want in this instance and some of it may be valid, but it doesn’t compare to the irreparable damage that Obama or Clinton can do to our military.  Keeping America safe is a major priority.  I know in my heart when I think about it that John McCain is better for that job than any leftist that caters to a base that hates this country.  I’m talking about the loony left, of course. 

We also have to face the fact that while conservatism ultimately lost in this election season that with McCain we have a much better chance of being heard.  Obama or Clinton have no intention, desire, or need to listen to what we have to say.  With McCain we do have a shot at being heard and not having to fight like hell while watching this country go down the toilet bowl of liberalism in all cases.  As Newt Gingrich whom is possibly our greatest conservative leader right now says we should rather wish to fight with McCain some of the time rather than all of the time with an Obama or Clinton. 

There is also another very important issue which is the issue of the supreme court.  The next President will have two to three and possibly even four replacements to make.  Now I would not be surprised if McCain somehow found three more David Souters to put on the bench.  But we don’t know that for sure and we will at least have somewhat of a say in where the direction of the court goes if we have someone that has to listen to conservatives at least to some degree in office.  With an Obama or Clinton with their views of the constitution we are sure to get three more Ginsburgs on the court or possibly even worse.  We will have no say as they do not adhere to us for our votes.  It’s too important to risk in my opinion and we need to focus on that as we look forward to November. 

Senator McCain may indirectly actually unite the party, but not in the way he says or thinks.  He may end up being the republican nominee or President that ultimately furthers on what George W. Bush has started and that is dissatisfaction within the party to an even greater degree.  The more discontent conservatives get the louder we are and the more we move.  The boots are on the ground and the grassroots are swelling as we speak.  There are many younger conservatives such as myself that wish to advance the movement and will do so because we love our country too much to sit still.  We lost this year, but to quote Don Shula “Success isn’t forever and failure isn’t fatal”.  Thus we live to fight another day.

It actually could be worse…

Anyone who reads my blogs obviously knows my strong conservative stances especially on economic issues.  I truly do believe that without economic prosperity the rest doesn’t matter because we will not have the resources to fight for what we believe otherwise.  Case in point we won the Cold War because of our economic prosperity in the 1980’s led by the greatest President of our time Ronald Reagan.  I know this blog is going to make some Huckabee supporters angry and possibly some McCain supporters will be happy I wrote this piece.  Who knows?  But I’ve come to the conclusion that Mike Huckabee actually makes John McCain look like Ronald Reagan reincarnated politically.

Ok before I go further I want to note that no John McCain is not and never will be utterly close to the smell of Ronald Reagan’s feet let alone his reincarnate politically.  Nor is John McCain an actual conservative.  I’m just comparing him to Mike Huckabee.  First of all Mike is good on pro life issues.  He’s also good on the protection of marriage.  He’s not a bad culture conservative.  However, he’s a big government tax increasing democrat as far as I’m concerned based on his record.  

As Governor of Arkansas early on in his tenure he actually did do some good things.  He fought for an 80 million dollar tax cut package in 1997.  He cut the state capital gains tax in 1999.  Then it pretty much all goes south and no I don’t mean south as in tax cuts.  He has supported a MULTITUDE of tax hikes throughout his tenure that includes: sales tax hike in 1996; an Internet sales tax in 2001; he opposed the repeal of sales tax on groceries and medicine; signed bills raising gasoline, cigarette, and beds for nursing home patients tax hikes; proposed another sales tax hike in 2002; he opposed a measure to ban the Internet taxes; and allowed a 17% increase in sales tax to become law in 2004.  Make up all the excuses you want this is not conservatism at work.  The wonderful Cato Institute gave Mike Huckabee a D grade on taxes.

Mike Huckabee had a net gain of 500 million in tax hikes.  I’ve seen him refuse to answer this directly when questioned about it.  He claims he cut taxes 94 times as Governor, but in actuallity they were minor tweaks in tax law.  The fact still remains a 500 million dollar net increase.  He not only not opposed many tax hikes he CAMPAIGNED for them.  I’m sorry, but where is Ronald Reagan Conservatism in all of this?  You know that fuel and gas tax hike he says the Arkansas people approved?  Well actually that part of it wasn’t subject to voter approval.  It was actually a bond issue that voters approved and the tax increases would have remained whether the bond issue was approved or not.  Also the Arkansas Supreme Court did not mandate for Mike Huckabee to raise taxes.  It mandated that Governor Huckabee spend more money on state education.  Instead of cutting government waste and finding the funds already in the budget Governor Huckabee’s first answer was to raise taxes.  Again I don’t see that as Reaganesque, but what do I know?

I understand he supports the FairTax now, but what people must not know is that he has only supported that since he got on the campaign trail for the Presidency.  Where in his history does he indicate by his record that he is for this reform?   Also while Huckabee criticizes Romney for “flip flopping” on signing the Americans for Tax Reforms anti-tax pledge Huckabee himself didn’t sign this pledge until after January of 2007. 

This is where I get the most angry.  It’s his record on spending in Arkansas.  From 1996-2004 government spending under Mike Huckabee increased 65%.  That was almost triple that of inflation.  The number of state workers increased 20% under Governor Huckabee’s watch as well.  The state’s obligational debt(money already spent for future years) shot up to a billion dollars.  Huckabee put together a number of Government programs which helps explains the massive increase in spending. 

I’m going to finish with regulation which is another pet peeve of mine as I’ve said in other blogs.  Not only is Huckabee a tax hiker, a big government republican, but also is bad on regulation.  He raised the states minimum wage from $5.15 to 6.25 an hour(to put this in perspective as Governor Mitt Romney only gave up a 25 cent increase in minimum wage to a liberal legislature that was demanding $1.75 increase).  On a state level this bad enough, but he then went on to propose that congress do the same thing on a national level.  Thankfully President Bush and the GOP congress apposed this measure.  He threatened to investigate “price-gouging” after 9/11 if gas prices went too high.  Oh, so he’s also for artificial price control in a price-coordinated economy.  This is further proven by the fact he signed a bill into law that would prevent companies from raising their prices 10% ahead of natural disasters.  Mike you should learn about supply and demand.  Demand goes up(which it would for those kinds of items before a natural disaster) then the price goes up.  He uses liberal rhetoric by saying “the line between capitalism and greed has to be very clearly delineated”.  That’s called class warfare, Mike.  It’s also a form of fascism(no I’m not calling Mike a fascist). 

I could easily go on about this guy’s record, but since he hasn’t a chance in the world to be the nominee I’ll stop here.  I do believe John McCain and Mike Huckabee are the two worst republican candidates we had running this year.  I’ve asked Huckabee supporters repeatedly to discuss his record with me.  No one stepped up to the plate.  I understand Huckabee supporters will be angry with this piece, but I welcome all of you to the table of discussion.  This is, after-all, a free country and debate is welcome.  However, given the choice between the two I have to say I am happy that it’s John McCain.  Ok I’m not “happy” per-say, but as Huckabee’s record indicates yes it indeed could be worse for us conservatives. 

Mending Fences

Well, Mitt Romney has just suspended his campaign and it was a  long shot for him to win the nomination from here on out anyways.  The question for many conservatives right now is “where do we go from here?” and that’s a valid question.  John McCain can talk up his “conservative” credentials all he wants and he does with the constant “83″ ACU rating they keep touting.  However, what they won’t mention is that in 2006 he received a 65 and in 2007 he received a 56 so his voting has gotten progressively left since 2000 if you look at the bills he tries to push through and some very key votes.  Since John McCain is the nominee at this point I am writing about how John McCain can mend  with conservatives in general.

First of all be very careful about who you choose for the vice presidential slot.  I would like to take this time right now to recommend Mitt Romney because of his economic know-how.  If you take Tom Ridge, George Pataki, Charlie Crist, or even Mike Huckabee you are already on the wrong path.  National security is very important, but impossible without economic prosperity.  None of the above even come close to understanding economy like Mitt Romney.  Frankly you should choose him and just forget about economic matters as to place that squarely in the hands of Mitt and then back whatever he says.  You will look smarter for doing so and frankly many will learn to trust you more. 

Second of all when it comes time to nominate judges to the supreme court you ONLY go get men like Alito or Roberts.  Nothing beneath that.  This isn’t about political conservatism, but rather judicial conservatism.  We do not want to be ruled by 9 people in robes that are unelected.  You want to call yourself the maverick so don’t be afraid to put up a fight with a democrat congress in order to get them through the process.  I put this as a second priority because I believe within the first two years of the next President’s term they will be choosing 1-2 new judges on the court.  I truly believe it’s going to be pretty immediate and this issue is always extremely important.  In fact it may be this reason alone that I vote for McCain in the fall. 

Third when it comes back to economic issues do not raise taxes.  Ever.  There is no excuse for it.  No matter what tax you raise it will slow or “cool” as they like to say certain pockets of the economy.  This includes you’re idiotic stewardship act bill.  Drop it completely.  I am with you on nuclear power, but while that takes any kind of hold within the next 20 years you can not tax people on energy and bring caps on carbon emissions as this will drastically hurt our economy well before we are able to rely more on nuclear energy.  You have an uphill battle with that one in the first place with all of the eco-freaks out there that use fascism to get their ideas across and they don’t even know it.  I would say keep taxes low, but they aren’t low now.  Lower them even further.  Much further.  Do not put caps and regulation in our economy and lower taxes. 

Fourth keep your word on spending.  Fighting pork in our spending bills will make you a conservative hero.  It’s one thing to have a vote in the senate, but another being the leader of an executive branch and in charge of a budget.  Bush has failed miserably with this, but to be fair most of it was national security reasons.  Pork is a drop in the bucket compared to the funds are paying now and are already promised to pay in the years ahead with entitlements.  Romney wasn’t kidding when he said within the next 8 years 70% of our budget will be entitlement spending.  THAT is where we need to attack as conservatives.  You need to show an urgency in reforming social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, and others.  These are issues that are facing our nation that are nearly as important as the war on terror.  If these issues are not addressed then your mantra on spending has become a shadow of what’s really needed and your complaints are no longer relevant or valid. 

Fifth you need to change your stance on illegal immigration.  You say you want to build the frence now, but your rhetoric and votes in the past leave a lot to be desired.  It’s hard to trust you on this matter.  You need to focus major resources on securing the border and other energy on how to stop the other aspects of illegal immigration such as chain migration and anchor babies.  No more liberal fascist rhetoric such as “I refuse to send an 80 year old woman home” because frankly that’s irrelevant.  No one is advocating mass deportation(although it’s more possible then people think) and stop assuming the issue is about LEGAL immigration.  No one has a problem with legal immigration.  We understand we are the greatest country in the world and that many millions of people wish to come here.  It’s about the rule of law.  It’s about incentive and fairness to those who wish to come here and be citizens.  You can’t become a citizen by breaking our laws to start your life in this country.  You talk about compassion and the rule of law IS compassionate to the American people whom are here now and forever.

Sixth you need to protect our culture as our leader.  Respect the sanctity of life and the tradition of marriage between a man and a woman.  I know there are separations in the conservative movement about these issues such as are they state issues vs culture issues.  To me they are culture issues, but I can come to a happy compromise with this on one platform.  Do not let the judges have control over these issues.  It is not for them to decide.  They are unelected officials and do not have say over what American culture is or was or will be in the future.  Protect the culture by doing whatever you can to keep the courts in check.

These are just a few things that would be a start to mending the fences with conservatives everywhere.   I didn’t mention the war on terror because that is one of the things that most conservatives actually trust you with right now.  I don’t want to downplay how important that issue is, but it’s a non-issue for John McCain as this is one of his strengths.  These are the issues that conservatives care about that you have not shown a lot of strength.  If we conservatives are to trust you and fight with you then you must show a pro-growth, tempered mindset toward being the President.  It was a nice start at the CPAC speech, but it needs to go much further.  You need to show it in your actions and in your plans.  Plans are promises that we can hold you accountable.  Not only are these policies right for the direction of our party, but right for the direction of our country as well.  Senator McCain we are willing to embrace you should you understand conservatism and adopt it as your philosophy.  Believe me when I tell you we would much rather vote for you rather than against a democrat.

Republicanism

It was an ordinary night last Saturday night on February 5th, 2008.  I strapped my mp3 player to my arm and put on my headphones.  I then put on my jacket to go for my nightly walk.  I usually put on all kinds of music from Boyz II Men to Avenged Sevenfold.  I use these times to reflect on my own life and of course my passion that is conservatism.  I can’t separate the two because I believe no matter how we all vote we actually in fact live our lives in the fundamentals of the conservative principles.  As I was walking down the street it dawned on me.  What the hell is Republicanism?

How can one call themselves a Republican without being a conservative?  These principles are rooted in right and wrong.  They are rooted in logic and common sense.  Without these foundations then we are led by our emotions and our emotions take us places where we won’t want to be once that emotion changes.  I can tell you what classic liberalism means and I can tell you what FDR/LBJ liberalism means as well.  I can tell you what it meant to be an old school Democrat.  I can easily tell you what it means to be a conservative(which is very close if not the same as classic liberalism).  For the life of me I can’t tell you the principles of being a Republican.  I’ve been a Republican for so long BECAUSE of conservatism and this being the party that most identifies with those beliefs. 

It furthered my thought this morning when I heard on the Glenn Beck program a woman call in saying how ashamed she was to be a Republican.  She is ashamed because of how we are treating John McCain because he is a war hero.  She then went on to say that she’s not a conservative, but rather a republican.  This is exactly what I’m talking about.  Where is the set of principles?  You’re electing a man based on the fact he’s a war hero?  We have a couple hundred thousand war heroes RIGHT NOW overseas.  They are all wonderful people.  However, does this qualify them all to be President?  Conservatives reject him because we have a set of principles that we bounce his policy ideas off of and come to the conclusion that he isn’t fit to be our leader.  We can put away emotional jargon such as “but he’s a war hero” which means literally nothing in regards to leading the country in all areas of concern.

I also had a woman email me.  She said to me “you are not where I want our party to go” meaning she didn’t want it to go further to the right.  She listed no principles that she believes in.  Just that she didn’t want the party to go in the conservative direction(she said in my direction, but since I’m a conservative I assume that’s what she means).  As far as I’m concerned there is no party without conservatism because without the basic principles we believe in the party seems to fall left every single time either because of emotional purposes of political expediency. 

The founding Fathers were the perfect examples of conservatives.  Even when they disagreed on the foundation of our government it was always about how to protect individual freedom from unilateral power.  This explains the Bill of Rights and the three Branches of our government.  It’s the primary reason for checks and balances because they understood the nature of man and without the principles of self governance and individual freedom we will always succumb to the will of government instead of the will of the people.  This is why I’m not even sure what the principles to the left of conservatism in a supposed “right wing” party are anymore.   To abandon conservative principles is to abandon what this country was founded upon.  Conservatives are beholden to the founders.  We are beholden to a set of principles that guide nearly everyone in their life in some way or form whether they recognize it or not.  We are not beholden to a party and frankly those in that party that wish to lead will need to cater to us for our vote because they won’t see us begging to join the club.  It’s a club of politicians and some supporters that seem afraid of what others think of them.  This may sound arrogant to a lot of people, but really it’s not.  It’s just conservatives sticking to America’s principles.