Obama’s Grand Plan for Change
I know, it’s been a long time without hearing from me. Well, I’ve really only been writing weekly columns on www.insidestl.com. In case anyone’s interested, my articles come out each Monday, if you get the time please check out www.insidestl.com, they’re good people for letting me spout off each week. I’m going to put some of my more favorite weekly pieces on the blog in an attempt to catch everyone up with some newer content and will return to posting more regularly. Sorry for being gone for so long and thanks to anyone who has stumbled upon this blog and taken the time to read a little. I’m still working on getting a new site up-and-running and I’ll have it ready in the next two weeks. Thanks again for support…
“I can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family making under $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax, not any of your taxes.” These were Obama’s words from a campaign speech last September. Throughout the election, Obama’s supporters constantly pressed for voters to elect their man if for no other reason than self interest because Obama’s tax plan was guaranteed to put more money into everyone’s pockets. However, last Wednesday, the largest tobacco tax increase in history went into effect raising the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes by almost $0.62 a pack. The tax increase is to fund massive expansion of the SCHIP program which will add over 4 million “children,” many well over the age of 20, to government healthcare. A look at the SCHIP details shows how misleading the debate truly was on this legislation and only reinforces the need for harsher scrutiny before Obama implements his cap-and-trade program which would represent a new significant tax on all American families, regardless of income levels. It’s already been shown that Obama’s campaign promise didn’t apply to anyone who smokes, which is a habit that very disproportionately affects those in lower income levels. The cap-and-trade program, as admitted by Obama himself, will represent new sweeping taxes on every item purchased by all Americans along with any energy they use either in their homes or at the gas pumps for their cars. Even if you don’t smoke, you may want to take a quick look at the recent tax increase because the current budget in front of Congress will include a much higher tax increase targeted at any American family that consumes any form of energy. These definitely don’t align with Obama’s constant promises of not raising “any of your taxes.”
The main problem with the increased tobacco tax in order to fund the SCHIP expansion is the idea that a tax which is meant to discourage people from smoking cannot reasonably be counted on for consistent revenues to fund entitlement programs. What if the tobacco taxes meet their stated goals of lowering the number of smokers? What then becomes the default revenue source for the expanded government healthcare coverage? Punitive tobacco taxes have become socially acceptable sources for government revenue because they are painted as accomplishing two impressive stated goals. The first is to provide incentives for more people to quit smoking. Second, the money raised is going to the noble cause of providing insurance for children not currently covered by government programs nor private policies. Both of these goals have noble intentions. However, the success of the SCHIP funding depends on the failure of the tobacco taxes to accomplish their objectives. Perhaps, even worse is that smoking is a habit which very disproportionately effects those earning lower incomes. An Associated Press article stated that a Gallup survey of 75,000 people last year found that 34% of respondents earning $6,000 to $12,000 were smokers and the rate consistently declined as incomes rose. At the $90,000 a year income level, only about 13% of respondents were smokers. Therefore, the brunt of these tax increases will be borne by those making far less than the $250,000 the level of income which Obama promised last September wouldn’t see tax increases of any kind. Apparently, he was speaking exclusively to nonsmokers.
This brings about the very important question about future funding for the expanded SCHIP program. If the tobacco tax accomplishes its goal of drastically reducing smoking, who will end up paying for expansion of entitlements? The program is based on conflicting goals. Are smokers really expected to quit smoking? Perhaps, they are just expected to continue smoking and heed Joe Biden’s advice during the election that it’s patriotic to pay higher taxes. The answer is obvious that future funding for the SCHIP program will become embedded into every taxpayer’s April 15th bill just as all other government entitlement programs. For now, the idea that the social outcast smokers will bear all of the increased costs seems to be enough to keep most voter concerns limited. Once tobacco revenues are insufficient, what are the next products or groups of citizens who will be targeted with higher taxes to pick up the slack brought on by smokers uncommitted to the cause of funding children’s insurance?
A similar tax proposal that will disproportionately affect those earning below the magic $250,000 level is also getting closer and closer to being reality as Congress reviews Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget. One of Obama’s main revenue streams in his budget comes from the establishment of a market-based cap-and-trade program which essentially taxes carbon emissions. Very few people seemed interested that Obama once sat on the board of the Chicago-based firm which would provide the national trading platform which would trade the lucrative tax credits. Needless to say, this firm stands to redefine obscene profits from running the government-mandated trading markets for carbon credits. Americans should be very concerned about the ramifications of this policy. As noted in a previous article, an interview which was conveniently covered-up by The San Francisco Chronicle before the election quoted Obama explaining that under his cap-and-trade plan, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Analysts of the president’s proposal claim that the average families’ energy bills could easily rise by more than $1,000 a year. Unfortunately, these increases don’t adhere to the cut-off for families below the top 5% of wage earners. These rate increases would affect everyone who uses any energy to run their home or drive their car. This means everyone will see their costs rise. On top of the increased energy bills, the cap-and-trade program would raise the prices of anything produced and sold in US markets because companies would have to pass along the cost for increased carbon taxes to consumers through higher prices.
So it seems that Obama’s campaign promise about no tax increases was speaking to a much smaller audience than originally reported. No one making under $250,000 a year will see any of their taxes increase as long as they don’t smoke, use energy, or purchase anything.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
In Obama’s press conference today, he took a shot at a true national treasure which was entirely uncalled for, unprovoked, and in very bad taste. In response to a question about whether Obama has consulted with any living presidents, he worked this line into his answer, “In terms of speaking to former presidents, I’ve spoken to all of them that are living. Obviously, President Clinton – I didn’t want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances.”
Obama’s promises to foster a nonpartisan environment is a farce. His true vision of bipartisanship, apparently, includes insulting the widow of one of the most popular presidents in American history who has herself had recent health problems. Well, Mr. Obama, you had better pray that we can find another Ronald Reagan in four years because that is the level of leadership we will need to undo the damage you will do to America both at home and abroad.
I honestly tried to give Obama a chance but picking on Nancy Reagan is completely out-of-bounds. Especially since the claims that she was some wacko spiritualist are completely wrong and blown out of proportion. Funny how Democrats label an aging widow as a nutcase because she saw a fortune teller once, yet they throw a fit when it is mentioned that Bill Clinton is an alleged-rapist despite the constant, valid charges that he was. Speaking of Democrats, seances, and Clintons, it was Hillary Clinton who claimed to channel Eleanor Roosevelt during times of stress. To Democrats, the idea of being bipartisan means that they will reach across the aisle to Republicans that agree with them. Republican dissent is labeled as partisan, Democrat dissent is considered proof of Republicans’ partisanship.
Below is a link to the full video of his interview today. Notice how he kept placing the blame for any further economic messes by pointing out that he isn’t president yet and he can’t make policies yet. We are in for a long four years, at least blogs like this will have plenty of material, as long as Obama and his rabid Democrat lapdogs don’t decide to start classifying dissenting content as hate speech.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
In case any of you are wondering about the fate of the Anti-Obamassiah Refuge, I just want to assure everyone that we will still be here pursuing the same purpose and mission as when we were established.
Already, Obama is choosing some of the most partisan, liberal members for his cabinet and Harry Reid is out discussing the strategy to throw Joe Lieberman out of the Democrat caucus to punish him for betraying Obama. This doesn’t seem to be shaping up to be the bipartisan utopia Obama and Biden promised in the wake of their election victory. Instead, it looks like we as a nation are about to be led further to the left than ever before. I pray that God keeps a watch over the nation and keeps us from having to suffer for the actions of leadership that is more focused on punishing their detractors than keeping the nation safe and prosperous.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
This is Democrat Senator Jerrold Nadler speaking to Orthodox Jews about Obama. One part of this video made national news already when Nadler explained that Obama couldn’t leave Wright’s church because he wasn’t politically courageous enough. However, I find this part of the Senator’s speech about Obama the most telling. Just so Senator Nadler can be straight, yes there have been phone banks in Gaza where Palestinians have been cold-calling Americans to drum up support for Obama. Yes, Hamas did endorse Obama in 2006, and quickly retracted their endorsement as soon as they realized the negative impact it could have on their candidate of choice. Obama has also had to return $30,000 in illegal campaign contributions from Gaza. Let’s not forget that Jesse Jackson who has referred to Obama as, “part of the family,” told the World Policy Forum in France that Obama will bring an end to, “decades of putting Israel’s interests first.” Therefore, Senator Nadler, your rambling never did answer the question. If Obama is such a strong ally of Israel, why do all of Israel’s enemies endorse him for president? Here’s Senator Nadler’s sensless, ill-informed ramblings:Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
This was published in the July 7, 2008 edition of Richmond TImes-Dispatch. It is an account of someone with experience.
Beware Charismatic Men Who Preach ‘Change’
Each year I get to celebrate Independence Day twice. On June 30 I celebrate my independence day and on July 4 I celebrate America’s. This year is special, because it marks the 40th anniversary of my independence.
On June 30, 1968, I escaped Communist Cuba and a few months later I was in the United States to stay. That I happened to arrive in Richmond on Thanksgiving Day is just part of the story, but I digress.
I’ve thought a lot about the anniversary this year. The election-year rhetoric has made me think a lot about Cuba and what transpired there. In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.
When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said “Praise the Lord.” And when the young leader said, “I will be for change and I’ll bring you change,” everyone yelled, “Viva Fidel!”
But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner’s guns went silent the people’s guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans. And now I’m back to the beginning of my story.
Luckily, we would never fall in America for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America?
Manuel Alvarez Jr. Sandy Hook.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
The San Francisco Chronicle has apparently suppressed audio of a January, 2008 interview with Obama where he describes his cap and trade system and plainly states that his system would bankrupt coal plants. This is the same Obama who wants to spend $15 billion a year for 10 years to develop alternative fuels while refusing to drill in the most oil-rich parts of the nation or even consider building nuclear power plants. What’s his excuse for drilling? That America uses 25% of the world’s oil production and we only have 3% of the world’s oil reserves. He also claims that since it would take some time before we would get the first oil from the increased drilling that it is not an answer to high gas prices at the pumps. He fails to realize that just the announcement of starting to drill would have an immediate negative effect on the oil prices in the futures market which would, in fact, offer immediate relief even before the first drop of new oil hits the markets. This interview is only further proof that Obama’s energy policy is not concerned with actually bringing down energy prices for the average Americans. He is looking to tax American companies, which results in taxing the American people, for the nation’s prosperity. Obama’s policies will only drastically compound the high energy prices and, with his tax increases, further cripple the American economy.
Here’s the excerpt from the interview where Obama says he will bankrupt the coal industry, which will result in massive job losses for all of the Americans employed by coal plants:
“I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”
For the full-text of his comments, click the link below:
http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industryRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Obama is out saying that he, “will change the world” if elected. This is exactly what should be scaring every voter. Remember, Soviet Russia also changed the world.
The link below has more on this:
Also, while we’re on the Soviet Russia subject. Obama is also claiming that he will establish a “Civilian National Security Force.” If his campaign tactics of using common Americans in positions with the government or in the media to personally smear other common Americans, the last thing we want is an Obama-created “Civilian National Security Force.” It would be safe to say the KGB also used a “Civilian National Security Force” to encourage citizens to rat out there neighbors who were voicing discontent with the state. This campaign has shown that Obama has no tolerance for any disagreement with his “message.”
Watch Obama explain his plan here:
This video should be reason enough to keep Obama out of the White House. It should at the very least show the company a voter would be keeping with a vote for Obama. After watching this, who is the selfish one in this election? Is it the taxpayers, as Obama claims because they don’t want to pay higher taxes? Or is it people like Ms. Joseph, who probably is one of the 40% currently not paying any taxes, who is voting for Obama because she is counting on receiving other Americans’ money? It is very obvious that Ms. Joseph is looking to Obama to alleviate her of any financial responsibilities. It’s also pretty apparent, that Obama’s promises of “sharing the wealth” will grow the welfare rolls exponentially. Why would people work when the government will take care of them for free?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Reporters from three newspapers were recently kicked off of the official Obama campaign jet. The three papers were, The New York Post, The Washington Times, and The Dallas Morning News. What do all of these papers have in common? All three papers’ editorial pages endorsed John McCain instead of Barack Hussein Obama for president. This comes on the heels of the Obama campaign cutting off a Florida television station from further interviews or access to the campaign because their anchorwoman had the nerve to ask Joe “Hair Plugs” Biden tough questions about Obama’s tax policies. This is how Barack Hussein Obama treats America’s, supposedly, “free press” before he is in a position of power. How will he handle media members who oppose his policies once he’s in the White House? Who can forget the invasive searches most likely performed by Obama cronies into Joe Wurzelbacher’s (a.k.a Joe the Plumber) government records because Joe the Plumber asked a tax policy question which Obama gave a socialist answer. Obama has had no problem attacking common Americans who dared to cross him on the campaign trail.
Obama’s base are the same people who refer to Goerge W. Bush as a Nazi, Hitler, and an idiot on a nice day. Yet, Obama cannot tolerate anyone that does not completely buy into his “messianic” message. Count freedom of speech and freedom of the press as two more rights Americans will be stripped of once Obama is in office. Among the others are the right to prosperity, the right to keep and bear arms, infants’ right to life once born alive after a botched abortion, the right to a secret ballot for workers voting on whether they want union representation, and the list goes on.
This November 4 is not just about who will sit in the Oval Office. This election is about protecting American from a radical socialist wanting to massively change the foundamental ideas that America was founded on. Get out to vote on November 4 and be sure to encourage everyone you know to vote to keep Obama out of the White House. Otherwise, enjoy the last couple months of very basic freedoms for which America was founded.
Click the link below to read more about the Obama campaign’s decision to kick reporters that do not support Obama from the official campaign jet, thus denying them direct access to Obama in the most crucial final days of the election. Obama is doing everything he can to dictate that we do not have an opportunity to hear anything contrary to his socialist message.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )
Ann Coulture was right, Americans have to pay higher taxes just to take care of all of the Obama family living in poverty because Barack and Michelle sure as hell aren’t. Awhile back, it was reported that Barack’s half-brother lives in a hut in Kenya when just $50 a month would help him to become part of the middle-class. Now, it turns out one of Obama’s aunts that Obama wrote very fondly of in his autobiography is living in a government housing slum in South Boston. So now we have learned that Joe Biden only gave just over $3,000 out of his over $2 million income last year, and Obama will not even help his family members who are forced to live in squalor. Yet, Obama and Biden want us to pay higher taxes to take care of everyone less fortunate. Perhaps Biden and Obama should investigate why America is the most charitable nation in the world. This is because most Americans, who Obama is now calling selfish for not wanting to pay higher taxes, give a much more substantial amount to charitable causes. Most of Americans would, at least, help family members forced to live in grass huts or inner-city slums. When viewed in light of the fact that Obama gave over $22,000 to Jeremiah Wright’s church in one year, it should be apparent that Obama projects his own selfish actions on the rest of America when he calls them bitter and selfish.
For more about Obama’s aunt, click on the link below.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
« Previous Entries