Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

This will be very exciting.

It will be the first year since 1952 when there wasn’t an incumbent president or VP running.

I like Chuck Hegel. The problem is that he is a senator. No senator has won the presidency since 1960, and that race was sort of an anomaly. As we recently saw with John Kerry, the Senate is not a particularly useful resume.

It is still a ways off, but I guess we will have to start putting our money and time where our mouths are next year.

Just think, we can start tearning down each others’s candidates right here on this blog.

And the red, blue and green can engage in internecine warfare. We will need a couple more columns.

You know if Republicans are red and independents are green, maybe Democrats should be yellow.

Senators make lousy Presidential candidates; a Senator’s voting record is always inconsistent based upon the deals that they have to strike.

The only exception might be Hillary, who has been managing her Senate voting record since the beginning in an effort to return to the White House.

Hagel does love the spotlight, and makes himself very available to the media. Generally speaking, I like what I hear from him.

However, his vote for the Bankruptcy Bill is despicable. Of course, he’s representing a powerful business interest in his state; nevertheless, it disgusts me.

Guess that’s one more example of why Senators make poor presidential candidates.

as the confirmed liberal mentioned here (thanks for outing me, chops), i have to add: hagel has something of the clinton effect. that is, he makes people fall in love with him. i’ve seen it in person. one cannot underestimate the importance of this quality.

The following was submitted to the House Ways and Means

Social Security Reform and Federal Income Tax

To: The U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means

From: Bob Moore, Phone 580-351-2531, Fax 484-259-5631, Webpage http://www.geocities.com/oklahomataxpayer Email oklahomataxpayer@sbcglobal.net

The following four pages is hereby submitted this 2nd day of March 2005.

Social Security Reform and Freedom from Federal Personal Income Tax

President Bush’s Inaugural Speech was about FREEDOM. Below are some ways the federal government can create more freedom for the American people.

I was telling a small group of friends about my Eight Year Plan when one lady spoke up to say, “Bob, you do not understand, the Federal Government is not into SIMPLE”. I had to agree. I am into SIMPLE. I use the “KIS Theory” Keep It Simple.

First example of SIMPLE is the federal income tax on interest earned on bank accounts. Why have income tax laws for 300 million people when the federal government should have the financial institutions (appr. 10,000) pay a monthly tax being a percentage of the total dollars paid as interest to clients. No tax due from the citizens, the bank pays the tax, SIMPLE.

Same is true with stock dividends, have the corporations pay the government a percentage of the dollar amount paid to the stockholders. No tax due from the citizens, the corporations pay the tax, SIMPLE.

Second example, most taxpayers believe there is at least 2% waste in the federal government. If the President reduced the size of government by only 1.25% each year. That would be 8 X 1.25 = 10% totally reduction in the size of government at the end of eight years. That is a huge 10% savings, just that SIMPLE.

Third example of SIMPLE is the 40-40 Tax on Gasoline. As a child, I asked where does the .9 of a cent go? Years later, I still don’t really know. Keep the tax simple and honest such as:
(a) eliminate the .9 cent;
(b) this tax shall not be amended for forty (40) years;
(c) a total tax of forty (40) cents a gallon tax according to the following:
(d) twenty (20) cents shall go to the federal government and
(e) twenty (20) cents shall go to the originating State government
(f) gasoline tax to ONLY go toward roads and bridges.

Fourth example of SIMPLE: Toll Roads, Sales Tax and Income Tax

Can you image driving up to the toll booth to pay the toll and the person starts asking you financial questions such as how much money do you make; how many children do you have; how many cars do you own. Then says according to your credits and deductions; the toll will be X dollars.

Next event, you visit Wal-Mart, when you check out, the Cashier starts asking you financial questions to figure out the amount of sales tax you will be charged.

Does this sound silly? Can you image how many people this type of tax system would require? How much un-necessary work this would cause?
Now look at the Federal Income Tax System with all the forms, credits and deductions, etc.

See the comparison? How simple the Federal Income Tax System could be with a flat tax. Our citizens live in fear of the IRS and hate April 15th.

There is a better simpler system available if people will demand it. With the follow system, we could eliminate the dreaded April 15th deadline.

Simple Tax System: Use the right formula then adjust spending to the amount of money collected. Truthful Tax Reform——- Federal Tax Payroll Program.

1. “TOTALLY” Eliminate the Personal Income Tax “TOTALLY”.

2. Fact: FICA tax is over 15% of the employees’ paycheck. Federal Courts have ruled the FICA is a tax not a retirement fund. The Federal Government needs to be honest and declare that FICA tax goes to the general fund to pay for government spending programs. Re-name FICA tax to Federal Tax Payroll Program.

3. Government taxes should be on commission, just like all private businesses and private business’ employees. The government spending can only grow if more people make more money.

4. Payroll deduction is the most efficient way to collect taxes. The Federal Tax Payroll Program will be the only federal tax that wage-earning Americans will pay. Never a personal income tax form to file with the IRS.

5. Keep the system simple, one rate for all taxpayers. Ten (10%) Percent is good enough for GOD, then Ten (10%) Percent should be good enough for the government. However the federal government is not as efficient as GOD so lets put the maximum rate at twenty (20%) percent.

6. The Federal Tax Payroll Program shall be 20% “Maximum” of which Ten (10%) Percent to be withheld from the wage-earners’ pay to be matched by Ten (10%) Percent from the Employer. Rate shall not be raised ever.

7. Earmark how the money shall be allocated, such as:

(a) 4% to Citizens Retirement Fund, a 401K type program——private social security fund for each person;
(b) 4% to Social Security Fund for Senior Citizens retirement only;
(c) 1% to Senior Citizens Medical Fund;
(d) 1% to DOD for National Defense and
(e) 10% for the other spending programs.
A total of 20% of the wage-earners’ salary to go to the Federal government.

This type of system would result in no forms, no worry and a much smaller I.R.S. No tax forms to file each year. No tax credits to be given or taken away by the Federal government. No increase or decrease in the tax rate.

This would get the Federal Government out of micro-managing the daily life of the taxpayers. It is called FREEDOM!

Social Security; at this point, the government should just pay everyone the same amount each month once the person has reached age 62 or 65. We are a rich Country and we do not want our Senior Citizens living below the poverty level so just increase the monthly check for all senior citizens.

An advantage given by the government to one person means an unfair dis-advantage to all other Americans. Our Founding Fathers believed that small government and less taxes means more freedom.

The Oklahoma Taxpayer, Editorial by Bob Moore

Bob Moore, P.O. Box 1683, Lawton, OK 73502; Phone 580-351-2531; Web Page http://www.geocities.com/oklahomataxpayer Email: oklahomataxpayer@yahoo.com

I wouldn’t vote for any IDIOT that reminded me of Clinton.

Indeed. Maybe the Left will create Vietnam Liars for the Truth for Chuck Hagel like the Right did for Kerry. As Karl Rove proved, Professional Liars are the most effective in Politics.

Bob Moore -

I’m honored that you would confuse this forum with the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means. I can understand your confusion: hundreds of boring people, mostly white males, debating endlessly and never agreeing, with a dubious distinction for the polemical.

However, seeing as this is not *actually* part of the legislative branch of the U.S. government and we can’t *actually* make laws, please take your petitions to the folks who can help you. We can’t.

And back to reality…

I think 2008 will be Frist V Richardson and a very close race.

After 2006, depending how that goes in congress, wildcards will start to emerge, especially for possible VP picks.

Hagel may be in the mix somewhere but I don’t see him as a frontrunner for top slot or even VP right now.
I think the GOP has a huge bomb to drop in 2008, but I can’t predict that untill after nov. 2006.
2006 may be a “off year” but it will determine the winner in 2008.

I just love politics, its like going to the track and betting all you have, except you get to bet with everyone elses money too.

The key to my riddle is ; “out of site, out of mind”.

I just love politics, its like going to the track and betting all you have, except you get to bet with everyone elses money too.

That’s great :-) I love it too… though sometimes I get a little fed up with the people who don’t realize that it’s just a game.

Chops,

You are correct, it is a game, a very serious one and people can get hurt.

But in the end… its still a game.

Chops,

If Hagel wants to raise the retirement age, he or anyone else that thinks that way, should spend their last working year as a brick/block layer…then let them get back to me on that proposal.

norman,

i wasn’t talking about clinton’s politics, or his public failures, that have made the right despise him. i was talking about his charisma, which both sides agree is significant. my mother, in fact (a woman who has never THOUGHT of voting democrat), said to me after meeting clinton in 95 that she was overcome by his charisma. this fact was very unsettling to her. she quickly began licking envelopes for the dole campaign.

Beagle -
When Social Security was instituted, the retirement age was 65 and life expectancy was 63. Try laying bricks after you’re dead! Seriously, though, if you want to retire at 67 (that’s the age for people under 40 or something), you can do it on your own funds. If you don’t have enough saved up, then maybe you should quit your bricklaying job and manage a Sunoco or become a shelfstocker for a few years before SocSec kicks in; it’s not fair to those of working age to be expected to support long retirements for workably healthy people.

Chops,

That is exactly why Fed. mandated, one size fits all, programs seldom work fairly for everyone.

If the bricklayer quits his job at 65 because his body is warn out, and works for crap wages for 2 yrs., he will get screwed on the ammount of SS he gets later.

People that work at hard labor likely will die sooner anyway.
The rules are made by persons setting at a desk, it seems quite reasonable to them because they never did any real work anyway.

I have an idea ; at 65 the bricklayer(or anyone doing hard labor) gets to replace someone in congress(or another desk job) and that person has to replace the bricklayer ect. for 2 yrs.

The average bricklayer is likely smarter than the average congress person anyway.

(humor was intended)

Chuck Hagel is the man who said this morning that privatizing SS accounts does not save Soc. Sec. He said Congress needs to focus on saving SS. He is not opposed to private accounts, but, saving SS for those who choose to continue in it (a majority of Americans polled) is the first priority.

David,

I agree that saving SS should be the 1’st priority, but those in congress saying take personal accounts off the table will be a non-starter in that debate.

A blend of personal accounts and SS funding reforms may be what is needed in the long run.

For the Dem. leadership to say ; take that off the table before we debate anything, is like saying….”I hate you and your ideas” at the start of a meeting/debate…little room for agreement or common ground after that ?

Beagle said: “but those in congress saying take personal accounts off the table will be a non-starter in that debate.”

I agree. But, you have to admit, private accounts does not “save Social Security” as Bush has said, and that puts the ball for coming up with a plan to actually save it financially for those who will choose to remain in it, (the majority of Americans according to recent polls) squarely in the President’s and Republican’s court. They made the claim they wanted to save it, but, have not yet produced any concensus amongst even themselves as to how saving it can be accomplished.

As long as the GOP wants to talk private accounts but not put forth a GOP plan to save SS, private accounts is moot and the Democrats are right not to engage in any debate about private accounts UNTIL a plan is on the table to save SS.

As most Americans are now learning, Private accounts alone will hasten the demise of the SS program. SO the ball is in the GOP’s court.

Beagle said…

“A blend of personal accounts and SS funding reforms may be what is needed in the long run.”

I think the merits of all should be debated in congress.

Beagle, I have thought about this further, and no longer agree with you or my former position about removing private accounts from the table. Bush has to provide a plan for saving SS if he wants to keep private accounts on the table. If he doesn’t, then his private accounts amount to little more than the destruction of the SS system which he point blank told the public he wants to save.

If he wants to keep it on the table, HE has to provide a plan to save SS first, else, his opponents have a bigger fish to fry, namely private accounts which threaten to end SS. They have a few years to save it, but, must stop Bush’s plan to end it first. Logically, that is how this plays out politically.