Spreading the Wealth Around

Earlier this week Barack Obama used these four seemingly harmless words. Words which ultimately present a striking contrast between the core principles of our two parties. The very fact liberals can't understand how this stirred such a hornet's nest is further proof how out of touch they are with heartland America. Hopefully those hard working folks with the rose colored glasses on have finally awoken to the realization Mr. O.'s policies are totally out of touch with capitalism and ultimately will hurt the people he is trying to help.

"Spreading the wealth around" sounds so very nice and fair. To disagree almost seems heartless. Especially if you espouse to be a member of the "party of values" like I am. The retort thrown my way on the local opinion page comment section is often, "How can you be for people having more when others are suffering?" Often times liberals take it farther and quote some piece of Scripture proving Jesus wants fairness for all. These same people usually haven't read enough of the Bible to know Jesus tells the crowds many times life is inherently UNFAIR. He also tells us life on this Earth will involve forms of suffering for all of us. These same liberals don't seem to understand it is equality of opportunity not equality of outcome that is so important in a free society like ours.

What is so fair and just about taking a person's hard earned money and passing it out to others? Barack Obama constantly promises tax cuts for 95% of people. Trouble is about 40 of those same people don't pay any taxes now. Sounds more like a welfare check to me. Basically, he advocates taking my money and handing it to people (who could justifiably need it) who he deems in need of propping up. Thank you Mr. O., but I would like to MAKE THAT CHOICE MYSELF. I'm more than willing to be charitable with my resources if you would just stay out of the way. Taking more of my hard earned money to fund stupid pork barrel projects and then demanding I pay more to 'spread the wealth around' is ludicrous.

Quite a few people are in to Barack's 'need to serve' message. I am too. The difference is Mr. O. wants to make the serving forced, and I want to serve willingly. In the first case, you are talking about a cousin to slavery, and in the second case you are talking about generosity. Liberals want social engineering around every corner. From the 'fairness doctrine' they are pedaling against successful conservative radio stations making money with conservative hosts, to asking people to pay more in taxes and calling it patriotic, all their ideals are about government doing for you what you should do yourself.

Where are all the true conservatives these days articulating the answers to such foolish ways of thinking? You remember them, don't you? They had strong moral values and a short leash for stupid spending. I hope they have been listening to the response Joe the plumber is eliciting these past few days. People are hungry for a fix to their problems. Either we have strong leadership reminding us about responsibility and continuing to craft policies promoting equal opportunity for all, or we take a giant leap towards socialism. Which will it be?

Personal Attacks, Really?

I'm so tired of hearing about the McCain campaign's personal attacks simply because he is pointing out Barack Obama’s associations with some seedy characters. I thought personal attacks were statements about another which are untrue, unfair, or simply not relevant to the decision making process? Pointing out inconsistencies in candidates' statements is not an attack. For the last time, advertisements rebutting your opponent’s false claims are not negative. Pointing out who your opponent’s close associates are is not a personal attack.

When Obama claims to be tough on terrorism, his cozy relationship with an unrepentant bomber on US soil seems relevant to me. I don’t care if this man was protesting a perceived unjust war or not. When Obama claims undying love for his country, his relationship with a spiritual mentor who blames America for 9/11 and uses god's name and America’s name in vain seems relevant to me. When Obama keeps bashing Bush for our increasing deficit (and he is partially right on this), but then proposes new spending totaling $1 trillion dollars, I want to know about it. When Joe Biden talks about a restaurant he frequents, but it has been closed for 20 years, this speaks to truth of his statements. When Mr. Biden says FDR gave speeches in 1929 on television after the Great Depression and FDR wasn’t president nor television invented yet, I care about it. When Obama says we need to insure 47 million Americans that the heartless Bush administration doesn’t care about, but doesn’t tell you at least 12 million of these are illegal immigrants, this speaks to the substance of his rhetoric.

The McCain campaign is highlighting the character of Barack Obama. Character matters when difficulty arises (and it always does). But, it seems these days the only important thing for most voters is how much money they have or will have. Or, how much money THE OTHER GUY HAS. The Left will say McCain is talking character because they can’t talk about the economy without losing. That is true. You can’t match Barack’s class envy rhetoric when class envy does, in fact, exist. How can you argue with somebody promising free health care for all when everybody wants lower medical costs? How can you argue against the rich paying more taxes when middle and lower class America feels squeezed by high energy and utility costs? How can you argue the Bush administration shouldering the blame for the mortgage mess and declining stock portfolios instead of asking individual taxpayers to shoulder some of the blame for bad decision making? They don’t want to hear it. So, Barack is right, McCain can’t fight on the economy. Barack Obama has the upper hand when it comes to class envy.

Arguing economic facts is a vain pursuit these days because the age of reason is dead. Voters say they want facts, but then call you negative if you recite ones they don’t like. You can tell liberals that decreasing tax rates actually increases government revenue and it doesn’t matter. Send them to the IRS site proving your fact, and they ignore it by shifting the discussion to ‘the deficit’ created by Republicans which has more to do with out of control spending then tax receipts. You can tell liberals the bottom 40% of American taxpayers already don’t pay income tax at all, and it will not matter to them. They will still tell you Republicans are for the rich. You can tell a liberal all day long that Barney Frank and his cronies were warned about the seriousness of Fannie/Freddie’s situation back in 2005 by Republicans and they still blame George Bush.

Character matters. Outlining the other candidate’s positions on issues or rebutting their false claims is not a personal attack. Barack Obama might be promising the moon, but can he deliver? I’m sorry Obama campaign that must have been a personal attack. Please forgive me.

A Big Reason For the Market Decline

The stock market continues to plummet almost daily. Five percent drops, almost unthinkable a month ago, now occur two or three times a week. Weren't these drops the main reason Congress crammed through a bailout bill of $700 billion? Wasn’t this going to stop the sky from falling and Armageddon from happening? Isn't this the same reason the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates by 1/2 a point the other day? How come this hasn't stemmed the tide? The S&P 500 is down almost 20% in the LAST TEN DAYS. People have lost a combined $2.5 trillion dollars in wealth.

There are many reasons behind a market's rise or fall. It is much too big a phenomenon to explain by simply one thing. Fear and greed always swing the pendulum too far in one direction or the other. I suspect this major drop is long overdue but shouldn't be quite as deep or have occurred quite as fast as it has.

The market is a forward looking indicator. The "people in the know" about future profits (institutional investors) take positions in the market for a profession. Their livelihood is looking at companies all day long. Their success depends on being right about the direction of the market more times than not. These investors talk to professionals all day long. So, despite the bailout and global interest rate cuts, why is the market still tanking? I believe there is one big reason right now. Investors are discounting a Barack Obama presidency. It is becoming ever clearer Mr. Obama is going to win the election. Our economy is struggling right now and the market sees Barack’s ideas as a death blow to corporations’ ability to make money and create jobs. One need only look at a few top line bullet points from his speeches to figure out why people are beginning to hide money in their mattresses.

*Barack’s sidekick believes taxes are “patriotic.” To an investor patriotic taxpayers cause very upset stomachs. I actually believe this comment was the precipice for the decline. Since Sept. 19th when he said it, the S&P 500 is down more than 30%. In only three weeks.

*Universal health care for all including the 12-20 million illegal aliens here. Why do I say this? You say “it can’t be Mr. Conservative in Ohio.” Well, Barack continually cites the 47 million uninsured he is going to take care of. Illegals are included in this number, so either he is going to insure them, or his rhetoric is a bit off. Either way, assuming he is lying about the number and subtracting them out, free health care for another 30-35 million folks has got to be paid for somewhere. This somewhere is all the rest of us.

*He is going to substantially increase taxes on “the rich.” While this sounds nice, they are the ones creating jobs. Would you invest in companies soon closing up shop rather than giving half their earnings over to the government? How about investing in companies moving offshore to avoid the excessive taxation? Or companies laying off workers because they had to raise their prices to cover the increased taxes?

*Mr. Obama has this very nice sounding rhetoric about our “shared responsibility” as a nation. This just seems so nice and fuzzy, but when you pick it apart, it really means those at the top of anything in society need to care about others through the use of government force. Forced caring is socialism and is what has put Europe on the back burner for a very long time (at least economically).

*An additional $1 trillion dollar government spending spree is the cure for what ails us according to Dr. Obama. Granted, Republicans have been no better for the last ten years on this issue, but digging the ditch deeper to, in essence, buy votes is sickening.

I have no proof that my theory is correct. Maybe the sky is falling? Maybe the market isn’t sure who is going to win the election or what their real policies will be?

All I know is the market looks ahead, and with 27 days until the vote, this issue is front and center in the minds of everyone. It sure seems like more than a coincidence to me. If you care about the next four years, please discuss this issue with everyone you know. It is too important to ignore.

It's Not the Economy, Stupid

This whole election cycle comes down to our economy. Most folks have one eye on the stock market and one hand clenching their wallet. Case in point, much of last night's debate centered on our 'dismal' economy and what each candidate will do to avoid the Great Depression Two. Most of the questions during the first hour were all basically the same, "How are you going to fix my wallet"?

Don't get me wrong, the reasons behind Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac's demise are important, but are they any more important than who the next Supreme Court nominee will be? People defaulting on their mortgage payments is very troubling, but is it as troubling as the imminent legalization of marriage for a lifestyle choice abhorrent to God? Is it more important than approving behavior which has been the downfall of every civilization in history?

People losing jobs is some serious stuff, but is it any more serious then finding out why one of the candidates regularly associates with an unrepentant terrorist? A candidate who pledges to keep us safe from these same terrorists?? BTW, thank you Sean Hannity for talking about this every day for the last year until finally the NY Times brought it up last weekend. Folks defaulting on credit card bills is devastating, but is it more devastating than securing our borders from nuts trying to get in here and kill us all?

Many in our own churches often criticize Christians as being focused exclusively on abortion and homosexuality as campaign issues. I would counter the general public is focused almost exclusively on their wallets and as a campaign issue.

Allow me to elaborate on just one of these important 'other issues.' There is an excellent chance our next leader could permanently alter the balance of power in the Supreme Court for the next thirty years. This same Court just spent the LAST thirty years largely making up law to suit their social engineering goals. The result? Abortion on demand. Prayer taken out of school. Our Judeo-Christian framework torn down every chance they get. Liberal policies are hailed as landmark judgments and progressive. Conservative policies are struck down as judgmental and restrictive. Often times, the victims have more rights than the accused. The Court has long held speech is free as long as this speech agrees with the current liberal think tanks. Clearly, if Mr. Obama is elected and an existing member of the Court steps down, the most liberal nominee possible will be nominated.

We don't have another thirty years to wait. The country will continue to slide morally, ethically, and spiritually. I know, I know, "you can't legislate morality" is often uttered by liberal atheists and liberal Christians alike. My concern is no longer "legislating morality", it is being in such a minority that anyone who doesn't agree with the present radical leadership will be censored. All countries have a framework for their laws. The question is not "if" but "what" do these laws get tied back to? Up until recently our framework, while not perfect, gave religious freedom for all. The government has never forced us to believe anything. But the buzzards are circling, and what liberals really want is religious freedom for all except Christians who they want to shut up.

Economic cycles come and go but a nation's soul continues to hang in the balance.

Advice to McCain

Time is running out for the Maverick campaign. Today we learned Obama-Biden won the first two debates against McCain-Palin by 50%-29%. It is time for them to stop playing up John's call for the successful surge in Iraq, and start defining why Barack Obama's policies are going to put the nail in our economic coffin. In a time when every one's focus is on their wallet, and the media reminds us daily of our economy's imminent collapse, people have tunnel vision and your message much be targeted to that vision.

When running against someone who's playbook includes 'patriotic' tax increases for people, you must come to the fight with concrete reasons why pilfering money from job creators ultimately hurts everybody. The class warfare argument plays well until people understand how they actually get hurt in the long term beyond the handouts given them in the short term. I offer up some useful dialogue for McCain's sprint to November.

*Ask the everyday folks this simple question. "All other things equal, would you work for a company charging you $2,000 for health insurance or $7,000 for the same insurance"? This simple decision is no different for companies choosing to locate in countries charging 10% versus our 35%. Companies will keep jobs in the U.S. when tax policy is more favorable to them.

*Economies are not built from the bottom up. Jobs are not created from the bottom up. Risk taking should be rewarded in life when a person succeeds. Inactivity (failing to take risks) should be discouraged.

*Lowering taxes actually increases revenue to the government. Out of control entitlement spending is the major cause of our $9 trillion national debt.

*Our current falling stock market and credit crisis are not the fault of deregulation as our media and Democrats would have you believe. Much of the fault lies with Democratic regulators IGNORING Republican calls for MORE REGULATION back in 2004 & 2005. When government mandates shaky loans to folks who can't afford it, all in the name of fairness and building the economy from the bottom up, this is what happens.

*Personal responsibility still matters. Gov. Palin began to touch on this at the beginning of the debate last week and McCain needs to continue the dialog. McCain needs to spread the blame where it actually belongs instead of on the Bush administration who had nothing to do with people's mortgage defaults. Blame the Federal Reserve for keeping interest rates artificially low solely to keep investors happy. Blame Barney Frank and his friends for being in bed with Fannie & Freddie executives instead of regulating them. Blame Republicans and Democrats in congress for spending our money recklessly. Finally, pointedly indicate those folks who took out loans they obviously couldn't afford are at fault as well.

I've said, since the beginning of my blog, McCain needed someone like Newt Gingerich or Mitt Romney who could clearly articulate these salient points to the American people. Believe me, Barack Obama couldn't dance with Mitt Romney on the economy and Mitt understands it much better than John McCain. When Republicans are in office, the media always makes our economy the defining issue, and the McCain camp should have been smart enough to figure that one out. War records gain respect, but fat wallets get votes.

Is there another choice for president??

Less than 80 days until US citizens step into the booth to cast their vote for our highest office. Frankly can I sit this one out? My choice is between a liberal who loves being called liberal, and a liberal who hides behind the cover of an elephant.

On the left, we have Barack Obama, the choice of European elitists. While those of us in Middle America are hanging on to our guns and religion, Barack is overseas belittling American values and generally trashing our way of life. We are the stupid people. He is siding with the folks around the world who would like nothing better than seeing our republic fall in stature.

The pendulum swings wildly for this guy. The unborn don't seem to matter as much as the environment. America shouldn't be polluting the environment drilling for oil, but it is fine for Saudia Arabia to do so. Clarence Thomas can't measure up as a Supreme Court Justice, but Rev. Wright with his American bashing, and Bill Ayers with his terrorist leanings are people he seeks council and friendship with. The war in Iraq is wrong, but we should march into Afghanistan or Pakistan. Mexicans should be free to live here and not integrate, but Americans need to speak other languages like French.

Electing this guy surely means higher taxes, sky high gas prices, more government, lousy health care, appeasement to our enemies, and unrelenting socialism dumped on the American public. I never thought someone could be scarier than Mrs. Clinton, but I have no doubt she would've drifted to the right a bit, just like her husband did. Mr Obama? No way, this guy is hard core left. No thanks, Barack. I've already had enough of the blame America crowd. This man doesn't inspire individual hope and hard work. He inspires the "blame everyone else" crowd and promises a government that will rescue us from every ill. Plundering the rich and passing things to the poor will solve everything. I happen to like the rich...without them where would the jobs come from? Have you ever worked for a poor person?

Of course, I'm not thrilled with Mr. McCain either. Here is a liberal in sheep's clothing. He snubs conservatives every chance he gets. What can we expect from him? Remember his endless talking about the appeasement of law breakers sneaking into the country by granting them amnesty? Or how about McCain-Feingold?? McCain-Kennedy?? If they weren't squaring off, I can almost see it now, McCain-Obama. Remember when he was pro-tax 5 years ago, and now he is anti-tax today? Or being against offshore drilling until a month ago. He still thinks we should protect ANWR and the 2,000 acres out of 19 MILLION at all costs. Apparently, he hasn't seen the photos of the caribou huddled around the oil pipelines. On most social issues, this man is clearly liberal.

So there you have it, we have a social and economic liberal versus a social liberal/economic moderate. Ronald Reagan cannot be smiling today. The city on a shining hill just had its lights dimmed a bit. I've decided to hold my nose and vote for John McCain in November. While he is leeringly liberal, he does have several very good points that make him infinitely better than Barack.

*He recognizes our national sovereignty is tied to being on the offensive against those who would nuke us.

*He without question loves this county. As opposed to Mrs. "America has never given me reason to be proud" Obama. Sure, Barack didn't say it, but do you really think he disagrees with his wife?

*He hates earmarks, and unlike most other Repub's. and Dem's. might actually cut spending.

I just hope the single, under 30 crowd stays away from the polls. I'm tired of having my vote cancelled out by people who look to late night comedians to direct their vote instead of actually thinking about the issues. Voting for president requires more than 5 minutes of listening to David Letterman.