A Christmas Poem for Family and Friends

TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS, HE LIVED ALL ALONE, IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF PLASTER AND STONE. I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE, AND TO SEE JUST WHO IN THIS HOME DID LIVE. I LOOKED ALL ABOUT, A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE, NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS, NOT EVEN A TREE. NO STOCKING BY MANTLE, JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND, ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES OF FAR DISTANT LANDS. WITH MEDALS AND BADGES, AWARDS OF ALL KINDS, A SOBER THOUGHT CAME THROUGH MY MIND. FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT, IT WAS DARK AND DREARY, I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER, ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY. THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING, SILENT, ALONE, CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME. THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE, THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER, NOT HOW I PICTURED A UNITED STATES SOLDIER. WAS THIS THE HERO OF WHOM I'D JUST READ? CURLED UP ON A PONCHO, THE FLOOR FOR A BED? I REALIZED THE FAMILIES THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT, OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT. SOON ROUND THE WORLD, THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY, AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY. THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR, BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS, LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE. I COULDN'T HELP WONDER HOW MANY LAY ALONE, ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME. THE VERY THOUGHT BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE, I DROPPED TO MY KNEES AND STARTED TO CRY. THE SOLDIER AWAKENED AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE, 'SANTA DON'T CRY, THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE; I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, I DON'T ASK FOR MORE, MY LIFE IS MY GOD, MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS.' THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP, I COULDN'T CONTROL IT, I CONTINUED TO WEEP. I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS, SO SILENT AND STILL AND WE BOTH SHIVERED FROM THE COLD NIGHT'S CHILL. I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT, THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR SO WILLING TO FIGHT. THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER, WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE, WHISPERED, 'CARRY ON SANTA, IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE.' ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH, AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT. 'MERRY CHRISTMAS, MY FRIEND, AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.'

Is John Boehner In Trouble?

The position of Speaker of the House of Representatives is normally a coveted and honored seat at the proverbial head of the table. But, as things in Washington, D.C. keep unfolding in disarray as it has for the past year, John Boehner may very well have a target on his back.

Several instances of flip-flopping have been apparent in 2011 and one wonders when will Eric Cantor, House Majority leader, make his move to attain the position he most covets. Boehner has not really shown the kind of leadership the junior members, mostly Tea Party members, want. When challenged by the freshmen representatives Boehner seems to re-position himself to satisfy the younger members of Congress.

If the House Republicans are responsible for raising taxes on the middle class and not close the loopholes for the most wealthy Americans, the message would be clear and resounding. Support for the millionaires and billionaires is, in their opinion, the way America should be led. And, if that is in fact the case, the "Super Pac's" will ultimately run this country while middle and lower class citizens could only run and hide and bury their heads in the sand.

America's businessmen and women understand, the best remedy for growth, hiring and most of all greater profits, is a healthy middle class that will purchase and use their products, not a over-taxed middle class that is scrounging to survive.

Boehner understands that raising taxes to the middle class while maintaining the huge loop-holes for the nation's wealthiest, will simply not fly. It becomes political suicide. Hiding behind a conference committee or talking about a one-year extension is simply crap piled upon crap. The Tea Party simply wants to kill it and claim victory as the "new" ideals for the american people.

Boehner is in real trouble and Cantor is all set to push him out of the way so he can ascend to the throne of power and crush all the dissenting members of the House. Boehner's political posturing has backfired and unfortunately he needs his democratic counterparts, he needs to strike a deal with them, and he needs to cut ties with the Tea Party members and take back control of the House. 

House Republicans push for new payroll tax cut talks

A reprint:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Republican-led House of Representatives will set the stage on Tuesday for a showdown with Senate Democrats over a payroll tax cut extension that is becoming a proxy for 2012 election year battles.

The tax legislation has become the latest in a string of battles in Congress this year, all of which have contributed to widespread public discontent with Washington politicians.

When the House votes on Tuesday it will in effect be rejecting a bill that passed the Senate overwhelmingly on Saturday and calling for formal negotiations with the Democratic-led Senate.

The Senate bill would set a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut with the aim of crafting a full-year tax cut extension early next year.

The House move will cast doubt on the future of the popular payroll tax cut, which is caught up in a high-stakes game of brinkmanship between the two political parties that some say could backfire.

Washington gridlock is fueling an anti-incumbent mood among voters heading into next year's elections.

"Our members do not want to just punt and do a two-month short-term fix where we have to come back and do this again," House Speaker John Boehner said late on Monday after a closed meeting with fellow Republicans.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid shot back that the House should allow an up-or-down vote on the two-month stop-gap plan. "I am happy to continue negotiations on a yearlong deal as soon as the House of Representatives passes the Senate's bipartisan compromise, and prevents a tax hike from hitting middle-class families," Reid said.

Several Republican lawmakers publicly agreed with Reid.

The bipartisan two-month deal crafted by the Senate came after efforts at a full-year tax cut failed.

At stake is much more than politicians' reputations and their 2012 re-election chances. If Democrats and Republicans cannot agree on extending the tax cut that expires on December 31, 160 million Americans will begin 2012 with less money - about $1,000 a year for the average worker - in their paychecks.

That, economists fear, could dampen, or even end what little economic growth there is as the United States struggles to right itself after the deepest recession in decades and severe debt problems in Europe that could infect America.

Not only would workers' taxes go up in a couple weeks if the two sides cannot find a quick compromise. About 2.2 million people who have suffered long-term unemployment will see benefit checks cut off by the middle of February. And doctors treating elderly Medicare patients also will see their reimbursements cut.

Once the House on Tuesday requests a new round of negotiations, as expected, the next steps are unclear.

"We are not coming back, we are not appointing negotiators until they pass the Senate compromise," Reid's spokesman Adam Jentleson insisted.

President Barack Obama already has delayed a Hawaii vacation. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Monday said, "The president has made clear that he wants Congress to get this done, that he is here now and will be here as Congress tries to sort this out." But Carney did not make clear how Obama might bring the two sides together, or whether he will even try.

(Editing by Christopher Wilson)

HEAD START PROGRAMS TO BENEFIT FROM GRANTS

On Friday, December 16th, it is expected that the White House will announce nine states will receive grants totaling $500 million for the sole purpose of getting children ages birth to 5 years ready for kindergarten. 35 states including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, applied for the chance at between $50 million and $100 million in grant money.

The nine states are California, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Washington, for an average of just over $55.5 million per state. The idea is to jump-start improvements in an often overlooked early childhood education program. The money to aid this country's youngest learners is part of the Obama administration's cornerstone education initiative called, "The Race for the Top" grant competition. The idea is for states to compete for federal dollars to create programs that make schools more effective. Although it seems like a lot of money being handed out, last year $4 billion was given for schools focused on K-12 education.

Annually billions are spent on early education programs in America, but the quality and availability of those programs varies. According to Steve Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, roughly 50% of all 3-year-olds and 25% of all 4-year-olds do not attend a preschool.

Kids that have attended "quality" early education programs have shown to do better in school, less likely to be imprisoned and make more money as adults. Children from low-income families who enter kindergarten without the benefit of early childhood education programs are estimated to start school 18 months behind and are likely to struggle to make it up.

In order to be considered, states were asked to demonstrate a willingness to commit to making programs more accessible, coordinated and more effective. Obama announced last month that new rules would require lower-performing Head Start programs were to compete for the funding. A proposal by the Education Department, if accepted, would create a new office to oversee the grants and assist in the coordination of the early learning programs. 

As the Deadline Approaches...

Congress is at it again. Another deadline is at it's critical point to keep the government funded and congress wants to hurry up and get it passed so they can go on yet another break. The problem is the territorial wars are back at it with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats controlling the Senate and White House, and this time it may just come down to a compromise. 


Republicans introduced a $915 billion spending bill in the House on Thursday trying to force the Democrats to pass the legislation that would keep the U.S. Government funded beyond this weekend when the "Holiday" break is set to occur.


And again it comes down to another deadline for the bill to be passed as the government shutdown would be in just two days. The temporary funding measure set to expire on Friday would, if not renewed or revised, shut down major services run by the departments of defense, education, health and labor.


But both Republicans and Democrats are arguing over how to extend an expiring payroll tax cut that would affect 160 million Americans and each side is attempting to use the bill as a bargaining chip. Included in the bill are funds that would provide crucial government functions such as patrolling the U.S. borders, but has little chance of passing unless the Democratic-controlled Senate can agree that the bill is complete. But at the White House request, the Senate Democrats are attempting to force the Republican "hands" to agree on payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits even if it means delaying their "vacation".


In other "news":


The House voted 283-136 for the $662 billion measure Wednesday night, a rare bipartisan vote the reflected the strong support for annual legislation that authorizes money for the men and women of the military as well as weapons systems and the millions of jobs they generate in lawmakers' districts.

The Senate was expected to clear the bill Thursday and send it to President Barack Obama.

The House vote came just hours after the administration abandoned a veto threat over provisions dealing with the handling of terrorism suspects.

Applying pressure on House and Senate negotiators working on the bill last week, Obama and senior members of his national security team, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, had sought modifications in the detainee provisions.

Negotiators announced the changes late Monday, clearing the way for White House acceptance.

In a statement, press secretary Jay Carney said the new bill "does not challenge the president's ability to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the American people."

Specifically, the bill would require that the military take custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates who is involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. There is an exemption for U.S. citizens.

"I told you so..."

My last post of November 14th was about the upcoming failure of the "Super Committee" to reach any sort of agreement and I was right. The deadline past without much fanfare by any media reporting or political backlash. It proves once again the truth about Washington being broken. The only winner was President Obama, that is, if his real purpose was to highlight that a "two-party" system can no longer provide for the American people, he succeeded.


On Saturday night, December 10th, the latest round of Republican debates was featured and for the most part, I haven't watched any of the others, but there was literally nothing else on television besides Christmas shows I have already seen, so I decided to watch most of the sparring by the six major contenders. Honestly I think ABC and Yahoo would have been better off simulcasting The "Grinch Who Stole Christmas" rather than a night of misleading speeches by those that can't decide on who their enemy is. 


Yes, there were a few light moments on stage. Mitt Romney offering a $10,000 bet with Rick Perry, a faux pas that could take serious numbers away from Romney. Michelle Bachmann and her consistent reminder of her "tragic" upbringing of being in a broken family. And, even the sparring between Romney and Newt Gingrich arguing about who was the closer friend to Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.


I really have no idea who might have won the debate as there was more sparring among the participants than actual posturing on key election topics. Maybe Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, or former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania actually came out on top because I heard very little from them about anything. 


I guess it's true that it's not what is said, but what you hear. For example, Romney incorrectly stated that President Obama said Israel must "go back" to the 1967 borders. That is simply not true! Obama stated Israel should go back to those borders as a starting point for "mutually agreed swaps".


Perry states that over the past 11 years Texas, under his leadership, has created over a million jobs, while there has been over two million job losses across the rest of the country. A statement that is both misleading and false. Numbers are inflated by Perry to make himself look good because as a matter of fact the U.S. has only lost 897,000 jobs according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics over the same period of time.


The one thing this over-used forum has proven is that it's really difficult to know who a Republican should vote for. With little criticism lobbed at Ron Paul or Rick Santorum, maybe they can sneak away some of the lead of the career Washingtonian, Newt Gingrich. I wish you good luck when you finally go to vote in the primaries across country. My advice...eennie meanie minee mo!

November 23rd Deadline

Once again Senior Citizens and the military are coming under attack by Congressional members as the Super Committee wrangles with the fast closing deadline of November 23rd to make policy recommendations to their fellow members of  $1.2 trillion dollars in budget reductions. And once again it is becoming apparent that the wealthiest Americans are still off limits.


It baffles the minds of those of the middle and lower classes  as to why they are always the target of budget cuts and program reductions. Why is the military always thrown out as the bait to get us to understand the difficult decisions that lie before the policy makers? One must admit that while the middle and lower classes are the reason these politicians are in office, they are the one’s ignored. Remember, the middle and lower classes make up a majority of the voters, who by all counts, feel these members of congress are looking out for them and that’s why they vote they way they do. It is also important to realize that the military is doing all the dirty work and keeping us safe so we can continue to elect these misfits. But if the mainstream American is voting on emotion only without really looking closely at the policies of those running for reelection, I guess we shouldn’t complain when our taxes are increased and our entitlements are reduced.


Why doesn’t it anger the American people when a deadline, as important as this one, is once again ignored and congress can take a week off. Obviously they feel they can reach a consensus in ten short days and Americans should not worry. They are, after all, looking out for our best interest because they owe us for their elected position and everyone knows it’s the American people they care most about and not the “fat-cats” of Wall Street or the special interest groups or the richest of us all. No, they are only concerned with us mediocre and common citizens. Yeah, right. And oh by the way, they had better hurry so they aren’t late for their annual Thanksgiving break as well.


And, one more thing, no matter what happens in this vote or when these members of congress come up for reelection, one thing is certain, even if they are not reelected they still will have the healthcare insurance and retirement pension to count on. 

Myths and Truths About Social Security

Exploding 5 misconceptions that threaten the system

Reprint from AARP Bulletin of 11/1/11: by: Jane Bryant Quinn 

It happened during the stock boom of the 1990s, and it is happening again. Social Security is coming under attack. The first challenge arose from hope — that savers would get more retirement income for their money if they bought stocks. But the idea of privatization was not popular with the public.

See also: Social Security recipients welcome 3.6 percent COLA.

Now, the attack comes from fear ­ ­ — that Social Security has serious financial problems and can only fail. Younger people lean more toward change than older people do. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll conducted a year ago found that 60 percent of adults who aren't retired expect to get nothing — zero — from Social Security in their older age.

Myth No. 1: Social Security is going bankrupt. No, it's not. Even in the unlikely event that nothing changes and the program's entire surplus runs out in 2036, as projected, checks would keep coming. Payroll taxes at current rates would cover 77 percent of all the future benefits promised. That's true for young and old alike, and includes inflation adjustments.

Myth No. 2: I'd be better off if I'd kept my Social Security taxes in my own investment account. Hmmm ­ ­ — you're saying that you'd faithfully put that money aside, every year of your working life, in a mix of stocks and bonds, without ever skipping a year, drawing on your nest egg or selling when the market dropped? Few such paragons exist.

You'd need to invest far more than you probably realize to match the benefits Social Security pays. As an example, take a 65-year-old couple with a single breadwinner who earned the average wage. At retirement, they'd currently get about $2,170 a month, plus inflation adjustments, for life, the Urban Institute reports.

To equal that sum in private savings, they'd need to have about $580,000, says Michael Kitces, director of research for Pinnacle Advisory Group, and the money might last only 30 years. How many average earners are likely to save that much?

Myth No. 3: In 1983, Congress made changes to Social Security to build a fund that would pay for boomers when they retire, so it's not fair to change benefits now. No, Congress did not intend to "advance fund" the boomers, according to a study of the record by Charles Blahous of Stanford University's Hoover Institution. It raised taxes and cut some future benefits to cure an imminent insolvency. The trust fund reserves — now $2.6 trillion — were a by-product of the decisions made. Congress never veered from its vision of intergenerational compact: Working people pay for those who don't, or can't, work anymore. On the flip side, the compact requires older people to make some concessions so that younger people can afford it.

Myth No. 4: You should get out of Social Security the amount you put in. No. Social Security is not an individual investment program (see Myth  No. 2). Your taxes paid for the earlier generation of retirees. Current workers are paying for you. The total amount of your benefit depends on how much you earned, whether you get a spousal benefit, when you retire and how long you live.

Myth No. 5: Social Security helps old people, not younger people like me. Wrong. It provides income support to qualified widows and widowers with young children, as well as orphans. Just as important, it saves young families from the cost of supporting older parents who, without Social Security, wouldn't have enough money to live on. It also provides benefits for workers who become disabled.

My final point … and it isn't a myth, it's a fact. If young people switched their payroll taxes into private accounts, the government would have to borrow $6.5 trillion or more (depending on the details) to keep paying out benefits to current retirees.

That means higher deficits, higher income taxes, further slashes in spending, or all three. It's smarter — and cheaper — to fix the current program and put everyone's mind at rest. 

Who is really at risk for 2012?

The upcoming 2012 elections may arguably become the most important opportunity for the American people to voice their concerns and displeasure of the current state of affairs in Washington, DC. That is if the people can recognize the cloud of fluff currently being offered.

The Republican led House, with John Boehner at the helm, has vowed to block any campaign President Obama introduces to create jobs, cut spending, balance the budget or create revenue. The Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell has threatened to use the filibuster to prevent any ideas from the Democrats. Instead of offering ideas or God forbid, compromising, they would rather become the second “do-nothing Congress” since Franklin Roosevelt incumbent Harry Truman ran for reelection.

It is the republican belief that with high unemployment, high debt, failed health care reform, Obama is a lame duck. Their continued political bantering while raising money and looking for support for the upcoming primaries is based on an ineffective President that can’t lead the nation back to prosperity. However, with all their finger pointing and arguing about which Republican candidate has the best “new” tax plan, they seemed to be as dysfunctional as a tiger kidney in a human body. It’s there, but it hasn’t solved the problem.

Obama is an intellectual and as such could use this to bolster his campaign and up his approval rating significantly if he truly wants a second term. No, Obama is not a true leader in the sense that Kennedy was, or as ruthless as Clinton or as likeable as Reagan, but he is charismatic and if he can perform as well as he did in 2008 by “informing” the American people of the Republican based congress, he still might have a chance. Let’s face it, there is no clear front runner in the Republican race and with their fractured approach to the economy and jobs creation, their convention might just end up as the best comedy on television next summer.

Everyone agrees that the Republicans took over the House Majority and won just enough seats in the Senate to create a stalemate for majority votes and apoplexy in government as a result of the terrible economy. But instead of job creation, they've busied themselves focusing on trying to defund Planned Parenthood, protecting Americans from the imaginary threat of Sharia Law, and fending off non-existent attack on the use of "In God We Trust." The Republican controlled House hasn't voted on a single job creation measure since John Boehner and his colleagues took power last January.

Even in the “Super Committee”, Republicans are unwilling to ask millionaires to pay to help jump start America’s economic house. They want to restrict the power of the EPA and restrict funding for contraception. In fact Mr. Boehner and his team published a House schedule for 2012 that has the House in session only 94 days out of 366, (yes it’s leap year), a whopping 75% of their year off with pay.

Instead of having demonstrations about re-distributing the wealth, how about we ask Congress to actually go to work in 2012? Just this once, let’s ask them to be responsible.

Apathy: The Reason We Never Change

When it comes to this country and the lack of change it becomes apparent that apathy is a strong motivator. Why do anything when it's easier to complain about the lack of leadership in Washington, rather than actually making a physical and mental effort to promote change.


It's not our fault Washington can't fix the country, after all, we elected the representatives from our district to fix all our problems and keep our interests first and foremost above all others. It's their job and if they don't do it right, we have the right to sit back and complain. They promised us they would do it and they should. Why should we get involved? Why should we have to make an effort to let them know what they promised and haven't delivered? They should know and they should fix it. 


But I digress, it should be clear as day. I created a petition that could possibly fix the problem, hold Washington accountable and limit their  stay in the Capital if they don't. But once again, apathy has played a big part as to the politico never having to be held accountable. We live in an apathetic time with a questionable attitude that says if they want our names and emails, they will come after us. It's not like this country was founded on the premise that there could be a better way to live.


No, society has become selfish and lazy to the point that why do anything at all when we can just sit back and point fingers and cast blame on those WE elected to fix our country and system. GOD BLESS AMERICA and the right to be apathetic.


http://wh.gov/ToU

A Very Simple Petition

http://wh.gov/ToU

Take two minutes to read and if you agree please sign and then pass it on. We need 25,000 signatures and the President will get a look at it and hopefully the people will have their voice heard.

Re-Post by Gene Vallee

Warren Buffett, "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all
sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. The 26th
amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months
& 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in
1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to
the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the
land...all because of public pressure.

Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of
twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do
likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the
message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*

1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office
and receives no pay when they are out of office.

2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All
funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security
system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system,
and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for
any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans
do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay
will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the
same health care system as the American people.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American
people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen
made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,
not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours
should serve their term's), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take
three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is
time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree with the above, pass it on.

By: Gene Vallee

Republican Candidates have all the answer, or do they?

With the upcoming 2012 Presidential campaign in full swing, at least on the Republican side, the People will more than likely see less and less accomplished in Washington. But make no mistake that we the people are not forgotten in this political process that clouds the mind with whom shall we vote for. The answers will be clear as mud as time goes on and the nearer we get to deciding who will lead us for the next four years.


However, one thing is clear, the Republican candidates are so used to bashing the Democrats ideas that they can’t decide on a viable plan in which to get the nation back on it’s feet again. Take the current candidates position on the tax  code.


Texas Governor Rick Perry’s plan would give taxpayers and corporate America a choice of paying a flat 20% or their current tax rate. Herman Cain has his 9-9-9 plan which would make a 9% federal sales tax, 9% personal income tax and a 9% corporate tax. Former House speaker Newt Gingrich wants a flat 15% income tax, while former Massachusetts’s governor Mitt Romney has a 59-point economic plan. And former Utah governor Jon Huntsman would set only three tax rates and eliminate all deductions, which in my opinion would stifle economic growth by causing people to hang onto their money rather than give money to charity, purchase a house or even contribute to political campaigns. Talk about a “shoot yourself in the foot approach“.


Perry’s plan is not as well thought out in my opinion as many people in this country would end up not paying any income tax at all. Take a family of four that are buying their home making $60,000 a year combined. The flat rate would be would be $12, 000. Take away four $12,500 tax deductions per person, they now have effectively reduced their income by $50,000 leaving a 20% tax on $10,000. But if you include the deduction for mortgage interest, you are bound to zero out any remaining tax owed and that doesn’t account for deductions for charity, or state and local taxes.


With all these concepts on how to tax the people and corporations of this country, not answering the question of how to put 9.2% of the country on unemployment back to work, deal with the healthcare issue, repairing our infrastructure and funding special needs like our education system, military and government to name a few, how can they be serious about running our country.


It’s easy to say President Obama has failed this country and driven it into a larger debt. Failed healthcare reform, infrastructure repair, balance the budget, and so on. It is easy to cast blame on the Democrats while the Republicans and Tea Party members say they have all the answers if only the opposing party would just listen. But it is still the constituents that have and will continue to suffer long after 2012 has come and gone. Everything put before Congress has been shot down by opposing chambers and at least we have the simple task of deciding who we want to guide us for the next four years. It seems clear as mud to me.

Cuts in Medicaid hurt those that need it most

With the growing debt in this country, the lack of federal stimulus dollars and the political arguing, comes the reduction in state funded Medicaid for those that need it most. States like Hawaii are limiting hospital stays to as few as ten days in a calendar year. Basically that means that after ten days you're out on the street whether you are well enough or not, or you pay out of pocket. As it is now, to get Medicaid  assistance I would have to pay around 75% out of pocket from my monthly disability payment in order for Medicaid to kick in. 


Senator Sherrod Brown, (D) Ohio, announced a 3.6% cost of living adjustment, (cola), for those on Social Security. It has been a number of years since the last cola and while it's great to finally get one, it doesn't amount to much when it comes to assisting an already impoverished class of Americans. 


If I take my disability stipend and multiply it by the 3.6% increase it amounts to less than $61 per month. Barely enough to fill a gas tank once a month, or pay for one night out (if your single) and certainly less than one more day in the hospital. While Obama-Care is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, it would at least assure an elderly person the opportunity to receive the necessary care needed for those afflictions that come with age.


Politicians, especially those in the Republican party, spend so much time defeating the proposals from the Democrats they fail to come up with a plan of their own that doesn't involve protecting the rich. When will the politicians realize the people of this country are tired of their posturing and gamesmanship?


I know I have said in the past we need to restructure the political system in this country, but it's time. It is time to stop protecting the rich, the lobbyists and start working for the people who elected them.

The Green Thing

In the line at the store, the cashier told an older woman that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment. 
  
The woman apologized to him and explained, "We didn't have the green thing back in my day." 
  
The clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment." 
  
He was right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in its day. 
  
Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. 
  
But we didn't have the green thing back in our day. 
  
We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. 
  
But she was right. We didn't have the green thing in our day. 
  
Back then, we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that old lady is right; we didn't have the green thing back in our day. 
  
Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana. 
  
In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. 
  
When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. 
  
Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. 
  
But she's right; we didn't have the green thing back then. 
  
We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. 

We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. 
  
But we didn't have the green thing back then. 
  
Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint. 
  
But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then? 

Time for a Financial Revolt

I believe it's time for a financial revolt to take place in this country. All the talk about financial stimulus and jump starting the economy is getting old and a bit redundant. The average american has been the biggest loser in this country for far too long and it's time to start taking back the nation and financial markets.


How many times do you see on television, hear on radio, or read in the newspapers about awesome low interest deals on cars, only to see, read or hear about special interest deals available to "well qualified buyers" and know you are not the people they're talking about? How is it car makers are posting profits if the average american doesn't qualify for their "special offers? Oh yeah, that's right, they get kick backs from banks by charging us higher interest and selling it to the banks as "damaged" credit customers, sometimes raking in 2% to as much as 5% back from the lenders.


The average person cannot qualify for home loans because they can't come up with the down payment and can't afford the house payment at the higher interest rates. The houses either sit empty owned by the banks or Realtor's snatch them up and rent them out for the house payment and a little extra for either profit or escrow accounts to "fix" or "repair" their investment. Again, little is done to assist those that would like to own a home that they can afford. It's little wonder that new housing starts are at an all time low, while properties are becoming apartment complexes and once nice neighborhoods, desolate grazing land.


While there isn't much we can doing about getting into homes at "current" interest rates, we can still do the following:


Go into a car dealership offering special interest rates and incentives, test drive the car you would like to have. Tell the salesperson all of the accessories you would like on the car, what color you want, the tires and wheels you want and take up most of their day. When it gets down to crunch the numbers time, tell them you want the special interest rate and payment you want, the number of months you want to pay or the lease term length, and let them run your credit. Even insist on a cup of coffee or soda while you wait, (most salespersons will be happy to oblige since they think they're going to make a big sale), and when they find out you aren't qualified for what you want and they come back to inform you, politely get up, shake their hand and say, "thank you" and walk out. I guarantee it will take at least two hours out of their day and the dealership will do everything they can to get you to buy, but just say thanks and leave.


If enough people do this, automotive makers will have to listen to their dealers and make incentives for everyone and stop the B.S. of "well qualified" buyer ads. I know from personal experience salespeople will get fed up and dealers will voice their concerns and frustrations to the factories. You can even walk on the sidewalk in front of a dealership and silently protest with signs that if you are not well qualified you will pay more for the car you want or have to settle for less. The sidewalk is a public place and the dealership cannot kick you off, especially if the protest is silent and peaceful.


This is an extreme I know, but what else is a person to do to get their voice heard? Certainly we can't count on Washington to help out, heck, they can't even agree on how to balance the budget or pass a budget for longer than seven weeks at a time, why trust them now? 


If the politicians won't tax those that can afford to pay and insist on raising taxes on the lower and middle class, maybe they can insist lower interest rates be available to all citizens of this great nation.

Cutting Government Waste

Do you ever wonder how the lawmakers are going to cut waste in government spending when they can't even agree on the little things like Military funding, social security payments, etc.? I often wonder what it must be like for our elected officials in Washington. How do they find the time to author, discuss, write and present those laws that affect all of us in as little as one year?


Lawmakers take not only two weeks a year vacation plus all the "legal" holidays, they take summer breaks, Christmas breaks and sometimes up to a week off for every holiday that falls during the week. That amounts to almost 26 weeks a year and leaves only 26 weeks to pass all those well conceived bills. That is if they can agree by majority.


Now members of congress make, in general terms, $174,000 annually and if you include the $100,000 in taxpayer-funded fringe benefits, it equals around $274,000 a year! I don't know about the average person, but I would have loved to have earned $174,000 per year in my time of employment. Given that amount, it would have equaled approximately $537 per day, (subtracting 14 days vacation, 24 weekend days and seven paid holidays), of actual work days. For members of Congress, they would put in approximately 130 days per year and taking only salary into consideration, they make roughly $1338 per day plus benefits.


So, how can they possibly balance the budget AND cut spending when they are already waist deep in waste without ever creating a single piece of legislation? 


Someone please enlighten me.

Here We Are Again...

Here we are again, a possible government shutdown. It seems the political process has not learned a damn thing with the people's response to raising the debt ceiling debacle of just over a month ago.


Political sides have drawn another line in the sand waiting for one or the other to cross before remedying a situation that not only affects governmental employees, programs and emergency funding, but it also affects every person, young and old, in this country. Boehner thinks his deal is best, Reid thinks his is. Another "dirty" stalemate looms in the offing, one the American people have seen before.


What's really sad is that this proposed funding is for only first seven weeks of the new fiscal year. Another band aid so that they can argue again in just a few weeks from now. Have the politicians not heard the voice of the "People"? Their approval rating is at the lowest ever and they don't seem to care. This will make the third time in six months a partial government shut down is possible if a Republican led House and a Democratic Senate cannot come to an agreement.


It seems to me if you can't organize your bills and pay your creditors as agreed, you face collections fees and nasty phone calls. Your credit rating goes down the dumper and you no longer can get the house or car of your dreams, you pay at a higher credit percentage and are expected to come up with more money down or forced to file bankruptcy. Either way, it costs you more to live and are supposed to settle for a lessor lifestyle. Maybe it's time for the creditors of our great nation to inform those that make these decisions on our behalf to fix the problem immediately or they will be the ones punished financially.


"It is embarrassing," Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., admitted Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." Warner asked: "Can we, once again, inflict on the country and the American people the spectacle of a near government shutdown?"


When is enough, enough? It's hard enough to go to our jobs daily hoping the doors are not shut, our paychecks don't bounce and that we will continue to have a roof over our heads, clothes on our backs and food in our stomachs. What makes it more difficult is that the pompous politicians sit on Capital Hill squabbling over keeping the government running and not be concerned that they won't get paid. 


It's time to stop the "pork barrel" spending, the idea that my state is more important than yours and focus on getting this country back on it's feet again. We were once considered the most "powerful" country in the world with streets paved of "gold" but now we are a laughing stock, the butt of jokes around the world.


How about we get rid of all the career politicians, and I do mean all, and elect CPA's, small business owners who are successful in positive cash flow, normal everyday people who can't raise millions for the election coffers, and start running this country as a business and not as a country owing to the 'fat cats" in Washington or the special interest groups out to buy an election. How about the people of this great nation stop their political rhetoric and take back what is rightfully ours.


In 2012 the people can make a difference by not re-electing any political candidate and taking a really close look at those average Americans willing to work one term to right the path of our country.

Time For A Change?

Arguably President Obama is at his lowest approval rating of his Presidential tenure, but is it because he has failed the American people or is it the result of the recent turmoil in Washington, DC regarding the budget/debt crisis? It’s true America was let down, in a catastrophic way, with the ineptness of both sides of the political process to reach a consensus that rectified a problem that has plagued this country for years until the very last minute. The members of Congress were not happy with the ensuing deal made to raise the debt limit but on the other hand they paraded around like war heroes and sport celebrities that had brought victory to the land of the free.


Republicans cast blame for the battle on the Democrats and vice versa. But the real reason for the delay is they can’t get fired for failing to perform the duties of which they were “hired”. Some even wanted to take their summer break and vacation instead of working for the greater good of a nation on the brink of financial disaster. Maybe it’s time to enact a performance clause into the election process much like what the ordinary American is confronted with in his or her job. Even the unemployed are faced with a performance clause weekly.


The constituents should be able to rate the performance of their elected official every six months and if the politician receives a majority negative response a special election would be held within ten days and a new elected official would take their place in Washington. If the majority responded in a positive way, the elected official would remain in office. The only exceptions to the rule would be to the President and Vice President. They would serve out their term to establish a sense of continuity across the globe.


I’m sure there are other ways to make elected officials accountable and to create a sense of urgency for them to deal with the concerns of the country. Maybe it’s time for the ordinary citizen to stand up and be heard, to make sure the elected official is totally aware of who they are accountable to. It’s not the special interest groups, or the big dollar contributor, but the everyday, common people of the United States. Unfortunately, like it or not, nothing will change in the world of politics until the people stand up and be counted in a voice that is not only loud, but possibly even deafening.