Politics Local and National

[manape]

GOPUSA Forum
www.gopusa.com/forum/

As grassroots conservatives, we need to be informed. Information and activism can change the world. Organizations like GOPUSA help provide up to date information and commentary on what is happening in politics. Many times we GOPUSA offers ways for grassroots conservatives to contact Congress and voice their displeasure.

However, just because you have a hammer, nails, and lumber doesn’t mean the house gets built. You have to have effort, and the credit goes to all conservative activists out there who took the time to get involved. Whether you used GOPUSA to contact Congress or you made your own phones calls, there is no doubt that they listen and feel the heat.

[summerose]

Increase the cost of new vehicles by thousands of dollars. Quote.
Endanger the lives of motorists. Quote.

We sure don't need that and I hope it doesn't pass!

[shortcircuit]

I oppose it and I don't think it has a chance of passing simply because of the fact that the auto industry has alot of lobbyists in Washington. I'm not sure if I would support a "gas guzzler" tax or not, if the tax money went to creating alternative fuels it would be a wonderful idea but knowing how our government likes to mismanage money I don't know if it would be beneficial or not.

[manape]

www.gafairtax.org/

Please visit GA Fair Tax and comment.

[summerose]

I read it and it sounds like a good deal to me!

[manape]

If this is the same fair tax that Sonny and others are pushing, then I want to know more about the local meetings. The people need to be back in control of our government the way our founding fathers intended. We are not powerless to create change. The politicians need to tell us their intentions on fair tax and responsible spending tax payer's money.

[manape]

The next stop on the Tour is IRS Tyranny!

Click the links below to see the images ENLARGED!
www.cafeshops.com/republidemocrat.6559060?zoom=yes#zoom

The First Image reads as follows:

The RepubliCrats

The Differences between the 2 Major Parties:

The Republicans:
They are Pro-Second Amendment but Anti-4th Amendment.
They talk smaller government but practice Big-Government.
They are Career Politicians who must be Loyal to their Party in order to keep their political careers.


The Democrats:
They are Anti-2nd Amendment but Pro-4th Amendment..
They talk Big-Government as if Socialism is the answer.
(It is far more likely that 50 Individual States will problem solve better than one Bureaucratic Big-Government!)
They are Career Politicians who must be Loyal to their Party in order to keep their political careers.

So basically, both parties are Anti-Constitution, Pro Big-Government (therefore Anti-State’s Rights), loyalists to their parties above the Constitution & therefore Felons! They both also sell us out to the highest bidder since they are both bought & paid for by special interests!

Some believe that the Constitution should be violated in order to legislate morality so they elect officials who profess the same views.

Violating the Constitution is wrong & doing wrong things will bring you bad things in the end. Example, you may not only be destroying your rights but the rights of you children by undermining the Constitution. It is the Constitution that protects our rights to do things like worship freely for example. So you are cutting off the hand that feeds you!

harrybrowne.org/articles/IncomeTaxDay.htm

[manape]

The Conspiracy!
“A Right-Wing Conspiracy?” You might ask.
Yes there is a right wing conspiracy to violate the supreme law of the land!
But not just a Right-Wing Conspiracy! A Left-Wing Conspiracy to violate the Constitution exists as well!

Both of the parties of career politicians are loyal to their careers, which are dependent upon their party, & not the Constitution to which they are sworn to uphold! They both conspire to violate the Constitution!

Weather it is the State’s career politicians conspiring to look the other way as the federal career politicians violate the Constitution by trespassing in State’s Rights issues. Or whether it is the Federal Career Politicians or “Federalists” who conspire to violate the constitution as they conspire to look the other way as the State’s Career Politicians violate the Constitutional rights of minorities with sodomy laws, no alcohol on Sunday, and many other clearly unconstitutional “Blue Laws”! I don’t know if segregation was considered a “Blue Law” or not but that went on for decades in the south until the feds took action. In some places, segregation still exists today.

The Career Politicians are almost all lawyers (familiar with the Supreme Law of the Land) “The Constitution” & they willfully & knowingly violate the Constitution if their party requires it! For example, the 2000 election. The Republican majority on the Supreme Court conspired to violate the Constitution by interfering in the Presidential vote count without any Constitutional authority! That’s the job of the Congress according to the Constitution! All hundreds of members & not just a few Supreme Judges who think that they are above the law of the land! Supreme Felons or the felonious five!

The common enemy of these 2 parties, the thing that both limits their power & threatens them by tying their hands, is the Constitution & together they share power & take turns violating the Supreme law of the Land. The Constitution protects “us the People” from “them the government!” & when they violate it – they become felons. Felons in charge!

Travis Patriot
www.MyPolitical.com
Email: [e-mail]

This may be republished freely in its entirety.

Also, the second image is newly added and reads "The Democrats are to the Left of the Constitution - The Republicans are to the Right of the Constitution - and the Libertarians are to the Center - directly behind the Constitution!

[manape]

Republicrats

Face it, the only difference is who’s in power.

Stand behind the Constitution.

The Domocrats are to the left of the Constitution. The Republicans are to the right of the Constitution. Who will stand behind the Constitution?

[shortcircuit]

manape said:

Face it, the only difference is who’s in power.

I pretty much agree with you there. There are a few republicans and democrats that are middle-ground but most of them have strayed to the far right or left. On the far left you have people who are darn near communist with their views and on the far right you have people who want a law passed saying that you have to get permission from the government before you can fart unless you're a big business owner. Ape, if Ronald Reagan were alive and still in power I guarantee you things would be changed for the better. As far as I am concerned all the democratic presidential hopefuls are extreme left wingers. Sad to say but some of the candidates who call theirselves republican are the same way. The republicans have one (potential) candidate who I consider a middle ground politician and that is Fred Thompson.

[manape]

Fix the problem at the source (Downsize the Federal Government)

To decrease spending at the local and state government levels, you need to start at the federal level. Limited federal government will reduce local and state government spending.

Congress has limited incentive to hold down spending because program costs represent benefits to its members (the gravy they seem themselves as responsible for producing).

Is government downsizing possible? Sure, if enough people demand it, but our political leaders typically hear more about how additional money should be spent than they do about how existing programs should be eliminated to save money. Politicians tend to get increasingly hooked on spending during their years in Washington, which is one of the reasons to support term limits.

The current programs of the federal government are too diverse and complex for Congress to effectively manage them; it would be far better to do a few things well than to do a lot of things ineffectively.

1. One special problem is government grants, which are used by the federal government to influence state or local government programs.

• Some $426 billion in grants were paid in 2005,
  
  
• ranging from $186 billion for the federal share of Medicaid and the $71 billion cost of the Dept. of Education (mostly grants)
  
  
• to “hundreds of more obscure programs that most taxpayers have never heard of.”
  

2. Another problem is duplication. If a program is ineffective or obsolete, the typical response is to create additional programs -- without eliminating the existing program.

• It is estimated that more than 100 programs and agencies could be eliminated with resultant savings of $380 billion per year.
  
  
• Different federal programs often have overlapping objectives, resulting in “turf wars” and/or unnecessary costs to ensure coordination.
  
  
• The GAO has reported 50 different programs for the homeless in eight federal agencies, 23 programs for housing aid in four agencies, 26 programs for food and nutrition aid in six agencies, and 44 programs for employment and training services in nine agencies.
  

Instead of downsizing the federal government, why not concentrate on managing its programs better? The answer is that efforts along this line, including the Committee of Economy and Efficiency in Government appointed by Taft in 1910, the Hoover Commissions (under Truman and Eisenhower, respectively), the Grace Commission under Reagan, Gore’s “reinventing government” plan, and Bush’s “management agenda,” have all failed. Government operations continue to be inefficient and in many cases ineffective.

[manape]

System Thinking (Thinking Inside the Box -- Back to The Constitution)

The problem with the Republicrats is that income taxes produce unlimited revenue to the government. To downsize government, there must be built-in limits to how much government can tax. Before the permanent income tax in 1913, the U.S. government was able to raise only so much money and no more, thus limiting big government.

Doing the same old things with new people in office and expecting different results is a sign of insanity. Restore freedom to America. With 47% of our income going to taxes, we are half slaves and only half free.

A Little History

Many people aren't aware that America — conceived in liberty in 1776 — didn't have a permanent income tax until 1913. In fact, the Constitution of the United States prohibited an income tax.

For over a century, the U.S. government survived quite well without an income tax. It operated a small, constitutional government on the revenue from tariffs and excise taxes.

Tariffs are taxes imposed upon imported products, and excise taxes are imposed at the manufacturing level on domestic products. Because those taxes affect the prices of products, they were self-limiting. That is, the taxes couldn't produce unlimited revenue to the government.

If a tax was raised too far, the product would be priced out of the reach of the consumer, sales would fall, and the tax revenues would fall.

Thus, relying on tariffs and excise taxes, the U.S. government was able to raise only so much money and no more. The same was true of state and local governments: there were built-in limits to how much they could tax.

As a result, in 1913 federal, state, and local governments combined took in taxes only 8% of the national income.

But that changed quickly with the passage of the 16th Amendment, authorizing an income tax. In contrast to tariffs and excise taxes, income-tax rates can be raised upward and upward and upward, since most people can't choose to stop working in order to avoid the tax.

That meant the federal government now had virtually unlimited resources to do whatever the politicians wanted. Respect for the Constitution disappeared almost overnight. The U.S. government plunged the nation into World War I, a strictly European war, something it couldn't have done without the income tax to finance the war effort. (The top rate quickly zoomed upward to 77% from 7% where it had been set in 1913.)

Today governments at all levels take 47% of the national income. That means you work nearly half your life to support the welfare state. And now there's no topic on which the politicians refuse to consider legislation. Your entire life is fair game for them to enact rules.

harrybrowne.org/articles/IncomeTaxDay.htm

[manape]

Shortcircuit wrote:

I pretty much agree with you there. There are a few republicans and democrats that are middle-ground but most of them have strayed to the far right or left.

Shortcircuit, we probably agree on more than you think.

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Replacing one Republicrat with another Republicrat is not altering our government. We need to abolish the cause of the problem, high taxes.

What I believe in is changing the situation we are in due to career politicians and limiting tax revenue to a more realistic level. The fair tax proposal is realistic because the tax base is not just limited to property owners. A national sales tax is realistic because it is self limiting due to limits of capitalistic system. It is limited due to supply and demand economics because if taxes go too high levels people stop buying. Also, we need to change the system to put able people to work and take care of those who can't work.

On the local, the problem I have with put "Lamar in jail" or don't re-elect him and things will be rosy again is there will be another career politician to replace him. If we continue to tempt a politician with unlimited pot of money (tax revenue), then he or she will spend, spend, spend. It doesn't matter if you put five commissioners in office or one, in six months time they become politicians. The only realistic control is to limit tax revenue and provide incentives for green business to come into the area to provide jobs and redistribute the tax base so the people will not burdened with high taxes.

I have asked what services people are willing to give up in Union County to limit local government and I haven't gotten an answer. Perhaps, part of down sizing local government is to turn the operation of part of recreation over to private enterprise and figuring out how to control spending for local law enforcement, since it is reported that law enforcement gets the biggest piece of the pie.

All the village idiots of Blairsvillecity seem to do is "pregnant dog" and moan about illegitimate puppies. I have never heard anyone of them tell us what the realistic solution is to limit local government, other than replace the politician. What we need is someone in office who is not afraid to fix the real problem, high taxes.

I don't agree with those who say we didn't need the courthouse. Yes, we could have continued running the government from a trailer park, but is that the image we want in our county? I think not. What we need is responsible spending based on realistic controls.

Just think what individuals could do with the money that is being taken away from us. For example, people could afford to send their kids to private schools and we wouldn't have to depend on a school system that only gets bigger and spends money on more and more buildings as more and more people come into the county.

[manape]

I've stopped posting in the "The Lamar Lied" forum because the PORN MONKEYS are more interested in driving voters away, than actually solving problems. My question is who will rise up and restore Constitutional freedom? I'm tired of politics as usual.

Those who equate voting against Lamar or forced removal of Lamar only to replace him with another politician are like caged monkeys who believe they are freedom fighters because they get to choose who brings them the bananas. What kind of monkey business is that?

The idea that a choice between two empty-headed career liars each of whom worship our tax dollars is nothing more than a power struggle between the insanely jealous and those who currently control our money. Elect someone else to office and the battle cry is, "Show me the money!!!" What kind of insanity is that?

It is time for the people to control their money by limiting the supply so that both national and local government is limited to only the essentials of government.

[manape]

Is the Fair Tax really fair? What will work to reduce the federal tax burden? Do you think fair tax is the answer or should total government spending be reduced?

There is only one word to describe the fact that the federal government now spends almost $3 trillion a year: obscene. At least 90 percent of what the federal government spends is unconstitutional, wasteful, or against the limited-government principles of the Founders. The only thing the FairTax does is change the way the state confiscates the wealth of its citizens. As Congressman Ron Paul says: "The real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform."
www.mises.org/story/1814