Sunday, November 29, 2009
In his speech about Thanksgiving, President BO said the following:
"When President Lincoln set aside the National Day of Thanksgiving for the first time — to celebrate America’s “fruitful fields,” “healthful skies,” and the “strength and vigor” of the American people — it was in the midst of the Civil War, just when the future of our very union was most in doubt. So think about that. When times were darkest, President Lincoln understood that our American blessings shined brighter than ever."
Close...if you count 74 years as close.
Actually, President George Washington made the first Thanksgiving proclamation in our country in In 1789. It was on November 26th, too:
WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:
NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and assign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed;– for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish Constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;– for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge;– and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
And also, that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressiona;– to enable us all, whether in publick or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wife, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us); and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.
GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.
(signed) G. Washington
For the uninitiated, the picture at the top is of a printer's type style called "dingbats." It was a term memorialized by Archie Bunker of the TV show, "All in the Family" with which he denigrated his TV wife, Edith. He could easily have used it to describe President BO.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
The latest example (at least as I write this…I’m sure it will be superseded in the next moment or two) is what is becoming known as “ClimateGate.”
As you have no doubt heard by now (unless your only source of news is the MainStream Media…in which case you have been left to wallow in your ignorance), we have hard evidence that the leaders of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have hidden and/or deliberately manipulated data that proves our planet is experiencing a cooling down, not a warming up.
In one of the emails we have the following quote: "Don't release any information. I'll delete it rather than release it, if I have to."
When liberals decide that something would be “good for the country,” yet cannot come up with a logical reason for accomplishing it, they just make something up.
That used to be called lying.
Now it is seen as making necessary adjustments to thought processes in order to accomplish a perceived agenda.
The truth is, you’ve been lied to about global warming.
By definition, climate change takes place, because “climate” means the way the atmosphere behaves in a given location at a given time.
But climate is a natural process, not a man-made process.
You and your fellow human beings are not big enough to significantly affect it.
Nevertheless, it suits the agenda of many liberals to create an image of emergency in order to justify the funding of unnecessary studies, grants and the like.
Huge organizations, such as IPCC and the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University need funding, mostly from the United States, and so they have fabricated the concept of Climate Change (which they used to call “Global Warming”) in order to convince you to let loose of some of your hard earned money.
The truth is, they have lied to you, Al Gore has lied to you, President BO has lied to you and you liberals like it that way.
Liberals live in a culture of “I Wish.”
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
I think I can handle the rudimentary procedures well enough, but it is one of the most intimidating things I have ever done. There is nobody looking over my shoulder telling me what to do if I go wrong...so I hope I get it right.
This work is not entirely new to me, as I worked in a cubby hole, a-la Dilbert, back in 1999. But there I had actual people upon whose shoulders to cry when I got stuck.
I'll be back blogging as soon as I feel comfortable, assuming that actually happens.
I don't actually go to work until Noon each day, so I will have mornings free to research and blog...I hope.
I'm going to try to go back to sleep, now, as all of the "I"s in this post are starting to make me feel like a certain President.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
Way too much hair.
This training stuff is daunting!
These people want me to actually know what I am doing!
The job I'm doing is done from home, but the six hours per day of training is about one hour more than my feeble brain can remain at full alert.
Nevertheless, it is good stuff and I am determined to learn it all.
That seems appropriate, since I have always been a "know-it-all."
Whenever someone says to me, "Joe, I'd like your opinion on something," my response is, "Great! I have one on nearly everything!"
Don't count this as a post, for I don't have time right now to post.
I'll be back in the saddle this weekend, I hope.
In the mean time, check out the side-bar features to pass the time as you wait with shrimp in your mouth (baited breath...get it?) for my return.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
One of the arguments you can hear, watch and read in all forms of media about the government requiring health care coverage goes something like: "Well, we require you to have a driver's license and this is the same kind of thing."
What a RED HERRING!!!
Not everybody is required to have a driver's license. The only people required to have a driver's license are people who choose to drive cars and trucks.
I know people who do not own or drive cars. Tens of thousands of people in New York City don't own or drive cars, and many of them do not have driver's licenses.
Furthermore, driver's licenses are NOT required by the federal government unless you have a government job, driving a vehicle as part of your job.
Driver's licenses are issued by the STATE you live in, not by the feds. In fact, hold up your hand if you have a driver's license (or a fishing license, or a hunting license, or a business license)issued to you by the federal government.
The government mandate for health insurance is nothing more than a method of spreading the wealth, which is a characteristic of Socialism, Communism and Dictatorships, not of freedom in a Democratic Republic.
Both the House and the Senate versions of Universal Health Care have mandates in them.
I hope somebody with the means to do so challenges the government's right to mandate health care in court. I hope it then goes before the Supreme Court. I hope the Supreme court then recognizes that the Constitution does not give the government the right to mandate health care.
I won't hold my breath for that to happen, though.
That would be bad for my health.
Monday, November 9, 2009
My hours have not yet been set, so my blogging may or may not be sparse for the next few days.
Try to get by without me, but remember, I'll be back.
Also, try to keep President BO from doing anything more outrageous than he alresdy has.
As soon as I know my regular schedule, I'll let you know (if you care).
Sunday, November 8, 2009
We conservatives have been telling you and telling you about the things buried in what is now PelosiCare, the health care legislation in House Bill now numbered 3962.
The House Ways and means Committee has released a letter from the Joint Committee on Taxation, a non-partisan group that confirms that the failure to comply with the individual mandate requiring the purchase of a $15,000.00 health insurance policy could result in people paying up to $250,000.00 in fines or facing up to five years in prison.
Here's the text: "“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]"
Read all about it HERE.
This is all about the Democrats' desire to be in complete control of your life. It is also the destruction of one more of our freedoms as citizens, the freedom to choose health care or not.
I surmise that liberals are sick and tired of Americans having so much freedom and thus back the content of HR 3962.
Why else would they sit by and allow our government to pass this atrocity of a bill, with all of its restrictions and its rationing of health care?
How far will we let this go?
Will we wait until it has all come to pass and then whine, "Why did they do this to us?"
When I first told you that this would be a part of the health care plan, liberals wrote to me to tell me how stupid I am, and how out of touch with reality I am and how wrong I was.
But I was not stupid, out of touch or wrong.
It is happening.
I told you so...right here on Jo-Joe Politico.
AND NOW TO MY REGULAR SUNDAY FARE:
SUNDAY SAYINGS FROM OUR FOUNDERS-Gabriel Duvall
SOLDIER; JUDGE; SELECTED AS DELEGATE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; COMPTROLLER OF THE U. S. TREASURY; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
"I resign my soul into the hands of the Almighty Who gave it, in humble hopes of His mercy through our Savior Jesus Christ."
Friday, November 6, 2009
Certainly our prayers are with the families of those killed as well as with those injured in the melee.
President BO thought it proper to hold a special telecast addressing the event.
As our brilliant, sophisticated, experienced leader stepped to the podium, eyes and ears all over the country waited earnestly for his opening remarks about the tragedy.
What? What's that he's saying?
"Please, everybody have a seat. Let me first of all just thank Ken and the entire Department of the Interior staff for organizing just an extraordinary conference. I want to thank my Cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. I hear that Dr. Joe Medicine Crow was around, and so I want to give a shout-out to that Congressional Medal of Honor* winner. It's good to see you. (Applause.)
"My understanding is, is that you had an extremely productive conference. I want to thank all of you for coming and for your efforts, and I want to give you my solemn guarantee that this is not the end of a process but a beginning of a process, and that we are going to follow up. (Applause.) We are going to follow up. Every single member of my team understands that this is a top priority for us. I want you to know that, as I said this morning, this is not something that we just give lip service to. And we are going to keep on working with you to make sure that the first Americans get the best possible chances in life in a way that's consistent with your extraordinary traditions and culture and values.
"Now, I have to say, though, that beyond that, I plan to make some broader remarks about the challenges that lay ahead for Native Americans, as well as collaboration with our administration,..."
There's been a slaughter of American soldiers and he's talking about the conference with Native Americans he's just been to.
With the requisite pauses and stumbling, stuttering nature of President BO's speech patterns, this took about 1 minute and 50 seconds...almost two minutes to accomplish.
He still hasn't addressed the Fort Hood incident.
"...but as some of you might have heard, there has been a tragic shooting at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas. We don't yet know all the details at this moment; we will share them as we get them. What we do know is that a number of American soldiers have been killed, and even more have been wounded in a horrific outburst of violence.
"My immediate thoughts and prayers are with the wounded and with the families of the fallen, and with those who live and serve at Fort Hood. These are men and women who have made the selfless and courageous decision to risk and at times give their lives to protect the rest of us on a daily basis."
If there is one of you out there who thinks this televised statement represented President BO's understanding of the solemnity, seriousness and urgency of this very horrific event, you are totally mistaken. Either that or you are so blinded by this man's charisma that you have lost all touch with reality.
What he DID demonstrate is that he is inexperienced, sophomoric, and absolutely un-presidential. He has no sense of dignity, nor does he understand why his opening remarks were inappropriate for the occasion.
His mind was on the preceding conference and he had to express himself about that mundane, irrelevant event before he could progress to the real issue he was supposed to be dealing with.
Already, some are writing that pointing out this shortcoming in President BO's ability to properly assess a situation is "playing politics."
NONSENSE!! ABSOLUTE NONSENSE!!
President BO is the one who was playing politics. He is the one who could not get on topic, not his critics.
The man you people (whoever you are) elected is nothing more than an incapable school boy (Yes, I dared used the word "boy," because that's what he acts like. If he does not want to be referred to as a "boy," then let him start acting like a leader...a man.).
If you are a liberal with half a mind, you must be embarrassed by this man's performance. If you are not, then I feel sorry for your intellect...it has gone missing.
There is no way, under any circumstances that the opening of this speech can be justified.
For those of you who will accuse me of lying, here is the speech (watch the time line):
Did you watch his expressions?
Did you observe his body language?
He was totally out of his element.
Toward the end he said, "...And I want all of you to know that as Commander-in-Chief, there's no greater honor but also no greater responsibility for me than to make sure that the extraordinary men and women in uniform are properly cared for and that their safety and security when they are at home is provided for."
As he said it, he was halting, pausing, searching for a way to get himself out of the grammatical corner he had painted himself into which would have required at least one or two more "I"s, but which he has become sensitive about, since too many "I"s seem egotistical. So he hunted for a way out and found it in "...there's no greater honor for ME (emphasis HIS)..."
Then, in a fitting close to his remarks about this terrible occurrence, he closed by saying, "Again, thank you for your participation here today. I am confident that this is going to be resulting in terrific work between this government and your governments in the weeks, the months, and years to come."
The MainStreamMedia has edited the video of his remarks so as not to include the parts that revealed his un-presidentiality. You will not see the references to the conference with Native Americans, because MSM wants you to think he WAS presidential.
But he was not, is not and never will be.
He will always be, as he is now, clueless in DC.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
I've seen it before, but I enjoyed watching it again. I learned from it as well.
Maybe you will, too.
President BO seems committed to moving us toward an oligarchy.
All of his proclamations and all of his actions thus far more nearly fit the pattern of an oligarchy than a republic.
In his world, the government, made of a "few" elitists, rule the people.
Wouldn't you rather have a government ruled by law, that let's the people alone?
So, come 2010, and later in 2012, what will you have?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
However, what I am about to propose will solve a myriad of problems that are a direct result of the power yielded to politicians as a result of a very deliberately complicated tax code.
A major portion of the so-called "special interest group" lobbying that goes on in Washington D.C. is related to seeking tax breaks in one form or another for some business category, or some professional group, etc.
These groups invite, encourage and sustain corruption among politicians.
"Hidden" federal taxes raise the cost of absolutely everything we buy.
The price of a loaf of bread is 40% taxes. So is a gallon of gasoline.
The tax code is so complex that even government tax accountants, indeed, the IRS, itself cannot keep up with it.
I have had personal experience with IRS audits on two occasions.
Each time, different IRS agents have given me different "advice" about the exact-same issue.
It is clear that the tax code needs to be simplified.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 resulted in a net INCREASE in paperwork of over 175%. With it came an increase in the number of tax laws, further complicating the whole mess.
Such is the government's definition of "simplification."
One suggestion that has been bandied about to help simplify the tax code is the so-called "consumption tax." It works like a states sales tax, only on a national level.
Whenever you make a purchase, a percentage is tacked onto the total. This is the consumption tax.
If you buy a $20,000.00 automobile, you would pay, let's say 12% on the amount over a certain level, let's say $5,000.00.
Thus you would pay 12% of $15,000.00, or $1,800.00 in taxes to the federal government.
Remember, in many states (as in Florida where I live), a state sales tax applies, too.
A car sold in Florida would have a 6% sales tax as well, assuming that the state keeps its sales tax...and that's on the $20,000.00. It amounts to $1,200.00.
So your total cost of the car would be $23,000.00 plus title and registration.
That would price many people out of the market for that particular automobile.
There are many issues connected to a consumption tax that are difficult to deal with: how to calculate the base line, how to enable folks to make a purchase, pay the consumption tax and wait to have it reimbursed to them if they are below the government established "poverty" or "base" income level.
I know, I've had many "consumption tax" proponents "explain" the issues away, but never successfully. They can't.
And if it's too complex for a person as brilliant as I am to understand (I know I'm brilliant; my father always called me "Sun."), then we're right back to the complexity that is one of the failures of the present system.
I have the answer.
It is simple.
It is sweet.
It is non-manipulable.
It is far, far less prone to corruption.
It is a simple, straightforward single percentage income tax that is paid on every earned dollar in the U.S above the "poverty" level.
There would be no deductions of any kind for anyone, but nobody could be taxed twice on the same earned dollar. This would leave the door open for genuine charitable contributions, which charities would not pay taxes on dollars on which taxes had already been paid.
("Earned dollar" would be defined as a dollar received for goods produced - at both the wholesale and the retail level - or services rendered.)
For the sake of discussion, let's say it was established at 9%.
A base line "poverty" income would be established, on which no taxes are paid. Then 9% of every earned dollar over that poverty line would go to the feds to do with as we tell them.
(That last part might be a pipe-dream).
Let's say I, as an individual have a company manufacturing widgidoodles, from which I personally earn $35,000.00 per year. Let's further say that the poverty level was established at $20,000.00.
My personal taxes would be 9% of the difference between what I earned and the poverty level, or 9% of $15,000.00, or $1,350.00.
Then let's assume that my company makes a NET before tax profit of $150,000.00. Allowing the first $20,000.00 profit to be tax-free, 9% of that would be paid in taxes, equalling $11, 700.00 in corporate taxes.
That would leave me an after-tax profit of $118,000.00 from which I could pay my investors and/or put back into company growth. Still a good profit...my payroll was met, as were my expenses.
All other federal taxes would be done away with totally. Absolutely.
At the present time this 9% system would afford the government would an estimated $3 trillion per year and every person and corporation would have the incentive to grow based on being able to keep 91% of everything earned.
There would no longer be cheating over this deduction and that deduction.
Talk about simplified tax returns! (I earned $35,000.00, deduct $20,000.00 "poverty allowance" and pay 9% of the difference).
The government problems would no longer center around, "How can we get enough money to meet the budget, the issue would only be how do we properly divide what we take in."
I would suggest that a fixed percentage of income be assigned to each budget item such as 30% for national defense, 30% for all federal salaries and benefits, and so-on.
The consumption tax people will jump up and down, yell and scream, turn red in the face and get angry at me for not liking their plan.
Government lobbyists will hate this plan, because 60% of them will be unnecessary.
Politicians won't know what to do with themselves if they can't come up with new ways to tax people and then tell them they are going to lower taxes...taxes will never go up or down because of the federal government, only because of increases or decreases in earnings.
What? You have an argument against my plan?
I've heard them all, and none of them holds water.
The final answer is: for you Consumption Tax People, yours isn't ever going to happen.
Sadly, neither is mine.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Today, most kids attend government schools.
"What's the difference?" you ask.
The difference is in how you view core subjects such as basic arithmetic and mathematics (you think they are the same thing? Guess again).
In public school I learned that to find the unit cost of something, you divide the total cost of the entire project by the number of units in questions.
For instance, if you purchase a herd of 10 cows for $7,000.00, you can find the cost of each cow by dividing $7,000.00 by 10. Using public school math, that comes to $700.00 per cow.
Government schools don't work that way.
In our county, if you divide the total education budget by the number of students enrolled, you arrive at a cost of $15,000.00 per student.
The teachers' union, however, says the cost is much lower per student because the cost of buses, administrators, janitors (sorry: ministers of maintenance), and the like do not count in the cost of actually educating students.
Government employees think that what taxpayers actually pay for schooling is not related to the cost of educating a child.
The federal government thinks the same way.
According to the White House, after several revisions downward due to faulty statistical analyses, the "stimulus package(s)" have created or saved nearly a million jobs at a cost of $160 billion.
Those jobs include "the waitress who's still on the job," according to VP Joe Biden.
Using that logic, every job in America was saved by the "stimulus package," which is just absurd. But since when has absurdity been an issue with this administration?
A public school graduate would divide $160 billion by the number of jobs "created or saved" to arrive at the total cost per job, which is $160,000.00 per job.
Jared Bernstein, chief economist and senior economic advisor to the vice president, called that "calculator abuse."
He prefers the government school approach.
He said the cost per job was actually $92,000 -- but acknowledged that estimate is for the whole stimulus package as of the end of 2010.
So you see, if you were educated in government school, actually using the correct formula to solve a mathematical problem is "calculator abuse."
Instead, you should interpolate the results with such things as good wishes and good intentions, factor in unintended consequences and draw a conclusion that you HOPE satisfies the expectations of the electorate, being ready to CHANGE the result if you need to.
Giving Jared Bernstein the benefit of the doubt, and accepting the $92,000.00 per job "saved/created," let it be noted that ONLY A RANK LIBERAL could accept that figure as a reasonable cost to "create/save" an above the poverty level job, and many of the jobs "created/saved" did not qualify for even that.
Once again our elected officials have taken the approach that, "...we will do what we want to do, when we want to do it, where we want to do it, how we want to do it, and the citizen's wishes for honesty and integrity be hanged."
What do you know about Jared Bernstein? You don't know much, because there is little about him anywhere, birthplace, early life, state he's from, etc. Here's all we know: He is reported to be 53 years old, but that is not known for sure. He holds a Bachelors Degree in Fine Arts from the Manhattan School of Music; a Masters Degree in Social Work from the Hunter School of Social Work; a Masters Degree in Philosophy and Ph.D. in Social Welfare from Columbia University. He has also taught at Howard University, Columbia University and New York University. Bernstein is on the Congressional Budget Office's advisory committee and has been a contributor to the financial news station CNBC. He is an extreme leftist and does not believe in a free economy. You can find out a little more about him HERE.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR OF DELAWARE; GENERAL IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
"Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom, and for all His other kindnesses, to Him I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity.