Article

2006-02-24 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2006-02-24 00:00|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 "It brings a certain level of approval."

There would more approval if their 2004 standard bearer would release all his military recrods.

Posted by badanov 2006-02-24 00:37|| http://www.freefirezone.org/cgi-bin/index.pl]">[http://www.freefirezone.org/cgi-bin/index.pl] 2006-02-24 00:37|| Front Page Top

#2 The problem with putting a vet in power, regardless of party, is they will only get burned by the Dems once. Then they will do whats "right" instead of the blind followership the Dems are expecting. This is FID 101, take them down from the inside, I just might vote Democrat!

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2006-02-24 01:25|| 2006-02-24 01:25|| Front Page Top

#3 It's unfortunate that I no longer live in Virigina. I'd be happy to vote for James Webb.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2006-02-24 01:46|| 2006-02-24 01:46|| Front Page Top

#4 This is interesting, I've talked to a lot of my peers about the prospect of running for local offices after we get out. The thing is most of us lean conservative tend to vote republican but actually don't care for either major party. We've discussed setting up a third party that's more libertarian in nature and just flooding a region with candidates accross the spectrum of seats and then expanding via grassroots means. Being a vet does bring some credibility but you'll always have someone questioning your service which is hard to take.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-02-24 03:31|| 2006-02-24 03:31|| Front Page Top

#5 The only other Democratic Iraq war vet with a national political profile, Paul Hackett of Ohio, dropped out of his US Senate race Feb. 14 under pressure from party leaders.

No mention that this "pressure" included rumors about Hackett abusing Iraqi corpses.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2006-02-24 08:52|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-02-24 08:52|| Front Page Top

#6 BH6: Is there a way you guys can tag up with the Free State/Libertarian movements? I see this as a serious (if still, small) movement in this country. I, for one, have begun to get fed up with both parties too, although the Republicans down in my neck of the woods tend to be a LOT more conservative (Constitutional) than others.

Posted by BA 2006-02-24 09:03|| 2006-02-24 09:03|| Front Page Top

#7 I keep reminding myself that *every* unit has one guy in it who is a luser. He is always whining and bitching, he says his last unit was really great but this new unit sucks. He doesn't do his job and has mastered malingering. He spends half his week in the dispensary, and the other half bumming smokes and drinks. He also brags a lot and "one-ups" the other guys about what a hot shit he is. He knows the CO and the first shirt have a down on him, 'cause they're always f'in with him.

If he is a "luser plus", he is also a racist who probably also hates women, a barracks thief and a drug dealer. In this case, invariably the luser has one amazing talent: avoiding the CID.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-02-24 09:33|| 2006-02-24 09:33|| Front Page Top

#8 These poor fools are donks ? In order to be a donk in the House of Reps, you MUST vote straight donk on all issues. It doesn't matter what you think or what you stand for, the party comes first, and that's it.
Repeat after me: Hillary is the queen, the light, and the source. Bless Queen Hillary, bless Queen Hillary.

Posted by wxjames 2006-02-24 11:22|| 2006-02-24 11:22|| Front Page Top

#9 BA: Thanks for the info, I'd imagine that is a definite possibility though I must admit I am not too familiar w/the Free State/Libertarian movements. I will google them and find out more. The platforms I've discussed w/my peers are based on some libertarian principles like being pro-gun, minimizing governmental intrusions, pork barrel reform, de-regulating "junk laws", term limits (though I'm not sure if the libertarian party takes a stance on that either way) & maintaining the original intent of the the U.S. Constitution. I think where we differ w/a lot of tradtional libertarians on the national level is that we want a wall on the U.S./Mexico border a long w/serious law enforcement of such. I could go all day as I have strong opinions as to which direction I think the country needs to go to improve but in the interest of not coming off like an ass or boring anyone I'll digress. I think you get the drift anyhow. The bottom line is that though most of us tend to lean right we're not satisfied w/some of the things we've seen w/the replublican party. Everything ranging from the aforementioned border fiasco to members of the party getting caught up in illegal schemes is criminal (no pun intended). We take integrity, U.S. sovereignty and not fleecing the hard working American tax payer extremely serious.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-02-24 11:34|| 2006-02-24 11:34|| Front Page Top

#10 Well, guys and gals, just make sure you're not going up against one of the boys. This from their former Golden Boy...

Paul Hackett has been a popular guy this fall. The tough-talking Iraq combat veteran turned a special-election fight in Ohios Second District into this summers political sleeper hit, energizing Democrats and converting Republicans in the deep-red counties outside Cincinnati and pulling 48 percent of the vote in a district where John Kerry got a mere 36 percent. Soon the national party came courting: Hackett met several times with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Chuck Schumer, chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), both of whom encouraged him to run for the seat of Ohios senior senator, Republican Mike DeWine, in 06. Hackett said he wouldafter been told by Ohio Congressman Sherrod Brown that he wasnt planning to runand on October 3 he publicly threw his hat in the ring.
Then, last week, his phone rang again. It was Sherrod Brown calling to tell Hackett hed changed his mind: he was running after all. Then Schumer called, and this time he wasnt delivering a pep talk. Hackett got the distinct sense that he was being asked to make way for the party insider. Schumer didnt tell me anything definitive, he says. But Im not a dumb ass, and I know what he wanted me to do.
DSCC spokesman Phil Singer insists that We didnt play any role in bringing Brown in. We were as surprised as anyone else when he decided to reconsider. Putting a positive spin on the contest, Singer notes that six months ago, reporters were writing off the state for Democrats. Now weve got two excellent candidates who would be good senators and can beat Mike DeWine in 2006.
Hackett, who says hes still considering his options, is less sanguineand less diplomatic. The Democratic Party is like an addict, he says. Theyre addicted to failure. I want to help the party. The question is, how do you help someone that doesnt want help?

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2005/10/hackett.html

Posted by tu3031 2006-02-24 11:36|| 2006-02-24 11:36|| Front Page Top

#11 The Democratic Party is like an addict, he says. Theyre addicted to failure. I want to help the party. The question is, how do you help someone that doesnt want help?

It's simple, really. You hold an intervention, and when the addict protests, tell 'em it's 'for your own good'.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2006-02-24 11:40|| 2006-02-24 11:40|| Front Page Top

#12 Broadhead6, if I might suggest... Please consider running -- the first time, at least -- on the Republican ticket. While the Libertarians sound like a better fit, philosophically, you cannot effect change if you don't get elected. Unfortunately, Libertarians don't get elected; the party isn't big enough to provide enough votes. And the Republic needs what you and your comrades have to offer.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-02-24 12:54|| 2006-02-24 12:54|| Front Page Top

#13 I'm with TW on that one, BH6. While I fall more along the lines of your belief (split somewhat between the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party), the only REALISTIC way to get elected is by having an "R" after your name. Then, affect change from within. It's time to get that party back to the basics, and call me an optimist, I believe it can be done. In this fight, I'm 100%+ behind our Prez, but domestic issues (like you) I have a lot of beef with him. Starting with Illegal Immigration, but also including, Spending total (not just pork barrel), taxation (I'd like to see the Fair Tax or some flat tax implemented), bring back the line-item veto, doing away with Fed. Depts/agencies that aren't Constitutional (like Reagan tried to do w/ Dept. of Education), etc.

Posted by BA 2006-02-24 13:06|| 2006-02-24 13:06|| Front Page Top

#14 TW/BA - Duly noted points, thanks. For the record, I was a member of the College Republicans many moons ago. I'm independent as far as voting is concerned now, but like I said I tend to vote Repub because so many of the Dems just seem to be such wimps.

Anyways, I wanted to postulate a theory to you all I've been stewing on the past six months here in Iraq wrt the major parties vs. running independent. I'd love to get your input.

-If, a group of veterans or like minded citizens were to start a third party, say near a military base or in that county/district. As a by product, not only do you have the military credibility but you also could be exposing every 18-23 year old service person that does a hitch through that area a different political philosophy. Maybe the information of this third party started by no non-sense service oriented folks works its way back to the home towns of the above mentioned demographic in maybe a grass roots fashion. Or say, more to the point, in your home town, you good Rantburg citizens noticed such an endeavor by an independent party w/noted military and some combat background. This group targets getting seats at the local level (which I believe is possible in comparison to state level politics where the "R" or "D" are more imperative). Do you think it is plausible that at that local level what I call a "beach head" or a foot hold for future follow on through put could be created? Would you consider voting for something like this at the local level? Obviously proper marketing and the foundation of the platform are extremely important. I could go on all day about it but let's just stream line it to what I mentioned in the prior posts along w/even some stereotypical democratic platforms like sound environmental stewardship so that future Americans can enjoy our natural resources, etc. (I'm an advid outdoorsman and hunter so I've secretly hugged more than a few oak trees in my day.) I didn't articulate my theory as well as I would have liked but for the sake of brevity I think you get the drift and I don't want to run the bandwidth to death.

BA - My wife actually mailed me the Fair Tax Book Boortz promoted. I've yet to digest his book though. I concur w/you on the WoT vs. domestic issues angle wrt the Prez. The man's got an unbelievabley tough job but the immigration reforms are too long in coming. One of the military's mandates is to protect the borders and sovereingty of the nation. I'd love to see us start going down there in deployment rotations to augment are border patrol brothers. Okay, enough of my literary diarhea and delusions of grandeur, thanks for giving it a look.

Posted by Broadhead6 2006-02-24 14:19|| 2006-02-24 14:19|| Front Page Top

#15 No, thanks to you for this insight in Us politics!

Posted by anonymous5089 2006-02-24 14:46|| 2006-02-24 14:46|| Front Page Top

#16 I wish the Donks many "Near Victories" come this November.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2006-02-24 14:51|| 2006-02-24 14:51|| Front Page Top

#17 Good luck to ya, BH6! Actually, I think you're right in that it would be easier to run independent in local elections. However, local elections tend to not really (unfortunately, the should) affect national-type issues. Mostly getting into zoning, local (police) law enforcement issues, and for larger cities/counties, things like traffic, water/sewer, development, etc. It IS a good way to cut your teeth though, as a stepping stool to the next level (State). The one area where locals COULD have a say in national issues is potentially illegal immigration.

Good on your wife for the book. I haven't read it yet either, but my Congressman (John Linder, R-GA) is the guy who wrote it and the main thrust behind it. I love Boortz philosophically, but I also believe that he's done his research and he can find nothing wrong with it. The way Rep. Linder explains it (I've been to 2 Town Hall meetings when he's back in town where he explains the Fair Tax), it sounds like a win-win for all! Here's my explanation of it in a nutshell:

(1) Disbands the IRS, all of their regulations, etc. and sets up the Federal Govt's income (taxes) basically as a nationwide sales tax. This actually cuts withholdings from your paycheck for ALL Fed. Gov't income (not just withholdings for Income Tax, but also, Social Security, Medicare, etc.)
(2) Gives a "Pre-bate" every month up to the poverty level for real necessities to EVERYONE (e.g. you get a check to cover housing, food, clothing for the month based on the poverty level, which is something around $20,000/year income for a 4-person family). THIS is important in that it shuts up the arguments about cutting back welfare/food stamps/etc.
(3) Sets the Federal sales tax at around 28%. Most people gasp at this number, but if you tell them to go and look at their paystub, and total up how much they DON'T receive that's withheld for Federal Income Tax, Social Security, Medicare, etc., they'll realize it's a win-win for most people (middle class). You would receive your ENTIRE paycheck (no Federal Withholdings).
(4) It captures taxes from illegal immigrants. Currently, we all know, a lot of illegals get paid "off the books", in cash, etc. Because the employer does this, they DON'T pay Federal Income Taxes (basically). By switching this to a sales tax system, the Feds start collecting money from every Jose, Pepe and Jesus out there that buys a cup of coffee at the gas station every morning.
(5) The tax would ONLY apply on NEW items. That is, if you buy something used (home, car, something off Ebay, etc.), you wouldn't pay ANY Federal sales tax on that item!
(6) It's a way for the power of the purse strings to fall back to the people, where it belongs. You don't want to give the Feds ANY money? Buy used products all year long...or don't buy anything at all. I know, that's realistically impossible, but in theory, it should give us more power in how much money Washington gets every year.

I had heartburn mostly over the RATE of sales tax that would be needed (28% or so) to cover the current Federal budget. However, as Rep. Linder explains it, it makes sense. Economists have studied it, and say that the AVERAGE item on sale has a built-in 28% tax in it for all the firms involved in making that item to comply with current IRS regulations/paperwork/filings. For example (one from Rep. Linder)...take a loaf of bread...the farmer builds in to the cost of selling his wheat the costs for complying with IRS regulations (including, paying for any employees Social Sec., Medicare withholdings). That wheat goes to a manufacturer to process, who themselves have built-in costs (probably more than the farmer, as they have more employees), to the trucker who ships it to the grocery store and on and on. You see how those built-in costs (are passed on to the consumer ultimately) could add up to 28%. If you do away with all those IRS regulations and payments, theoretically, the price of that loaf of bread should drop by ~28%, which means that (again, in theory), the price (after the 28% sales tax proposed by the Fair Tax) should be what it is today. Obviously, there'd be some companies who keep the price as is and reap the benefits, and there'd probably be "growing pains" the first year or two in switching systems, but go look at your paystub and see how much is withheld for Federal Income tax, Social Security and Medicare combined (including your employer's portions). You'd be amazed!

Posted by BA 2006-02-24 14:51|| 2006-02-24 14:51|| Front Page Top

#18 Si if you buy a house from someone else, is it used or would you pay sales tax on that? If the sales tax were only on new construction, that market would either die or the price of "used" homes would go up 28% to compensate.

Posted by remoteman 2006-02-24 15:37|| 2006-02-24 15:37|| Front Page Top

#19 At the local level, it isn't party so much as affiliations -- that is, how many groups of acquaintances can you get to vote for you? eg. fellow church members, scouts, soccer parents, PTA, Lions/Elks/VA, etc. You and your wife will want to get involved in lots of local organizations, and get yourselves known to the members, who will suggest to their spouses and friends that they all vote for you because you're a good guy. I imagine you're right that in a community near a base being a vet would be a big draw, as long as you have those other connections to the outside community as well. And if you are successful as a group of independent candidates campaigning together (that part is important, too; people like to choose packages, not a one-off individual), then with time the Dems/Repubs will court you for their line-up -- easier to sell a proven quantity to a county or state electorate than a newcomer. I suspect that's a good piece of why Hackett failed the first time, in addition to it being noticed that he was talking out of both sides of his mouth, and why he was asked to give way to an old pol this time.

Good luck to you and your comrades, Broadhead 6. What you propose will do our country good.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-02-24 16:13|| 2006-02-24 16:13|| Front Page Top

#20 Interesting! While I would like a much simpler tax, you can't just shut down the IRS.

No, really.

Whaddabout all the unemployment? The accountants and tax attorneys - they'd all get laid off. Somehow it'd hafta be phased in , with early retirements, reassignments and absolutely horrendous whining and crying. It'd make Ahrnold's proposed changes last year look like a cakewalk.

Remember all the folks who you're going to lay off have votes, too.

Sigh. It IS a swell idea!

Posted by Bobby 2006-02-24 16:56|| 2006-02-24 16:56|| Front Page Top

#21 ....and a very large percentage of those IRS "workers" vote democratic for some unknown reason.

Posted by Visitor 2006-02-24 17:45|| 2006-02-24 17:45|| Front Page Top

23:44 .com
23:42 Frank G
23:41 Frank G
23:40 smn
23:21 twobyfour
23:11 trailing wife
23:10 trailing wife
23:07 .com
23:06 .com
23:03 C-Low
23:02 trailing wife
22:58 Barbara Skolaut
22:53 Fred
22:51 trailing wife
22:49 CrazyFool
22:44 Bill Nelson
22:42 Vinkat Bala Subrumanian
22:41 Omavith Gleatle8151
22:38 Frank G
22:35 mojo
22:34 Vinkat Bala Subrumanian
22:31 Frank G
22:29 Alaska Paul
22:28 Frank G