“I Think, I Observe – Therefore I Worry”

“I Think, I Observe – Therefore I Worry”
By: Ron Boat

Election 2016; A turning point in America that presents us with the end in sight. It will either be the end of America as we know it or… the end of a socialistic slide that started years ago but was hastened over the last 7 years with our current white house occupant.

As for the “D”s running for office…

We pretty much know the Clinton story. Lived off the government her whole life; Couldn’t pass the bar in DC to get a law license so moved to Arkansas. Lived off the people as the wife of the governor, then as first lady. Then after stealing the white house blind of artwork, furniture, china and other things (which were forced to be returned) lived off the people again as a senator, then as Sec. of State. Now she enjoys the high life, private jets, fancy living at the expense of billions paid to their many foundation endeavors, speaking fees and other sources hidden or otherwise accounted for. And those foundations give about 15% to causes while keeping the bulk “in house” for salaries, lavish traveling and other expenses a charity? You decide. People might be interested in this Hillary retrospective:  http://www.rense.com/general80/hopes.htm

And on the other side of the “D” list – Sanders, a radical and agitator in the ferment of 1960s and '70s Vermont, a tireless campaigner and champion of laborers who didn’t collect his own first steady paycheck until he was an elected official pushing 40 years old.

He went to Brooklyn College, before transferring to the University of Chicago, where he joined the Congress of Racial Equality, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the Student Peace Union and the Young People’s Socialist League. He read psychology, sociology and history. He read Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. He demonstrated against the city’s schools – getting him arrested and charged with resisting arrest. Just another Chi-Town socialist hoping to carry on the legacy of our current white house “Commandant-in-Chief.”

He was always poor, virtually unemployed, living off unemployment insurance. In subsequent Liberty Union campaigns he advocated for “the doing away with all limitations for unemployment  benefits.”

Sanders decided to run for mayor of Burlington — and then, by 10 votes, he won: His first paycheck. He was the socialist mayor who somehow had gotten elected in the immediate wake of the inauguration of Ronald Reagan. “Yeah, OK, I’m a socialist,” he told the Globe. “We’ll charge $10 a head to come see the freak mayor of Burlington.”

It’s truly amazing and interesting to me that the lemmings who live in the Democratic party will choose either an obvious liar who was incompetent in her job as Secretary of State, and is laden with multiple FBI investigations for lying, incompetence, and putting our country’s secrets at risk – or... an admitted socialist who has accomplished nothing in his life, lived on welfare till elected to the Congress, never had a bill passed, and wanted to give everyone everything by taxing the “rich” at 90%.

Here’s a fact: If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 Billion. That’s only a third of a year’s deficit and our national debt would continue to explode. As John Stossel says, “My $616 billion assumption above is absurd. Rich people wouldn’t work if government takes all their earnings.” And "Fox News analysts" found that "taxing millionaires at 100% would now run the federal government for only two and a half to three months." There just aren’t enough millionaires and billionaires to pay the government’s bills.

Let's look at this hypothetically, based on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) statistics and the 2012 level of federal spending.  If the government were to ...

1. Nationalize the entire wealth of every billionaire in the country ($1.3 trillion) by liquidating all of their hard and soft assets, thus rendering them broke.
2. Seize all income earned over $250,000 (no deductions, gross pay), you would have $1.4 trillion.
3. Confiscate 100% of the profits of the Fortune 500 ($400 billion), thus making them non-profit enterprises ...

You would have enough money to operate the U.S. Federal Government… for maybe 10 months.

Get the picture yet?

Maryland created a special “tax on the rich” that legislators said would bring in $106 million. Instead, the state lost $257 million. Maryland’s rich just left the state. When New York hiked its income tax on millionaires, billionaire Tom Golisano moved to Florida, which has no personal income tax. “My personal income tax last year would’ve been $13,800 a day,” he said. “Would you like to write a check for $13,800 a day to a state government, as opposed to moving to another state?”

Even Donald Trump gets this one right. He says of rich people, “They’re international people. Whether they live here or live in a place like Switzerland doesn’t really matter to them.”

I write this to show that either Clinton’s stand on “redistribution” or Sander’s idea of just “taxing the rich” is not good for America and will have no positive effect on our debt or spending – only attempting to keep the voting masses happy. But when thinking about voting D this year, just think about all that. Which of those two could you really support?

On the “R” side of the electoral ledger….

We have the leader, Donald Trump. Drawing crowds, drawing support from many, drawing the ire of those not in love with a democrat turned republican. A man whose background is filled with enough fact and fiction to fill many reality shows. But a true success story no matter how he started out, for he has proven himself a survivor, a mover and shaker bettering himself and others.

The more he rants and raves about things… the more his numbers go up. Is the electorate really that pissed against the establishment ruling? Is he awakening a sleeping giant of discontent that will move this country to vote for him and “make American great again?” Or, as has been presented, is he really a distracting democrat plant stirring the pot to ensure a Hillary win?

Personally, even with some of his actions and words which disturb me, I rationally think that 1) with his wealth, assets and future potential growth, he would not mess up America, thereby hurting himself. And 2) if he were to mess up, destroy things and embarrass himself and this country, it would be a worldwide blow that I don’t think his ego could take or allow. He’d fight that with every ounce of gold he owns.

I dismiss some of his furious dissertations as a guy who is “self-made, successful and rich.” I say that having had a couple of billionaires and several millionaires as clients over the years. I learned that in general they are nice people, caring people, giving people (which Trump has proved many times) and, they just think different than us “common people.”

They think faster, more thoroughly, on many simultaneous levels, and more completely. They consider the ramifications of their actions they are looking at alternatives, consequences, outcomes all while considering the benefits and problems of a situation and at the same time carrying on conversations. Their thought process has brought them much success so it must be working and often causes them at times to “shoot from the lip.” This is true of Trump as he’s a fast thinker, gets out part of a thought then moves on to the next one sometimes leaving many to assume or judge the conclusion to his thoughts.

Others on our list are the Texas senator Cruz, who many have accused of everything from illegal citizen and money taker from Wall Street to fake Christian and liar. And the Florida senator Rubio who has been on both sides of issues so much, no one is sure where he stands today. For me personally, years ago I’ve learned not to trust people who smile too much especially when it’s forced – enter Joel Olsteen.

For others on the list, we hear chants of “read my lips – No More Bushes,” Dr. Carson is a nice gifted man but not for president, Kasich who? And No Christie hugs for me. Carly had many great points and worldwide connections most never acknowledged but… gathered no moss on her downhill roll.

Are becoming so demanding that no one can possible meet our needs and desires for a leader? Were we spoiled by Reagan and blinded by Obama that we’re confused in our expectations and tolerances? Here’s a thought… God isn’t running for president. He doesn’t need or want the job so it’s up to us to find the next best person – as best we can.

Personally, I have not 100% decided yet and promote no one. I am tired of holding my nose to vote for a McCain or other second best choice in order to avoid a socialist takeover of America. (whoops, too late). And if people are going to harshly judge, or blindly ignore the Republican choice, and stay home as they did for Romney, we’re doomed to repeat our history of electoral failures.

This year it’s not just about a president for 4 or 8 years, it’s SCOTUS appointments which can affect this country for the next 30 or 40 years… and that is an insufferable option that will destroy this country with more left leaning, socialistic decisions that could strip 2^nd Amendment rights, religious freedoms, the rights associated with free speech, assemblage, and our capitalistic society.

If you think that 8 years of a semi-congress-controlled president were tough, think about 30 years of a Justice Barry Soetoro in your lives. Think of him sitting beside an Erik Holder and Loretta Lynch. Think of 8-1 decisions changing America into the third world, tyrannical landscape of socialism that these power hungry, anti-white, anti-capitalism, anti-American, oppressive despots wish for their “subjects.”

When it comes to this process of electing a leader, steeped in well thought out methodology of our founders’ visions and established in law, I think that it’s becoming more clouded, more complicated, more involved that it used to be in the days of JFK or Ronald Reagan. I almost think we’re doomed.

I find that I'm observing a change in America’s recognition of, and tolerance for dishonesty and lack of reason. I'm seeing a country I don’t even recognize, and when observed and reviewed in the microscope of history, will appear ridiculously rampant with stupidity, blind “sheepliness,” greed and disingenuous, illiterate, uniformed actions and loyalties.

Therefore after thinking and observing… I can only worry. Will this be the final nail, the proverbial straw, the clutch play that continues and accelerates the fall into historical oblivion? Will 2016 be the last year we enjoy our freedoms, the ability to grow and achieve, our joys of family and friends without fears of total intrusion, oppressive oversight and control?

God bless, God HELP America.

Has the Tea Party Vanished?

Has the Tea Party Vanished?

Al Ritter 

The scene in 2014 was a revolt in a way, it pitted the establishment GOP against the “people.” Those people had enough of the good old boys’ network and set a course to elect candidates who promised to change the way things were done in DC. 

Although it never really gained a full momentum the results held the House and retook the Senate. Some candidates have actually done what they were elected to do under the umbrella of the Tea Party, others not so much. 

We call those who didn’t actually follow the direction of the Tea Party push, RINOs (Republican in Name Only.)  

The Republican side has plenty of mainstream candidates, ones who borderline on the RINO idea, but as we are finding out, not everyone identifies with the Tea Party. They are the moderates or independent voters who see the political landscape as being right center. Most are happy with big government and just want to see everyone get along.

These same voters like to claim they are tired of the way government works, but they vote the other way. 

Although there are a few candidates who were the darlings of the Tea Party in 2014, one defected from a stance of no amnesty to working in the “Gang of Eight” and supporting amnesty along with his democratic counterparts in the Senate. Another Tea Party favorite has slowly moved away from the Republican and Tea Party values by taking a decidedly libertarian stance and now has faded into the same obscurity suffered by his father’s cultish following. 

We have two political outsiders, one of which is a retired pediatric neurosurgeon. This man is a gentle soft spoken person, he has lots of good ideas, but his stances and specifics are often muddled to the point of not really knowing which side of an issue he rests. 

The other outsider is a loud brash bombastic businessman, who uses profanity and vulgar insults at his campaign stops much to the glee of his rather strange group of followers. He rarely speaks in specifics of how to fix America’s woes, instead claiming he will “hire the best people” and “you will really be happy!” His insults and falsehoods rarely seem to be aimed at the Democratic candidates, but rather at his fellow Republican Candidates. 

Only one candidate was elected as a Tea Party favorite and has done what he promised to do. He has defended the Constitution not only in the Senate but also in the Supreme Court as Solicitor General of his home state. He has adhered to the Republican values even when the leaders of his party seem to have abandoned them.  

Has the Tea Party just become a footnote in history and along with it the values we fought so hard for in 2014? Or do principles, values, and honesty still matter to the voters who have chosen the Republican Party?