The GOP has lost its way - and I'm not sure its recoverable, at least in time to win the next election. A conservative party needs to be grounded in the roots of our Country's history - the Constitution - and the economy. To not pay attention to either is to give in to socialism.


The Socialists' 100 Reasons Why President Obama Is NOT The Same As President Bush

A socialist posted a link to these 100 items on another person’s Facebook wall in response to my opposing socialism.  On the surface, it would seem that some may not realize there are differences between Obama an Bush – but only if your head has been in the sand.

Obama is the Socialist in Chief, Bush is a conservative (and I make no apologies for his screw ups).  That difference is not on this list…but that is what the list is telling you.  My opinions, some ideological, are noted.

At least 10 of these 100 are repeats, most worded differently.  Several are truly pointless – such as one of my favorites #99.

I believe government should be only about our Constitution and economy – fiscal conservative, limited government.  100% opposed to socialism.  100% in support of programs that help those less fortunate – but you will have to read my book to find out what my foundations for these are and why going back to the roots of our Country is the answer.

1. Bush started the war in Iraq and Obama ended it.  True, that is what happened.

2. Bush lowered taxes on the wealthy and Obama raised taxes on the wealthy.  Raising taxes is nothing to be proud of.  Lowering taxes is – and the taxes were lowered across the board.  I did not and do not agree with the lowering of payroll taxes – it depletes the social security fund.

3. Bush tried to give Social Security to Wall Street and Obama protected it.  It would be better privatized – but the government needs the money.

4. Bush left office with a $1 trillion deficit and Obama has lowered it.  Huh?  The magic of number manipulation.

5. President Bush ignored the War in Afghanistan and Obama made it his focus.  It should not have been ignored.  However, deaths have risen in ½ the term of Obama vs. Bush – not sure what that is about.

6. Bush didn’t kill Osama Bin Laden; Obama did.  UBL was killed at Tora Bora.  However, the SEALs killed someone based on intelligence started under Bush.  Neither killed anyone.

7. Bush sanctioned torture and Obama ended torture.  Torture has to be defined.  I do not consider waterboarding torture.

8. Bush opened the Gitmo prison and Obama is trying to close it.  Opened to keep terrorists off of American soil and courts.  Obama announced plans to close in his FIRST speech – still hasn’t.  Bush never promised to close it.

9. Bush instituted the failed No Child Left Behind education program and Obama ended it.  It was a plan of good intentions that is bureaucratized, abused and a failure.

10. Bush relied on military force while Obama has relied on diplomacy.  Diplomacy was tried for a long time, before Clinton.  What successes has Obama had with diplomacy?

11. Bush nominated mostly men to the Supreme Court and Obama has focused on nominating women. (Bush nominated one woman, but she was totally unqualified for the position.)  Why focus on any sex – that is a biased litmus test.  Vote pandering.

12. Bush nominated white men to the Supreme Court while Obama has nominated a white woman and a Latina. Why focus on any sex or race – those are biased litmus tests.  Vote pandering.

13. Bush was placed in office by a conservative-leaning Supreme Court in 2000 while Obama won each of his elections legitimately.  His legitimacy – both as a candidate and winning will always be in question.  Gore wanted only selected democratic counties recounted, SCOTUS said no.  That being said, the courts should not be involved in these – it should have went to the House.

14. Bush took unilateral action in foreign policy while Obama has worked more with our allies.  Simply not true.  Colin Powell made the argument before the UN.

15. Bush responded poorly to natural disasters like Katrina, while Obama has responded more than adequately to disasters like Irene and Sandy.  FEMA failed to appropriately respond, states failed to request aid timely and some declined the aid.  Response to natural disasters is an emotional purpose.

16. Bush detained terrorists without due process and Obama has had terrorists prosecuted successfully with due process.  What terrorist has been prosecuted?

17. Bush deregulated big banks and Obama reinstated some of those regulations.  Not a good idea to deregulate as it was done, a conservative value.  Obamas reinstatement is a liberal value that is yet to be tested.

18. Bush never signed an Equal Pay for women bill while Obama did. It was the first piece of legislation he signed.  That is realistically covered under other laws and is actually a waste.

19. Bush tarnished America’s reputation around the world and Obama is restoring it.  Completely disagree and find the opposite.

20. Bush invaded a country illegally while Obama has done no such thing.  I’ll question illegally; however, Obama did not have to, it was already done – and he has expanded the use of drones.

21. Bush had a cooperative Congress for most of his administration, while Obama hasn’t.  Both have had cooperative and uncooperative – most of the issues of today are because of Congress and Obama having created socioeconomic divides, focusing on social issues, and vote pandering.  Presidents only cooperate with Congress when its beneficial.  Obama would not have had the socialist laws he wanted passed without a cooperative Congress - so much so that, as an example, the healthcare bill was passed before anyone knew what was in it.

22. Bush used fear to control the American public while Obama has not.  So, what is Obama using to control the public?  Socialism - which is control.

23. Obama instituted healthcare reform that covers millions of people; the topic was not on Bush’s agenda.  This healthcare reform is an economic and freedom grab – it is not about healthcare.

24. Obama ended ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’. President Bush continued it.  This was a bad policy under Clinton that served a limited purpose that’s effectiveness is yet  to be determined.

25. Obama supports marriage equality and Bush does not.  What is marriage equality?  This is often based on religious beliefs in an attempt to legislate morality.  I don’t oppose equality.

26. Bush supported anti-union policies while Obama supports unions.  Not a good thing – this is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

27. Obama has expanded land and water conservation programs more than Bush.  That should read that the EPA has instituted more regulations.  Bigger government.  Water conservation is good – big government is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

28. Obama has provided generous subsides to alternative energy producers. Bush didn’t do this.  And how many of those have failed?  Subsidies – of any kind – is a taxpayer funded government handout.  This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

29. Obama instituted tough emissions standards for cars and factories. Bush did no such thing.  Simply not true.

30. Obama believes in climate change and that mankind has played a big role in that change. Bush is a climate change denier.  Climate change is a proven fallacy.

31. Under Obama, the stock market has eclipsed 15,000 points. It never got that high under Bush.  The stock market tanked a few times under Bush – 9/11 being one – and rebounded.  It got past 10,000  under Bush and continued to grow.  It took five years for it to grow about ½ of what did under Bush’s first term.

32. Obama created the Consumer Financial Protection Agency to protect consumers from unfair banking practices. Bush allowed the banks to use unfair practices at will.  From an investigative view  this is not as good as it looks.  The purpose was well intended – the final program is not.  This was also introduced by Congress, not Obama.

33. Obama is pursuing gun control laws in response to tragic mass shootings while Bush took a hands-off approach.  Bush supports our Constitution – Obama does not.  Our Second Amendment is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

34. Obama has cut defense spending while Bush only increased it.  War will do that.  Guess what spending Obama did increase, that Bush did not, that is not on this list?

35. Obama is bringing clean energy to the armed forces. Bush did not.  The technology being used today was developed under research of the Bush era and began to be implemented.  Large implementation is good – except, Obama is spending more on this clean energy than was being spent before; no savings are being realized.

36. Obama has created more private sector jobs than Bush did.  Presidents – government –do not create or lose jobs; their policies have a role.  However, the bottom line is that under Obama first lost more jobs than Bush and has yet to recover those jobs.

37. Obama is for reducing and eliminating all nuclear arsenals. Bush withdrew America from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which is the opposite of Obama’s stance.  Obama thinks our enemies will be our friends.  He has not read Sun Tzu or the history of the Cold War.  He was too busy being a puppet of and being an activist.

38. Obama supports Planned Parenthood while Bush did not.  This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.  Planned Parenthood has its purposes, and it does not.  Regardless of view – it should not be funded by taxpayer dollars.  Social issues should not be part of the political process.

39. Obama supports a woman’s right to choose while Bush does not. This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.  Planned Parenthood has its purposes, and it does not.  Regardless of view – it should not be funded by taxpayer dollars.  Social issues should not be part of the political process.

40. Obama and Bush both support fighting the AIDS epidemic, but only Obama supports the use of condoms as part of the fight.  Not really getting this one – condom use is now political.  Social issues should not be part of the political process.

41. Obama hasn’t landed on an aircraft carrier to falsely declare mission accomplished. Bush did.  Not a good moment.  Didn’t understand it then – it was obvious combat operations were not over.

42. Obama has taken far less vacation days than Bush.  Recalculate that.  Count golf days and count taxpayer dollars used extravagantly.

43. Obama has written personal checks to Americans in need. Bush never did that.  Are you sure?  Do we care?  What charitable issues has Obama been involved in that are not government programs.

44. Obama isn’t being used as a puppet by his Vice-President. Bush kinda was.  Biden is too stupid to be a puppet master.  Obama is the puppet of a large group.  Cheney did have too much say in presidential policy.  In a sense, that worked and it didn’t.  Obama kinda is someone else's bitch.

45. Obama hasn’t used 9/11 as a political tool. Bush did that for nearly eight years.  Wow, that’s a blatantly false statement.  When he’s not blaming Bush, Obama disguises it when he does.  His focus is on socialism – healthcare to illegal immigration.

46. Obama signed the American Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus, to save the economy. Bush chose to save the banks.  The bank bailout started as a $60+B buyout of toxic bank assets.  As soon as Pelosi and Reid got in in Congress it tripled, then Bush – for some unknown reason – agree with Obama to let Geitner and another involved (after Obama won the election) and it became hundreds of billions.  Then the auto bailout was started by Bush and increased by Obama with Cash for Clunkers.  Then the recovery stimulus.  Bush made bad decision on these that Obama exponentially increased.  All these worked so well - he said they didn't work well enough and more government handouts were needed - and denied.

47. Obama is working to end the War in Afghanistan. Bush began the war and could have ended it sooner had he not focused on Iraq.  Bush should have won the wars with different rules of engagement.  Obama has waited until his second term to do so, although he promised to do so in the first half of his first term.

48. Obama did more to save the auto industry than Bush did.  Obama took a small bailout of guaranteed bank loans (that I agreed with) and turned it into a full bailout an Cash for Clunkers.  That hurt the economy by taking money out of the economy – as did the bank bailout.

49. Obama toppled Moammar Gaddafi without placing soldiers on the ground in harms way. Thousands of soldiers were killed in Bush’s quest to topple Saddam Hussein and he never got Bin Laden.  The Libyans did their own thing, we didn’t intervene – thankfully.  UBL was dead at Tora Bora (and if not – neither Bush or Obama would ‘get him’).  Hussein as toppled early and without loss of life.  It was the continuation for ‘diplomatic reasons’ and rules of engagement (such as don’t touch mosques with terrorists hiding in them).

50. Obama kicked banks out of Federal Student Loans, something Bush never did.  Not a good move - unless you're a socialist, and then this is just the beginning of government seizure of private enterprises.  Student loans were guaranteed by the feds – now it is a full loan.  The government is a non-profit.  This was an economic grab – a precursor to other socialist agenda items.  This took billions out of the economy.

51. Obama expanded Pell Grants for low-income students, which is another thing Bush didn’t do.  The Pell Grant program is a taxpayer funded government handout that is now given to anyone that applies to college.  He not only lowered it (not necessarily bad – its purpose is low income), but the high-end was also increased (not a good thing).

52. Obama created Race To The Top to reward states for education reform, something else Bush didn’t do.  I disagree with having schools compete for federal funding.  I disagree with federal funding of schools to the point of extortion.  I disagree with the feds getting state money and then filtering it through bureaucracy to redistribute.

53. Obama increased fuel efficiency standards for vehicles. Bush didn’t.  This is repeated – had to get100 somehow, I guess.

54. Obama signed a new GI bill for returning veterans. Bush didn’t.  I also believe that returning vets and active military are having a more difficult time getting benefits, or reduced beneifts.

55. Obama also expanded the budget of the Department of Veteran’s Affairs more than Bush did.  Can’t opine on this.

56. Obama tightened sanctions on Iran while, if Bush were still in office, America would probably be embroiled in another war in the Middle East.  Sanctions tightened and the UN did not enforce them.  That is part of the multi-pronged purpose of the Iraq war (yes, part of it was pre-emptive of Iran).  Wars in the Middle East can come to an abrupt and conclusive end, but they won't.

57. Obama issued new EPA regulations that will cut mercury and other toxic pollution. Bush weakened the EPA. Bigger government.  Toxins and toxic pollution – not good – big government is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

58. Obama signed a major overhaul of the food safety system which desperately needed it after the Bush years.  Can’t opine on this – but it looks to be bigger government.

59. Obama expanded national service by tripling the size of AmeriCorps, more than Bush ever did.  This should read that Obama expanded taxpayer funded government programs and socialist agendas.

60. Obama has protected more wildlife areas than Bush.  I’m not sure how this is defined – number of birds killed by windmills or expanded protective areas for mice in Pelosi’s district.  Bigger government.  Water conservation is good – big government is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

61. Under Obama, the FDA now approves of making the morning after pill available over-the-counter to women as young as 15. Bush never did that.  This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.  Regardless of view – social issues should not be part of the political process.

62. Obama is pushing to make the federal government more energy-efficient. Bush didn’t.  Ummm…this is just a blatant lie to reach 100.  Bush signed several laws I don’t like – such as incandescent bulbs (LEDs and CFLs mess with some peoples’ vision). 

63. Obama cut the Reagan-era missile defense budget, something Bush never did.  We need a missile defense budget.  Obama is just cutting the military / defense programs (which are inflated – always have been and need addressed) in favor of socialist agendas.  This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.

64. Obama is increasing programs to combat cyber warfare more than Bush did.  Cyber warfare was not what it is today – this is called adjusting with the times and technology.  However, cyber warfare has also turned into spying on citizens outside of national security.

65. Obama is pushing for a new space shuttle and manned mission to Mars, whereas Bush wanted to go back to the moon where we have already gone before.  Obama cut NASA significantly.  We now pay Russia and China - two communist countries - to take our astronauts to the Space Station.  They used to pay US and fund NASA and further research greatly.  You cannot get to Mars if you do not have the moon as a point of base operations.

66. Obama is improving school nutrition despite Republican attempts to classify pizza as a veggie.  Obama is trying to give his wife something to do.  First ladies are not elected and we really don’t care what their opinions are or are not.  He is increasing the enrollment of the school nutrition programs – and every other taxpayer funded government program.

67. Obama is encouraging a national push to get fit and eat right to cut healthcare costs and prevent diseases. Bush didn’t do that.  This is essentially #66 – still needing 100 differences.

68. Obama has expanded hate crime protections, especially for the LGBT community, something Bush largely ignored.  The issue of hate crime has been expanded to include if a person is of a protected class, and a crime is committed against them, it must be a hate crime.  Under Bush DOJ the requirement was that the crime be motivated to inflict physical or emotional injury on a protected class for that purpose.

69. Obama has avoided scandal despite petty attempts by the GOP to make up scandals. Bush, on the other hand, was involved in scandal after scandal.  Yeah, this certainly transparently true -- if you're blind and deaf.  Not sure what all the scandal after scandals are (there were scandals – all administrations have them).  Obama has scandals against the American people and Constitution.

70. Obama forced BP to quickly compensate and set up a fund for victims of the Gulf oil spills, again proving he is better than Bush at responding to disaster.  It was done through extortion or they would not get their drilling back.  It was done before damage assessment and responsibility was determined.  That is typical of the emotional knee jerk reactions.  Bush did protect certain interests – as Obama has and does.

71. The Obama Administration is more transparent than the Bush Administration.  A blatant lie.

72. Obama is spearheading a movement to bring broadband internet to every corner of America, also something Bush did not do.  So, what has all that internet tax been for?  What Obama did do was move the telephone tax for rural services to internet for rural areas.  He simply ended one defunct program for a program of current and relevant need.  Might be one of the few smart things done.  A natural transition.

77. Obama’s EPA declared carbon dioxide a pollutant for the first time in American history. Bush could have done this, but didn’t.  I’ll have to check on this – but I believe it was an emission declared under Carter.  However, the reason it is regulated in the manner it is – to push global warming and clean energy programs that have cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions with no return.

78. Obama supports funding of stem cell research and lifted the Bush ban on the research.  This is a difference of conservative vs liberal ideologies.  Regardless of view – social issues should not be part of the political process and funding can be derived privately.

79. Obama aided South Sudan in declaring their independence. Bush didn’t.  Blatant lie.  Per Jimmy Carter, Bush (Colin Powell) brokered this within weeks, at his request.

80. Obama saved Americans $4 billion dollars by ending the F-22 program. Bush didn’t.  No savings here – billions were spent developing the program that was ended for no reason, other than to cut the military budget and skew some numbers in the budget.

81. Obama has aided African-American and Native American farmers, something Bush didn’t do.  Honestly, I’m not aware of large groups of farmers in these classes of peoples.  Native Americans are part of sovereign nations.  Any taxpayer funded government program should be based on need, not social, cultural, ethnic, gender, religious or other identity.

82. Obama dared to slash the salaries of bailed out bank executives, whereas Bush didn’t.  The government – except a socialist and communist government – should have no position in private industry.

83. Obama hasn’t started any wars since becoming President. Bush involved America in two of the longest wars in our history.  This is a repeat of #1 and a couple others.  Still trying to get those 100 differences.

85. Obama has lowered taxes on the middle class more than Bush.  Another repeat and still trying to get those 100 differences.

86. Outsourcing skyrocketed under Bush; Obama is reversing this and now jobs are coming back to America.  Outsourcing is a private enterprise decision that began to grow under Clinton and expanded under Bush.  In some part because of corporate taxes (see GE), and others because of labor and production costs; others due to liability and tort.  Its capitalism, business decisions.  Those businesses are coming back because many costs have reduced and its cheaper to do it right the first time here, instead of multiple times abroad.  These are business decisions - capitalist - and not because of government.

87. Obama has been cool under pressure while Bush was more reactionary and indecisive.  Obama has been absent and doesn’t know what government has been doing.  Except when he gives opinions on events that do not merit his opinion, resulting in a beer brunch.

88. Obama established a credit card bill of rights to better protect card holders. Bush did no such thing.  One of the effects – much higher interest rates and greater difficulty in getting credit.  Credit was too easy, now its impossible.

89. Obama established the White House Council on Women and Girls. There was no such council during the Bush Administration.  Why have such a council – and if necessary, why at the White House level?  Bureaucracy and vote pandering.

90. Obama ordered financial agencies to establish Offices of Women and Minorities to promote more diverse hiring. Again, Bush didn’t.  See #89, and still trying to get those 100 differences by vote pandering.

91. Obama increased minority access to capital, thus helping minorities in ways Bush never did.  First, there should be no preference for or bias against because of race, gender, etc.  Under Bush housing credit was too easy, people that otherwise could not get home loans did – resulting in a bubble that burst.

92. Obama negotiated a deal with Swiss banks to permit the US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals. Meanwhile, tax evaders had a field day under Bush.  I’m not so sure I’m keen on our government interfering with private businesses of another country.  Each country is sovereign.

93. Obama extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, which Bush never did because he is anti-LGBT.  This is #25 again. and still trying to get those 100 differences and vote pandering.

94. Obama protected gay and lesbian partners’ visitation/healthcare decision-making rights, which Bush also never did because he is anti-LGBT.  This is #25 and #94 again, and still trying to get those 100 differences and vote pandering.

95. Bush was a child of privilege who had every advantage that money and social position could provide. Obama was a self-made man who crafted his success from his own efforts and abilities.  No one really knows what Obama was or wasn’t.  However, what is known is that Bush’s education was paid for by his family wealth and Obama was paid for by taxpayer funded government programs (and some say - aid for foreign students).  He then became a community activist (socialist) to state senator, and somehow went from an inexperienced junior senator in his first year to being a presidential candidate that had a campaign (concurrently like McCain’s) going bankrupt in 09-2007, only for both to jump to win the primaries.

96. Obama is extremely strategic in his thinking and planning and seems able to look past the immediate moment and defer gratification to achieve a greater future good. Bush had no such skills or vision.  ‘The greater future good’ is a socialist mantra.  Obama never knows what is going on at the immediate moment.

97. Obama understands the true personal and economic costs of warfare, unlike Bush, who involved us in two wars while deeply cutting taxes.  Obama knows that in order to spend on his socialist agenda, he must cut defense and military – and those cuts are what will end the wars.

98. The 9/11 attacks occurred under Bush’s watch, not Obama’s.  I really can’t believe someone went there.  I would not blame Obama at that time.  It can be said that no other attacks occurred under Bush, whereas under Obama several have – including a ‘workplace incident’ [terrorist attack] at Fort Hood.  Most important - 19 radical muslims who hate America, our multi-culturism and self-made prosperity attacked us.

99. Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize. Bush does not.  This is trying to get to 100 differences - and I truly laughed pretty hard at this one.  Obama was nominated for this BEFORE he became president (nominations are due by Feb. 1st - he was inaugurated Jan. 20th, based on his campaign rhetoric (officially - "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." and "We have not given the prize for what may happen in the future. We are awarding Obama for what he has done in the past year." [ten days].  This certainly was never earned – even Carter would have been more deserving – and should be given back; it is an embarrassment to the Nobel Prize endowment.  If anything, he has acted completely contrary to the Nobel Peace Prize.

100. Bush is a conservative Christian and his decisions and actions were largely faith-based while Obama’s decision-making has a rational, scientific basis resulting from a consideration of facts, data, and logic.  Obama attended a radical Christian church.  Politics should never be based on religious beliefs in an attempt to legislate morality.  However, Obama’s decisions are based on the socialist agenda – not science, let alone logic.

I encourage you to read these and form your own opinions based on your own research, ideologies and experiences.  You might also find other useful posts on this blog - including this one:  http://www.beerswithourfoundingfathers.com/3/post/2013/05/nationalized-train-wreck.html

Don't forget to your your copy of my book - http://www.beerswithourfoundingfathers.com/order.html

There is a lot of talk about President Obama appointing Attorney General Holder to investigate himself - his actions in authorizing the subpoena to seize records of journalists in the course of investigating leaks by the Department of Justice to the media.

That is NOT what President Obama stated in the speech I saw. What he said was he had directed Holder to report back on his review the Department of Justice protocols of investigating journalists and leaks.

Our agency conducts reviews of reports, records and photographs of official investigations of death. We also conduct investigations of death, which includes reviews of reports, records and photographs of the official investigations. The two are not the same. Here is what the SINC said...
“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs … [and] I have raised these issues with the Attorney General, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review,” he said. “I have directed the Attorney General to report back to me by July 12th.”

All Holder is tasked with doing is reviewing the guidelines of Department of Justice investigations involving the media. A review of practices and protocols is the lowest spectrum of investigation and analysis and serves only to see if the process is compliant with any overseeing rules, regulations and protocols.  It is NOT to determine if there was any wrongdoing or violation of law.

Its a dog and pony show - a distraction.

On a side note - and another dog and pony show - we know how a similar review went after President Obama directed Vice President Biden to meet with stakeholders regarding the Second Amendment and addressing the issues of mental health and mass shootings.  Stakeholders were ignored and preconceived outcomes were ready far in advance.

Updated 06/14/2014
Not a smidgeon of corruption...

Headline - IRS’ claim that the agency lost two years’ worth of former IRS official Lois Lerner’s emails (only Lois Lerner, and only the relevant requested two years).

The IRS has no redundant backup systems - the only agency in the federal (or any) government that doesn't. When was this noticed - long after the subpoenas were issued. Spoliation of evidence. Call the NSA - they have them.  Better yet, use Carbonite.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06... See More
http://www.abolishirsnow.com

Updated 05/22/2013
Top IRS Official to Plead The Fifth
Lois Lerner, director of IRS division that targeted conservative groups, is expected to invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions during testimony this morning before House hearing on agency scandal.

My prediction is the media is not quite ready to abandon the Obama (Socialist in Charge - SINC) ship.  I predict that it will be revealed that the IRS, not just the Department of Justice (the third prong of the Tri-Fecta of Scandals, blog post to follow next week), was spying on the media and reporters under the guise of national security.

Tri-Fecta of Scandals – IRS Corruption
Why are people upset about IRS Corruption?

I first began to write about this ‘Tri-Fecta of Scandals’ (before the media picked up the term) at http://www.beerswithourfoundingfathers.com/3/post/2013/05/nationalized-train-wreck.html

“Its not the scandals, or even the depths of the scandals, that should concern you - the American People. 

It is the potential of the scandals.

Like an iceberg, be concerned with what has not surfaced (only 1/9 of an iceberg is above the surface).

How this current legislative branch handles the tri-fecta of scandals of the executive branch will literally define the future of our Country.”

First, it is important to note that the Internal Revenue Service is a federal law enforcement agency that has powers far beyond any law enforcement agency.  It is tasked with enforcing federal laws, regulations and policies to collect revenue – taxes.  It is also, unlike any other law enforcement agency, able to enact regulations and policies of enforcement and collection – and has its own tax court.

The recent revealing that the IRS has been used to target political groups in favor of limiting government – including taxes – while favoring those in support of bigger government is alarming.  Government is a bureaucracy – it works from memos and policies, employees at the ‘front line’ do not come up with these themselves, they simply do as policies and regulations dictate.  The IRS has the ever growing and perpetual authority to make your life miserable – to shut you down, bankrupt you (although you cannot include back taxes).  The IRS is as responsible for bankruptcies as healthcare – but there seems to be no desire to reform the IRS; although, given the manner that healthcare has been ‘reformed’ – to be enforced by the IRS – and immigration is being proposed in reforms, we may not want the IRS reformed – instead it should simply be abolished and a new tax system proposed.  In fact, the current revelation of this preferential corruption of the IRS is now linked to the healthcare reform.  A foundation for a new tax system is proposed in my book (www.BeersWithOurFoundingFathers.com) and blog – ‘Income Tax Reform’ (Income Tax Reform).

“A government has become corrupt when they impose any tax, or any semblance thereof, without the expressed consent of the People. From corruption is bred tyranny and oppression.”

Imagine you are posting on your social networking, even your private email and phone conversations, about your disagreement with certain government bureaucracies and political groups.  It’s your First Amendment right, together with every other person, to do so.  You begin receiving letters and phone calls from the IRS disputing your tax filings, perhaps being audited and/or penalized.

Imagine you find that the IRS has only one position – their position, no compromise, no exploration of your status.  A resolution rests solely at their discretion, penalties accrue and your financial costs continue to rise for one, two or three years.

Imagine that you question - perhaps through the bureaucracy of the IRS – their policies and methods.  You are against a behemoth that is essentially omnipotent and self-regulating.  You begin to write your Senators and Representatives for help.  If you are a business owner, perhaps your business has been hurt or shuttered by the actions of the IRS, either deliberate or by circumstance.

Imagine finding out that persons of similar concerns and circumstances have also faced the wrath of the IRS for exercising the same First Amendment rights.  Years later, after many questions it is learned that a special internal team of IRS employees were organized to review persons and businesses of similar concerns and circumstances – and they have been harmed by the willful, but revealed illegal, actions of the IRS.  The damage is done, the income is lost, the penalties and charges made.

Imagine this happening to a charitable organization for the less fortunate.  No one would stand for it.  Imagine this happening to a non-profit organization for persons of race, gender, culture or other identifying trait that is inherent.  Again, no one would stand for it.  These have happened – they were wrong; still do – and they are wrong.  Imagine that these tactics were used for personal and political gain.  It has happened and no one is above the law.

This is what is happening now.  Organizations of concerns and circumstances that question the policies of our government (which is We the People) and direction of our Country have been under selective attack for exercising their First Amendment rights.  These attacks appear to slither through the bureaucracy and leadership of the IRS and the executive branch – Internal Revenue Service, Department of Justice and White House.  The media has been distracted by the third scandal of the Tri-Fecta, but if they were targeted by the IRS in the manners described, they would be relentless.

The IRS is a law enforcement agency tasked with collecting taxes - and now enforcing mandated healthcare through taxation.  We should not stand for this - I think you will agree.  If you're still unsure...

I have warned of the IRS - a revenue law enforcement agency - having accessing to your financial records is bad enough, and under enforcement of Obamacare would be massive control of your liberties and money. I warned of scandal...guess what just broke 05/15/2013...

Suit Alleges IRS Improperly Seized 60 Million Personal Medical Records!
According to a story by Courthousenews.com, an unnamed healthcare provider in California is suing the IRS and 15 unnamed agents, alleging that they improperly seized some 60 million medical records of 10 million Americans, including medical records of all California state judges on March 11, 2011.

According to the complaint, the IRS agents had a search warrant for financial data pertaining to a former employee of the “John Doe Company,” however, “it did not authorize any seizure of any healthcare or medical record of any persons, least of all third parties completely unrelated to the matter.”

Full story at http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2013/05/15/the-irs-raids-60-million-personal-medical-records/

Past the Time for Resignations - the Time is for Impeachment at http://www.beerswithourfoundingfathers.com/3/post/2013/05/past-the-time-for-resignations-the-time-is-for-impeachment.html

Nationalized Healthcare - NObamacare - A Better Solution
(new additional commentary has been posted 09/30/2013 at http://www.beerswithourfoundingfathers.com/3/post/2013/09/the-affordable-care-act-is-bad-medicine.html

Preview:
The ‘Affordable Care Act’ is Bad Medicine

Today is the last day of free market capitalist healthcare.  Our healthcare system, as a whole, has flaws.  Because our healthcare system consists of the consumer, provider and insurer – the flaws are not easily resolved, nor are they resolved when each component is more damaged in the socialized transformation that is ObamaCare.

Having health insurance is not the only answer. Having a health plan and a reformed healthcare system, without government intrusion into our personal lives and economic overreach is what worked in the past. I would suggest those so highly in support of this to look at the history of healthcare in America and the world. Moreover, this ObamaCare is NOT about healthcare or you. If it were, there would not be so many requests and approvals of exemptions. The key to understanding is to be an informed leader and consumer, not a misinformed follower and parasite.

Updated 11/03/2013
On October 1st the 'roll out' of the healthcare website failed.  Six people were able to enroll in the new healthcare exchanges, and it crashed.  It the weeks following, many excuses - and no acceptance of responsibility - were given.  If you liked your doctor and/or liked your insurance - you were promised to be able to keep it; period.  Hundreds of thousands, soon millions, of policies have been canceled in nearly every state.  People are being told that they can call or mail in their healthcare exchange enrollment to comply with the individual mandate that looms January 1st.  Was this an insurance scam or part of a plan to fail to push the solution of single-payer healthcare?  The answer is both.  The scam is only in part the insurance companies. Policies could be grandfathered if they met the healthcare act and did not have a change in premium. However, for most to be healthcare act compliant required a change in premium. That is the scam -- and intent -- of the healthcare act (failure). The insurance scam is pretty simple - if they don't want to insure, raise premiums by at least $5.

In Congressional testimony, HHS Secretary Sebelius testified that 95% of the people had coverage acceptable under the healthcare act.  She also testified that policies meeting such requirements would be grandfathered, so long as there were no changes to the policy or premiums - by more than $5.  If current healthcare worked for 95% of the people - why did it need 'reformed'? If it worked for 95% of the people - why upend it? If it worked for 95% of the people - why 'mandate' it for everyone?

If current healthcare worked for 95% of the people - why did it need 'reformed'? If it worked for 95% of the people - why upend it? If it worked for 95% of the people - why 'mandate' it for everyone?

Because it is not about your healthcare, it is about control of one of the largest economies in the country and your money - your freedoms.

Updated 07/19/2013
Derailing a Train Wreck

The unions have a five year exemption extension for the NObamacare mandate, and want another five.  The president has (unconstitutionally) extended the employer mandate.  Between these two that leaves a pretty small percentage of individuals that will be required to have insurance by the end of this year.  These individuals will be funding the fully program for all of 2014.

As Pelosi said - they had to pass the bill so we would know what's in it (all part of the translucent administration).  Well, its a train wreck - as any person with a 70+ IQ would have been able to figure out.

The House has tried nearly 40 times to repeal it and its predictably fails in the Senate.  The House has now passed two bills - one to extend the individual mandate and the other to extend the employer mandate.  This is how our Constitution works - Congress passes laws, not the president.

But, the president is determined to 'roll past' these efforts to derail the train wreck (derail a train wreck - that's how bad this NObamacare is).  If either or both of these bills pass the Senate (not likely), the president has said he will veto both - because it would be bad for the American people for Congress to extend these mandates.

And people voted, not once - but twice - for this historical One Big Ass Mistake America.

Updated 07/08/2013
Why is no one questioning the decision by this administration to extend the business employee mandate for health insurance by one year?

The law is very clear - 12/31/2013 all employees must be covered.  So, he can just ignore the law?

This law is more than bad - its unconstitutional.

This program is severely - and predictably - underfunded, and always will be.  What else is not being said?  The INDIVIDUAL mandate remains (it is, after all, the law).  That means every individual will be footing the entire bill for a year before businesses do (I think its unconstitutional to require a business or individual to purchase goods or services, but stay with me).

That also means that if you work for an employer that should cover you by the end of this year, but does not - you will still be required to have your own mandated insurance coverage.

Seems fair ... doesn't it?

Congress is not acting fast or strong enough on this - and it will happen with any immigration bill - reform or amnesty.  Headline - "If ObamaCare won't be enforced as is, defund it"

Wrong - repeal it. Even if defunded, that does not remove the individual mandate - it would be like defunding the courts, but you still have to obey law; or defund the IRS but you still have to pay taxes.

Repeal NObamacare and abolish the IRS for a non-progressive flat tax.

Congress is not limited to funding or defunding - that is just a method of avoiding a solution - which is what Congress does routinely.

Updated 07/03/2013
The NObama administration has extended the employer mandate of NObamacare one year.
-- Can a president just disregard and change a law?  You should be used to it by now, it has been going on for years.
-- Why the change?  Its NOT because businesses have said they need the time.  When they said the time frame was undo-able BEFORE passing the law, they were told to deal with it.  Its because the costs have skyrocketed and potential enrollment is way down - meaning more are willing to take the penalty (and the penalty will not fund the program).

The NFL, and others, have declined to be involved in promoting it, the health secretary has been running around asking for 'donations' - which is illegal.

If the Republicans don't jump on this new strategy to repeal the program, they are not representing the people.  The people did not want it, still don't want it and can't afford it.

The problem is - much of the Republican (GOP) party in Congress has Gotten Obviously Progressive.

Originally posted 05/17/2013
The first component of this new 'healthcare' law is that it will be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.  A law enforcement agency of unprecedented powers and authorities recently exposed for corruption, whose sole purpose is to enforce revenue collection laws.  A police state of healthcare enforcement - an agency with access to both your financial and medical records.

Supporters of nationalized healthcare give a few reasons to rationalize the need and Constitutionality of it (one is not synonymous or reliant upon the other).

Let's take the Commerce Clause.  Supporters claim that the federal government has the authority, under this clause, to regulate healthcare.  True...but...

To mandate a service - and to enforce and penalize through taxation - is not regulation.  Therefore, in my opinion - is unconstitutional within the Commerce Clause.

This healthcare law is not about your health or care - it is about your freedoms and nationalizing one of the world's largest economies - all of the components of healthcare, from the individual to the health insurance companies, from the providers and facilities to the pharmaceutical  companies.

Here are some combined excerpts from the book - one of the largest chapters (pages 299 to 324).

The most ridiculous arguments for nationalized healthcare are:  1) By example of requiring automobile insurance if you own a vehicle; and 2) Everyone has a right to healthcare.  We are all empowered with the right of self-protection; exercising a right is a choice (and should be a responsible choice) – but never required. 
During the course of debate – and opposition – to this healthcare law was a bad analogy played by both sides, required automobile insurance coverage.  For all the bad analogies given, what was not given was an accurate analogy of automobile, home and other insurance to healthcare insurance.  Imagine what your home or automobile insurance premiums would be if these insurances covered the same as current health insurance, and operated the same way.  First, these insurances provide coverage for damages, not elective or preventive maintenance, and they are relatively inexpensive – less than $100 per month each on average, but when damages do occur (call it equal to catastrophic or major medical), they are costly.  When was the last time a claim could be submitted for painting a house or a vehicle oil change?  Why is it that our medical insurance is expected to cover our physical regular checkups and routine maintenance, or physical appearance improvements?

There is no right, stated or implied anywhere, to healthcare.  Look, you will not find it.  Can that right be added to our Constitution?  Sure – by the process of a Constitutional Convention.  Should it?  Possibly – only under particular circumstances, such as temporarily only those that are without coverage or unable to be covered; such as reformed Well Fair.  For those that are uninsurable – such as terminal diseases, it is only humane to absorb those costs as taxpayers.  The reasoning being that financially for any family it would be catastrophic.  To not do so would be the equivalent of otherwise shortening a person’s life for financial accommodation.

What is the solution?  Simple – return to what worked!  No co-pays of $10, but a flat 20/80 split.  But, our government cannot have that – how would you control the economy and people?  How would you garner continued votes without the nonsense of the right to nationalized healthcare?  The solution framework is relatively simple:

• Employers no longer offer health insurance as a benefit, but as an option;
• As an option, employers may choose to subsidize and as an employee benefit, with the terms of the benefit at their discretion as an employee recruitment and retention incentive;
• The insured either pays out-of-pocket or is insured.  Two levels of insurance – routine and catastrophic.  The former is the 20/80 with a deductible towards catastrophic.  This is for medical care, not extraneous options;
• Those uninsured may be treated at an urgent care clinic for non-emergent care.  There is no preventive care coverage.  They pay a sliding scale on their share of the 20%.  This may include their physician.  The treatment provider is compensated at the 80% from an enrolled government (taxpayer) funded program or insurance pool;
• Medicare and Medicaid would be the same program criteria with a sliding scale;
• Prescription medications would also be 20/80 with a sliding scale.

It has been noted that healthcare is not a right, but it cannot be ignored that it is a problem in our Country.  Many argue that it is a right – that is all they argue, however they cannot support this assertion.  In looking at the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I challenge any person to find a healthcare equivalent right.  The rights enumerated in our Constitution and Bill of Rights is left to the individual’s choice to exercise.  None are required to be exercised.  And none, save one, poses any costs to the taxpayers.  The closest may be the Sixth Amendment and right to an attorney as a criminal defendant.  If healthcare were to be considered a right to be amended to our Constitution, let us provide for a healthcare plan that is similar to the Sixth Amendment.  Here is a useful comparison:

Criminal – covers felony charges; and
Healthcare – covers traumatic, major medical and catastrophic.

Criminal – covered by the states; and
Healthcare – covered by the states.

Criminal – fees are set by a state administrator; and
Healthcare – fees are set by a state administrator.

Criminal – providers opt to participate or not;
Healthcare – providers opt to participate or not.

Criminal – defendant must prove being indigent and private option unavailable;
Healthcare – patient must prove being indigent and private option unavailable.

Greed only feeds more greed.  If the government truly wanted healthcare for the American people, they would first address the collective monopoly of the insurance companies controlling premiums, treatments and payments.  Think of these three in similar terms as the three branches of government – checks and balances.  There is no form of checks and balances; therefore the insurance companies operate like a dictatorship to the patients and treatment providers.  Unconscionable.  The other consideration is the disproportionate qualifications to enroll into the taxpayer funded public assistance of Well Fair.  As previously noted in this chapter, a uniform income scale qualification with a Well Fair to work component, and an income adjusted 20% payment by the patient would reduce costs and provide justifiable enrollment.

Order your copy today - be part of the solution, not part of the problem.  One way things can be made better - helping each other outside of bureaucracy, instead of relying on the bureaucracy.
www.BeersWithOurFoundingFathers.com/order.html

Sent to Speaker Boehner today, I suggest you do the same - write your own, copy this, modify it - whatever you wish, as long as you speak out.  Please use 'Homeland Security' so that all of the calls for impeachment are together and the critical issue of national security is emphasized.

http://www.speaker.gov/contact (under topic of ‘Homeland Security’)

Speaker Boehner,

It is often said that the President of the United States is the most powerful person in our Country, if not also the world.

I disagree.

I am ONE of the most powerful people in our Country - myself and every citizen.  We the People are our government and we are taking it back.  

The power of our vote and to redress our government are unequaled throughout the world.

No more government of the People, by the government, for the government.

This is OUR Country.  It does not belong to corruption.  It does not belong to any person here illegally.  It does not belong to the Department of Justice, Internal Revenue Service, Department of Health or Department of Treasury.  It does not belong to Congress.

It belongs to the We the People, not the government.

The time for resignations has passed.  

The time for impeachment is NOW.  

You, you alone, hold the Constitutional authority to bring impeachment proceedings against these individuals - and all others impeachable of the offenses against the We the People.  

National security is often said to be the primary concern of our various elected officials and at least two of the three branches of our government.  Having these individuals in office is a national security concern - they are a clear and present danger.

Thank you and may you make the decision in the interests of the security of our Country and We the People.

Dean A. Beers
American Citizen and American Patriot
www.BeersWithOurFoundingFathers.com

Updated 07/13/2013
In the headlines today - Not So Transparent Administration?
When Obama was sworn into office in 2009, he said his presidency would be 'the most open and transparent in history,' but recent controversies have clouded that message.

Geez, this took the media two months to figure and and report!  More accurately, this has always been:
The Translucent Administration

Secret Email Accounts - the most translucent administration in history.

Truly, we cannot be surprised. This activity is not limited to this administration. I have seen at the state, county and city levels. Corruption knows no limitations.

The real question is - what were these people hiding and why? Remember, they are looking at YOUR email. THEIR email is considered public record. YOU have a RIGHT to read their email.

Why 'translucent'? Because information is allowed to pass through, but is diffused so that the information passing through is not clearly visible.

Originally posted 05/13/2013
Its not the scandals, or even the depths of the scandals, that should concern you - the American People. 

It is the potential of the scandals.

Like an iceberg, be concerned with what has not surfaced (only 1/9 of an iceberg is above the surface).

How this current legislative branch handles the tri-fecta of scandals of the executive branch will literally define the future of our Country.

After the second SEAL Team 6 incident and deaths, I said it was highly suspicious to have two incidents.

After the very first revealing of the actions of SEAL Team 6, I said it was highly suspicious that information of such detail would be released.

After Bin Laden 'escaped' from Tora Bora, I expressed great doubt - and again when he was 'assassinated' in a much exposed SEAL Team 6 operation, and 'buried at sea'.

Attempts and attacks by radical muslim groups, nationally and internationally, have been on the rise - and ignored while simultaneously blaming our 'disregard' and 'disrespect' for their radical culture.

Spending and debt are beyond comprehension, so much that the concern is lost and dismissed.

Taxes are on the rise, but as long as it pays for 'free' services -that's fine, because now less than 1/2 the working population pays taxes.

Nearly 1/2 of the population - including illegal immigrants - are on some form of taxpayer funded government handouts reserved as a privilege for citizens in need.

A push for a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants - without securing the borders or enforcing the laws prohibiting taxpayer funded government handouts for illegal immigrants - is being pushed through like the 'healthcare' law.

After a 'successful' government 'bailout' of banks and the auto industry - the government nationalizes the college student loan program and is working on the home loan and private retirement programs for nationalization.

The 'healthcare' program for 'everyone' is excludes federal employees and federal elected officials.

Healthcare is the third largest combined economy in the country and implementation and enforcement is delegated to the IRS - a revenue generating, regulating and enforcement agency of immense authority.

The IRS is targeting pro-USA groups and favoring socialist groups, something first exposed in 2011 and dismissed (actually it was exposed before 2011, but publicly dismissed in 2011).

The president and his administration, as well as Congress by an overwhelming majority, are more concerned with spending money, increasing taxpayer funded government handouts, granting unvetted amnesty to illegal immigrants, nationalizing programs such as healthcare and government (was guaranteed) loan programs, taxpayer funded government handouts as household income - than the well being of our Country and citizens.

Nothing to worry about here folks, keep moving...move along.  Train wrecks happen all the time.

If you want to stop this train wreck - start with this book blog and then order the book!
www.BeersWithOurFoundingFathers.com/order.html

http://www.abolishirsnow.com/

“A government has become corrupt when they impose any tax, or any semblance thereof, without the expressed consent of the People. From corruption is bred tyranny and oppression.”
– Dean A. Beers

Updated 07/11/2013
Abolish the IRS and return taxation to the states

In my book, I expand the concept of taxation to include jurisdictions of the states and federal governments.  In short, the federal government, beyond income tax, has no authority - except interpretation of the commerce clause - to tax within the states.  As an example, federal fuel taxes.  When you go to the pump an average of forty cents is added to the price of gas, with most of that being federal taxes.

I am opposed to any federal taxation of any goods and services within the states.  The only reason the states allow this is to get federal funding for programs - schools, highways, etc.  This is redistribution of state monies.  The federal government acts as a filter, keeping a percentage of the funds to fund pet projects and bloated departments (such as the Department of Education).  If a state or entity within does not comply with a federal 'optional' regulation - such as a federal holiday or reducing the DUI limit - the federal government will withhold state funds until 'voluntary' compliance.

Abolish the IRS - and the federal taxation of goods and services within the states.

Originally posted 05/10/2013
This week it was announced that the Chairmen of the congressional tax committees, Rep. Dave Camp (R., Mich.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, have launched taxreform.gov and joined forces to move the campaign to overhaul the tax system online. Your input is needed, I have sent the below information and links.

There are simple foundations to a real solution for income tax and reform.

In summary:
•    Any adjustments to the tax rate must be approved in a manner similar to a Constitutional amendment – the state legislatures have an up or down vote and a super majority of two-thirds of the states affirming and sending to Congress as the Peoples’ consent and final vote.  A super of two-thirds in both houses of Congress would also be required.  Introduction of a tax adjustment must be introduced to the states by April 01st and concluded by September 30th.  Any inaction or unconcluded action after that time the proposal is expired and void forever;
•    All income is taxed at 10% on all derived income from business ventures and employment;
•    No post-income activities are taxed, to include savings, retirement, investments and gains on personal and business holdings;
•    Retirement, disability and public assistance are not taxed;
•    Deductions would include all consumer and business loan interest, non-elective medical and personal care (eye, dental, etc.), education, charitable donations, medical accounts, retirement accounts, secondary education accounts, and income producing expenses and losses;
•    No deductions for marital status, children or other personal lifestyle decisions;
•    Exemptions for state and federally recognized non-profits business;
•    Federal taxes of any form on all sales, goods, services and other in-state taxes all prohibited;
•    Withholding is at 10% of the gross wage, salary or compensation paid;
•    Personal assets of a primary residence, single personal vehicle, retirement accounts and up to six months of gross income are exempt from post-adjudication seizure for any non-payment of taxes or any civil or criminal penalties or judgments;
•    Penalties can only be assessed for the aggregate late filing and payment or non-payment at 10% per occurrence and annum;
•    Arrears qualify for installments termed at ten years and accrued interest equal to the federal prime interest rate, with no additional accruing penalties.

Public Assistance Income
•    Total public assistance (housing, food, medical, unemployment, etc.) cannot exceed the equivalent of 80% of the net median poverty level income of the state of residence;
•    Any aggregate public assistance overpayments are taxed as income and the difference is payable to the overpaying program/s under the terms similar to the income tax penalty otherwise described in this work;
•    Earned income must be obtained and will reduce the aggregate of public assistance accordingly, earned income is taxed, and assistance reduced by 80% of the gross income differential (the converse may also apply for the loss of income).

A temporary preview of this chapter - Equal Taxation and Equal Representation Income, Inheritance, Payroll, Fines and Tariffs, etc.
is at < Click Here >