Tea Partying; Because Barack is a Socialist

May 4, 2012

Before I was aware that Obama, in fact, used his executive power to REDUCE taxes, I wrote a comparison between the Tea Party and the original Boston Tea Party for U.S. History. It is slightly embarassing, but ‘I enjoy looking back at my roots and showing my progress via my blog here at Secular Morality. Here it is:

The Tea Party movement began in 2009 as a protest against the economic stimulus package. The main goal of this party is to decrease the government’s power in America by cutting taxes and spending. The majority of the Tea Party supporters are conservative, white, male, married, and over 45; they are wealthier and better-educated than the general public. Considering the movement began only 2 short years ago, the Tea Party has been successful in helping increase conservative views throughout the country.

The purpose of the Tea Party movement and the American revolutionary movement are very similar; however, the

problems they were formed to address were caused by very different sources. Both parties were formed by a group of

From the Albuquerque Tea Party on Tax Day

people who felt they government they were under was too strict. The American revolutionary movement was formed to stop the British government from taxing the colonies, due to a massive debt caused by the French and Indian war. Now this is where the difference between the two movements is; the Tea Party was formed to stop a government from overtaxing to fix a debt that the American citizens created themselves, by electing socialist leaders to govern a capitalist country. The Tea Party was formed by a group of individuals wealthier and better-educated than the general public, this is because they strived to succeed in life, and for the most part have succeeded. The American revolutionary movement was an attempt to preserve what they created, and the Tea Party attempt to return America to what it once was; a conservative, anti-communist, consumer based, capitalist country.

(Yes, I did embolden wealthier and better educated in the original)

 

To show where I am now on my journey through the ever-changing political spiral here is what I posted recently:

Here is a list of the socialist regime’s actions against the people thus far. I have included a “Socialist-o-meter” rating in parenthesis after each of the bullet points.

The first bill signed by President Obama regarding taxes was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Actwhich effectively:

  • CUT taxes for 95% of working class families (0/10)
  • Gave 70% of the tax cuts to the middle 60% of American workers(4/10)

Then we saw The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Re-authorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 which:

  • Extends middle class tax cuts to prevent a typical working family from facing a tax increase of over $2,000 on January 1 (0/10)
  • Provides a 2% payroll tax cut to 159 million workers – providing the typical working family with an additional $1,000 tax cut (0/10)

The most recent action being  Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 which:

  • Extends unemployment insurance so that millions of Americans who are looking for work will still be able to depend on the vital lifeline of unemployment insurance (6/10)
  • Includes important reforms that the President proposed in the American Jobs Act to help discourage businesses from laying off workers and to connect workers with jobs. (4/10)
Its a shame, my calculator added that up to be 14/60 in socialist points. I spend over $100 on the damned thing and it doesn’t even know that Obama is a socialist! Now, I do understand that Obama intends to raise the taxes on the 2% of Americans who make over $250,000 a year. If one wants to call this socialism, he must also call Eisenhower a socialist also.
Let us compare the two presidents’ income tax policies for the wealthy:

Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)

  • Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income over $400,000: 92% – 91%

Barack Hussein Obama (Socialist)

  • Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income: over $372,950 – over 388,350: 35%

If you feel that any information is inaccurate, feel free to report it. Please prove me wrong, but do not say that I am biased towards Obama without disproving any of the facts I have provided.

Tax Cuts since Proposal A

Tax Cuts since Proposal A (Photo credit: farlane)

Related articles
Advertisements

Remembering Sadam: A Liberal in Defense of Bush

May 3, 2012

The United States’ war on terror moved into     Iraq on March 20th2003. One must be extremely careful when indicating who America was at war with, because they did not attack the nation of Iraq. U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair organized a joint effort to infiltrate and overthrow the Saddam Hussein. The two leaders articulated three reasons for the invasion.

Former President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, make...

Former President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, makes a point during his initial interview by a special tribunal, where he is informed of his alleged crimes and his legal rights. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

First, Saddam Hussein possessed nuclear weapons. Second, that he had ties to Al-Qaeda. Third, Saddam’s regime had been oppressing the Shia Islam population for decades. The first two have been, for the most part, proven untrue, causing Bush to be deemed a liar by a mass delirium throughout the nation. As a result of his reputation as a liar, many Americans overlook the incredible joy felt by every Shia Muslim upon hearing the news that Saddam Hussein had been captured by the U.S. on December 13th2003. They would finally be allowed the religious freedom taken for granted in America, and would no longer fear the oppressive Sunni regime, something that would have been impossible without U.S. intervention. This did not mark the end of America’s occupation of Iraq, however, and America decided to stay in control of Iraq until a stable democracy was established. It ended up taking until the December of 2011 for the U.S. to withdraw its troops from Iraq under President Barack Obama, thus putting an end to the Iraq war.

When evaluating the decision to invade Iraq it is possible to assert that President Bush lied to the American people about Saddam’s ties to terrorism and still deem his decision to invade admirable. Saddam was executed in 2006 after being found guilty of 148 murders of Shia Muslims in 1982. Since then it is impossible to accurately calculate the number of Shia he was responsible for slaughtering, but had America decided to stand idly by it is fair to say that Saddam would still be murdering the Shia today.


The Sentence I Overheard That Made ME Liberal

April 15, 2012

Capitalism has been associated with freedom, opportunity, risk, success; the list goes on and on. Communism is often associated with the complete loss of individuality. It seems, however, that a college that costs $40,000 sans room and board is the furthest thing from opportunity. With 1 in 6 children in Milwaukee living in poverty, the notion that America is a land of opportunity seems awfully far-fetched.

I am fortunate enough to attend a high school with tuition exceeding ten-thousand dollars per year. For years I had been under the opinion that Capitalism was what made higher education possible; this idea was based upon what I was taught by others, for I had never put much effort into researching what made my education possible. The school is located in a relatively poor neighborhood, and after school one afternoon I was waiting to be picked up, when a group of 4 or 5 teenagers walked by the school. The next thing I heard is something I can never forget.

“HA, the students that go to that motherfucker walk around with 10 G’s in their back pocket!”

Perhaps the education I took for granted was denied to most children, children that would give anything to switch places with me. This

Kerry State School

Kerry State School (Photo credit: Rana X.)

is what made me realize that the notion that “America is the land of equal opportunity,” is not based on facts, but on manipulated opinions given to the general public by people who can afford to pay millions to keep their billions. Perhaps there can be no “equal opportunity” when there is absolutely no equality in the education system.

America is not Charlie Scheen, despite what the media has caused most people to believe, America is not always winning. Let me be clear, America is LOSING. We are losing ground faster than ever before. It is appalling to see presidential candidates deny that they ever cared about education reform in order to gain support.

Few people know that Canada’s McGill University costs $1,900 per year, even fewer realize that it is ranked higher than 3 Ivy League schools. I have decided to work on Daniel Riemer’s campaign for Representative in the State Assembly in Wisconsin’s new 7th District. I have decided that I will work as hard as possible to assure that no child is left behind because their parents could not afford to spend $40,000 on their high school education. To learn more about Daniel’s campaign or to contribute to someone who brings hope to Wisconsin’s struggling public school system due to Scott Walker’s policies see: http://riemerforassembly.com/

 


Your Tax Return Due Date is Approaching – What Has That Socialist Done To Steal Your Money So Far?

April 12, 2012
President Barack Obama signs the Tax Relief, U...

President Barack Obama signs the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 at the White House. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Here is a list of the socialist regime’s actions against the people thus far. I have included a “Socialist-o-meter” rating in parenthesis after each of the bullet points.

The first bill signed by President Obama regarding taxes was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which effectively:

  • CUT taxes for 95% of working class families (0/10)
  • Gave 70% of the tax cuts to the middle 60% of American workers (4/10)

Then we saw The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Re-authorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 which:

  • Extends middle class tax cuts to prevent a typical working family from facing a tax increase of over $2,000 on January 1 (0/10)
  • Provides a 2% payroll tax cut to 159 million workers – providing the typical working family with an additional $1,000 tax cut (0/10)

The most recent action being  Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 which:

  • Extends unemployment insurance so that millions of Americans who are looking for work will still be able to depend on the vital lifeline of unemployment insurance (6/10)
  • Includes important reforms that the President proposed in the American Jobs Act to help discourage businesses from laying off workers and to connect workers with jobs. (4/10)

Its a shame, my calculator added that up to be 14/60 in socialist points. I spend over $100 on the damned thing and it doesn’t even know that Obama is a socialist! Now, I do understand that Obama intends to raise the taxes on the 2% of Americans who make over $250,000 a year. If one wants to call this socialism, he must also call Eisenhower a socialist also.
Let us compare the two presidents’ income tax policies for the wealthy:

Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)

  • Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income over $400,000: 92% – 91%

Barack Hussein Obama (Socialist)

  • Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income: over $372,950 – over 388,350: 35%

If you feel that any information is inaccurate, feel free to report it. Please prove me wrong, but do not say that I am biased towards Obama without disproving any of the facts I have provided.


Planned Parenthood’s “Black Genocide”

April 9, 2012

At a Catholic Conference (out of respect for my parents, I am not a Catholic)  a couple months ago I realized that there was a table selling DVDs on Planned Parenthood‘s “Black Genocide.” Now, I was not about to pay $15.00 for a DVD accusing  Planned Parenthood of such a terrible thing, because the money would end up in what I felt were corrupt hands.

This weekend I remembered the stand selling the DVDs and decided to research and post about the accusation that Planned Parenthood was the Adolf Hitler of the 21st century.Here are some of the key points I pulled of their website,http://blackgenocide.org.

Personhood is always redefined to exclude the intended victim class. In 1935, the Nuremberg Laws codified the exclusion of Jews from German society. The next year, the Reichsgericht (Germany’s highest court) essentially legalized the Holocaust. Cartoons routinely depicted Jews as pigs, dogs, rats, and other vermin. In 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court declared Blacks “…a subordinate and inferior class of beings…” in [Dred] Scott v. Sandford.Black slaves were often assigned diminutive names, such as “Mingo,” that were normally reserved for pets. In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court found that “the word ‘person,’ as used in the [Constitution], does not include the unborn.” Today, unwanted children are spoken of in dehumanizing terms: “embryo,” “fetus,” “products of conception,” etc.
holocaust
lynchings
abortion
Genocide often framed in the language of “choice.” The Nazis asserted that the racial make-up of the German nation was an internal matter for the German people to decide. They also emphasized Hitler’s choice, his “Will to Power,” as a Nazi propaganda film put it. In the Senatorial debates of 1858, Stephen Douglas said that he was personally opposed to slavery but that each state should have the right to choose whether to be a slave state or a free state. Pro-abortion advocates argue that if pro-lifers don’t like abortions, they shouldn’t have them. Abortion is not mandated; it is a matter of personal “choice.”
Victim class tends to be people who have what we want or get in our way. Eastern Europeans owned land that the Nazis wanted forlebensraum (“living space”) for the German people. Jews owned material wealth that Nazis wanted for themselves. Blacks owned the work product that slave owners desired for themselves. The loss of this uncompensated work product would deprive slave owners of material wealth they desired to maintain. Killing babies is often justified based on the desire to acquire material wealth and /or maintain lifestyle. Babies get in the way of career development, women’s rights, sexual freedom, etc.
holocaust
lynching
abortion
Victim class is often seen as a “disease” on society or as diseased themselves. “Parasites” and “bacilli” were words used by Nazis to describe Jews and others targeted for extermination. Benjamin Rush, a leading American scientist who personally opposed slavery, speculated that all blacks were really leprous, diseased, whites in need of a cure. In his medical textbook Abortion Practice, Warren Hern analogizes the unwanted, unborn child to a disease, the treatment of choice for which is abortion.
Resources are inadequate to care for intended victim class if they are allowed to live. The Nazis justified killing “useless eaters” based on the fact that they were using up resources needed by the German people. Pro-slavery advocates justified the continuation of slavery because they said the slaves, if emancipated, could not take care of themselves and would be a drain on society’s resources. Pro-abortion advocates attempt to justify abortion by stating that there are inadequate resources to care for all unwanted babies if they are not killed by abortion.

http://blackgenocide.org/abortion.html

 

Please leave any comments on your stance on this claim. I do not want to take any side because it seems to me like something the Tea Party would start to “prove” they aren’t racist. If this is true, however, I do not want to be a denier of such an atrocity.  


Are You Going to Bite Little Doggy?

March 30, 2012

With the 2012 presidential election around the corner, many American’s try to figure out what they have missed in the last four years. Of course, there will be many on the Right who believe Obama has taxed this country into oblivion. They will  believe that Obama alone is responsible for the rising gas prices. So the question remains, what has Obama done?

Logotipo da campanha de Barack Obama

Logotipo da campanha de Barack Obama (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Obama has actually cut taxes. Sure this helps keep American wallets a little bit fatter, but I would rather see taxes raised. Bill Maher,

taxes

taxes (Photo credit: 401K)

although he donated $1,000,000 to Obama’s re-election efforts, has been very critical of some of Obama’s decisions. Maher argued that this country needs a 3rd party, a real leftist party. I support a nationalized health care system, but I do not support a health care system that no one contributes to.

Part of the Social Contract that must be present in a socialized system must include requirements an individual must meet to be taken care of by society. It is not enough to be entitled to benefits because you were born in America.

So do I agree with the Right? Yes.

The solution, however, is not to throw out healthcare. It is to require something in exchange for healthcare.

So Obama, stop barking. Bite.


Thomas Jefferson: The Liberal, Slave-owning, Founder of the Constitution (Yes I did Say Liberal)

March 27, 2012

For those politicians who claim to be more Jeffersonesque, if you will, than their opponents, it seems you may need to review your history books a few more times. Now, certainly I would not expect to write about the fact that he owned slaves and expect my readers not to already have this knowledge, but I would like to stress the first word used to describe Jefferson in the title, yes, Liberal.

When a group of people  is asked to name a president who showed complete disregard for the constitution one is likely to find that the Democrats will cite George Bush’s invasion of the Middle East, and the Republicans will shout about birth-control (No, this is not Fox, I do not claim to be “Fair and Balance”). But none of the founding fathers wouldn’t bypass congress entirely to change the fate of our nation forever… would they?

The great Thomas Jefferson (Don’t get me wrong I think he was one of the greatest men this country has ever seen in office) did bypass congress entirely and spent millions of dollars to nearly double the size of the United States. That’s right, the Louisiana Purchase happens to be one of the most unconstitutional events in U.S. history.

Louisiana_Purchase_1904_Issue-10.jpg

Louisiana_Purchase_1904_Issue-10.jpg (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Where would the United States be now without the Louisiana Purchase? Clearly not a better one. The reason Jefferson was forced into bypassing congress was because the deal would not stand the duration of the process (looks like congress has always been slow…). So the moral of the story? Sometimes the Constitution is better off broken. Considering that free states are still required to return escaped slaves back to their original owners I think there are definitely a few erroneous things (a lot actually) still hidden within the Supreme Law of the Land.