The Land of the Free!

Don't blame it on the president!

Everyone needs to see this:



Let us never forget that we are free and accountable for our own actions.

If I were a reporter, this is the kind of stuff I would like to create.
Good job John Stossel!

Comparison of Taxes: McCain vs. Obama

I did my daily check of the articles summarized on the home page at RealClearPolitics.com and found an article in the Wall Street Journal about the differences in the proposed tax plans of Barack Obama and John McCain. It is interesting to see how the two candidates "spin" their statements on taxes, especially Obama. I quote three portions:

Mr. Obama claims no "working families" earning less than $250,000 would pay more in taxes, but that's because he defines income more broadly than the taxable income line on the IRS form. If you're an individual with taxable income of $164,550, you will pay more taxes.

Now, I am fiscally nowhere near the $160K or $250K tax bracket, and it seems that right now I may benefit more from Obama's plan. More highlights:

As for Mr. McCain, the central plank of his personal income-tax proposals is to make permanent almost all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. This would leave the top marginal rate at 35%. The one exception is the death or estate tax, which expires for one year in 2010. Mr. McCain wants a 15% death tax on estates larger than $5 million. Mr. Obama wants a 45% rate on estates larger than $3.5 million.

Mr. McCain would also increase the dependent exemption by two-thirds -- to $6,000 per dependent from $3,500.

Summary:

In sum, Mr. Obama is proposing to use the tax code to substantially redistribute income -- raising tax rates on a minority of taxpayers to finance tax credits and direct income supplements to millions of others. How much revenue his higher rates would raise depends on how much less those high-earners would work, or how much they would change their practices to shelter their income from those higher rates.

By contrast, Mr. McCain is proposing some kind of tax reduction for most Americans who pay taxes. He says he would finance those cuts by reducing the rate of growth in federal spending.

The one thing I like about both is that they're both going after the oil profits. Obama's plan is much less friendly to small businesses and for well-to-do families hoping to pass on their estates to heirs. Obama has many little perks for people like me, students, and lower-income families, thus his comments that 95% of all Americans would get a tax break or cut under his plan. In the same breath many of those same people would also be paying more taxes elsewhere. Obama also wants the wealthier portion of America to be the primary financiers of the Social Security program, using it to "redistribute wealth." McCain's is aimed more towards reducing government spending and promoting growth in the economy by taxing businesses less.

Remember to vote!

Record vs. Rhetoric

Here is a great article from RealClearPolitics.com that talks about the current candidates and their VP picks. It discusses experience, or record, as opposed to rhetoric. I thought it very insightful:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/record_vs_rhetoric.html

It's a good, short read.

Flip/Flop?

Hmmm...



What shall we believe when a candidate speaks? Who knows what McCain will say or do next.

I wonder if it's too late to convince Colin Powell to run for office.

"One for the ages," from Terry Moran

Someone e-mailed me this and I had to share it:

Republicans are up a creek without a brain!

Alternate titles for this blog entry:

Who do I vote for now?
President Hillary Clinton?
Feeling the pain with John McCain
Red or Blue?
Would your mama approve of Obama?
What does it feel like to be a Democrat?
"Mitt, Mitt, Mitt..."

Mitt Romney, in a speech this past week, chose to "suspend" his run for the presidency. It has literally caused a lot of recent thoughts to become a reality and has left me and others with a few choices. More on the choices later, but for now, here are some of my thoughts over the past few weeks... and as I finish this entry I can't help but think that Mitt may know something that we don't. Why did he pull out of the race so early? As he announced his decision publicly, the cries of, "No! No!" from some of those in attendance say it all.

While waiting in line to vote this last "Super Tuesday" I welcomed the 30 minutes of calm in what was shaping up to be a crazy week (parent-teacher conferences = working 12-hour days). I spent some time reading the walls, watching people, chatting to the woman next to me, and pondering my political choices. I stood there as one of the 3 out of 5 Utahns that are registered voters but have not declared themselves as affiliated with a party.

Yup, 60% of Utahns have not declared themselves as either Democrats or Republicans. I think of myself as a fairly intelligent and informed voter, one who chooses candidates that I feel are honest and would best represent us on different matters. Honestly, here in Utah, many Democratic candidates running for local, state, and national positions are actually quite conservative. Running as a conservative Democrat in Utah is like having to wear your sister's pink coat to school because you lost yours- and you want to arrive at your destination without freezing to death. You just put it on, run like heck, and then ditch it in the bushes outside. It can be easily retrieved it at the end of the day when everyone else is long gone. In what is largely a red (Republican) state some look down their noses at Democrats, but a whole big chunk of the state is voting for them. One of our current representatives in the U.S. Congress, Jim Matheson (D), won by a landslide. I'll bet that half of the people or more that voted for him typically vote for those on the Republican ticket. A private ballot allows for many of us to be "closet Democrats," if you will. In Utah the two-party system often allows us to pick between two conservatives. I think it's kind of funny to discover that in many cases, the Democratic candidates are actually as conservative- if not more- than their Republican opponent. Some local/state candidates think that just because they're "Republican" that we should vote for them. They also think that they are therefore not required to have a brain and assume that we do not have one either.

So there I was in line- and was reflecting on if why I wasn't registered as a "Republican." I thought I had changed it at a caucus meeting some years before. Earlier in the day I had looked up my polling location on-line and did find that I was in fact "registered as unaffiliated." I would have to fill out that little paper in front of everybody and acknowledge my political neutrality in public.

I had some other thoughts while in line. They are very similar to those expressed by Heidi in her "Bamamoma" blog. Knowing that Romney was a shoo-in here in Utah, should I vote for Obama in hopes that it might circumvent one little delegate vote going to her campaign? Hillary received 9 Utah delegates and Obama 14.

My choices now are:
1. Write in Mitt Rommey when I vote this November.

2. Vote for somebody else. What does McCain have to offer? What are Obama's positions on national security, moral issues, etc.? Mr. Obama has a lot of charisma but does he have the strength to lead a nation? I think I'd rather write in Mitt, but will that help get someone into office with whom I agree even less? I'll have to do my research. Obama seems very pro-family and seems to want Americans to put their best foot forward. Let's hope that he will gain the edge over Hillary because of his "we-can-do-it-together" attitude. That motivates people more than Hillary's "I'll solve all your problems" rhetoric.

3. Vote for McCain? Right now I can't bear the thought. Maybe he'd get smart, further unify the party, and choose Mitt as his V.P. running mate. That'd be a miracle. McCain would definitely benefit from Mitt's proven business background, sound advice, and national support. Maybe Mitt has some insider information that we don't. He has a lot of connections and support from within the party on the national level. Continuing to run the race against McCain may have further pitted the two against each other, and pulling out may be an opportunity for reconciliation- AND consequently put Mike Huckabee in the hot seat. Speculation is that McCain will choose Huckabee as his running mate, but pulling out before Huckabee may have been Mitt's way of offering the olive branch first. I know who I'd choose as my running buddy if I were McCain. Right now this is the only way that I could bring myself to vote for him.

4. Wait to see how things play out and then make an informed decision in November. It'll be interesting to see what happens on both sides. Who will McCain choose as his potential V.P.? Who will win the Democratic nomination?

I think it is important for leaders to require more from those they lead- not just promise them ease and prosperity. "Prosperity" and "wealth" is relative and cannot be measured in monetary terms. It is found by children whose families may be on the lower rungs of the social-economic ladder, but know that they are loved because their parents and their community care about them and teach them.

Tell me your thoughts! (or at least tell me where the typos are...)
-Loren

Super Tuesday!

The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all -John F. Kennedy

It's here! Tuesday, February 5th, 2008, is the day on which citizens everywhere can become voters and help to determine which two candidates will represent the two major parties in the presidential election this November. Get smart by educating yourself on candidates and issues, choose a candidate, and vote! Promote your preferred candidate- even if he/she is about to get skunked!
Here are some my "primary" thoughts:
1. Ron Paul is fun to watch! He's a firecracker. He has strong ideas and he reminds me of Ross Perot. I wonder why both he and Mike Huckabee have not pulled out of the race.

2. Mike Huckabee is as stubborn as Mitt Romney! Mitt is frustrated as to why he and Ron Paul have not yet pulled out of the race. In Mitt's mind these two fellas have no chance of winning. He's probably right- and that must mean that they have other reasons for staying in the game- as a distant 3rd and 4th place, Huckabee and Paul have a lot of power. Just one of them pulling out and endorsing one of the two Republican front-runners could single-handedly decide the party's nomination.

3. I am curious as to why Barak Obama is gaining so fast in the polls. He is right behind Hillary Clinton right now. It will be a close race for the Democratic nomination! I may end up being right with my former prediction that Obama will win. I have seen 3 of his television advertisements here in Utah. They are family-oriented and very "pro-people. I like Obama's "challenges." I think that the most significant thing that a president can and should do is to inspire individuals and unite people in service. Obama has the best, and most "symbolic" campaign. (For more on the "symbolic" perspective, see one of my favorite books: Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, by Lee G. Bolman, Terrence E. Deal)

4. I cannot yet understand why people are choosing to vote for John McCain. Ann Colter, conservative "super-nag," says she'd rather vote for Hillary than for John McCain. I don't know her very well and don't think I'd agree with too many of her ideas, but I think she has something here. So if you're a Republican voting for McCain, vote for Hillary instead so that Mitt Romney has more of a chance. It won't hurt you to be a Democrat for a day. He's a good, strong-willed fellow, but I don't think that means he should be president. I think he has no vision. He is clearly the "same old story." His only good ideas are those on campaign finance reform. Has he even stated what he'd do for us as president? I know he keeps sharing old war stories...

5. Yup- you guessed it- I think that Mitt Romney most deserves to be our president. In my mind he most deserves the 4-year opportunity to remodel the executive branch, influence legislation in his effort to solve problems, invigorate the economy, and in his own words, "change Washington." I am curious as to how he would do. I think he'd get frustrated at the fact that he won't be able to restructure or change things as fast or as much as when he was turning around businesses, but I think he has good ideas. His weaknesses are that he resides too much in the world of facts and forgets that voters are people, not business investors. He needs to connect. I think that if he'd hired the right people to help him promote the human side of things, he'd do better. Romney did very well during the Salt Lake 2002 Olympics as he created and inspired an army of volunteers. He should have taken the same approach (and people) in his bid for the presidency. He needs to make more "human" connections. (The "human" perspective is also one of the 4 "frameworks" from Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, by Lee G. Bolman, Terrence E. Deal)

Thanks to our good old Constitution, and organization under it.... [The country] only needs that every right thinking man, shall go to the polls, and without fear or prejudice, vote as he thinks. - Abraham Lincoln

Presidential Predictions

As I've watched parts of debates there have been some thoughts that I'd like to share. These are my "Presidential Predictions" for the 2008 election from both parties.

Prediction #1:
Barack Obama will win the Democratic nomination. He is the only one who can beat any of the Republicans. Hilary Clinton only has a chance against the "lesser" Republican candidates. John Edwards would never beat any of the top 3-4 Republican candidates. Obama is the strongest choice. Hilary chose the wrong year to run. Obama has both the charisma and vision that she lacks.
Is it just me or does the press love Democrats? I can't help but notice that they (the press) are compassionate and optimistic when they speak with them. It seems to me that when members of the press are interviewing or questioning Republicans in debates that they are much more hard on them- asking tougher questions, are more pointed, etc. Democrats are babied when they are interviewed- almost as if they were lost children found in Wal-Mart waiting for their mom or dad to come and get them. Want a lollipop, Honey?

Prediction #2:
Mitt Romney will barely win the Republican nomination. We haven't heard the end of, "but he's a Mormon!" just yet. I think that is pretty interesting that some people freak out about that and also think that it gives us a little perspective on the religious prejudice that lingers in some. The press is partially responsible for continuing to bring up religion. Mitt is the only candidate in both parties that really has a complete plan- about which he can speak in detail. Sometimes Mitt is too rigid and focuses too much on issues and not people. A few other candidates are lopsided and running on only one issue. Mitt will win just as many states as the other front-running candidates and while he is at risk on coming in second place in many states, with McCain, Guiliani, and Huckabee taking turns being first by a few percentage points, he'll win the most delegates over time for the national convention. I heard that he has the most delegates already. I just read my e-mail after typing that last part and found out that Romney has earned more votes than any other candidate so far. The only way that the Republican party can beat Obama if he is the Democratic nominee is with Romney. I also don't think that McCain, Huckabee, or Giuliani would do very well against Hilary Clinton and think that the big-wigs in the Republican party already know that- as well as the press.

I look forward to learning more about the candidates as they campaign and debate. More details at Real Clear Politics. You'll also find on that web site the delegate count.