The Attentive Public

The stupidity is running rampant in Washington, and here’s the proof. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., is proposing a $0.50 tax increase on gas to “cut consumption.” Mr. Dingell, and any other politicians who think they know what they are talking about, let me explain why this is a bad idea.

Firstly, this will put a big hurt on our already weak economy. Some people cannot help how much they have to travel, so their disposable incomes will drop significantly. This will also hurt local economies that depend on tourism. Jobs will be cut and many businesses will close. Fuel costs also affect the cost of EVERY good sold in stores. I’m not sure how much a $0.50 increase will raise prices, but it will. So long story short, people consume less so our economy suffers.

Secondly, I disagree with altering supply and demand just to decrease greenhouse gases. If you want to decrease consumption, new alternatives must be introduced. How about we cut spending and divert money to encourage states and cities to build mass transit systems. A light rail system would do wonders in my county, but it will never get done because of the cost. We could also provide more incentives for alternative fuel sources. Make a deal with the automakers that if they can produce and market automobiles that effectively decrease gas consumption, the federal government will decrease their tax rate by X%. Let’s bring back personal tax exemptions for fuel efficient vehicles. There are many other ways to decrease consumption without a tax increase. Increasing taxes is the LAZY way of decreasing gas consumption.

Lastly, this will hurt lower income Americans. Americans on low and fixed incomes will not be able to afford this increase. Democrats are notorious for saying that people are struggling in American. Pass a gas tax and they certainly will be struggling, along with everyone else.

I want to decrease greenhouse gases not because I believe in global warming, but because we should be good stewards of the Earth. Raising taxes to force people to consume less might decrease polution some, but it will not even make a dent in the global contribution. The Fox News article points out that the decrease would be less than one percent. One percent. Is one percent worth our economy or the financial situation of so many people? If you want to decrease consumption Mr. Dingell, do so in a way that will actually have lasting results instead of putting a Band-Aide on the problem.

I thought the drama regarding the tanker deal with Boeing vs. EADS/Northrop Grumman would be calming down, but not so much. I’ve been seeing advertisements about the USAF “outsourcing” this work to France instead of creating American jobs. To anyone who is familiar with this contract, that argument is just stupid. Here’s why:

• If Boeing had won, there would not be many new jobs. The 767 is an older aircraft and the assembly line was going to shut down soon. This was an attempt by Boeing to keep that line open. They are already producing 767 tankers, so there would be few new jobs.
• Boeing outsources some of their work too. While Boeing aircraft are ASSEMBLED in America, many of the parts come from over seas. This is the pot calling the kettle black in my opinion.
• The EADS/NG award will actually create more jobs for Americans.

So when it comes down to it, Boeing was a little arrogant and proposed what they thought was the best solution. There solution didn’t meet the requirements and when you add past performance, that’s a losing combination. It doesn’t matter how you color it.

Boeing has decided to protest because they feel there were problems with the process. This worries me because the Air Force does not have a good track record when it comes to acquisition. I see this as a last ditch effort by Boeing to keep their tanker group together so they have a shot at future contracts. Boeing claims that they were quietly told not to propose a 777 tanker, which would have been similar to the aircraft proposed by EADS/NG. If they can prove this, then their argument might hold water. If not, I think the contract will stay with EADS/NG. The good news is the GAO has to make a decision on the protest within 90 days, so this could be over soon. If the GAO agrees with Boeing, they will have to rebid and this could take forever.

Everyone in the universe now knows that Eliot Spitzer, the Democratic governor of New York, was busted for his involvement in a “high end” prostitution ring. I’m not sure that the phrase “high end” is supposed to be in the same sentence as “prostitution ring” but I digress. When this first broke and read that he was busted for his “involvement” I thought that is was more than just picking up a hooker. The offense became a federal crime when he decided to import his trick from New York instead of sampling what our nation’s capital had to offer. Not a good idea.

The big shock: he didn’t resign yesterday. I’m wondering if he got on a conference call with Bill Clinton and Larry Craig and they advised him to hold out. There is life after scandal. The bigger shocker to me was his wife came to the press conference with him. I was waiting for her to take off her shoe and beat him senseless in front of the press.

Now here’s the big question, does this scandal make Eliot Spitzer unable to fulfill his duties as governor? We all know that most politicians are liars and cheats, so is this really a big surprise? Is Spitzer a bad guy? Yes. Was he wrong for cheating on his wife? Yes. Should he resign…my opinion is yes. Not because he cheated on his wife, but because he broke federal law. If he didn’t know any better, then he’s not fit to be governor.

It must be a dry week for the main stream media. John McCain’s birthplace is raising questions of whether or not he is eligible to be President. McCain’s father, a Navy Admiral, was stationed at a military facility in the Panama Canal. Since he was born outside of the U.S., the New York Times is wondering if he is eligible to serve as President because the Constitution states “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United
States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the office of President…”

McCain is a natural born citizen, so he’s eligible. The families of military personnel, even those born outside of the country, are considered “natural born citizens.”

It seems that some folks aren’t happy that John McCain isn’t attacking Hillary/Obama. While you would never catch me saying anything nice about Clinton or Obama, McCain has the right idea. The democratic race is getting nasty and all they are doing is hurting each other. They are both doing a favor for John McCain. So McCain needs to keep his name out of it and continue to fund raise.

I do think it’s ironic that McCain could possibly be hurt by the law he passed. I’m sure he’s kicking himself in the arse for that one. If he wants to win the White House he needs to win the federal funding fight. The Democratic nominee will have a huge arsenal, so McCain will need all the cash he can get.

When I saw this picture on Drudge this morning, the phrase “drive by” came to mind for some reason. Even though it’s not true, this image really does make Barack HUSSEIN Obama appear to be a muslim. Give him an AK-47 and you can picture him standing next to Osama bin Laden. The desperation in the Clinton campaign is pretty apparent.

The chatter amongst the talking heads today is that Hillary’s comments at the close of the latest debate were similar to the concession speech of John Edwards. I don’t think she’s ready to pull out yet, but I do believe she won’t be able to catch Obama. Obama’s cult of personality appeal is only going to get stronger. Him selling change shows his hubris. I’m not that happy with McCain, but I do think he will tear Obama apart in the general debates.

Now that Mitt Romney is out, I’m left without a horse in this race. It is amazing to see how much one person dropping out can affect the field. The media has already crowned McCain the nominee, leaving Huckabee out in the cold. I think I have to agree with the media on this one, McCain will be the nominee hands down.

For those of us who do not want to vote for McCain, we are in a difficult situation. Our alternative right now, Huckabee, isn’t much better. Some would argue that he is worse. We all know what is coming, and already starting to happen. John McCain is saying that he is the true conservative that embodies the ideals of the Republican Party. He pointed out at CPAC yesterday that if you look at his record as a whole, it is very conservative. Up until 2000, it was pretty conservative. After loosing to GWB, it seems like he got angry at the Republican Party and went out of his way to throw stones. Voting against the Bush tax cuts, McCain-Feingold, the Gang of 14, McCain-Kennedy, and most recently trying to pass McCain-Lieberman. His quotes regarding the tax cuts as being “tax cuts for the rich” and class warfare make me uneasy. That sounds like a Democrat. His comments at CPAC yesterday were good at attempting to extend an olive branch, but it also sounded like he wasn’t prepared to back down on some of his stand points.

I have some big concerns. He has said that he will secure the boarder before trying to fix illegal immigration again. Fair enough, but I still don’t agree with amnesty. He also has the temperament to go against Republicans. If he doesn’t get his way, will he cut the Republicans out of the loop and just work with the Democrats? I would hope McCain puts a leash on his ego and becomes a party player.

I’m also concerned about his VP choice. If McCain wins the general, his VP is the Republican front runner in training. If he chooses Huckabee, then no dice. I think Huckabee is a nice guy, but I don’t think he’s a President. There is some talk of him choosing Lieberman or Graham. I wouldn’t vote for either of them. He needs to pick someone that can actually win the nomination in 2012. I know this is assuming that he doesn’t run again, but he’s already said he would likely only serve one term. He needs to choose Romney, Fred Thompson, or somebody like Kemp or Forbes. Romney or Fred would get him more support from the right. Kemp or Forbes would help in with the economy, which he admits is not his strong point.

I’m still struggling with the decision to support McCain, but it’s still early. We’ll see how this plays out.

The media darling John McCain is making headway in the Republican Nomination fight, but he’s not fooling the Republican base. Those of us who pay attention to politics know that he has liberal tendencies. Since he’s been running for President (since 2000) he hasn’t been acting his conservative self. While McCain does have his high points here are 6 reasons, in no particular order, why Republicans should not vote for John McCain.

1. McCain-Kennedy. In an effort to fix our illegal immigration problems, McCain partnered with one of the most liberal Democrats in Congress to propose The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act. The bill came to be know as the Amnesty Bill because it allowed the illegal immigrants currently in America to get work visas. The American Public responded with a resounding no, and the bill was defeated. I have no doubt that McCain would make another attempt is he was elected President.
2. McCain–Feingold. McCain partnered with Russell Feingold (D-WI) to craft the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA). While I do not have problem with the soft money rules, I have a huge issue with restricting the “issue ads” 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election. This is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed. I get tired of watching the issue ads during the election, but the 1st Amendment protects the right of Americans to ban together to oppose a candidate.
3. Opposing the Bush Tax Cuts. Senator McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts not once, but twice. He says he wants to make them permanent, but doesn’t want to admit that his decision to vote against was wrong.
4. Not an Economist. “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less
   about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I
   still need to be educated.” These are John McCain’s own words in an article written by the Wall Street Journal. I don’t expect the President to know everything about the economy, but he needs to know how it works in general. John McCain has spent his whole career in the public sector. I would prefer the President have some experience in the private sector and have first hand knowledge of the economy.
5. He’s an Asshole. While a group of Congressmen were working on drafting an immigration bill, McCain got involved on the last day of the effort. “Wait a second here,” John Cornyn said to McCain. “I’ve been sitting in here
   for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the
   last day. You’re out of line.” McCain replied with “F@&$ you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room.” That’s classy. Also add on his demeanor during the debate last night. He seemed to always have this smirk on his face and used the word “I” a lot. His ego is entirely too large to fit into the White House.
6. The crowning reason: he’s part of the problem. John McCain has been in
   Congress since 1982. If he is this great leader that can unite the
   conservatives, why hasn’t he done it already? You don’t need the title
   of President in order to unite the party. Anyone who believes that by
   electing him to the White House will bring change is naive. If he
   couldn’t change Washington in 26 years, then why should we believe he
   can do it now? To unite the party, we need a leader that speaks for us
   with one voice. John McCain is more likely to turn on conservatives as
   he has in the past than to unite us.

Did I miss anything?

They are projecting that McCain is going win Florida. What a sad day.