THE DUMBEST MAN ALIVE

As many of you know I dislike all Democrats and most Republicans. Both parties take turns trying to control our lives. However much I dislike these people John Edwards takes my hatred to new heights. This man, if elected would be more of a threat to our freedom than Osama Bin Laden. He would destroy Capitalism and punish success, like no one in this countries history.

In a recent speech John Edwards has outlined the following plan. He would create the " get ahead program", which is nothing more than more welfare. First, I love the catchy title, who could be against the "get ahead program" "PEOPLE WHO WANT THE POOR TO BE STAY BEHIND, LIKE GEORGE BUSH, EXXON AND HALIBURTON!!!" (I hear libs yelling now). Really they disguise their big welfare programs behind these names because Americans might not buy the title "more money for deadbeats initiative".

This program would give the poor and extra $500/yr for saving the same amount. Wow talk about an amazing rate of return. Add this to the many other handouts like unviveral health care and increased welfare.

And how will he pay for this you ask? Of course by raising taxes on the rich. He wants to increase the rate of capital gains tax to 28% to ensure that high-income investors will pay taxes on their investment income, as well as repeal the Bush tax cuts for the families who make more than $200,000 a year. All this and I quote "to restore fairness to a tax code that has been driven badly out of whack by the wrongheaded rules of the Washington establishment – more wealth for the wealthy and more power for the powerful."

Lets see the poor already pay almost zero federal tax, they use $8 in government services for every $1 they pay. The rich pay the lion share of the taxes and use nearly no services. If you want to restore fairness shouldn't we raise taxes on the poor and their cut programs?

This metro sexual has many great slogans, but seems to ignore the facts. My favorite might be "It's time to end the president's war on work" So you work hard to get ahead and make a lot of money, and if someone wants to keep this money well there is now a war on work? Should we really be taking the definition of the term work from a man who made his money suing people who did work? People like John Edwards are the most dangerous because he will get millions of followers who buy into this crap. My only saving grace is that the two other socialists are ahead in the polls. I will complain about them later.

JCARD IS BACK

After a brief vacation Jcard has returned more angry then ever. The first thing I read today is a poll on the drudge report that states the majority of people in rich countries believe in socialism (not in so many words, but that was the gist) . Although the US polled better it is still disappointing to read these results.

The question "do you think the government should set pay caps on the heads of companies" was disturbing. Every European country polled higher than 50% in the yes category, while the US polled a little over 30%, while another 25% was unsure. I really don't get this kind of thinking. In a supposedly free countries they want to tell people how rich they can become.

When did we as a country replace admiration for someones success with jealousy? We used to strive for success now we ask for hand outs and want to make the rich weaker. Look around, the average middle class worker works less and has more material wealth than anytime in history (contrary to what Lou Dobbs says). Yet they feel since someone else worked hard and got ahead that that person is the enemy. We will never be great again until we celebrate success and this means no redistribution of wealth.

Debt Ridden

I have always believed that the difference between the rich and the poor is the amount of debt they voluntarily put themselves into. Most of the problems of the poor have nothing to do with Exxon, Conservatives, the rich, or their bosses. Rather it is their own financial mistakes that makes and keeps them poor. When someone spends what they haven't earned they voluntarily make them self an indenture servant. A man can never be free when he is in debt. Even the bible points this out this when it states "the borrower is servant to the lender". The result is people's own actions make them richer or poorer.

The problem arises when the Government spends money and takes debt out in your name. No matter how much financial restraint you may have shown the government is putting you into debt. If you take the current total national debt and break it out by person it is $29,368.63(total debt of 8.8 trillion divided by 303 million). Since the US does not have the same accounting standards as corporations the number is actually considerably higher. This also does not include all the local and state bonds that are issued that the citizens will be accountable for.

The most ironic part of this is that most of this money is spent by liberals who were voted for by the people who put themselves into debt. They screwed themselves now they are screwing you. When it comes time to paying it back, the people who are financial responsible are the ones who will have to foot the bill. Obviously the poor are not going to be able to pay the bill when it comes due, which will increase your share. It is really scary that government officials can borrow money with no consequences and in fact are encouraged to by their voting base to do so. People like John Edwards can call for huge entitlements while the rest of us are left footing the bill.

When a private individual steals your credit card and puts you into debt it is a crime and we put that person into jail. When the government does it we put that person into congress and the White House.

How They Want You

Does the government want you to be successful? Do they want you wealthy, financially independent and well informed? I think you know the answer to these questions. To me it is obvious government officials want you to be a working class American slug. I do not believe they want the majority of people to live in poverty, rather they want you to work your 40+ work week come home and turn on the television and turn off what's left of your mind.

What got me thinking about this was rules for retirement accounts Why, I asked myself, can't I pull MY money out of an IRA early if I had successfully invested it. Why am I limited to how much I can contribute? It made me realize even more that they don't want me to retire at 45 and live carefree for the rest of my years. This also may be why the average American can't invest in things such as Hedge funds (they are only for the wealthy by law).

A financial independent person is a powerful person. You are not dependent on them for handouts such as Medicare or Social Security. You will not vote to increase their power over your life. You will not allow them in to interfere with your life. If you can afford your own health care why do you need them? The same goes for retirement. Anytime you increase your own power the power of the government and the people who run it is diminished. Why would they want that to happen? Whenever a politicians states he or she will fight for working families they mean the will fight to keep you there. It is in their best interest to do that.

The only way for politicians to lose power is for Americans to gain it. This does not happen by asking for handouts or begging the government protect us from our own stupid decisions. It happens by working to and becoming successful.

THE UNEDUCATED MAJORITY

Today I read a disturbing article courtesy of Yahoo News. I will link this article at the bottom of the page.

The article was titled Poll: Majorities say income gap too wide

It goes on to explain how 70% of American think that the divide between the rich and poor is too wide. It always amazes me how people think this is a bad thing. Americas poor have the highest standard of living of any poor in the history of the world. Only in America can you drive by the projects and see Satellite dishes and new cars. Go to Asia and Africa and see if their poor live this way.

What difference does it make how rich someone else is as long as your standard of living is high. Would you rather live in a country where everyone lives equally in filth? As long as there is the opportunity to get rich then people should not look at the difference as a bad thing.

The article goes on to say "Two-thirds said the government should make sure there is a job for everyone who wants one." Who will really be providing the job for those who want one? There obviously is no market demand for this fictional position or it would be filled. Basically the tax payer would be forced to pay an unneeded salary.

Lastly the article states a "Small majorities said it should provide jobs for people who can't find private employment, increase federal training programs and redistribute money with high taxes on the wealthy." The article does not define a small majority, but any majority who thinks redistribution is acceptable shows a real ignorance for freedom, capitalism and economics.

The only redeeming question was the last one were it two thirds of people think it is not the governments job to ease income distribution. I do not see how you can ask for job creation and redistribution without stating it is the governments job to ease the difference between rich and poor.

It really just amazes me how this country continuously asks for our rights to be taken away. One day when we get our wish we will be sorry we did.

Here is a link to the article

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070706/ap_on_re_us/income_gap_poll_2

Our Founding Fathers

On this Fourth of July I would like to discuss our founding fathers and what they envisioned for this country. The American system was a totally unique experience in the history of this planet. It was the first of country that gave the people the power and not the government. It respected and enhanced individual rights to a level never seen before.

Although I believe the founding fathers would be astonished to see how far we have come, I also think that they would be ashamed as to the way the average American let slip away what they worked so hard for. They also would be outraged how a mind set of self reliance has been replaced with an entitlement mentality.

Unlike today’s leaders are founding fathers respected individual rights. They would not steal from the American public in order to give hand outs to big businesses and a dependent poor. They would not strip private land from an individual in order to increase their tax base. There were no "two Americas' to them, only a country of individuals trying to make the most out of life.

Our founding fathers did not give us "the right to happiness" they wrote "The right to pursue happiness" Funny how one word changes so much. This is because they knew the average American did not want to be taken care from Cradle to Grave, but rather wanted the opportunity to be free. Social Security, Medicare, Socialized medicine were against what they stood for because they violated individual rights and responsibility.

The sheer size of the government would probably anger them. I do not think they risked their lives and property to create a government of our size. The fact that the people not only allowed this kind of growth, but also asked for it in many cases, would anger them further.

Additional are the founders of this country knew the risks to freedom and were willing to act to protect against those risks. During the revolution they did not waiver when the fight got tough. Although they took heavy losses they kept fighting until the job was done.

Lastly, the founders would not trade security for freedom. Increasing the size and power of the federal government to make us more secure was not in their nature. They knew that a big government was the greatest enemy to a free country.