How much is a SMILE worth ??

By now most people know I am a supporter of Herman Cain. The link below will tell you why!

http://johnmahr.patriotactionnetwork.com/2011/08/24/herman-cain-the-1-untainted-candidate/

But something new has come to the forefront!!

In the Fox/Google Debate in Florida, I realized something that had eluded me until this debate. When other candidates responded to questions, I listened intently, seriously pondering their stance, policy, or demeanor. I either agreed or disagreed. Nonetheless I gave each candidate very serious contemplation and took their answers to heart.
But by the end of the night, I noticed something that had been happening in the past. I never put it together until this debate.

When Herman Cain speaks – I SMILE!!!!

Sure, I’ve had occasion to laugh at something said by another candidate now and then when they have a witty aside or skillfully deflect a question or attack. But those are few and far between.

Herman Cain, within 15 to 20 seconds or so from the time he starts speaking, makes me start to smile. Even if he is giving a serious answer on a serious topic, all he has to do is smile one time and I find myself following his lead. How powerful is that??

With a President that has a penchant for tanking the stock market every time he takes to a microphone and a Chief Executive that can’t speak to grade school children without a teleprompter – how refreshing is that?

If all else is equal (I know – a huge premise there) and several candidates have enough going for them that each could handle the office of President of the United States, how powerful does that smile become?

You can argue that Cain has never been a politician; you can say he is from “big business” and you would rather have someone with legislative savvy, you can say “I like his policy on XXXXX but I don’t agree with his take on XXXXX”. But you would be hard pressed to say he is boring, lackluster, or plastic.

Herman Cain has the ability to MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER??? That is Priceless!!!!!!!!

There is a national consternation that the MOOD of the country has fallen. It has. This is a sullen nation. We have Obama to thank for that. The next President will inherit an abysmal national scenario. His job from day one will be to start the turn around. It won’t happen overnight, but the MOOD can change in heartbeat.

I have no idea (if Herman Cain was to be elected) what his inauguration speech would contain. But I would bet my bottom dollar that by the time he was done we would all feel better immediately!

Every candidate in the debate professes a belief that the country can and will get better and I believe they believe it. But when Herman Cain says it – I BELIEVE IT!!!

Regardless of what method is used to turn around this abysmal Federal nightmare, this country needs to smile again. That’s the one thing Herman Cain delivers purely because he is Herman Cain.

Measure each candidate, listen to all views, decide on policies and procedures, but if you need to smile – LISTEN TO HERMAN CAIN.

So – How much is a smile worth???? EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

“I AM THE MIDDLE” & I’m “Damned” tired of being called – “the Right”

I am "Damned Tired" of being called – the far right or even just - the right. I am neither.

I am - the MIDDLE!

I believe in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution (as the framers originated it)

I believe in a Small (unintrusive) Government.

I believe in less Federal taxes (if any) and less Federal regulation (if any).

I AM – the TEA PARTY!

The Tea Party IS NOT - the far right – or even the right, it is the Middle.

When you look at a tea party gathering, what do you see? Militants? Angry Mobs? Unruly thugs?

Not a chance – you see parents, grandparents, veterans, workers and bosses, retirees, families, students, executives and line workers, white collar and blue collar – you see Middle America!

 

You want to see the right? – Look at Ron Paul, or any other PURIST LIBERATARIAN. They want to bury their heads in the sand (Iran, Terrorism, Wars, Defense, etc) and ignore the worlds influence on America. Bring everybody home and there will be peace for all. (Yeah right). Everything should be legal – drugs, prostitution, free and open marriage (gay, polygamist, multi, etc.). Everything falls to personal responsibility. Everyone should be able to do whatever they want as long as it does not affect some else. They believe in complete and total LIBERTY (that's why they are libertarians). That is - the right!!

You want to see the far right – go look at a picture of Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City Bomber). You want to meet someone from the far right – go to the woods, fields and forests of Montana, North Dakota, Texas and any number of other states and find their camps and enclosures. You'll know them by their fenced off property, warning signs, camouflage clothing, and weapons. The far right is waiting and training for the day they have to protect themselves from their own government. They HATE the government and most everyone else. That is – the far right.

 

I am fed up with the press, commentators, radio hosts and pundits that constantly place the Tea Party in the "right" column. It is erroneous - misguided – unwarranted – and just downright WRONG!

While I know that the "left" media (and that is most of the media) will always try to portray the Tea Party as extremists and such, there is no excuse to hear it coming from supposed "Fair and Balanced" reporters and pundits.

O'Reilly, Hannity, Smith, Van Susteren, (and the list goes on) need to STOP referring to the Tea Party members, followers and movement as "the right" and start portraying them as what they really are:

THE MIDDLE

O'Reilly constantly interviews members of Congress and continually suggests that the Republican Party members are 'leaning to the right' by acquiescing to Tea Party philosophies. NOT TRUE.

Hannity has talked to countless interviewees and panels and suggested that The Republicans are 'staying on the right' because the Tea Party is pushing them there or holding them there by the pressure from voters and constituents. WRONG.

O'Reilly constantly makes references to the need for compromise from the 'two sides' and holds the Tea Party responsible for the Republicans holding to their guns about debt, taxes and spending and that the Republicans will not 'come to the middle' because the Tea Party influence is 'keeping them anchored on the right'. WRONG.

 

The Tea Party (the middle) cannot compromise because to do so moves it to the left. It's already in the middle.

Compromise (by the Republicans) to Democratic principles and ideologies has brought us to where we are today. Constantly (over decades) giving an "inch" has given the Democrats the "Mile" they now own. They have brought us to this "Entitlement Society" precisely because of those compromises.

 

Following the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution IS THE MIDDLE.

 

Those who want to twist the original meaning and purpose of the documents to allow 0% of Government control, oversight or influence and distrust anyone in power want to pull the country to the right.

Those who want to twist the original meaning and purpose of the documents to a more progressive ideology and allow for extended Government control, oversight and influence want to pull the country to the left.

The Tea Party is the MIDDLE – wanting minimal government control, oversight and influence.

I understand we have compromised so much over the years that the position of the country is now SO FAR LEFT that the middle seems too far away to be called anything but the right – but that is WRONG.

The Middle has always been there. We just never had a name. Because we were silent.

We went about our lives and trusted our politicians to handle "our affairs" for us. They didn't! And we all share the blame for being acquiescent and apathetic.

Well – that time is over - We have a name = TEA PARTY and we have a place = THE MIDDLE

OBAMA may WANT an actual DEFAULT!! See why here!!

Remember the phrase - "NEVER LET A GOOD CRISIS GO TO WASTE"?

It is certainly conceivable that Obama would like nothing better than to have the Republicans stand firm and let the August date go by without a debt ceiling increase.

At that point, our country will not have the money to pay ALL of its expenses. Hence, some things will have to be cut.

EVERYONE KNOWS, by now, that there is more than enough revenue income to pay the interest on our debt and still pay Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Military, and Veterans benefits.

Nonetheless: The President (Executive Branch) will decide who gets paid and who doesn't.

Is it so outlandish to think that Obama WOULD PURPOSEFULLLY DEFAULT ON OUR LOAN INTEREST PAYMENTS ANYWAY? And SEND OUR COUNTRY INTO DEFAULT?????

The Democrats have not passed a budget in years. WHY?
He has NEVER offered a budget plan of his own. WHY?
He has stood on the sidelines (golfing mostly) for this whole debt ceiling process. WHY?
His brokering in meetings has only been as an arbiter, NEVER a participant. WHY?

Just my opinion – BUT – allowing the debt ceiling date to pass without an increase allows the President to declare that – HE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO DEFAULT ON OUR LOAN PAYMENTS
.
He will declare that, because the Republicans pushed his hand, he decided that defaulting on the debt payment was the best thing for the country.

He will say:

I COULD NOT JUSTIFY PAYING FOREIGN INVESTORS BEFORE PAYING AMERICANS.

SENIORS AND THE MILITARY ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PAYING A LOAN PAYMENT.

FOREIGN INVESTORS CAN WAIT – They'll still get paid – just a little later. OUR SENIORS, PEOPLE ON WELFARE, PEOPLE ON UNEMPLOYMENT, MEDICARE and MEDICAID PATIENTS ARE FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN PAYING A LOAN PAYMENT.

I CAN NOT JUSTIFY PAYING A LOAN PAYMENT WHILE FIRING PARK RANGERS, WEATHER SERVICE EMPLOYEES, FOOD INSPECTION WORKERS. (And so on and so on and so on). THE FAMILIES OF THOSE WORKERS ARE FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO ME.

In his mind, Obama would be the HERO OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Is it crazy to think this could happen?
For 57 of my 61 years on this Earth, I would have said "Yep – this is nuts"
Today – I am scared to death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WALL STREET – LISTEN UP – NOW IS YOUR CHANCE !!

The absolute BEST way to send a signal to the world that we here in the United States are aware of our problem and DEALING with it is to NOT RAISE THE DEBT CEILING.

WALL STREET – LISTEN UP – This is your chance to Deliver a Message right at Obama's doorstep.

If the Republicans are able to keep the Debt Ceiling from being increased:

FIND A WAY TO MAKE SURE THE MAKETS RISE IN REPONSE!!!!!!!

The markets are losing ground in this run-up to the decision – it is a perfect time to tell all your hedge managers, stock portfolio managers, investment advisors, etc. to advise their customers that this is the right time to BUY!!

Obama has postulated dire drastic upheavels if his debt ceiling is not raised. Don't let him get away with it. PROVE HIM WRONG !!!!!!!!!!

Send a message to the World and Obama and the rest of the Nation that controlling our debt is the RIGHT DECESION!!!! For Business, for Banking, For Growth, For America.

Obama has trashed you as a greedy capitalistic entity that is completely removed from and indifferent to the average American.

PROVE HIM WRONG!!!!!!!!

THIS IS YOUR CHANCE!!!!!!!!!!!

Show other Markets how they should react to similar measures in their own countries!!!

MAKE A STATEMENT HEARD ROUND THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2 WAYS TO FIX THE CASEY ANTHONY JURY ISSUE

Given the outrage over the Casey Anthony Jury and having heard from several jurors (most notably jurors #14 {alternate} and # 3) it would seem that these jurors were incapable of understanding their task and unable to understand or comprehend the meaning of "Reasonable Doubt" as instructed by Judge Perry.

To see why I believe they GOT IT WRONG – read:

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/profiles/blogs/reasonable-doubt-vs-shadow-of-1

That being said, I believe there are two methods available to forestall or at least minimize a repeat of the outrage that precipitated upon the reading of the Casey Anthony verdict.

For reasons of cost, complexity, and time these suggestions are to only be applied in Capital/ Felony offenses (State or Federal) where the penalties are Death or Life imprisonment.

1. Overhaul and restructure the method and proceedings of a "Voir Dire"- it generally refers to the process by which prospective jurors are questioned about their backgrounds and potential biases before being chosen to sit on a jury.
   
   1. Go beyond a search into bias and background and include intellectual competency.
      
   2. Have professionals devise a test (several different ones) to asses a person's ability to understand compound or complex instructions.
      
   3. Do the "Voir Dire" in sections – 1^st group weeds out bias and background (as it is done now with both prosecuting and defense attorneys approving or dimissing jurors) – 2^nd group is thinned again by independent court appointed personnel that administer the "complex issue testing" – 3^rd group is given a problem to solve as a team. They are put into a conference room, given the problem (A non legal and unrelated to their case problem) of moral, political or financial consequence. The deliberations are watched by both sides and either can exclude jurors based upon their ability or inability to handle the problem or their ability or inability to contribute to the process.
      

   For a 12 member jury – 36 candidates are picked in group 1, 24 candidates are chosen from those tested in group 2, and the final 12 are selected from the team deliberation in group 3.
   

Right now, "Voir Dires" take days to accomplish in high profile cases.

In the scenario above, the first group questioning can be done rather quickly. (Remember – in today's method of voir dire the attorneys ask far more questions because who they pick will actually be on their jury.) In the scenario above the people picked in the first group only move on to group 2 and if they survive group two testing they can still be weeded out in group 3.

Part c above in the "New Voir Dire" can actually be a real time saver. Observing potential jurors in a deliberation setting for 30 to 45 minutes or so can reveal far more than days of questioning can accomplish.

If there is a concern over the ability to find "qualified jurors" in this manner – then just increase the pool in order to double the first number of candidates picked in group 1 to 72 and whittle it down to 48 in the testing phase so that you will have two 24 member panels going through group 3 deliberations.

The group 3 deliberations can be watched live by the selecting attorneys or just videotaped for their joint review.

Group 3 observations by video can be done with the defense watching the first group deliberation while the prosecutors are watching the second group video – or – they can watch the tapes together consecutively.

1. Employ a Professional (non-voting) Jury Foreman
   
   1. Professionally train personnel to act as jury foremen.
      
   2. No criminal law attorneys (prosecuting or defense) can hold the position. Retired trial judges would be able to act as
      

      Professional jury foremen only if they had never held criminal prosecuting or defense attorney positions.
      

   3. They are the 13^th member of a 12 member jury and have no vote in the case outcome.
      
   4. Their job is to organize data, promote discussion, poll members and take ballot counts.
      
   5. They may not speak to case, evidence or trial issues and may only answer questions to or clarify issues regarding trial judge instructions or charge definitions.
      
   6. If a jury is to be sequestered – then the selected jury foreman must be sequestered during the trial and away from the proceedings. He only comes into play if the jury is given the case to deliberate and then leads the jury in cohesive deliberations over issues and evidence that he has no previous awareness of.
      

To all the people that have expressed such outrage over the Casey Anthony verdict and have vilified the jurors as well as proclaiming that our jury system is broken – I say:

Our criminal justice system is the best in the world – BUT – we can make it better, or at least more responsive to and reflective of our society and system of jurisprudence.

That's just my viewpoint – What do you think?

"Reasonable Doubt" vs "Shadow of a Doubt" - How the Casey Anthony Jury GOT IT WRONG!

I happened to be watching Griff Jenkins interview Russell Huekler (alternate juror) on the Great Van Susteren Show on Fox News Wednesday evening - I now have a HUGE PROBLEM -

Huekler was speaking to the fact that Judge Perry was VERY CLEAR about his instructions regarding "Reasonable Doubt".( The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable doubt is possible from the evidence presented.)

Yet, in the same sentence, Huekler says to Griff Jenkins “…if you had the SLIGHTEST RESERVATION…”

Whoa! - - That is NOT the "Reasonable Doubt" standard - that is the “BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT” standard and more importantly - NOT WHAT JUDGE PERRY INSTRUCTED!!!

Huekler then, in a follow-up question by Griff about what turned the decision for him, stated that he made his decision when CHANEY MASON (in the closing) told the jurors how to decide if someone is guilty. (see SLIGHTEST RESERVATION referenced above).

That’s right – CHANEY MASON – set Huekler’s standard of judgement and NOT JUDGE PERRY.

If other jurors (in interviews or discussions) ALSO evidence such a decision standard - this jury DID GET IT WRONG !!!

They deliberated on the standards suggested by the Defense and NOT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE JUDGE.

I am sure I must not be the only one that caught on to the importance of what Huekler said in that interview - sooo - by now, many of the jurors may be on the alert not to make the same mistake - BUT - you cannot erase the interview that we have already heard on Greta's show. Huekler let it slip.

Why Judge Perry allowed Chaney Mason to do, in the closing, what the Judge would do anyway in his instruction set is beyond me. I am sure he probably thought the jury would still hold his instructions as the standard to use in their deliberations.

Huekler let it out accidently - nonetheless - the jury DID GET IT WRONG by using the wrong standard of proof.

It would seem to me that JURY NULLIFICATION has to be considered based upon Huekler's statement (which is on record now and can't be taken back).

Irrespective of all the other reasons people are angry with this jury, this one seems to be the most telling.

Plus - 

When one expert says “The smell of Death was in a car” and another expert says “There was no smell of Death in a car” the 1^st expert HAS NOT BEEN REFUTED. Countered yes – but refuted – absolutely not. This is the way defense attorneys CONFUSE JURIES.

Put more simply – If a 50 year old woman is on trial for robbing a bank and one witness testifies that the robber he saw was about 50 yrs old or so and another witness is brought up by the defense and says the woman I saw was about 20 years old or so, it means one of them is right and one of them is wrong. NOT – BOTH OF THEM ARE WRONG.

The jury is charged with using evidence based on who they believe.  They are not charged with discarding evidence because two sides have issued different viewpoints.

When 2 experts testify to an issue or fact and they are polar opposites – the jury must decide on who they believe. If not – then there is no reason for the jury in the first place. Hell – if juries can just discount testimony because it has been countered, why even present conflicting testimony to them. When the prosecutor presents the court with {gun expert 1} that says “Gun A” was used in this crime and the defense comes up with {gun expert 2} that says “Gun A” was not used in this crime, the judge might just as well refuse both the ability to testify because the jury will just be confused. HOW STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is the jury’s job to make decisions based on expert testimony. Listen to the testimony of the experts and chose the expert you believe is right. If a jury can’t come to a verdict because they can’t decide between two issues and tell the court the same – that is fine – that is a “HUNG JURY”. BUT if a jury actually states a person is guilty or not guilty (which this jury did) because they “…just couldn’t decide. THAT IS WRONG!! – THEY DID NOT DO THEIR JOB.

As to nothing linking Casey Anthony to the crime:

Only one person searched for Chloroform (even if it was only once for 3 minutes) – CASEY

Only one person owned a car that had the smell of decomposition in it – CASEY

Only one person owned a car that had traces of Chloroform in it – CASEY

Only one person asked to borrow a shovel – CASEY

Only one person lied and sent the police on purposeful “wild goose chases’ – CASEY

Only one person had the last known physical custody of Caylee - CASEY

Now before any of you scream – THAT DOES NOT MAKE HER GUILTY - your right – but they all do LINK HER TO THE CRIME!!!

That is what circumstantial evidence is all about.

The actual jurors on this case have already admitted that they thought she might be guilty (even felt so) but since it wasn’t proven, they couldn’t decide on her guilt. Well – by their own statement – they could also not decide on her innocence. Therefore – I submit - this jury GOT IT WRONG!!

Hueklers own statements attest to the fact they used the wrong “standard of proof”. The statements of others (as I just mentioned above) show they were undecided as to guilt or innocence.

A more intelligent and less lazy jury would have spent far more time on deliberations, asked for transcripts and testimony to re-examine or argue over and then after several days of deliberation, and finding they cannot decide on guilt or innocence, tell the judge they are a HUNG JURY!!! This would have been the proper pronouncement and would have sent the message they wanted, which was – Hey Prosecutor, there is a case here, now go back, FIND MORE EVIDENCE OR CHANGE THE CHARGES, and try this again, because you couldn’t convince us either way.

Thats just my opinion - What do you think??

To All Republican Candidates - TAKE THE GLOVES OFF -

Yes – you want to be the one to oppose Barack Obama

Yes – you want to be President of the United States

Yes – you want to reverse the direction of the Country

Well then:

Stop – being politically correct

Stop – dodging the SEVERITY of reality

Stop – being civil in an uncivil confrontation

As each of you speak to the crowds you attract, your message has to be that the travesty in the White House HAS TO COME TO AN END!

Each of you has different ideas on what needs to be done to correct where this country is now heading.

You may be big on RIGHT TO LIFE, maybe your opinions are hugely PRO ISRAEL, perhaps you think TAXES ARE TOO HIGH, or maybe you want the FED DISSOLVED right after you tackle the huge IMMIGRATION NIGHTMARE confronting all of us. Whatever your hot points are - - - -

They are the same for all of your competitors!!!

During this campaign to win the Republican nomination you only have to win over the folks that already believe in your platforms. Barring a rogue isolationism issue as proffered by Ron Paul or a libertarian policy of Lawful Marijuana as proposed by Gary Johnson you are all in agreement on what is wrong with the country today. We (the independent and Republican voters) will decide on one of you based on issues other than your platforms – those issues will be

DO WE BELIEVE YOU??

DO WE TRUST YOU??

DO WE THINK YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH THE TASK ONCE IN OFFICE?? (whether you have a majority in both houses or not). (And YES -we know it will be tougher without the majorities you want)

That’s it!! That simple. No more complicated than that.

So as you continue to campaign for our votes in this battle to be the nominee –

Speak to winning our belief in you, play to our trust issues, and try to prove to us that you can get things done once in office – and then:

TRASH THE CRAP OUT OF THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION.

Even though you are attempting to woo those of us on the right and in the middle to select you as the nominee – EVERYONE IS WATCHING AND LISTENING!

So TAKE THE GLOVES OFF:

Stop – telling us Obama is well intentioned

Stop – saying Obama just doesn’t understand the economy or capitalism

Stop – pandering to the left (they hate you today, they’ll hate you tomorrow)

Stop – saying the numbers proffered by the Administration are “in error” or “poorly defined”

You will have months to deliver your message from one primary to another. Every single time you need to highlight the UTTER INCOMPETANCE of the guy in Office now.

BARACK OBAMA LOVES THE TRAPPINGS OF THE PRESIDENCY!

HE HAS NO CLUE ON HOW TO HANDLE THE PRESIDENCY!

We all know about Obama’s policies and we certainly know what the policies of liberals and progressives have to offer. There are no news flashes there. What the public needs to hear OVER AND OVER is that this President (irrespective of his policies) is INCOMPETANT.

The decisions he makes are WRONG (healthcare, et al) - JUVENILE (remember the Beer Summit, et al) – RACIST (Black Panthers, et al) – UNTIMELY (troop surge request, et al) and even DANGEROUS (Israel Pre 1967 borders, et al).

So in conclusion – Use the next year to get us to believe in you, trust in you, and buy the fact that you can accomplish a task once given it. But while you have the stage – TAKE THE GLOVES OFF!!!!!

TAXES - FAIR TAX vs. FLAT TAX ? AN OPEN LETTER TO HERMAN CAIN

Dear Mr. Cain
 

I have a MAHRvelous proposal!!!! (Sorry for the pun)

There is great concern across the country about what must be done to bring our nation back onto a sustainable financial path. The answer is simple, though painful. Entitlements have to go away. Period!!!! There cannot be any sacred cows!!! The problem is everyone will scream – “Take his money” – “not mine”!!! The other problem is - who is going to be the “Bad Guy” that makes the cuts? The Republicans are itching to get their power back. OK. But will they actually be content to be the “Bad Guy”? I wonder. Cutting school lunches, eliminating free cheese, dismantling social security, really ending pork project spending, and so on.  Regaining power in 2012 and attempting to set the financial ship aright can only play into the Progressives hand. They will be waiting in 2016 to be swept back into office on a carpet of riotous dissent from the poor and disaffected from the previous 4 years.

There is an answer though –

If you are going to take away something from someone, you have to give something in return or
exchange that is as important to them as what they are losing.

A FLAT TAX – not a value tax – not a sales tax – not any variable tax of any kind. A FLAT TAX

So many times we hear the proponents of a national sales tax spout about how it incents people to save because we aren't taxed on what we save but only on what we spend. WELL !!!!!! That's great for the period of time that I am saving. But after putting away a little each paycheck something will come up that I can now finally afford. A new TV, new car, add a garage to the house - etc. - Well!! There goes the benefit of the “Fair” tax - right out the window. We get hit as soon as we finally spend what we have saved for so long - So what is the difference??? The only way to avoid it is to DIE with a lot of money in the bank. Doesn't seem too appealing to me!! You still get taxed on everything you earn because eventually you will want to spend it

NO BENEFIT THERE!!!!!!!!!

The other down and dirty issue is that a “Fair Tax” would only promote a whole massive Black-market of traders, swappers, and barterers, all trying to get around an onerous (20% or more) tax. It would be a nightmare. Right now we have a whole host of people using deductions and tax exclusions and numerous loopholes to circumvent the tax code. Using a “Fair” tax would only shift the same people’s efforts. (See Steve Forbes for specifics!!!!). Ever know anybody that has paid cash for a product or service to get out of paying a 7 or 8% sales tax???? I'll bet you have!! The buyers gets away without paying the extra money in tax and the seller omits having to hold, document, and pay out the tax money collected. What do you think it will be like when a tax jumps to 23%?????

Flat Tax proponents have bandied about numerous rates (15%, 17%, 20% and so forth). But those rates are all based on the present bloated federal spending.

If we can strip out all those things the federal government shouldn’t even be involved in, we could pare that number down to 10%. Yep – 10% for EVERYONE. PERIOD. NO EXCEPTIONS.

Withholding will still take place. That infrastructure can stay in place. There will be no tax deductions of any kind. For anyone. PERIOD. No Filing, No refunds, No tax incentives, no tax penalties. Nothing.

10% is 10%

A person who makes 50,000 a year will pay 5,000 in taxes.

A person who makes 5 Million will pay 500,000 in taxes. Yep – the rich will pay more automatically!!

Yep – that means someone that makes 10 times as much money as you will pay ten times as much tax as you.

Wow – what a concept!!!

That is really the only fair way to tax the population and take away the power that taxing gives to politicians.

The IRS – all of it – goes away. (As will H&R Block and every other Tax Service)

Let’s put that monumental talent pool (insert sarcastic smirk here) back into the private sector.

People constantly say that Medicare is the largest entitlement or Social Security or Medicaid. – Well. They are wrong. The largest entitlement group (by volume) is the 47% of the population that pays NO TAXES!!

The only reason the politicians want the rich taxed so heavily is because the lower classes don’t even pay taxes – so who cares if they are working or not. The Progressives could care less if the people are working or not (they can’t get anything from them [since they don’t pay taxes] – except votes) as long as they can keep over-taxing rich people and evil corporations. Power is supreme. So, as long as the Progressives can keep more than ½ of the country not paying any taxes, they can expect to keep receiving over ½ of the votes to keep them in power.

The largest entitlement group is the group that is entitled to pay NO TAXES. That has to stop.

And by the way – this proposal is NOT a “Tax everyone 10% proposal” Nope!!!!!

This is a “KEEP 90% of everything you earn” proposal. That is how it needs to be sold!!

10% of every dollar earned in the country is more than enough to sustain the needs of the federal government.

Offering such a simplified tax code – at such a low rate – and eliminating the IRS and ending the yearly mess and consternation over tax returns forever might just be enough to allow us to swallow the bad medicine in order to make us healthier.

If you want cheese go to your city or county or state. If you want school lunches go to your city or county or state. If you want ANYTHING, don’t look to the federal government to provide it. Go to your local organizations, churches and communities for whatever you want.

10% is enough for the federal government. (Ray Stevens said it best musically when he crooned “If ten percent is good enough for Jesus it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam”)

Eliminate EVERY federal tax on any and every product. Fuel, cigarettes, utilities, etc. All go away.

If you allow everyone to take home substantially more money from their paychecks and (at the same time) make products that were federally taxed cheaper to buy plus eliminate the onerous IRS all at the same time, you just might be able to get the people in this country to go along with the huge cuts to their entitlements that must be made.

Millions would be affected by entitlement cuts – but hundreds of millions would be blessed with lower taxes and cheaper prices.

Given the success of the Obama campaign for the Presidency – (The complete ruse foisted upon the American voter with the Hope and Change message) – this solution can be sold to the public just as easily.

Everyone seems to believe the thought that in order to cut spending some part of the American public has to lose. Either this part of the public or that part of the public and so on. NOT TRUE!

The issue of who has to bear the brunt of spending cuts always compares different parts of society and their need for federal assistance. Which group needs their money more? (Seniors, Medicare recipients, school lunch programs, education assistance users, etc)

The one group that never makes that list is the Government itself.

When you take away social security benefits or Medicare benefits or school lunches and so on – but in return – give back to each person lower withholding, cheaper gas, cheaper utilities, cheaper cigarettes, etc – then the only person that really loses is the government. It has gotten smaller!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The government is more than willing to pit us against each other in the argument about spending cuts when in reality the solution is as simple as giving them (the government) less and us (taxpayers) keeping more.

If redistribution of wealth is really Obama’s creed (so to speak) then the answer is as simple as taking from the richest entity in the country (THE GOVERNMENT) and not giving it back to but rather leaving it in the hands of the poor (US).

One further item needs to be addressed - Earmarks, Pork projects and other financial appropriations.

There is ONLY ONE WAY to put an end to this travesty.

Once the above tax rate of 10% is made law – we must also add the provision that once income tax monies have been forwarded to the Federal Government – NO FUNDS ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE STATES. Period!! Ever!!!!!

The monies we pay to the Federal Government are to be used for Federal (National) issues.

This would eliminate Senators and Representatives vying for pork projects. There would be no further reason to lobby them and nothing for them to trade and bargain with each other for. Everything they would be voting
on would only have a Federal purpose. (Defense, Trade, Federal Salaries, Security, International relations, etc.).

(It may also greatly improve the nobility of the candidates that would now choose to run for office. If today’s politicians can no longer bleed the tax payers or lobbyists, the greedy opportunists we have now would
have to take their glib and polished demeanors to the private sector and ply their trade there.)

Want to bet that not even half of them would ever make it past middle management??????????????

If (by any chance) the Federal Government runs at a surplus (insert loud guffaws here), then those tax dollars stay in the hands of the Federal Government to be used when emergencies do happen. (Disaster aid, Wars, and the like)

No longer would tax payers in Maine fund river projects in Texas, or tax payers in Ohio fund research at Universities in California. And so on and so on and so on!!!!!

Useless and unnecessary departments need to go. Dept. of Education – GONE, Dept. of Agriculture – BYE BYE., Dept of Health and Human Services – SEE YA – and so on and so on.

The Cabinet??? – My guess is we can get along just fine with a Sec. of State (for foreign affairs), Sec of the Interior (for internal affairs), and a Sec of Defense (for Military issues). Everybody else – SO LONG!

As to the argument that such drastic measures are insane and would shove millions of government workers out into the street; there is an answer as well. When these depts. are cut, offer every single government employee a full 1 or 2 year phase out period. In other words. They will keep their jobs for two years as their dept is shut down. This gives the states time to beef up their own departments to cover issues the Fed used to and gives the ousted employees plenty of time to find a new private sector position. (Many would probably find their comparable positions in state and county governments.) Any employee will have the option of leaving at any time and will be offered 50% of their remaining salary as a severance. If the phase out is two years, an employee can opt leave immediately and get a full year of severance pay. Or they can stay a year while they look for other work and then leave and get 6 months of their remaining pay.

This is fair – humane – and NECESSARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And now for the clincher - - - Get ready - - Here it is - -

The 10% Flat tax imposed by the federal government CANNOT BE RAISED BY CONGRESS EVER AGAIN.

If the government decides the 10% rate needs to be increased – the only way it can be increased is - it must be put onto the next national presidential election ballot and only the “People of the United States” can vote to increase the amount.

I am sending this to you because I have heard countless arguments regarding whose benefits have to be cut (pitting us against ourselves [young against the old, rich against the poor, etc]) and NEVER once has anyone suggested that the government has to be the one that takes the loss. This solution would work, and I bet (as I referenced earlier) that Steve Forbes could elucidate it far better than what I have done here.

My guess is that I can’t be the only one that has thought of this but if you have any questions or thoughts, I would be happy to respond.

I would forward this to others in the media (Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Mike Huckabee, etc) but my guess is they will never even get to read it. Or even if they do – it would be too sweeping of an endeavor to even consider. My hope is you, with your business acumen, and those you speak to everyday might see some merit in this proposal.

We would only need ONE Senior politician or candidate to have the guts to champion this sweeping type of solution and the TEA Party throngs would take up the chant.

As a businessman, you have the hardest job in securing a party nomination. My guess is that professional politicians have no interest in seeing someone outside of their circle usurp them in an election.

It is my feeling that the ESTABLISHMENT (media, govt, etc) has absolutely NO INTEREST in giving any credence to a non-political candidate. If a businessman can win the highest office and actually do well, there is no reason to continue to think that Senatorships or Representative offices are breeders for the highest office. Excluding Governors - Senators and Reps. have NO SKILL SET to run anything. And Governors may well run large budgets BUT - IT'S NOT THEIR MONEY!!!!!!!!! A businessman making a million $ decision vs a Governor making a million $ decision is not the same thing!!!!!

You won the first debate in South Carolina hands down. Nonetheless, your name is almost nonexistent in media conversations since then. Since Huckabee and Trump pulled out, all the media talk is about how that might help Bachman, Daniels, Pawlenty, Santorum, or Romney – NEVER CAIN!!!!!

You have to be far more dynamic, far more original and infinitely more appealing.

Everyone else will be running against Obama – and playing to those he has alienated.

Don’t Do it – Don’t run against something – run FOR something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you can put up a better and more appealing model than other Republicans and show everyone a better life than the one Obama envisions for us – YOU WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!

The “Right” wants this to be a race where a vote for a Republican is a vote against Obama – They could lose that one!!

Trying to get the general public to believe that they must vote against the first Black President in order to make things better is a HUGE mountain to climb and may well be an insurmountable one.

Someone (hopefully you) needs to make the public feel that their vote for a new candidate is not a vote against Obama, but rather, a vote for a NEW VISION, a NEW WAY, a NEW LIFE.

I know this may sound blasphemous to many BUT here it goes –

AMERICA – you made the right choice in 2008. The Federal Government was corrupt, out of kilter and running wild. You voted in 2008 for hope and change. That was the right thing to do. Your vote has brought about huge changes that have had years to develop and show success. It hasn’t. That’s a fact.

You voted for Hope and Change and you got it. But you didn’t get a NEW VISION – you didn’t get a new WAY and you certainly didn’t get a NEW LIFE. It’s time to get all three!!!! You had the right idea!! - You just picked the wrong guy!!

I know I have pontificated at length in this missive – BUT – this country needs a Herman Cain.

I hope you actually get to read this!

I am not a scholar or a politician. I am not rich. I am not particularly gifted (except for the blessings of my wife and family) and I am not better or worse that anyone on my street, block or city. But I am an American (served in the Marines) and I love my country dearly. And while I worry (and sometimes fear) for the generations that will follow me I have an unshakeable faith and pride in the United States.

If we were to take up this drastic and sweeping change to the size of government, NOW is the time to do it. We must develop a rallying cry for the conservatives (the true center) in this country. Many came out to vote this last November – MANY MORE will need to be rallied for 2012. (You can bet your house on the fact that the Democrats are already shifting voters [and establishing residencies] to what they consider “swing states” in the Electoral College in order to steal the next election as well).

This kind of change can only happen with a conservative majority in the House (DONE) – the Senate (next election) and the White House. Reclamation in 2012 – it’s coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Respectfully

John Mahr (hence the term MAHRvelous)

DREAM TEAM 2012 - CAIN/BACHMANN

My “DREAM TEAM” for the upcoming election would be Herman Cain for President and Michele Bachmann as his running mate.

My pick for President (and why) is highlighted in my blog titled - “Cain – the 1 “UNTAINTED” candidate” -. Please read the blog and you will see why I think Herman Cain can do more in the office of President than any other candidate.

Let me state here that I believe Michele Bachmann would be as good a President as Herman Cain. But my “DREAM TEAM”– is not about who’s best for the positions – it is about which team has the best chance of GETTING INTO OFFICE – This is not about who makes for the best Pres./Vice-Pres. tandem – it is about who makes for the best nominee tandem - Therefore –

I believe that Herman Cain has a FAR BETTER chance of defeating Obama than Michele Bachmann.

1. Obama facing off against a Black nominee completely removes any “White Guilt” that has been bandied about since the last election.
2. Obama (in facing another Black candidate) will certainly have some portion (the # is arguable) of his Black voting bloc diminished because of the match-up. Many will now have to actually make a decision between two candidates and not just “vote for the black guy”.
3. There is a portion of the black community (the # is arguable) that is EMBARASSED that the 1^ST BLACK PRESIDENT is so completely incompetent. A chance to correct that could loom large for them.
4. Herman Cain is EVERY BIT AS INSPIRATIONAL A SPEAKER as Obama. (Perhaps even more so). Selling a conservative viewpoint (of jobs, personal responsibility, free choice, LESS GOVERNMENT, etc) to an Obama mesmerized audience can only be accomplished by a black candidate that has achieved success by using his own doctrines. There is absolutely NO WAY that Bachmann, Pawlenty, Romney, Gingrich, et al, can speak to the Black and Hispanic community and say “…I will reduce the size of government and your life will be better for it”. They won’t believe them. Herman Cain can deliver that message and they might believe him.
5. While there has never been a woman President – there has also NEVER BEEN A FEMALE VICE-PRESIDENT. If the Cain/Bachmann ticket can win, Michele still breaks new ground and becomes the first woman to ever hold that office.
6. With 8 years of Herman Cain in office (I am supremely optimistic) Michele Bachmann would be perfectly placed as the “heir apparent” to the Presidency. Her term as a Vice-President could ensure 16 years of conservative Executive Branch dominance for the Republican Party.
7. Michele Bachmann is soooo optimistic, soooooo upbeat, soooooo effervescent that I have a hard time believing a sizeable enough majority would take her seriously for President. She is extremely sharp and articulate – BUT – she will have that same problem that ALL WOMEN have when playing with the Big Boys. If she smiles too much and looks to happy and upbeat – she is vacuous, dimwitted, and shallow. If she shows any measure of pugnacity or comes on forcefully she is disrespectful, can’t handle the stress and a B****. The (left cajoling) media would do her far more damage than what they could foist upon Herman Cain.
8. Michele Bachmann is also young enough that as a Vice-President, the years in office would give her the national recognition and acceptance that she needs to aspire to be the 1^ST WOMAN PRESIDENT. Without the kind of scrutiny she will have to face and overcome now.
9. We have already elected a 1^st Black President. Having a chance to elevate a woman to the highest office ever held by a woman would be a “feel good” moment for all of us as well.
10. One final issue - PAY ATTENTION TO THE ONE PERSON THE ADMINISTRATION TALKS ABOUT THE LEAST. That will be who they fear most.!!! Right now that seems to be Herman Cain. It is my belief that the Obama administration is “SCARED TO DEATH” of Herman Cain. My guess is they don’t want to do anything that would give Herman Cain a chance at increased exposure or notice. No matter what he says – They won’t respond. No matter what he proposes. They won’t respond. They will respond to something said by Romney, or Gingrich, or Paul, or Pawlenty, etc. They don’t believe any of those candidates have a ghost of a chance of rallying enough independent votes to hurt them. But Herman Cain – Oh, he doesn’t even exist. Obama would ‘shake in his boots’ if he ever had to debate Herman Cain without a nearby teleprompter. Oh – I would pay to see that !!!!!!!!!!!!!

My "DREAM TEAM" has not been compiled with the idea of who would be best in either office (Pres.or Vice-Pres.) it is simply compiled considering the demographics of the voting public and:
WHICH TEAM HAS THE GREATEST CHANCE TO WIN!!

CAIN - The 1 "UNTAINTED" Candidate

I like Herman Cain because of the "...content of his character". A measuring tool to be applied to ALL public 'elected or appointed' officials.

It is my feeling that the ESTABLISHMENT (media, govt, etc) has absolutely NO INTEREST in giving any credence to a non-political candidate. If a businessman can win the highest office and actually do well, there is no reason to continue
to think that Senatorships or Representative offices are breeders for the highest office. Excluding Governors - - Senators and Reps. have NO SKILL SET to run anything. And while Governors may well run large budgets - there is a difference - - IT'S NOT THEIR MONEY!!!!!!!!!

A businessman that has to make a multi-million $ decision vs. a Governor having to make a multi-million $ decision is not the same thing!!!!!

The continued statements that have been made in many circles (especially the media talking heads) that Herman Cain “…is not even close to any of the rest of the candidates, he has no history" confound me.

He has no history AT WHAT????????????

Duplicity??? - Speechmaking??? - Shaking Hands??? - Campaigning??? - Obfuscation of issues??? - Political Nepotism??? - and so on and so on?? These - among others - are the skill set of our elected officials (politicians).

While using my previous measuring stick (about business experience)  allows Romney some leeway - I am the first to (sadly) admit that Romney (while having been a businessman) has become so politicized that I do not trust him to supersede his political acumen for his business sense. He has the skill set - but I believe it has been eroded by cronyism and an entrenchment in the political establishment.

Ron Paul - YES - does have an immense knowledge of economics and the underpinnings of our decades long financial decline. His social issues also seem to be firm and rooted in conservative values. BUT - his foreign and military stances are so rooted in isolationism and libertarian ideology that I cannot support his stances there. The issues involved in our global economic immersion and military presence are far more complex than Ron seems to want to admit. 

Herman Cain is the only "untainted" candidate out there.

His answers to questions about foreign policy are always based upon his knowledge of the problem. Not being in the inner circle and not privy to sensitive secret issues disallows him to give the answers people want to here. THAT IS HONEST. Any good businessman knows you can't make pronouncements regarding issues without all the necessary facts. Herman Cain will never tell you what you want to hear for the sake of having something to say. Once again, THAT IS HONEST.

Obama made grand statements and promises about foreign policy and military issues during his campaign but then got into office (learned what only a president and a select few really know) and had to say WHOA !!!!!

Cain is smart enough to know better.

As to the myriad of statements out there that this is a lackluster field of candidates -I say NOT TRUE!!!

The continuous bandying (amongst many) of the “lackluster” term is nothing more than the media’s way of trying to tell us all that “we are not worthy” – yet. I would say to those keeping their eye on the Republican dash for the party candidacy, - - PAY ATTENTION TO THE ONE PERSON THE ADMINISTRATION TALKS ABOUT THE LEAST. That will be who they fear most.!!!

Right now that seems to be Herman Cain. It is my belief that the Obama administration is “SCARED TO DEATH” of Herman Cain. My guess is they don’t want to do anything that would give Herman Cain a chance at increased exposure or notice. No matter what he says – They won’t respond. No matter what he proposes. They won’t respond. They will respond to something said by Romney, or Gingrich, or Paul, or Pawlenty, etc. They don’t believe any of those candidates have a ghost of a chance of rallying enough independent votes to hurt them. But Herman Cain – Oh, he doesn’t even exist. Obama would ‘shake in his boots’ if he ever had to debate Herman Cain without a nearby teleprompter. Oh – I would pay to see that !!!!!!!!!!!!! 

At this point "Howdy Doody" would do a better job at President than the present guy in the office and "Buffalo Bob" isn't even here to speak for him. (Wow-really dated myself there)

Give Herman Cain another look - perhaps you might find he isn't as "Lackluster" as you think!!

There are those that say we can't have someone learning on the job??? What is a President to learn???

The job of President IS NOT to know everything about every subject. CAN'T and WON'T HAPPEN!!

Every applicant to the job (excluding the idiot in now) has had some history in some area of expertise in his past. Maybe economics, perhaps foreign affairs, or social issues , or energy - or military and defense – or something.

The job of President is NOT to know everything or even anything - it is to DECIDE on everything. He has to be a decision maker. That is the key.

When a person takes on the mantle of President he MUST surround himself with competent people that have the knowledge of issues that he doesn't. He must have a cadre of people that will tell him what he wants to hear as well as what he doesn't want to hear.

Today’s politicians surround themselves with credentialed individuals that have a politically nepotistic reason for being there. (They know somebody, went to school with somebody, financially supported somebody, and so on). It is a culture of "Quid Pro Quo" politics. That has to stop.

The man or woman we put into office has to have the ability (and courage) to surround himself/herself with the right advisors and then make immediate and forthright decisions based on the information he/she has. That's it. No more complicated than that.

Obama took 6 days to decide to shoot the pirates that took one of our captains hostage off the Somalia coast. A decision that doesn't need more than a few hours to make.

He took 3 months to answer his Gen on the troop surge in the Afghan war. A decision that should have taken no more than several days. (An elected President, prior to his inauguration, is brought up to speed on EVERY issue.
That is what a “lame duck presidency” is for). His explanation of having to ssess the issue was as stupid as it was lame.

I had heard that the Navy Seals built a mockup of the Bin Laden compound and practiced their mission for 7 months (7 MONTHS). If they built the compound 7 months ago they must have had the intel for the mission way before that as well. WHAT THE HELL TOOK SO LONG TO PULL THAT TRIGGER?

There are countless more examples of Obama hedging on decisions in order to take the measure of the political wind.

How many times did Senator Obama vote “Present” while in Congress??????????????????

Not only is this guy (Obama) in office devoid of any knowledge about issues, he has incompetent advisors as well - whose only purpose is to advise him of a decision's impact on his party, his stature, or his legacy. If you think Anthony Weiner was a narcissist, take another look at Obama.

We need a decision maker. Someone that can look at an issue (no matter how complicated) with a "Cost benefit analysis" and PULL THE TRIGGER. If he is wrong - then he is wrong - but make the damn decision.

As to Herman Cain - I believe him when he says "...I will put the right people around me that have the foreign policy experience, economic experience, legal expertise, trade knowledge, etc.", and so on and so on.

People that have the knowledge to tell him - this ruler is "...like this and has ...this agenda... and responds to this" or "this country wants this to happen or is trying to accomplish this or that” - or " the history on this issue is this" - and so on and so on."

Presidents never have to know everything – they have to DECIDE ON EVERYTHING!

In closing – does anyone really think that any established career politician would EVER have the Courage, Chutzpah, Cojones, or Nerve to come into office and eliminate whole departments of people? Remember – career politicians are all part of the same family – and families protect their own. All of the countless directors, managers, chiefs, supervisors and czars are all appointed by – guess who !!!! POLITICIANS.

The ONLY CHANCE we have to correct the horrid and miserable state of affairs in our bloated and self serving government is to elect an "UNTAINTED"  candidate into the Oval Office and give him the majority he needs in both houses such that he can GET THINGS DONE.

Herman Cain doesn't need on the job training - He is a decision maker now !!!!!!!!!!!!