Conservative Blog Reporting on Media Bias and the Liberal Agenda

As every morning, I began this morning reading the Wall Street Journal.  I first read an account about the ill-fated Air France flight last year, which killed 280 some people.  The pilots were getting bad readouts on their air speed due to frozen sensors, and although the airplane was going into a classic stall, and stall warnings were going off in the cockpit, the pilot pulled the nose up and exacerbated the situation.

The next article I read was of an even more dire nature, as it pertained to the concern about the U.S. economy going into a stall and producing a double dip recession or depression.  (Remember the old line:  “A recession is when my neighbor loses his job.  A depression is when I lose MY job”.)

In the case of our economy, the sensors are working fine, but apparently, those in the cockpit have never flown a plane.  The economy is stalling, and their solution is to pull up the nose by raising taxes, increasing our debt to the point of bankruptcy, and over-regulating business and finance.  These actions will produce the same result as the Air France flight above.

My real question pertains not to the competency of the crew, we know they have never flown a plane before, but whether like 911, we might not have a terrorist at the controls.

The drill sergeant’s famous shout in the movies is “I own you recruit!” or even something a little more earthy stating very clearly that the recruit has lost every element of control of his life to the military. It was this image that immediately came to mind when Peacock read the opening paragraphs of Susanne M. Schafer’s AP article on January 27, 2011 titled “First lady: Army health initiative may be a model”.

Given the context of Obamacare and other clearly socialist initiatives designed to exercise greater control over our lives I don’t think I am overreacting to the following paragraph from the article quoting the First Lady.

“A lack of fitness is ‘not just a health issue but a national security issue,’ she said, and the military’s health initiatives could be a model for youngsters elsewhere.”

That comment from a First Lady gives me the creeps.

Obamacare scares me in many ways. At the outset it creates a situation in which all personal health care is eventually and inevitably forced to migrate to a government plan and federal control. In the long run, as  the private systems are, by design, driven out of business there ends up being no choice. Obamacare will be the only health care option left. Anyone who examines the numbers sees that this is the only outcome. So, we end up with Obamacare and Social Security to take care of us from cradle to grave. The nanny state promoters like the First Lady will then see it as a national security issue to make sure we all eat and exercise properly. We will be told that if we don’t stay fit we will not be healthy enough to keep the nationally run system financially viable and therefore assure that the nation is secure.

At some point down the road I am concerned that some federal executive going to scream at our descendants through the television, “You will stay fit and eat properly because I own you, it is a national security issue, and we have to keep the health care system solvent”.

Considering what has been happening since FDR dramatically accelerated socialism I don’t think this scenario is a stretch.

We all recall how Barak Hussein Obama came to power.  A young, charismatic, orator, unknown to the public, gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004.  He was quickly promoted by the Democratic Party, becoming a Senator in 2006, and running for the presidency in an environment when the public, conditioned by eight years of character assignation by the mainstream media, found themselves sick of George W. Bush, and the Republican Party.

To a majority of the country he appeared to be the savior, running as a moderate and railing against partisan ranker, Washington’s out-of-control spending and waste, and “change”.  The mainstream media burnished his image and virtually ignored his radical, left wing past.

In an historic election, this country elected the first black man to the highest office in the land, if not the world.  For a brief time, some were smug and patted themselves on the back.

Several days, and only several days, after his inauguration, Mr. Obama stepped out of his acting role, made a hard left-hand turn, and revealed his true colors.  This was an acting role of a lifetime, and he should have received an Oscar.  Instead, he received only a Nobel Peace Prize.  When the hangover cleared, we found that we had elected the most radical, left wing socialist in the history of our country, as the 44th President of the United States.  (How about a shout out here to the mainstream media?)

The next two years were followed a raw show of power, as only a party controlling all of the branches of government can pull off.  Cabinet appointees were not vetted by Congress, merely appointed as Czars, and moving forward the most liberal agenda since the “New Deal”.  We got larger government, more supervision over private enterprise, and less liberty for all.  His stimulus program spent trillions on things that produced no results, but did reward his political base. His crowning achievement, Obamacare, 2,700 pages of legislation that no one had read or understood, was shoved down the throat of the people, in the dark of night, against all of their protests.  It was historic.  No significant piece of legislation had been forced on the country with such narrow margins and such strong arm tactics. Yet, it fulfilled a seventy-eight year liberal dream, and cost his party the House and most of the Senate.  His approval rating plummeted.

Fresh from this self-described “shellacking”, we are now witnessing “Obama II, The Sequel”.  His new role is much the same as his old character, but it will be much more difficult to pull-off given the fact that he exposed himself after the first performance.

The trailer for his new role was previewed in his recent State-Of-The-Union Speech.  Peppered with words such as, bi-partisanship, deficit reduction, investing in education, green jobs, making America more competitive, and jobs, jobs, jobs, his inner moderate is re-emerging.  After all, he did extend the Bush tax cuts.

As all great actors, Obama has the ability to act out a role, but be someone else, to say one thing, and do exactly the opposite.  With personalities of this ilk, you cannot listen to what they say; you must look at what they do.

As a public service to those of you in our costal states, who may actually listen to Obama’s words, Peacock has decided to decode his words so you may better understand what he is saying.  It is not hard to decode.

“Investment” means more government spending and a larger deficit (if that is possible).  “Bi-partisanship” means making nice on the surface until I can find a rock to crush your skull.  “Investing in education,” means throwing more money and power to the teacher unions who have our children enslaved in public schools.  “Green Jobs” means regulating carbon and destroying the economy further by drastically raising the price of energy and destroying more jobs than are created.  “Making America more competitive,” means bigger government telling private enterprise just what technologies they should pursue, and punishing industries that do not follow that lead.  It all adds up to continuing the march to socialism, and the upcoming battles with Congress will reaffirm this.

Peacock from the beginning has held the opinion that Obama was designed by the radical left to be a one-term president  Do as much damage to the country in a short period of time and spend the rest of your life traveling the world and giving speeches to fellow travelers.  That being said, no harm in giving it the old college try.  As P.T. Barnum said, “There is a sucker born every day” (or a new voter, as the case may be).

It is an old adage, but one that is true.  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

This writer is constantly amazed by the absolutely total irresponsibility of government at all levels. While the waste at the federal level is so outlandish that it hits the news every day there is massive excess at state and local level as well. It is fascinating to observe local government managers complain about a lack of revenue when so many services in neighboring municipalities and counties are duplicated rather than shared. While it is laudable that personnel numbers are being constrained by introducing efficiency through new information technology it is outlandish that these technologies are being introduced in government silos. Even neighboring communities that claim extensive cooperation often operate independent and incompatible police and fire computer applications that inhibit rather than promote public safety. They duplicate, rather than share, expensive computer applications for human resources, parks and recreation, financial and tax management, public works administration and other needs.

While the scale may be different, the causes of this irresponsible management are the same at all levels of government. Too much money flows into government coffers from too many directions to keep track of. Those at all levels of government who receive this money are all too willing to spend it all and ask for more because they see it as their money, not the taxpayers money. Furthermore, the more money they receive the more they can build their personal domain and assure their job security.

This irresponsibility of government officials will not be changed without aggressive tax reform. Increased money always means increased power and the more money we send to government the more power moves from the people to government. It is well known that the more power a group has the more power they tend to want to have. It is a circular problem and the evidence is stark. Sending more money to the government increases government power which the government will want more of which means the government will want more money. The citizens of the republic continue to lose authority over government and eventually become subjects rather than controllers of government.

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”

Thomas Jefferson

We can and must stop this money/power spiral and transfer of authority. The government is addicted to this spiral and the only ones who can control the supply to the addict is the supplier. We can do this through aggressive tax reform at all levels of government. We have to if we want to cure the addict and not lose our republic.

PeacockWatch believes that tax reform must include the following elements.

• There must be only one all-encompassing tax at each level of government. No additional fees or assessments associated with specific items or services.
• Taxes must be consistent and predictable over several years.
• There must be no tax exemptions for anything.
• The amount of tax collected at each level of government must be posted on-line daily by each government entity.
• The total amount of tax collected must be such that it limits the government expenditures to a certain percentage of GDP.

The writers of PeacockWatch have long experience as business executives. We understand that it is important to keep things simple because they will get complicated all by themselves. Therefor we are working to keep this set of elements simple and short. However, they do require some explanation which we provide here.

There must be only one all-encompassing tax at each level of government. No additional fees or assessments associated with specific items or services.

The present tax code is outrageously confusing. It is ridiculous, and even criminal, that those who are responsible for the tax code use its complexity as a defense for breaking tax law and paying too few taxes. It is clearly designed to control behavior of the population which, except in matters of clear police action, is none of the business of government at any level. The lost labor and the expenditure associated with complying with tax law by individuals and businesses has a strong adverse effect on our gross domestic product. It works against, not for, the economic health of our nation.

Many of our taxes are hidden from clear view by the taxpayer and those that are visible are, like the income tax, collected by the various governments before the citizen even sees their paycheck. New taxes, or taxes disguised as fees, are levied by the legislatures or executive branches without giving them strong visibility. Consequently, we are all taxed at a higher level than is readily recognized on a daily basis.

PeacockWatch’s recommendation is that we go as a nation and as state and local governments to the Fair Tax and no other source of revenue collection by any government in the United States of America. This fixes the tax rate at a totally visible level at all levels of government.

Taxes must be consistent and predictable over several years.

Individuals, families and businesses must be able to develop financial plans over extended periods of time with some certainty of tax stability. When one examines monthly individual and family expenses it becomes clear that for most of us our greatest single source of expenditure is taxes. For those who want to see the details please look here. You may have thought that your greatest expense each month was for your home. In reality, your greatest expense each month is taxes with many of those taxes representing a drain that you don’t even pay attention to.

If the single greatest category of expense is taxes then there must not only be clear visibility of that expense there must be consistency in that expense so that individuals and businesses can plan with a much greater degree of certainty about this expense category than is possible today.

PeacockWatch believes that the FairTax is the most visible and most honest tax method of government revenue generation. We also believe that any FairTax implementation must be fixed over a five year planning period. Any change to the FairTax rate must be made at least two years before the end of that planning period and only with a totally visible vote by every member of the legislature without absence or abstention.

There must be no tax exemptions for anything.

Tax exemptions are the government’s tool for controlling citizen behavior. However, in a republic it is the citizens who must be controlling the government’s behavior. If the government cannot levy selective exemptions to the tax law or tax to influence behavior it keeps the government from interfering in individual and family lives. It also keeps the tax code simple and short.

The amount of tax collected at each level of government must be posted on-line daily by each government entity.

Most municipal governments, all state governments and the federal government now use computerized systems to track tax income. Each of these governments must be required to post that total income on-line at the end of each day. Just because the money moved from the taxpayer’s pocket to the government coffers doesn’t mean that it is the government’s money even if various governments would like to think so. The money still belongs to the taxpayer and the taxpayer must be provided full visibility of every penny the government has been allocated for use to the benefit of the taxpayer.

The total amount of tax collected must be such that it limits the government expenditures to a certain percentage of GDP.

This will be addressed in a future article about “Statutory Limits On Spending”. The only reason it is brought up here is that it is part of the formula for deciding what the Fair Tax rate should be.

The on-line documentation systems described above combined with a totally visible FairTax system designed within limits based on the GDP and strict debt retirement constraints can be used to provide a specific and consistent numeric guideline for a FairTax rate. The FairTax organization places the revenue neutral FairTax rate at 23%. In the initial years PeacockWatch suggests that the rate might have to be a few percentage points higher in order to eliminate debt in perhaps ten years and establish a one year financial reserve a few years later. After that, the FairTax rate could drop to a fully visible revenue neutral rate.

The whole purpose of this proposal is to simply restore our nation to economic health and improve our national security. PeacockWatch believes that the present system is being gamed by a broad range of powerful people including those at high levels of the federal government.  Some of the people gaming the system may be well-meaning but ignorant of the consequences of their actions. Others are well meaning and fully aware of the consequences of their actions and fully justify them by taking care of their constituents at the expense of a larger population. (Those two previous sentences require a very generous benefit of doubt for theoretically intelligent government leaders.) Some are just crooks who have managed to be elected or appointed to governmental power. Whatever the reason, gaming the system becomes much more difficult when the rules are simple, there are no exceptions to the rules, finances are strictly controlled by those the money belongs to (the citizen) and money income and outgo is made fully visible down to the penny in a fully public medium, the Internet.