Friday, November 21, 2008

Why Republicans Lose Elections

The following guest article was contributed today by my good friend and "Great" American, Fernando Nieves. There will be more on Nieves in the coming weeks, as I am planning a feature story on his incredible journey from being born and raised in Venezuela through his quest to become an American Citizen (legally) and achieving the American Dream!

I agree with my friend Jimmy Lewis, regarding his previous article on Sarah Palin ( ). Governor Palin does not deserve this at all, ("They used this woman … and then when they were finished, they threw her under the bus".) and that’s part of what has been wrong with the Republican Party, which has control the US government for the last 8 years in the white house and 10 out of the last 10 years in the congress.

It occurs to me that republicans ought to perform a serious soul search, analyze their own performance with objectivity, before blaming the “liberal media”, the democrats, and yes Sarah Palin. Here is what I have noticed: These people are not protecting the interest this great nation; on the contrary, they only protect their own interest and the interest of the good ol' boy network and big business.

Quite frankly the Republican Party needed a kick in the ass like this so they can get back to true conservative values (small government and FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY), something that they left behind during GWB administration. An example of this behavior is GWB tax cuts. The Tax Policy Center of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution has analyzed these two tax-cut measures and they found the following:

· Some 54 percent of the tax cuts from these two measures will go to households with incomes of more than $1 million a year, the top 0.2 percent of households, Another 43 percent of the tax-cut benefits will go to the 3.5 percent of households with incomes between $200,000 and $1 million. Thus, 97 percent of the tax cuts from these two provisions will go to the 3.7 percent of households with incomes over $200,000.
· That leaves only 3 percent of the tax-cut benefits for the 96 percent of U.S. households with incomes below $200,000. That 3 percent of the tax cuts will go almost entirely to households in the $100,000-$200,000 range. Essentially none of the benefits will flow to families with incomes under $100,000 (see table below).
· High-income households already are receiving extremely large tax cuts without these two new tax-cut measures. According to the Tax Policy Center, households with incomes of more than $1 million are receiving tax cuts that average $103,000 this year, and will receive tax cuts averaging $108,000 in 2010, from the other income-tax cuts included in the 2001 and 2003 tax-cut laws. (The Tax Policy Center estimates that when the effects of repeal of the estate tax are taken into account, those in this very high income group will receive tax cuts averaging $133,000 in 2010 from tax cuts other than the two measures discussed here.) The Tax Policy Center’s analysis shows that adding in the two tax-cut provisions slated to start taking effect in 2006 will bring the total tax cut for people with incomes over $1 million to $152,000, on average, in 2010. (These figures are in 2010 dollars.)

Note: Republicans in congress are calling to make the tax cut permanent.

Now, I do know that nobody wants to pay taxes, but to cut taxes and increased size of government and expending like the GWB administration have done was immoral and irresponsible, and it makes the argument of “liberals are going to tax you to death” hard to defend, because at the end of the day, it does not take a rocket scientist to understand basic economics.

The next government(s), it will take years, will need to pay the debt, which the Bush Administration incurred in order to fund the same tax cuts I just illustrated above, which benefited only 3.7% of the American households. You all know who they are, and unfortunately I am not one of them, as I have seeing my income, savings and retirement funds diminishing like most Americans since the Bush Administration took office. At least I feel lucky, I am healthy, have a wonderful wife and both of us have jobs, and I know that there are far too many Americans unemployed that have lost everything and the worst is yet to come. I pray for them.

Back to fixing the mess GWB policies have helped create, the new government will also need to pay for national security (the military, security at the border, etc), and to pay for other services such as rebuilding the nation infrastructure and yes bail out all these corporations which in my book constitute as corporate socialism. Also, repair the reputations of America in the international community, let us not forget the rest of the scandals, the justice department (Alberto Gonzalez), the you “doing a heck of Job Brownie” (FEMA during Katrina), throwing under the bus a CIA secret agent, only because her husband uncovered the truth that Sadam really did not have a nuclear program, nor was trying to hide WMDs, “water boarding is not torture”, etc. These cumulative abuses of power have created the monster we now called President elect Barak Obama.

As an independent conservative, that’s what I consider myself now, I found myself at odds, trying to defend the un-defendable, thus I consider myself as a former republican, and for that reason I decided not to vote. By the way, I can also say proudly that I can never force myself to vote for a democrat, thus my reason to be upset with the current republicans; as they almost made me do the unthinkable, vote for a liberal.

Finally, all politics aside, I also happen to disagree with the selection of Gov Sarah Palin as a VP candidate, even tough I believe that she has accomplished a lot, and done well for herself. However, having said all of that I believe the Republican Party selected the wrong candidates period. Both candidates! I believe that both McCain not Palin were president material by any stretch of the imagination, and once again that demonstrated to me that the Republican Party was out of touch with the American people, and the reason they have to use a crazy dude from Toledo Ohio, a mythical character no less (Joe the Plumber) as it turned out, that wasn’t his name nor his true profession, as it was a way to prove to the American people that they really were the party for the middle class … that’s how much out of touch there are.

Once again putting politics first before the well being of the country, and by doing so they deserved what they got; a huge defeat in the election.

But as my friend Jimmy Lewis, always says:

“Keep The Faith,”



Andy said...

Keep the Faith... for where would any of us be without our Faith and Dreams.....

Child of God said...

The US needs a new motto to better reflect the character of American subjects under the rule of "O"

E unum pluribus
Out of THE ONE, many.

Tina R.F.Hemond said...

Hola, Fernando & Hello Jimmy! (I’m on a rant, so this is lengthy) Fernando, I am going to agree to disagree with you on several points – First, although it appears that Sarah Palin has been “thrown under the bus” – she was not alone this past general election – as far as the Republican Party or the Democrats were concerned (Hillary Clinton, was not thrown, but pushed under the bus – more on that later). It was the ridiculous sexism from both parties that was Palin’s undoing and ultimately will be her strength. Let’s talk about the Bush tax cuts – although it is true, those households that earn over $200,000 have a bit more in breaks than those earning less – those that earn less pay almost NO federal income tax – Frankly, anyone living in my middle-class neighborhood, here in Massachusetts, pays through the nose in state taxes, but generally is getting a check in the mail from the Feds before April 15. (This helps offset what they pay to the state) I’m not sure if you were here, in this country, before Clinton’s 2nd term, but I can tell you, there was an amazing difference in personal income as well as growth for the last 4 years of Clinton’s presidency (Congress/ Senate under Gingrich) and the first 4 years under Bush – then, suddenly things appeared to stall. The GNP was still doing well – but the country had to find a way to repair itself from several major financial fiascos. Terrorist Attack 9/11 – still had impacts on several fiscal levels, hurricane’s, fires, floods, mudslides, etc., took an additional toll, that was in our country alone, never mind what we dished out for aid abroad. It was a usually burdensome four years, two of which saw the congress under the control of the Democrats, with Bush alone to fend them off – the last two years, little to nothing was accomplished except to spend, spend, spend.
A flat tax would work out best, that way everyone would pay the same rate – that would not sit well with those earning less than the $200,000 – because they would not be getting those refunds, but, it would be Fair. The tax cuts need to be kept in place.

There are several types of Republicans, just as there are several types of Democrats – the problem the last few years was that one could not tell the difference. President Bush appeared too at ease with Ted Kennedy. Now, as to the litany of messes you attribute to President Bush – there will never be a closed border – we have laws in place, they need to be enforced. Hard to do with millions of illegal’s under the protection of the DNC. Those corporate bailouts – see Freddie & Fannie and a guy named Barney Frank (you can also check out Chris Dodd)
George Bush was guilty of not yelling long and hard about this mess to the media – which, may have ignored him – similar to networks not carrying a State of the Union address during sweeps weak (no kidding)
Katrina – FEMA was not prepared for a disaster of that scope – and yet, I see you make no mention of the Democrat Governor who held back for days before allowing aid to come into Louisiana – Bush, being the nice guy he is, didn’t point fingers, he should have.
Plame was no secret, she was on the cover of Vanity Fair yammering about her status in the CIA, there was no cover-up – her husband was an idiot – this was liberal drama at its hilt, again – Bush, was the nice guy (theme developing here)

Barak Obama is not a monster – Barak Obama is our President- Conservative, Liberal, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green Party, Socialist, Communist – he belongs to us and it is our responsibility to respect him. We can disagree with him in principal and policy – once he does something – so far? – He’s made appointments. (Keep Hillary in mind)

I’m shocked to learn that you did not vote. I hope you mean you did not vote for the President but did vote on other issues, and other offices – my father, from Spain, earned his citizenship the hard way, he came here legally, escaping the nightmare that Franco loosed on the country – murdering most of my family in the process. My father fought for civil rights, for workers rights, for the Democrat Party and read the constitution to me as a bedtime story – he also got me registered to vote as soon as I turned 18 (although I was campaigning for his party before I could vote), and always stressed how lucky we were to be able to cast our ballot, how it was a sacred duty and a privilege.
It is what your citizenship gifts to you – the right and privilege to vote and the right to complain (without getting pulled out into the street in front of your house and shot).

Sarah Palin was a breath of fresh air, and, it would not have mattered who took that slot – Palin took a bullet for the party – she tried her best – and she was at a disadvantage from the get-go – so was McCain – here’s what was missing from the general election. PACs! 501’s – not one – not one came out for McCain, or for Palin, and there was plenty of time and tons of money – just didn’t happen – why? Good question.
One theory is: they (Washington Rove, the rest) wanted to lose because they had a good idea of what was in store: more media bias, more stalled do-nothing Pelosi running the congress with Reid in the Senate, pointing the fingers at the Bush administration and Republicans in general and sinking the already damaged Republican brand into the toilet. By jamming McCain (and Palin), the Party has two years to get back into the good graces of the people, four to make it solid, and eight to regain control, solid control. It might not work out exactly as planned, which is part of the problem.

Here’s the deal - If McCain ever needed a boost, it was when he suspended his campaign to go to Washington and work on the bailout (or prevent it) – what happened? Bush called Obama back to Washington, got into the middle of it, made a prime time address and McCain ended up looking like an idiot (he was being nice). Therein might lay the biggest problem with Republican’s. They play fair, they play nice, they don’t get on television every 20 minutes to rant, rave and point fingers – they don’t rat out the other guy – they tried hard to play ball, and to blend in – to be liked – and it was the worst political move I have ever seen in my life.

They need to start acting like Republicans. That is the big problem – when a Republican acts like a Republican (fiscal and social conservative combo) the press goes insane, they scream Christian and suddenly everyone is pro-“choice” and starts adding Pork to every bill in sight – when that stops happening, then they’ll get JQ Public’s attention again. In the meantime, they are hoping that f Obama makes a mess of things – and with the state of the Country, he may never have the time to dig out from under, giving the appearance of ineptitude (regardless of performance). Hillary may lend a hand, by accepting the office of Secretary of State; she will become the most powerful woman in Washington, surrounded by old friends in the Cabinet, and every single aspect of government where Obama seems to be placing them.

dmarks said...

If total tax revenues increased after the cuts, how were they immoral? Also, the very rich pay a huge amount of taxes compared to everyone else, so of course a small cut will for them will end up looking huge. Just remember that the Tax Policy Center and Brookings are leftist pressure groups. From Brookings own web site "An independent research and policy institute with a left-liberal inclination". I've followed them for years, and they love to skew information to favor their side.

The Tax Policy institute tends to portray tax cuts as government giveaways, which is a lie: when someone's taxes are cut, not one cent is given to that person from the government.

As for Alberto Gonzales, someone tell me what he did wrong?

"the truth that Sadam really did not have a nuclear program, nor was trying to hide WMDs"

He was trying to hide them, as he said there were none, and more than 500 WMD shells/etc were found after the invasion that he had not documented or accounted for. And it does look likely that Saddam was trying to get yellow cake from Nigeria (he was trying to get an import from there, and yellow cake would have made the most sense).