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 ( http://rougerevival.blogspot.com/2008/11/sarah-palin-go-ahead-make-her-day.html ). 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,”

Fernando

Mitt May Be Right ...

The leaders of the big three automakers spent Wednesday waiting for word from lawmakers in Washington on whether or not Congress will give the go-ahead for a $25 billion bailout to help stave off potential bankruptcy.But many people are wondering exactly what would happen if Congress does nothing, and an automaker slips into bankruptcy. Depending on who you ask, the answer could be doom and gloom or a reason for cautious optimism.

If the former Massachusetts Governor, and Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney had anything to say about it, as he has been in making the news circuit over the past 18 hours, he’d let them all go bankrupt.

“If General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed. Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course … the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.”

Romney went on to talk about the role our government has played in the potential demise of the big three. His comments pretty much echo those we shared here, at the Rouge Revival blog, on November 12th. The article “U.S. Auto Industry Alternative Solutions” discussed the death grip that “Café” Standards has around the entire U.S. Auto Industry’s collective throats.

For additional Romney comments, as well as a spot on analysis, please click on the link below, for last night’s Talking Points Memo on “The O’Reilly Factor.”

U.S. Auto Industry Alternative Solutions

Governor Jennifer Granholm (by the way, we’re still waiting to be “blown away”) appeared on the CBS “Early Show” this morning, begging for taxpayers across this country to bail her out from failing policies and leadership here in Michigan. Of course the governor conveniently camouflaged this plea under the guise of the current crisis in the U.S. automotive industry.

Granholm stated that the auto industry supports one in 10 U.S. jobs. “If the industry fails, there would be a ripple effect across the entire country.” She added: "This government decided that it was going to step in and throw $700 billion at the financial sector. We're just asking for a fraction of that."

Sure, why not! She’s getting a fraction of every penny we earn and spend here in Michigan … there’ no place else to go.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants Congress to support a financial bailout for the troubled U.S. auto industry, which is suffering under the weight of poor sales, tight credit and a sputtering economy. Pelosi, D-Calif., said Tuesday she was confident that lawmakers would consider "emergency and limited financial assistance" for the auto industry under the $700 billion bailout measure that passed Congress in October. She urged the outgoing Bush administration to support a compromise.

So you’ve got Granholm and Pelosi out there trying to get the money, when there are viable alternative solutions that won’t cost the taxpayers an arm and an axle.

Recently, there was a great column about this in the Wall Street Journal by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., and it's entitled: 'How to Save Detroit and $50 Billion.' (Please review at the following link):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122100316976917063.html

Granholm, along with the Detroit Auto Makers and their lobbyists are now out there on high alert with their plea for $50 billion in federal loans. “Congress practically owes us this money”, Ford, GM and Chrysler argue … because Congress slammed us with new fuel mileage mandates that will cost us $100 billion to meet. John McCain caved. The White House is in the process of caving. Barack Obama didn't need to cave.

But before rushing to pass the legislation, there's an easy way to save $50 billion or whatever part of these loans wouldn't be paid back … just repeal the fuel economy rules. It must infuriate the auto makers how readily their critics attribute their problems to their own incompetence.

Then how do you explain that GM is thriving in Europe, selling small cars which get very high miles per gallon? There was a story recently that Ford has a car that gets 65 miles to the gallon but they can't sell it in North America, they're not allowed, can't sell it in North America because it runs on diesel. It seats five, it gets 65 mile per gallon. Buick is among the biggest selling brands in China. GM is running away with Latin America.

The Big Three's problem, to be blunt, is North America. They should have pulled out long ago. And his idea is rather than give them $50 billion, just get rid of these stupid CAFE standards, get rid of the government running the auto business.

Keep the damn environmentalist out of the auto business and let them make the cars that they know the customer wants. These silly restrictions are causing all kinds of retooling, all kinds of investment. They don't face these restrictions in different parts of the world, and they're doing well.

The only reason GM and Ford is thinking about going bankrupt is because they're all kicking butt around the world. They're just not kicking it here. Now, why is that? They also got saddled with a monopolistic union, UAW and big, huge contracts and paying people who are no longer working for them. Toyota doesn't have that. Other foreign makers that make their cars here do not have the same restrictions that the big three do ... so it's real simple.

The auto business is overregulated and it's costing a lot of people a lot of money per car. The union contracts are estimated at over $3,000 per car, with the health insurance portion taking up the bulk of that figure. That's nearly $2,500, per car, that Toyota doesn't face. So it's real simple. Mr. Jenkins is exactly right. If you get the government out of these businesses, they'll be fine, because the government cannot tell 'em what CAFE standards to build in Latin America, in China, in Europe, and American cars are definately kicking butt over there.

A Salute to Our Veterans

Veterans Day, formerly known as Armistice Day, was originally set as a U.S. legal holiday to honor the end of World War I, which officially took place on November 11, 1918. In legislation that was passed in 1938, November 11 was "dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be hereafter celebrated and known as 'Armistice Day.'" As such, this new legal holiday honored World War I veterans.

In 1954, after having been through both World War II and the Korean War, the 83rd U.S. Congress ... at the urging of the veterans service organizations ... amended the Act of 1938 by striking out the word "Armistice" and inserting the word "Veterans." With the approval of this legislation on June 1, 1954, November 11 became a day to honor American veterans of all wars.

In 1968, the Uniforms Holiday Bill ensured three-day weekends for federal employees by celebrating four national holidays on Mondays: Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and Columbus Day. Under this bill, Veterans Day was moved to the last Monday of October. Many states did not agree with this decision and continued to celebrate the holiday on its original date. The first Veterans Day under the new law was observed with confusion on Oct. 25, 1971.

Finally on September 20, 1975, President Gerald R. Ford signed a law which returned the annual observance of Veterans Day to its original date of November 11th., beginning in 1978. Since then, the Veterans Day holiday has been observed on November 11th.

FYI: According to the Military Officers Association of America, 127 Members of the current 110th Congress have served in the military. The House has 99 out of 434 and the Senate 28 out of 100. The number of veterans in the 110th Congress sadly reflects the trend of a steady decline in the number of Members who have served in the military. For example, 390 veterans served in the 93rd Congress (1973-1975); and 236 served in the 103rd (1993-1995).

It's Veterans Day in the USA and we proudly salute the veterans, both men and women, who have served our nation with honor, dignity, pride and sacrifice. We remember and we thank you. Our flag will forever fly and we are forever free, thanks to you and to the blessings and grace of God on our nation. May God bless each veteran whose life we celebrate today. Stand tall, veterans everywhere ... We Salute You!