Taxes...

Ahh... what the heck... label this another "Open Letter" to Nan Hayworth!

Nan. As you well know the Democrats and their media allies will try hard to "tag" Republicans with wanting to "extend tax cuts to the rich."

Well... it's time that you and indeed all Republicans officeholders and soon-to-be officeholders respond with a intellectually honest reply based upon basic American concepts of fairness and equity.

What's a "fair" percentage of one's income for the authorities to demand? Throughout human history - both secular and religious tradition - a 10% "tithe" seems to represent a reasonable opening gambit.

(One might say, "if it's good enough for God...")

Of course the more separate "authorities" one is answerable to, the greater the number of individual "tithes" - or in terms of government demands... taxes - individuals are subject to.

Here in America - depending upon where one lives, works, or simply spends money - one is subject to federal and/or state income taxes, capital gains taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, school taxes, fees, surcharges, tolls... and on and on and on.

Individual taxes, fees, and surcharges can amount to pennies... well under a full percentage point... but they can also be levied at rates some would consider confiscatory.

Now we come to the question, though... don't we...? What exactly is "confiscatory?"

Is 10% confiscatory? Most would no doubt say "no."

How about 20%?

Thirty percent...??? Forty percent...??? Fifty percent...???

I ask... assuming the money is legally earned... does a government supposedly of and for free citizens have a right to demand half - or, worse, beyond half - of a citizen's income (or in regard to sales taxes half or more again in taxes accessed for the "privilege" of buying a legal product or service) under penalty of law... under threat of force?

Now, putting aside for the moment the multitude of federal, state, and local taxes Americans are subject to and also laying to the side the reality that these taxes are cumulative, allow me to focus the topic upon just one tax... the federal income tax.

First a bit of context:

When the 16th Amendment was first ratified and signed into law, the new "federal income tax" rate went into effect with a ceiling of 7% - and that top rate was only for taxpayers earning more than $500,000... and we're talking $500,000 in 1913 dollars! (And bear in mind... this new "federal income tax" - even at the then-floor of 1% - was paid by only one out of a hundred Americans! Ninety-nine out of a hundred were exempt due to the fact that their incomes didn't rise to the level triggering even the 1% tax!)

In any case... (*SIGH*)... the key number here is "seven" - as in 7%.

So... for the sake of argument... allow me to posit as an "opening bid" that if our nation is going to rely upon a federal income tax for a huge portion of federal revenues, then the 7% "top rate" of the original federal income tax "table" is the "opening bid" for a top assessment of 7%.

On the other extreme... the ceiling... (and bear in mind, again, for the moment we'll just pretend - for the sake of this discussion - that other taxes besides the federal income tax simply don't exist)... let's throw out a common sense guideline:

It is... on it's face... universally recognized as unjust for any government supposedly representing a free People to demand more than an equal share of any citizen's income.

Fair enough...???

Setting the basic goal posts at 7% and 50% respectively... a fair enough starting point for further discussion...???

Well, Nan, going back to addressing you directly with regard to how Republicans need to respond to the Democrats' charges that we unjustly favor "tax cuts for the wealthy" my suggestion is a simple one:

Since in the real world all of us do pay taxes above and beyond federal income taxes, I'd suggest that an "opening bid" of say 33.3% as a federal income tax ceiling would be looked upon by the average American as just.

Your position and that of your fellow Republican elected officials: "No just federal government would even contemplate laying claim to more than one-third of an American's income."

Now... if you're wondering why then I suggested planting the "high end goal post marker" at 50% rather than 33.3%, this is where we connect the concept of "federal income tax" to the reality of "American taxation."

Of course it's up to the individual states and their component municipalities to decide upon their own tax rates. Most states have some form of income tax... a few don't. A resident of one locality in one state making say $50,000/yr. will "share" a higher or lower percentage of his or her earnings with "government" than another American making the same salary but living or working somewhere else. Then of course there's property taxes... school taxes... yadda, yadda, yadda....

My point is this: Just as it's surely defensible - even laudable... a demonstration of common sense - for you and your Republican colleagues to argue that no American should be forced to turn over more than one-third of his or her earnings to the federal government in income taxes... it's just as obvious - and I'm guessing that it would be even more universally accepted - to promote as a moral and ethic concept that no American should be forced to surrender more than half of his or her income to "government" as a broad entity.

Anyway... (*SMILE*)... I'm not trying to write a bill here... I'm simply outlining a philosophical proposal that I believe would resonate with the American People.

Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2010

A little tune to stir the blood...

More Advice to Nan Hayworth: Staffing

Yep... for the next few days there's gonna be a flurry of posts - "Open Letters" - addressed to my newly elected Congresswoman-Elect, Dr. Nan Hayworth.

I hope to hell that others are emulating me... are reaching out to their newly elected (and even re-elected) representatives!

O.K., Nan... staffing...

First off, you've publicly committed to carrying through on my call to cut 10% out of your first congressional office budget as compared to what Democrat John Hall ends up spending for this final year of his term... this final year of his final term in office.

(*GRIN*) (*WINK*)

Great! 'Nough said!

Now... some other advice:

First of all some context...

When I was a junior at Northeastern University I spent a semester abroad (in London, England) studying, earning credits, and most important, interning for a senior backbench Tory Member of the House of Commons.

I'm not telling you this to reminisce, but rather to point out the following: This senior backbench Member of the House of Commons - the "Mother Parliament" of Western Democracy - had one full-time professional researcher (aide) "on staff" and... me.

My Member - the Right Honorable Sir Teddy Taylor, MP (retired) - shared a secretary with another (even more senior!) Member of the House of Commons.

Nan... this was (and to the best of my knowledge still is) the norm.

Now I'm not telling you to emulate British Parliament staffing norms (after all, they have a professional non-partisan civil service which acts as professional staff to the combined Legislative-Executive Branch that is the British Parliament), rather, I'm pointing out that our system goes deliberately in the complete opposite direction.

In America... in Congress... each senator and representative is King (or Queen as the case may be) of his or her domain.

Oh... it's not as bad as it used to be pre-Republican Revolution 1994 (at least staffers since the Gingrich era have enjoyed certain basic labor protections under federal law), but congressional staffing is still pretty much a "feudal" enterprise based upon personal loyalty to the individual senator or representative.

When hiring staff, Nan, the first question you should be asking of applicants is the following:

WHO DO YOU WANT TO WORK FOR?

The answer, Nan, will tell you everything you need to know.

The correct answer is "The American People."

Now of course people working for you are... er... working for you... but you get my point, right?

When George Schultz served as President Reagan's Secretary of State he used to call newly minted foreign service officers into his office and ask each young man or woman to "go over to that map and point to the country you've been assigned to or hope to represent."

Inevitably the nervous youngster would point to France or England or Russia or Japan...

(*PAUSE*) (*SMILE*)

Schultz would then gently shake his head and answer "no." He'd then point to the United States and say, "no, this is the country you represent."

(*SHRUG*)

You're going to be the boss, Nan. It can't be otherwise. And of course your staffers have to be "loyal." This too goes without saying. HOWEVER...

Those who end up working for you must understand and accept - willingly accept... indeed, embrace - the concept of "greater loyalty."

No... I'm not saying that in your office staffers can follow their own "hearts and minds" to the contrary of your agenda. What I'm saying is that each and every member of your staff must want to work for you not primarily out of financial need or a quest for personal advancement, but rather because they believe in you and believe in your agenda.

At the same time... each staff member needs to understand that while reasonable people can disagree on specific issues and details... should a staffer ever lose faith in the overall "righteousness" of your agenda it is that staffer's responsibility to resign rather than make take the unethical path of either working against you from within or - on the other extreme - surrendering his or her own most deeply held beliefs.

Nan. You know what kind of people tend to gravitate towards "staff work" in Washington?

Self-serving, slippery, brighter than average but too lazy to have majored in a hard science or even business or other "math-centric" field of study in college personalities - that's who.

Washington D.C. is full of bright, eager, hard-working young go-getters. The question is... what is it that they're actually focused on getting...???

My advice, Nan... if I were you, I'd contact Ron Paul's chief of staff... Michele Bachman's chief of staff... I'd try and reach John Shadegg directly... I'd reach out to my fellow physicians serving in the House... I'd try to directly reach Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn over on the Senate side... in other words, Nan, I'd reach out to sources you can trust for staffing advice and assistance.

Nan. It's crucial that if you're sincerely committed to "recapturing Washington from the politicians" and "returning power to the People" (as I know you are!) that you're supported by a crack team of sincere true believers.

Anyway... as always... just giving the best advice I'm able to give.

Advice to Nan Hayworth: Just Say No...!!!

Nan,

I know you're being flooded with emails and texts.

Therefore...

I'm posting this "Open Letter" in order to highlight the three word mantra that you must mainly live by as an elected representative:

Just...

Say...

No...!!!

Nan. If you're going to stay true to your ideals then 90% of your job is going to be saying no and voting no.

And bear with me here... I'm not simply talking saying no to President Obama.

No, Nan... I'm talking saying no to each and every single Republican elected official in the district who will now be looking to you as their pipeline for bringing federal largess into the district.

Oh, Nan... I hope you know what you're in for! The county executives within the district... the sheriffs... the legislators... the town and village politicians... the special interests... they'll all be at your door with their hands out.

Nan... you've gotta say no. (At least in the vast majority of cases...)

It's not a question of all or even the majority of requests being "unworthy." No. Most requests will sound laudable in the abstract. No, Nan... the reason you've gotta stick to your guns and "just say no" is because present spending is unsupportable... additional added spending must be looked upon by you as unthinkable!

Nan. We've got to pull the nation back from the brink and this means saying no and voting no!

Besides resisting pro-spending/pro-debt pressure from "your" elected officials and your own constituents you're going to have to stand up to your new colleagues in the House... obviously the RINOs... but at times fellow self-described conservatives who for whatever reason buckle to pro-spending/pro-debt pressure and who attempt to get you to sign on to actions you know in your heart are wrong.

As to Speaker (to be) Boehner... (*SMILE*)... as Ronald Reagan so simply yet eloquently cautioned... "Trust but verify!"

As days...

(Heck - even hours!)

...weeks, months, and years go by no doubt I'll be offering lots (and lots... and lots... and lots...) of unsolicited advice to you, but for now... there's no greater advice I can give but to steel yourself to being booed as well as cheered - even by your supposed allies - as you fight for what's right by doing what has to be done... namely... to reiterate...

Far more often than not - if you're representing our common ideals - you'll just say no... JUST VOTE NO.

The Barker Ballots...

Obviously I voted for Nan Hayworth. She won!

As to the Calhoun vs. Donnelly contest... I stuck to my guns and wrote in my own name rather than vote for either woman.

* Last I checked Nancy Calhoun was leading by a few hundred votes but the race has apparently still not yet been "called."

Over on the state Senate side, 20-year GOP incumbent Bill Larkin has apparently won re-election. Well, folks... he did so without my vote. Again, I wrote my own name in rather than give my approval to the wheeling, dealing, politics as usual Larkin.

* By the way, folks... I do myself no favors by being honest. This is the story of my life! I'd be much better off - professionally that is - if I were less... er... forthright.

I voted "Paladino For The People" of course.

* Flawed candidate that Paladino was, the ship of state here in New York will continue to flounder under Andrew Cuomo. (Frankly - quite honestly and sincerely - I'd much rather keep Paterson as Governor than allow Cuomo to get his mitts on the levers of state executive power...)

As for U.S. Senate... obviously I voted for (losers) Jay Townsend and Joe DioGuardi. Both men would have been far preferable to (winners) Schumer and Gillibrand.

* Gillibrand actually supported ACORN to the bitter end... and that should tell you all you need to know...

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

As for the rest of my choices...

For NYS Attorney General I voted Republican - Dan Donovan. He lost...

For NYS Comptroller I voted Republican - Harry Wilson. He has apparently lost as well.

Whenever a candidate runs unopposed I write myself in.

* Doesn't matter if we're talking a Republican or even a libertarian-leaning, constitutionalist, conservative... if there's only one "choice" on the ballot - either one name or the same name on multiple party "lines" - I refuse to rubber stamp the "selection" of the party bosses.

Well... that's that, folks!

(*GRIN*)

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Election 2010 Results

First... the Ugly --

Jerry Brown? Really...?!?!

Barbara Boxer... (*SIGH*)

California truly deserves everything it gets. The problem is... we're all going to suffer when "We" (the People of the other 49 states) are forced to pony up the (borrowed) money to bail California out of the hole her irresponsible voters (and their elected representatives) have dug her into.

And speaking of irresponsible...

Andrew Cuomo...

Chuck Schumer...

Kirsten Gillibrand... (*HEADACHE*)

Now of course we knew this would happen. I mean, the NY GOP is as dysfunctional as any state Party organization in the nation. (Once again Giuliani let us down...)

Back to state governorships...

What a bummer that Tom Tancredo lost...

Deval Patrick re-elected...? Really...?!?! (*SIGH*)

(And Barney Frank re-elected...?!?!) (Don't even get me started...)

Over in Nevada it looks like 'ol Harry Reid is going back to Washington. This is of course extremely disheartening, but... (*SIGH*)... it is what it is...

One point about the Nevada races: While I'd love to be able to believe that the only reason Reid one was that he somehow "cheated" - won by engaging in voter fraud - the fact that his son lost the state's governorship by a large margin discounts the "Reid won by fraud" theory. (To a large extent, anyway.)

Don't get me wrong... I'm not saying that Harry Reid and his corporate and union allies didn't bend the rules... even break the rules... but I doubt that any actual fraud which took place will rise to the level of magnitude - not to mention legal standard of proof - to overturn the Senate Majority Leader's re-election.

Over in Alaska, assuming the initial results hold and Joe Miller loses to self-serving RINO "Princess" Lisa Murkowski... (*SIGH*)...

(*SHUTTING MY EYES*) (*SHRUG*)

In Connecticut... liar Richard Blumenthal... REALLY...?!?!

In Delaware... Christoper Coons over Christine O'Donnell... (*SIGH*)

Yes... O'Donnell was a flawed candidate. No doubt! That said... she would have voted the right way in the U.S. Senate.

As expected, Barbara Mikulski handily won re-election in Maryland. (*ROLLING MY EYES*)

In West Virginia... Manchin pulled it out. (*SHRUG*)

Second... the Good --

Actually... allow me to start with GREAT news: Alan Grayson, A--hole-Florida, was soundly defeated!

(*WILD APPLAUSE*)

Oh... and then of course there's Marco Rubio kicking the crap out of that dirtbag Charlie Crist.

(*HUGE FRIGG'N GRIN*) (*WINK*) (*HIGH FIVE*)

Let's see... other key bright spots...

Sean Parnell - Sarah Palin's handpicked successor - won the governorship of Alaska. Big!

Governor Jan Brewer handily won re-election in Arizona.

(*WINK*)

Republican Brian Sandoval handily beat Harry Reid's son - "Prince" Rory Reid - in Nevada. (Now we have to hope that Harry Reid doesn't corrupt and co-opt Sandoval via pork and special interest federal legislation focused on Nevada.)

Susana Martinez took the governorship of New Mexico away from the Dems. (We'll see how that plays out...)

John Kasich is back! He'll soon be sworn in as the new Governor of Ohio! (This is huge...!!! He'll be yet another convincing national spokesperson for conservative ideals!)

A Republican - Tom Corbett - has won the Governorship of Pennsylvania. This too is huge news... particularly when coupled with...

(*DRUM ROLL*)

The election of Pat Toomey as a U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania!

Oh... and how'bout Nikki Haley in South Carolina...?!?! Go Tea Party...!!!

Finally... Back to the Ugly... and the just plain Bad --

How many... er... less than worthy candidates were elected re-elected?

(*SIGH*)

Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Pete Stark, Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters...

Oh, hell... I can't even bear to go on! This is just the worst of the worst from one state...!!!

Anyway... you folks get the idea.

Now, folks... our job... keep the Republican House and the Republican Senate Minority on the straight and narrow. Keep after Republicans to stand for "our" values... to stand up for the Constitution.

There are plenty of RINOs - and worse - out there, folks.

We must keep up our principled offense... as well as keeping up our principled defense.

If we can't "take back" the country over the next couple years... then you can "put paid" to the Great American Experiment.

Nan Hayworth Wins! As Usual... (*GRIN*)... I'm Right Again!

Well, folks... as usual... (*GRIN*)... I'm right again.

My candidate - Dr. (now Congresswoman-Elect) Nan Hayworth - beat incumbent Leftist Democrat John Hall to win New York's 19th Congressional District seat.

Good for Nan... good for me... good for America!

Notice, folks, I didn't throw out many predictions during this election cycle. I certainly wasn't stupid enough to base my predictions upon polling data! That said... patting myself firmly on the back, I knew Dr. Hayworth would win. I knew it all along and my confidence never wavered.

(Folks... I really am "Usually Right!")

Republicans won big, overall, but all that talk of 70-90 seat take-backs in the House was hot air. You didn't see me falling for the hype...

And, yeah, as I hoped - and publicly stated - it's actually a positive for the GOP that the Dems held the Senate. Putting the RINO wing of the GOP back into power in the Senate would have been a disaster for the country.

(McConnell and his ilk have got to be stripped of power!)

Back to the House... (*SIGH*)... as long as folks like Don Young and the rest of the "appropriators" can move up the ladder through seniority and misuse their power so as to "serve" their constituents (and out-of-district, out-of-state donors!!!) and in many cases line their own pockets and buttress their own careers by doing so, the People will only be able to look upon the GOP as the "lesser evil" as compared to the Democrats.

Anyway...

Throughout the campaign Dr. Hayworth was generous with her time and personal responses to my many (many... many... many...) emails concerning my questions, concerns, and advice.

I wasn't on the payroll, but I was a strong supporter and via my daily newsbites and private communications I'd like to think that I supplied a share of the "ammo" that the campaign relied upon to make the case for Nan Hayworth's election and John Hall's defeat.

As to the future...

Well... I am who I am. I'll continue to offer our soon-to-be Congresswoman the best advice I can and to offer her my services as a researcher and writer if called upon.

Most of all... I'll continue to be honest and forthright with her.

Even now - prior to being sworn in - Dr. Hayworth is no doubt being referred to and addressed as "Congresswoman Hayworth." That's fine. That's good! She deserves the title. To me though... (*SMILE*)... she'll always be "Nan," or "Doc," or - most heartfelt of all - Citizen Hayworth.

Barker's Election Day Newsbites: Nov. 2, 2010

Today I have just one question...

You Think I'm Kidding About Societal Breakdown...?

Here's the Headline --

Riots break out in San Francisco after Giants win World Series

And here's the story...

The front page of the San Francisco Chronicle's website said city streets were full of "joyful mayhem" in the hours after the Giants won Game 5 of the World Series on Monday night and Tuesday morning.

Joyful mayhem is a euphemism for riots.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)

Among the fires, attempted looting and general madness, here is shocking video from KTVU of a mob attacking a car, even pulling people from the car and beating them until riot police closed in - after several frightening minutes pass.

We're talking animals, people... (And not just a few...)

Around 10 p.m., a crowd that had taken over the intersection of 3rd and King streets had started multiple fires, but those were extinguished soon afterward.

An hour later, at the intersection of Mission and 22nd streets that had been taken over by dozens of fans, a large fire had been started. Later, a car attempted to drive through the crowd was stopped, and the vehicle and its passengers were attacked.

Listen... just listen to the audio as you watch the video...

What the heck does any of this have to do with Tim Lincecum and the first World Series championship for San Francisco?

Nothing. It should not be an occasion to bring out the worst in people. But it does.

Folks... this is why I say it's time that all responsible, law-abiding citizens sign up for an NRA weapons course with safety training and then arm themselves.

With a handful of exceptions, conventional news organizations have been late in reporting what's happening.

No surprise there.

Thankfully, outlets such as Twitter and Mashable got the word out, and the Los Angeles Times - from a town that's no stranger to riots great and small(ish) - has been picking up the what social media has been reporting.

Barker's Newsbites: Monday, November 1, 2010

Well, folks... tomorrow is Election Day.

So... those of you with land lines... how'bout all these damned robocalls?!

Notice folks, the same politicians (of both parties) who created "do not call" laws deliberately exempted their own calls which invade our privacy and waste our time.

Anyway...

(*SIGH*)

Tomorrow criminal scum such as Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters will be re-elected to Congress.

(Hey... folks... this ain't partisan - they're just the first two I think of; no doubt there are quite a few Republican crooks who will be re-elected tomorrow as well.)

(Oh... and to be clear... just because the Congressional Black Caucus seems to be unusually chock full of criminals... even for a congressional caucus... there are no doubt a number of white crooks just as corrupt as the likes of Rangel and Waters.)

(Last point: At least Rangel seems like a jolly scoundrel. Waters comes off as a vicious, low-IQ whack job.)

Tomorrow I pray that Carl Paladino is able to pull off a miracle.

Is the guy a "hero" of mine or roll model - someone I look up to? No. But is he the only guy standing between Andrew Cuomo and the governorship of New York State...? Yeah...

I hope Christine O'Donnell wins in Delaware.

I pray Joe Miller wins in Alaska.

Ditto Dino Rossi in Washington state.

I can't get too worked up about Schumer - this is New York - but the fact that this idiot Gillibrand is going to be re-elected with no real Republican opposition just kills me.

Folks... if only New York would secede from the Union...

(*SIGH*)

I fear Barbara Boxer will be re-elected in California. And if Brown beats Whitman - as the polls seem to indicate is the smart bet - then damn the people of California to hell!

(Looks like Toomey is gonna win in Pennsylvania. So much for the views of the Frums of the vast RINO conspiracy...)

(*WINK*)

To reiterate, I hope the Dems retain technical "control" of the U.S. Senate. I certainly wouldn't want to see Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority Leader undercutting principled conservatives as he no doubt would while at the same time tarnishing the reputation of the the "new" GOP by returning to power (in the Senate anyway) the cowardly, dishonorable, hypocritical ways of the "old" GOP.

Nope... until DeMint and the other true conservatives can successfully supplant the Senate GOP "old boys and girls" network of "go along to get along" RINOs who act as the "Democrat Lite" wing of the Senate Republican Caucus, I'd rather let the REAL Democrats keep center stage as the party in power in the Senate.

As to the House...

All I can say it... Boehner better not screw up. He'd better walk the walk once he's Speaker. He'd better go after the Left with everything he's got!

O.K. Rant off. For now...

On to the newsbites...!