Under the FairTax, all the controversy in the news today, from IRS abuse, to tax favors, to tax punishments, will disappear. Gone! The immense size of the IRS? Gone! The immense cost of compliance to taxpayers? Gone!
The term “take home pay” becomes obsolete. No more federal deductions. You take home everything you make. Can you handle that? Oh, and April 15th becomes just another day in paradise.
Under the FairTax, other terms like “tax exempt status” and “mortgage deduction” also become obsolete. Under the FairTax, no contributions you make or receive are taxable. And since your mortgage payment will now be made in ‘pre-tax’ dollars, you have nothing to deduct your mortgage interest payments from.
All the taxes you and businesses are paying now? Gone! What’s left is a simple, transparent, and fair consumption tax. Period. Fair to individuals and business. The FUD factor disappears. Business and individual investment decisions no longer include factoring in the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt about tax consequences because those decisions become tax neutral.
The motivation to shelter trillions of dollars offshore disappears. That money can stay right here and be put to work without any tax penalty. All by itself, the FairTax is an economic stimulus that doesn’t involve spending, borrowing, or increasing the national debt.
The FairTax is the means to fund the government whose time has come.
In yet another attempt to serve up his quid pro quo to Big Labor, Thomas Perez is President Obama’s choice for Labor Secretary. But what he is really after is a Labor Union Secretary. Foisting labor unions on the 89 percent of workers who are not union members and that don’t pay forced-union dues is his nirvana. It completes the circle of money laundering between Big Labor and Democratic campaign contributions.
Dear Gentle Reader,
Union bosses count on Barack Obama’s bureaucracy to serve as an organizing arm for Big Labor.
That’s why they know pro-forced unionism Thomas Perez is just the man for the job to be Barack Obama’s next Secretary of Labor.
A recent article in the Washington Free Beaconexposes yet another power grab Obama’s Department of Labor bureaucrats have implemented to grease the skids for forced unionization of American workers.
You see, when the DOL’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) conducts workplace inspections, workers may select one of their own to observe.
Now, for the first time ever, Obama’s OSHA has advised union bosses that they too can observe these inspections, even in nonunion workplaces.
Union operatives would get automatic access to company property and an opportunity to browbeat workers with union-boss propaganda.
Once the Obama Administration has let Big Labor in the door, union bosses could make frivolous accusations of safety violations to try to get the company to sell out its workers with a “card check” agreement.
Over the last four years, the Obama Administration has implemented one behind-the-scenes sweetheart deal after another to make it easier for union bosses to ensnare workers into forced-dues-paying ranks.
So there I was this morning, listening to Media Matters Radio on the Talk Left channel on XM radio. It’s a good place to go to see what’s in their head. They don’t hold back. Sort of like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. For today’s exercise, it didn’t take long to see that ‘there’s no there there.’
If it were not for FOX News, they wouldn’t have a show. Maybe I started listening in the middle of the demonize FOX hour. Not sure. But the subject was Behghazi and how Republicans are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Essentially agreeing with EVERYTHING President Obama has said on the subject, except one that garnered no mention.
Where they dwell, Obama isn’t soft on terrorism. In fact, on his first mention of the Benghazi attack, he said the word terrorism, albeit in a general sense, so, yes, Obama said that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack. That’s good enough for them. They berated FOX anchors and FOX contributors for asking why no help was sent, where Obama was on the night of the attack, what he did on the night of the attack, and why there was no photographic evidence that Obama was involved in the crisis management one would expect to see in such an instance? And the biggie, by wanting to know what Obama was doing on that night, Republicans are trying to attach blame for the attack to him.
They were fine with Sec. of Defense Panetta’s statement that he called the President and that he (Obama) was kept abreast of the situation. So for FOX to ask those questions was just stirring up a political attack. Sore losers and all that. As I recall, Panetta made that call late afternoon or early evening of the 11th. The fight at the consulate went on for over eight hours after that call was made. And as far as anyone outside The White House knows, that was the last communication to the President on the subject. You would think that the Progs might have figured that something isn’t right about that. Apparently not.
I think they were all fair questions to ask based on experience. President Obama seemed eager to let the world see him in the situation room while he was killing a Muslim, bin Laden. If he were at least as involved on September 11, 2012, why do you think he didn’t want to be seen trying to save four Americans? Could it be because he chose to do nothing instead of something? We all know that no help was sent. We know that people closest to them were told to stand down. Although we don’t yet know who, as in a name, gave those orders. We all, except for the Progs, want to know why? That’s not creating a political smear campaign. That’s just wanting to know the truth of what happened.
They also never got around to the testimony, under oath, that State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland didn’t want any reference to alQaeda, or terrorist attack, or earlier warnings, as was in the CIA’s initial report, to be in their final version, for political reasons like an upcoming election.
The early versions of the talking points, drafted entirely by the CIA, included references to the al Qaeda affiliate Ansar al-Sharia and to previous CIA warnings about terror threats in Benghazi. State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland expressed concerns about including those references in the talking points.
In one email, previously reported by ABC News, Nuland said that including the CIA warnings “could be used by Members [of Congress] to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why do we want to feed that? Concerned …”
Translation: for political reasons, delete all references of the truth of what actually happened.
Oddly enough (not really), the one thing that Obama said that the Progs on today’s show totally ignored was that he also said, for weeks after and to the United Nations, that the attacks were a result of a “demonstration” by a crowd that was pissed off because of a cartoon video mocking Islam. Somehow, they never got around to reconciling that lie. Why? Because the perpetration of that lie by Obama himself ties him to the attack and the subsequent cover-up. That’s why.
Somehow, the Progs on talk radio don’t see a need to find the truth of what happened, despite the fact that the American people and the relatives of four dead Americans were lied to for political considerations. Instead, the meme is Republicans are on a political witch hunt. Apparently, they are OK with the lies. Especially for political manipulation weeks before a Presidential election. “Whatever it takes” is their moral standard.
The media bought him the time he needed to dodge the truth until after the election by parroting The White House’s talking points. Now, they’re trying to save face by appearing to be inquisitive. That’s all a show too. The election is over and the cow is out of the barn.