April 19, 2006

The Dukes of Cary?

The Ogre received an email entitled, "The Dukes of Cary?" As most people who get piles of email every day, I thought, "Spam," got hungry and readied the "delete" key. But I missed the delete key and read the email by mistake.

I found a reference to a printed letter to the editor in the Raleigh News and Observer. If you've followed politics in NC at all and know the politics behind the current Duke Lacrosse team, you'll get a kick out of the letter.

Nice one, Mike!

Posted by: Ogre at 06:05 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Carnival of Liberty

Have you seen this week's Carnival of Liberty? It's good, as it usually is. Thanks for hosting, Left Brain Female.

The idea of a blog carnival is for one post to contain links to writings of many other people on a given subject (usually). The Carnival of Liberty provides weekly links to writings of wonderful and thoughtful people regarding, well, liberty. If you're interested in liberty, this is THE carnival you should be reading. Head on over and take a peek!

Posted by: Ogre at 05:03 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Fair Tax Blogburst

This week's Fair Tax Blogburst is a post by Terry in support of making taxes fair. I know there's a lot of people opposed to this idea, but that doesn't make them right. Taxes are, quite simply, evil:

In honor of everyone's favorite day of the year, Terry and I decided to grab his camcorder and catch up with some of the foot soldiers in the Fair Tax campaign. Of course, April 17th was D-Day since April 15th fell on a Saturday, so we ventured to the main U.S. Post Office for Birmingham, Alabama, camcorder in hand. If you are one of the prudent souls who actually plans ahead in their preparation, watching your fellow denizen is quite comical on Tax Day. A post office branch is no less similar to that of a colony of ants as they scurry about battling their fellow procrastinators.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:08 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

1 I like the idea of the consumption tax, I think it is interesting. I also agree lowering transaction costs for citizens, capturing lost taxes from the black market, eliminating a bureaucracy, and eliminating a needless service industry would all have positive effects on our economy.

However, I do question the effect this tax would have on US consumption. The tax would increase the incentive to work, to save, to invest, and to pay off debt, all good things. It would also increase investment in business, but there would also be a negative pressure on consumption. As the world's largest consumer, has any research been done to evaluate what the type of chain reaction we might cause?

Obviously it would be better for the economy if the government did not tax at all, and wherever it does tax it will cause the market to behave imperfectly. Quoted from fairtax.org by Alexander Hamilton, "If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption." There is an optimal consumption tax percentage that will maximize tax revenue for the government. But if the consumption tax is revenue neutral, my concern is that we have already crossed the natural "barrier" which Mr. Hamilton references and ultimately the consumption tax would unbalance the world economy.

Given legislators general ignorance of economics, I don't trust their judgment in considering the option of decreasing a consumption tax to increase consumer demand with an end result of increased revenue.

If at some point the government wakes up and balances the budget and begins to pay down some of our more than $8.3 trillion in debt then I think would be in a better position to experiment with the tax system.

I may be off base here so I welcome corrections.

Sincerely,
David Goebelt

Posted by: David Goebelt at April 19, 2006 06:10 PM (IKgKR)

2 Which is better for the economy -- having more money put into savings and investment or into consumption? I would propose that it is better to allow people to choose which.

I'm not sure we've crossed that line -- when we haven't even tried it. And I think one of the theories behind the fair tax is that the actual cost to people will be reduced. In other words, if it costs 50% less to MAKE a product, the reduction in price will be passed on to the consumer. So, if the consumer has to pay 10% more in sales tax, it's 10% of 50% of today's cost of the item. That sounds like it could result in MORE consumption, not less.

The reason I don't want to wait for the government to balance the budget is because they simply will not the way the current system works -- they will just keep taking more and more of my money, claiming they need it, and they will continue to punish those who work.

If a fair tax were implemented, hard work would once again be rewarded. I could choose to spend my money or save it -- and government would be more limited on their spending.

Posted by: Ogre at April 19, 2006 06:21 PM (/k+l4)

3 Mr. Ogre,

I wasn't very clear about the "line" to which I was referring. Hamilton was talking about a natural tax barrier beyond which increases in consumption tax would result in decreases in overall tax revenue. What I would be worried about is that a revenue neutral mark missed and bring in less tax revenue as a result of misunderstood market dynamics. I don't think the government needs more money (in fact they need less), but I don't think many people realize what a precarious position the federal government is in. If a consumption tax that is intended to be revenue neutral falls short, it will cause us to run an even larger annual deficit, because Washington doesn't quite have the hang of spending less than they bring in.

(Aside: I believe our nation is on the edge of a precipice due to the incredible spending habits of our national government. At best within the next 10-15 years we are in for a massive tax increase or at worst the bankruptcy of the federal government and the resulting collapse of our economy. In 10 years social security will be insolvent, which will add to the strain on the federal budget. Additionally, a large percentage of our federal debt is owned by baby-boomers. As they begin to spend their retirement, they will cash their treasury bonds. This will cause instability in the demand for federal debt, which has been financed in large part over the last several years by China and Great Britain, but is still owned mostly by US citizens. The federal debt is more like a car loan or credit card debt than a morgage. It is not debt that we can make gradual payments on, or just stop adding to annually if demand for federal debt diminishes. The vast majority of the debt is in short term securities that need new investors on a regular basis, which means if the market for federal debt falters, there will be immediate consequences. This huge debt creates an upward pressure on interest rates, which the Federal Reserve keeps in check by increasing the money supply. The increased money supply cause the dollar to falter and contributed to the increase in the cost of imported energy and goods. I know there are many other dynamics which have also contributed to the increased cost of oil, but the situation I described only exacerbates the problem. But, on a lighter note.)

Marginal analysis would tell us the government would move the consumptive tax percent, up and down to find the optimal point for their purposes. My question is if the tax burden is already to great to flip everything over to the consumption tax causing massive shifts in our economy. If I were a policy maker I would suggest a gradual shift towards a consumption tax over a 10 to 20 year period. In this way we wouldn't shock our economy and we would allow businesses to plan ahead. Think Alan Greenspan slow

There's another thing I may not be thinking about correctly, or maybe I need to do a little more research. The only way I can think that it would cost less to produce a certain product is that the supply of labor would increase, thereby lowering the cost of production a portion of which would be passed on in consumer savings.

You don't need to sell me on the idea though, I think it is feasible. Perhaps, though I need to do more reading on the subject to be completely comfortable.

Sincerely,
David Goebelt

(I guess I need to learn how to shorten my posts?)

Posted by: David Goebelt at April 19, 2006 07:30 PM (22i1h)

4 Hey, if you keep writing that much, you're going to have to get your own blog! (Just kidding)

I could agree with a gradual implementation -- but there would have to be strong controls to ensure that we didn't end up with taxing income AND sales -- that's my biggest fear.

The way it would cost less is because to make an item will cost substantially less. If you move towards a consumption tax, you remove all the intermediate taxes AND the income taxes. For example -- let's take the classic widget, sold at Joe's Widgets and Stuff.

That Widget has to be manufactured. The manufacturer first has to buy raw parts. The raw part costs 2 cents. The raw parts have to be shipped to the manufacturer -- there's taxes on the shipping, roads, trucks, and other items used to transport the item. The shipper also has to pay huge taxes on the wages of the truckers. Therefore, to GET the raw part to the manufacturer now costs 5 cents. For the shipper to make a profit, he's charging 8 cents.

Now the manufacturer gets the raw parts. He's got to pay taxes on the manufacturing facility and on the wages of the people who do the manufacturing. So while it costs about 8 cents for the part, he's got to pay 6 more cents in taxes to manufacture it. Then he's got to have some profit, so he sells it wholesale for 17 cents.

Next another shipper has to ship from the manufacturer to the store. Again, taxes on the labor (4 cents) plus profit (3 cents), so the store has to pay 24 cents for the item.

Now the store has to pay taxes on the income of it's employees (4 cents) and on any profit they make, so they're going to sell the item for 32 cents -- that's the price to the consumer.

The consumer will have to pay a sales tax on the item of about 7%, so they'll pay about 34 cents for the actual item.

Now, if there's no income tax, you can remove all the taxes from that process involving income -- the shipper, the manufacturer, and the seller. The end price to the consumer, if reduced by those tax amounts, will end up being 32 - 17 = 15 cents! Even with a national sales tax rate of 20% (enormous), that's still a grand total to the consumer of now only 18 cents -- half the initial cost.

Posted by: Ogre at April 20, 2006 12:52 PM (/k+l4)

5 So you are saying every tax we have would be rolling into a consumption tax. I thought it was just individual income tax, I didn't know it would also be replacing corporate taxes. That makes more sense

Posted by: David Goebelt at April 20, 2006 03:50 PM (IKgKR)

6 Yes, the idea is to replace nearly all taxes -- income taxes, both personal and business would be the primary targets.

Posted by: Ogre at April 20, 2006 05:40 PM (/k+l4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

NC House District 95

There has been a lot of discussion on this blog about the Republican primary race for North Carolina House district 95. The race is between incumbent Karen Ray and challenger Robert Brawley. I have been trying to investigate the race and provide information to any readers of this blog regarding the race.

As a note: this is the blog of a private citizen who is in no way affiliated with, nor working for, nor paid by any candidate or political party. This is simple freedom of speech by a citizen.

Recently I've been handed a few of the campaign brochures for both campaigns. Interestingly enough, both campaigns heavily emphasize that the candidate is a conservative. In fact, Karen Ray's ad says that Karen Ray is

Recognized as one of the General Assembly's most fiscally conservative representatives

Looking at the bills that Karen Ray sponsored her last year (51 of them), I just checked the ones that dealt with spending. Here's what I found:

H1794 Supported spending more than $10 TRILLION passenger trains.
H1724 Give $5,000,000 to Nascar Museum
H1718 Give $1,125,000 (new money) to Nursing Schools
H1717 Give $4,000,000 to "Arts"
H1614 Spend $50,000 on "Study committee" to study the Dept of Public Instruction
H662 Takes $1,019,336 FROM THE HIGHWAY FUNDS and authorizes their use TO CATCH TAX EVADERS
H575 Give $51,740,554 (new money) to Community Colleges
H574 Give $11,000,000 to Community Colleges as RESERVE funds
H573 Give $42,000,000 to Community Colleges for new health systems

What? That's called "one of the most fiscally conservative?" Holy spending spree, Batman. That's over $115 million dollars of MY tax money being spent on seriously questionable (to me) issues (AND a resolution supporting $10 TRILLION of my tax money on damn passenger trains! Hello?!? Can we join the 21st century now?)

The WORST one of the bunch is H662 -- taking money OUT OF the gas tax revenue, that is supposed to be used for BUILDING ROADS that we very sorely need, and using it to catch tax cheats! That's unconsitutional because money raised for one purpose is supposed to be used for that purpose.

I'm sorry, that is NOT fiscally conservative -- that's spending money like it's going out of style.

Posted by: Ogre at 02:09 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Charlotte Observer Opposes Fighting Crime

There has been much discussion in Charlotte recently, especially in the very socialist Charlotte Observer, about individuals and organizations hiring private security forces to protect their property because the police force of Charlotte is clearly unable to do the job. After featuring many stories, the Observer's editors have weighed in on why this is bad.

Now keep in mind that one of the primary purposes of government is to protect citizens. That's why government exists. However, that's not a valid reason to spend money, according to the City of Charlotte -- they're more concerned with spending money on building arenas, trains, and museums -- that IS their priority, whether they admit it or not.

So, when homeowners associations are spending money to hire private security forces to protect their property, clearly something is wrong -- what's wrong is that the police are not doing their job. But the Observer, in true socialist style, can't bring themselves to say that's the problem!

Instead, the Observer editors complain that since people are hiring private security that people are perceiving a problem where there may not be one! Yes, even if the facts prove that there IS more crime, the CRIME itself is not the problem, the problem is that people are SEEING the crime and pointing it out! Just ignore it and say nothing, and IT'S NOT A PROBLEM -- according to the Observer and those who run the city.

In addition, the Observer whines that it's not fair! Yes, that's right, if you work hard and earn money and buy things, it's simply not fair that you should be able to protect what you've earned! Seriously, that IS what they argue! They think that if there's going to be crime, it's only fair if EVERYONE is equally affected. Folks, I can't make up garbage like this.

And yes, they do complain that public streets should not be made private, too. You see, if someone wants to walk through your neighborhood and examine what's there to steal, even if they have no business in your neighborhood, they should be allowed to -- that's the Observer's position. I wonder if they would apply that policy to their newsrooms -- oh, guess not -- their offices are all guarded by security cards and armed guards.

Finally, the biggest complaint from the Observer is that people who are spending money on their own security because the city won't provide it might not support tax increases. That's right, the idea that cars are being stolen doesn't matter -- all that matters to the Observer is that the city get more tax revenue to spend on anything BUT crime control.

These editors are gone. They have no clue what the word "freedom" even means. I bet they're gone to that point that they don't know what a free election is. I know they don't like them. I know they hate capitalism and freedom in all forms -- but this attack on people who want to protect their OWN property is just amazing.

Posted by: Ogre at 01:01 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Gimmie More Money

That's the message to the North Carolina General Assembly from the North Carolina Community College System. They want more than $1 billion, an increase of THIRTY percent over last year's budget. Why?

Because we've never been fully funded

Community college officials said they would prefer to keep tuition affordable for working people, so the extra money needs to come from taxpayers.

The theory is that the students will get higher-paying jobs and generate more state tax revenue in the future to ease the burden on the taxpayers who now being asked to foot the bill.

If that theory is so true, can anyone tell me the last time that ANY education system EVER asked for less? At what point will there be a reduction in burdens on the taxpayer? In North Carolina? The morons who run this state can't even make do with cost of living increases -- they're asking for THIRTY PERCENT MORE. No, that's not a theory, that's a blatant lie.

The Community College system might have a purpose, but it's no longer being used to educate -- it's being used to redistribute wealth from those who work and earn money to those who do not. It's wrong -- but the Socialist Democrats running the state disagree. As long as you support Democrats in North Carolina, they will continue to spend and waste money taken from those who work.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:03 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

April 18, 2006

NC-13 Congressional Race

A week ago I sent a couple questions to the candidates for the 13th Congressional District in North Carolina (However, I have no email contact information for Charlie Southerland -- if anyone has that, please send it along). I've only received ONE reply so far from one candidate. We'll see if the others will bother to respond. The questions are:

Illegal immigration is something that many of my readers are concerned with. As a candidate to the United States House of Representatives, it is an issue that you will have to face.

1. Do you think that illegal immigration is a problem today? If so, how much of a problem?
2. What specific, concrete laws would you support or introduce regarding immigration?

Posted by: Ogre at 07:07 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

New Advertiser

Time, once again, to introduce a new advertiser here. This time it's AubreyJ.org. Here's the tagline from the site:

No matter what your political views might be... One thing is for certain. In these days of fast news and even faster life styles... We all seem to have forgotten those moments in history that so abruptly and tragically changed this beloved Country of ours............ 911- How soon we forget......

I'm just a standard old Republican who cares. It’s not by my fault. Have you seen the Democratic Party lately?

There's also commentary on other current events, G.W. Bush, and the weather in Texas. Head on over and take a look!

Posted by: Ogre at 05:07 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Jobs -- For The Children(TM)

Remember, later this year, as across North Carolina you are absolutely inundated with calls for increased spending, increased taxes, more funding, and bond package support that's For The Children (TM) and government-run "education."

Since the 1997-98 school year:

Cartaret County lost 300 students through decreased enrollment -- but gained 117 new employees.

Craven County lost 278 students -- yet gained 142 new employees.

Rutherford County lost 115 students and gained 146 new employees.

In a total of 36 of North Carolina's school districts, there was a reduction of nearly 10,000 students -- and an increase of 800 new "administration" and other employees. Across the North Carolina system, enrollment is up 11% while the number of employees has increased 19% -- to a tune of over $1,000,000,000.00 in the last TWO years.

Remember that the next time an elected official tells you that ANY increase in taxes or education funding is "For The Children" or even for educating the children -- they're just outright lying.

Posted by: Ogre at 03:05 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Israel at WAR

About 100 countries recognize Palestine as a state.

Hamas is the ruling party in this "state" of Palestine.

Iran is giving millions of dollars to Hamas.

Islamic Jihad attacked Israel with the latest bombing in Israel.

Hamas supports Islamic Jihad and the actual bombing carried out.

Can someone please explain to me how this is not a war? It seems like some in Israel are starting to get it. It's time for the world to realize that one country has attacked another. They're doing it the support (financial and otherwise) of another country. So there's at least two countries now in an active war against a third. Hey, United Nations, isn't this your reason for living?

Israel, I think you're on your own here. It's time to choose defense or death.

Posted by: Ogre at 12:48 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Charlotte Needs More Taxes?

Apparently so. Despite being one of the highest taxed areas in the entire southeast, a large "coalition" of government and those on the government dole are seeking even higher taxes -- this time on car rentals.

They are trying to get the car rental tax increased to 14 or 15%. They claim it will somehow drive tourism, but that shows the utter insanity of such groups who honestly appear to believe that if you charge people MORE money, they will come visit you.

What's worse is the "partnership" group that's forming here. Wachovia, a HUGE government supporter because they get enormous piles of government cash, stands to gain the most from the deal -- they will get more buildings for business expansion and "residential" units -- whatever that means. They will also get huge tax write-offs that won't appear as cash giveaways, but actually are.

BankAmerica will also get cash benefits in the form of tax credits. City governmental leaders will get more money to spend, so they're all on board. The city is also trying to literally bribe two car-rental companies to support the tax increase by giving them free advertising funds and seats on local government boards.

If you've never read Atlas Shrugged, now is a good time. When businesses and government are working together arguing over who gets to spend more of the workers' money, things are really bad. There's almost no opposition to this taking of money from those who work -- the only discussion is who gets to spend more of the cash, once taken.

State Representative John Rhodes and State Senator Robert Pittinger are both fighting this -- but as you can see, there are substantial forces aligned against them and the taxpayer.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:09 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

April 17, 2006

On Immigration...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.

Those are the words of Teddy Roosevelt, from 1907.

I agree.

Posted by: Ogre at 07:11 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Italy's Mohamed Cartoon

A publication in Italy has outraged Muslims. Well, anything that "outrages" them is probably a good thing -- after all, they want me dead, so I don't really care if they get annoyed at the same time -- what are they going to do, kill me?

Searching around, I found that there have been numerous apologies issued to any who have been offended. That's a lot more than Christians get, eh?

Searching even more, I did finally find the cartoon at a blog nicely named "Anti-Dhimmi." Thing is -- there's not even a drawing of Mo! They're now offended at cartoons that even TALK ABOUT Mo.

Seriously, go take a peek. There is no attempt at drawing the most sacred pedophile -- just two people talking about him, referring to Dante's writings. I wonder when the Italian embassy will start burning.

Posted by: Ogre at 06:49 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Freedom of Association?

I recently received a comment on a post of mine about the John William Pope Civitas Institute. The comment was by someone identifying themselves at "tatertot" with no listed blog or website. The comment is rather disturbing on a couple levels. First, they questioned:

Why tell people to get involved in politics?

Most people would prefer to go about their lives, work hard, earn their money, and take care of their families. However, those who want to take that hard-earned money ARE active in politics. Those who do want to tell you what to do ARE the ones on the left who are protesting and not working, and trying to take things away from you.

So people need to be encouraged to be more active because if we can get a few more people who want to be left alone running government, many more people would actually GET left alone, and freedom would increase greatly.

The second question was much worse:

It's a free country. If people don't want to get involved they shouldn't.

This is the type of "freedom" that exists in Marxist and socialist countries -- you have the right to be free as long as you do what you're told. What sort of freedom exists if people cannot suggest anything? What kind of freedom do you have when you are not supposed to question government?

In this person's view of a "free" country, you should not have the freedom to suggest ideas to anyone. That's not freedom, tatortot, that's totalitarianism.

Posted by: Ogre at 06:01 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Guard our Borders!

A Welfare State With Illegal Immigration Offers Businesses a Better Deal Than Slavery

by Darnell MaGavock at Indpendent Conservative

Let me start by saying I don’t endorse either slavery or illegal immigration. But looking at things from the economic standpoint of a company that hires illegals today versus the use of slave labor in the 18th and 19th centuries, illegal immigration offers companies a better deal than any slave owner ever had. The reason is the modern day welfare state that is known as America.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:02 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Government is not...

A great commentary by John Hood that helps to explain government in terms that liberals and Democrats simply cannot comprehend.

Government is not a charity...It is coercive, not charitable.

In a true charitable situation, there is a giver and a receiver. When the giver voluntarily gives, they are aware of the donation and can see the immediate results. The giver can decide for themselves if their money, which they actually worked to receive, should be given to whom, and for what purposes.

The receiver in a truly charitable situation, receives the money that they know was earned. They may see the giver and know that the giver honestly believes in the receiver. There is often a quite real relationship that is formed between the giver and the receiver -- both benefit.

In many cases, the giver may never see the receiver -- an anonymous donation is often one of the best, as both parties still benefit without additional complications.

However, when this is extended to government, all benefits of the charitable situation disappear. The giver has no choice. The giver is required to "donate" their money, or they will be placed in jail. That's the power government has. The giver has no say over who or what will receive the "donation." If large amounts of waste are present in the system, again, the giver has no way to control that situation.

In addition, the giver receives no relationship with the receiver. The giver does not know who will receive the money, nor how much they will actually receive. The giver cannot determine not only if their hard-earned money will be used for causes they believe in; but also the amount that will be used.

The receiver in a government "charity" situation also does not benefit. They do not know who the giver is. They often are faced with bureaucratic hurdles that make getting the "donation" harder. And they are told by those who distribute the wealth that these people "deserve" the money.

The receiver does not receive the knowledge that someone actually believes in them or their ideas, because they see that others are also receiving the exact same amount, or the exact same benefits, no matter their own, or others', personal actions.

When government takes from one person, by force, and gives to another, both parties are worse off. Government is literally incapable of charity -- no matter if it's for "the children(TM), arts, "the poor," or any other reason -- so stop trying to claim they are.

Posted by: Ogre at 03:04 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Marchers want Free Stuff

I would say that one of the worst side effects of having so much leisure time, so many people who work hard, and so many leeches who suck at the teat of the government; is the number of people who have time to show up at "marches" for free crap because they don't have to work for a living.

A number of people have noted that in response to the criminal invaders (formerly known as illegal immigrants) that Americans should protest. The problem is that the Americans who are supporting these criminals have to WORK to support them and don't have time to take off work to protest.

But, for another example, take the potential thieves who marched on the governor's mansion recently. They want $550,000 in cash. What for? Well, that doesn't really matter, does it? The bottom line is that they want the working people to work harder so they can have $550,000 to spend as they please.

Why don't they work and earn that money? There were supposedly 150 people who marched -- that's about $3,700 each. In a truly free society, they'd have two options -- have all 150 people work and earn that money, then they could do whatever they like with it -- or they could try and convince others to GIVE it to them willingly. If they've got a cause that companies and people support, they'd quite easily get that money.

But no, in this era of socialist government, especially in Democrat-run North Carolina, they choose a third option -- "protest," claim there's a crisis, and then DEMAND that hardworking citizens give them the money because they want it and don't want to work for it.

Oh, how I yearn for freedom.

Posted by: Ogre at 01:05 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Party Primaries

What's the purpose of a political party? And what's the purpose of primary elections for political parties?

In North Carolina, the political climate is quite interesting right now. For those who don't know, the state has been run completely by Democrats basically since reconstruction. The State Senate has NEVER been run by Republicans. The State House and governor's mansion have only been run by Republicans about twice. Therefore, all the rules have been made by Democrats.

These rules include serious gerrymandering of the districts to ensure that Republicans will have great difficulty ever gaining a majority in either house. These rules also ensure there is little competition from others, not allowing any other political parties, other than Republican or Democrat. There's also rules so that judges cannot run by party affiliation (because too many Republicans were winning judges seats).

This has made things very difficult for those who support any ideas other than those supported by Democrats, who continue their standard tactic: raise taxes every single year, and spend enormous piles of money every single year (with massive increases every year).

In the last couple years, the Republican Party has changed. Basically, half of the party has decided they want to get elected, so they go along with and support Democrats. I'm not completely sure why these people don't just change their party affiliation to Democrat (and a couple have), other than that they won't get elected in some districts without an (R) after their name.

The other half has decided that they don't want to be Democrats and instead would like to be different. They'd like to support conservative ideas instead of the liberal ones Democrats support. And this has caused major problems in the Republican Party.

You can see this effect in the various primary races across the state. There are a large number of challengers in various districts for state house and senate races where the theme seems to be -- "Do you support Richard Morgan?"

So, who should decide the outcome here? Should the currently elected Republicans decide who and how the Republican Party should proceed? Or should the voters decide? In my view, that's what the primary elections are for -- so that the members of the political party can decide which people they want to represent them, and how the party will proceed.

Much may be determined after the primary election this year. Leaders of the Republican Party are working against current Republican elected officials, trying to unseat them for working against the party -- but the end result will be who shows up and votes on May 2nd.

Many of the Democrat-supporter incumbents are likely to win -- but some might fall to more conservative challengers. It may be a long process over a number of years before some fall -- or they might not fall, with most voters deciding that they'd rather have people who bring them presents back from Raleigh, rather than statesmen.

Unfortunately, no matter the results, the Democrats are highly likely to remain in power -- gerrymandering is a very powerful tool. So it's likely that the North Carolina government will continue down it's long, painful path towards socialism. The only real question is will they go very fast, with elected Republicans helping Democrats, or will they go slower, with conservatives trying to slow the Democrats down the road?

After all, no other political parties are legal in North Carolina, so your only other option -- the one that the majority seem to be taking -- is just to ignore them all and try and get on with your life, despite them.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:47 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

April 16, 2006

Happy Easter!

That is all for today.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:34 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

1 Easter blessings to you. I'll be offline until late this evening.

Posted by: Always On Watch at April 16, 2006 01:10 PM (wZLWV)

2 Happy Easter!

Posted by: Quality Weenie at April 16, 2006 05:05 PM (BksWB)

3 Happy Easter, to you and your family!

Posted by: William Teach at April 17, 2006 12:13 AM (doAuV)

4 Thank you all.

Posted by: Ogre at April 17, 2006 01:23 AM (2eMZT)

5 Thank you all very much.

Posted by: Ogre at April 17, 2006 01:28 AM (2eMZT)

6 A little late. Happy Easter. Hope you enjoyed the easter eggs and bunnies. ;-)

Posted by: vw bug at April 18, 2006 01:17 PM (3W+U2)

7 mmMMMmmm...fried rabbit...

Posted by: Ogre at April 18, 2006 01:20 PM (/k+l4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 15, 2006

NC House Democrats to Meet

The meeting date is set: April 18. That's when those in the North Carolina Legislature who have a "D" after their name will meet. There's 63 registered Democrats in the North Carolina House, and at least 5 other Democrats who are registered as Republicans (there's no word yet on whether those legislators have been invited).

The meeting is allegedly for anyone to talk about anything they want regarding the upcoming legislative session. Of course, the real purpose is to discuss Jim Black. The caucus meeting cannot actually DO anything about Jim Black -- only the entire House can vote to remove him.

However, Jim Black is currently under investigation by various agencies. The State Board of Elections (D) has agreed that he has broken campaign finance law and have referred his case to the District Attorney (D) for prosecution. He is also under investigation by a federal grand jury. Oh, and other county prosecutors are looking into other violations of lobbying law violations.

Since the allegations are so serious, shouldn't he be arrested and jailed? That's what people continue to say about the alleged "Duke lacrosse Rape case" -- and there's almost NO evidence in that case, but plenty of evidence in Jim Black's case.

Black continues to absolutely refuse to resign. Heck, he's even running for election this year. I don't think he will resign at any point in time. Others assume it will be a matter of time, but I think he will stay until he's physically removed from his office.

The Democrats in the General Assembly may attempt to remove him, but they're going to have to get a vote to the floor -- and Jim Black controls all votes that get sent to the floor, so it's going to have to be nearly all of the 68 63 Democrats united to remove him -- and that will make Democrats look bad. I think secretly the Democrats hope he just loses the election in November.

But, keep watching -- who knows what the next move will be of a megalomaniac.

Posted by: Ogre at 01:05 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.1663 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.1597 seconds, 61 records returned.
Page size 65 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.