By Ron Dupuis
During any political campaign, the underdog always wants to debate the perceived leader. The leader never wants to debate the underdog. The reasons are clear. The underdog has nothing to lose; the leader has nothing to gain.
With his sweep of 10 primary wins in a row, it is clear to many of us, without question, that Barrack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for the office of president of the United States. His "Kennedy" style message is resonating well with the left leaning socialist currently controlling their party. Conversely, Hillary's message of "experience" seems to be falling on deaf ears.
I spoke with a few Obama supporters this week and they all seemed to echo the same concerns. Hillary's eight years as first lady should not be deemed as "experience." In fact, some people view her health care policy that was touted, and defeated, during her husband's first term as president, was less of an administration "policy" and more of a strategy to attain position and power by an interfering, uncontrollable shrew. Some political activist even feel that Hillary's election to the Senate was more of a result of her husband's popularity and that her move from the political left to the political center was a deliberate calculation in order to be more acceptable to the general public during this current run for the White House.
In the coming months Hillary Clinton will realize that she has lost. That is, if she has not done so already. She will continue to badger Obama into a debate, which, if he is smart, he will refuse. She will also begin some political strong arming of the delegates who are already committed, the so called "Super delegates that are not committed, anyone else that would further her quest if by some strange occurrence this entire process ends up at a brokered convention.
When all is said and done, the fact is that Hillary is not a very well liked person, even among her own. The prize is lost and Barack Obama is the winner.
On a more personal note: Last week I met three of the most professional police officers I have encountered in more than 25 years — Chief Jeremy Sullivan, Sergeant Dave Hobbs, and Patrolman Tim Hamlin of the Hampton Police Department.
Years ago, I, your humble columnist, worked as a police officer. I was wounded in the line of duty while arresting an armed robber. The injury was serious enough to medically retire. I went to Chief Sullivan, told him the story and requested a ride along in order to compare police works and officers of today as compared to over a quarter of a century ago. The chief was more than accommodating. There will be a full account of my adventures while observing the Hampton Police Department keeping its citizens safe and sound in an upcoming column. For now, thank you Chief Sullivan, thank you Sergeant Hobbs, and thank you Patrolman Tim Hamlin. You and your fellow officers are all heroes in my book.
On an even more personal note: A few month ago the Dupuis family complained one evening that whenever we have "Chinese food night" we always order it out. "How come we never go to a restaurant" was the question? I told them it was "my humble opinion" that Chinese food should be eaten from boxes at home, in front of a roaring fire, or, at the very least, a TV. They disagreed vehemently. In order to prove my point next month the Dupuis family will be traveling to Beijing, China. We will be visiting the Great Wall, Tiananmen Square, and the Ming Tombs, to name a few. We will also be eating in restaurants. Stay tuned.
2.22.2008
2.17.2008
"Lynch" Mob
By Dave Buhlman
In one of the Sunday New Hampshire Union Leader's editorials on February 17, the idea of taxing cigars at 60 percent was described. Cigars in New Hampshire are not taxed now and even Massachusetts "only" puts a 30 percent tax on cigars. The owner of the Two Guys Smoke Shop in Salem said that this tax would cause him to close down. This owner left Massachusetts a few years ago when that state levied its first tax on cigars. He "voted with his feet" and escaped to the relative freedom of New Hampshire but, with the Democrats now in charge of the state, Massachusetts has caught up with him. If this tax passes, there will be nowhere for him to run.
Following are points from the New Hampshire State Republican Party on the budget crisis created by Democrats overspending
Today Gov. Lynch called for a hiring and spending freeze. This is too little, too late. The appropriate time to show fiscal restraint was when he was raising spending by 17.5%.
Blame for the budget crisis the state is currently facing falls squarely on Governor Lynch's shoulders. He created the deficit through his own irresponsible spending hikes and by using rosy revenue projections while ignoring warnings of an economic downturn.
While Gov. Lynch claims that we’re facing a $50 million dollar deficit, but that’s only for this year. Lynch’s own department heads predict a much larger shortfall. Lynch needs to be more honest with taxpayers and give us a full picture of this looming crisis.
From what I heard, the Democrats taking over the state legislature in 2006 was based on a negative reaction to President Bush's policies, especially the War in Iraq. Many who voted straight-ticket Democrat in Novemebr 2006 voted for Bush in 2004. It's a shame they had to shoot themselves in the foot twice.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic. He and his wife, both Boston natives, voted with their feet about ten years ago.
In one of the Sunday New Hampshire Union Leader's editorials on February 17, the idea of taxing cigars at 60 percent was described. Cigars in New Hampshire are not taxed now and even Massachusetts "only" puts a 30 percent tax on cigars. The owner of the Two Guys Smoke Shop in Salem said that this tax would cause him to close down. This owner left Massachusetts a few years ago when that state levied its first tax on cigars. He "voted with his feet" and escaped to the relative freedom of New Hampshire but, with the Democrats now in charge of the state, Massachusetts has caught up with him. If this tax passes, there will be nowhere for him to run.
Following are points from the New Hampshire State Republican Party on the budget crisis created by Democrats overspending
Today Gov. Lynch called for a hiring and spending freeze. This is too little, too late. The appropriate time to show fiscal restraint was when he was raising spending by 17.5%.
Blame for the budget crisis the state is currently facing falls squarely on Governor Lynch's shoulders. He created the deficit through his own irresponsible spending hikes and by using rosy revenue projections while ignoring warnings of an economic downturn.
While Gov. Lynch claims that we’re facing a $50 million dollar deficit, but that’s only for this year. Lynch’s own department heads predict a much larger shortfall. Lynch needs to be more honest with taxpayers and give us a full picture of this looming crisis.
From what I heard, the Democrats taking over the state legislature in 2006 was based on a negative reaction to President Bush's policies, especially the War in Iraq. Many who voted straight-ticket Democrat in Novemebr 2006 voted for Bush in 2004. It's a shame they had to shoot themselves in the foot twice.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic. He and his wife, both Boston natives, voted with their feet about ten years ago.
2.15.2008
The man on the street
Hampton Union 02-15-08
By Ron Dupuis
With Barack Obama's sweeping victory last Tuesday, and given the propensity of Democrats to tell us how terrible life in America is, I, your humble columnist, felt it was time to get the "man on the street" opinion.
With a wide array of friends and acquaintances in a broad spectrum of socio and economic status, I got on the phone and questioned a lot of them on a broad range of beliefs and concerns.
June, a successful New Hampshire real estate agent on the economy:
"My business is down and I feel it's the fault of the lending institutions who have deceived the public into believing that a three-year or five-year adjustable rate mortgage is better than a fixed long-term rate. Unscrupulous lenders convince people that all they are trying to do is help a borrower achieve the "American dream" of owning a home. By lending money at below prime for a short period of time they give the borrower a false sense of accomplishment and security. They fail to emphasize that the interest rate, when refinancing is necessary, most time is way above the going fixed rates, not to mention new closing cost and expenses.
"The Democrats are right. The economy, especially the real estate market, is bad right now. The solution is not only a possible bail out for these lending institutions and their victims but also a long, hard look at how we got into this situation."
Carl, retired Massachusetts business man, again, on the economy:
"I don't feel that things are as bad as the Democrats would like us to believe. I worked all my life and now I'm enjoying retirement. I have a pension, health insurance, and despite what the Dems say, Social Security still sends me a check every month. My feeling is that the party of Obama and the Clintons are trying to create a need for a "Nanny" government. They want to take care of us because we are, in their eyes, too dumb to do it ourselves.
Mike, 45-year-old mid-level manager on health insurance:
"I have a wife and two children, a good job with a future, and I share the cost of health insurance with my employer. I always felt my share was too high until my daughter needed care for a life-threatening illness. Four hospitals and a slew of specialists later, she recovered and is now doing fine. When I look back, I do wonder what people without health insurance would have done. I don't feel a blanket government-run universal health policy is the answer, but instead some sort of adjustment in the rates in order for smaller privately owned businesses to afford to offer shared cost with employees."
Ellen, homemaker, mother of three, and part-time retail worker, on the Democratic Party:
"Things are OK for us right now. Not great, not so bad we need help, just OK. We're paying our bills, we're providing for the children, and we even manage to put a few dollars in the bank every month. I work because the children are in school all day and it provides us with that little extra. I'm a Democrat and will vote as such, however I wish my party would stop telling me how bad things are. That sort of talk doesn't help the economy or, for that matter, people's attitude."
There you have it. A sampling of concerns from people of various social and economic back grounds. The intertwining theme is that things are not as bad as Obama and Clinton would have you believe. Sadly, they will continue, as they have for years, to tell you how bad off you are and how much you need their "Nanny" style of government.
Of course this is just "In My Humble Opinion."
By Ron Dupuis
With Barack Obama's sweeping victory last Tuesday, and given the propensity of Democrats to tell us how terrible life in America is, I, your humble columnist, felt it was time to get the "man on the street" opinion.
With a wide array of friends and acquaintances in a broad spectrum of socio and economic status, I got on the phone and questioned a lot of them on a broad range of beliefs and concerns.
June, a successful New Hampshire real estate agent on the economy:
"My business is down and I feel it's the fault of the lending institutions who have deceived the public into believing that a three-year or five-year adjustable rate mortgage is better than a fixed long-term rate. Unscrupulous lenders convince people that all they are trying to do is help a borrower achieve the "American dream" of owning a home. By lending money at below prime for a short period of time they give the borrower a false sense of accomplishment and security. They fail to emphasize that the interest rate, when refinancing is necessary, most time is way above the going fixed rates, not to mention new closing cost and expenses.
"The Democrats are right. The economy, especially the real estate market, is bad right now. The solution is not only a possible bail out for these lending institutions and their victims but also a long, hard look at how we got into this situation."
Carl, retired Massachusetts business man, again, on the economy:
"I don't feel that things are as bad as the Democrats would like us to believe. I worked all my life and now I'm enjoying retirement. I have a pension, health insurance, and despite what the Dems say, Social Security still sends me a check every month. My feeling is that the party of Obama and the Clintons are trying to create a need for a "Nanny" government. They want to take care of us because we are, in their eyes, too dumb to do it ourselves.
Mike, 45-year-old mid-level manager on health insurance:
"I have a wife and two children, a good job with a future, and I share the cost of health insurance with my employer. I always felt my share was too high until my daughter needed care for a life-threatening illness. Four hospitals and a slew of specialists later, she recovered and is now doing fine. When I look back, I do wonder what people without health insurance would have done. I don't feel a blanket government-run universal health policy is the answer, but instead some sort of adjustment in the rates in order for smaller privately owned businesses to afford to offer shared cost with employees."
Ellen, homemaker, mother of three, and part-time retail worker, on the Democratic Party:
"Things are OK for us right now. Not great, not so bad we need help, just OK. We're paying our bills, we're providing for the children, and we even manage to put a few dollars in the bank every month. I work because the children are in school all day and it provides us with that little extra. I'm a Democrat and will vote as such, however I wish my party would stop telling me how bad things are. That sort of talk doesn't help the economy or, for that matter, people's attitude."
There you have it. A sampling of concerns from people of various social and economic back grounds. The intertwining theme is that things are not as bad as Obama and Clinton would have you believe. Sadly, they will continue, as they have for years, to tell you how bad off you are and how much you need their "Nanny" style of government.
Of course this is just "In My Humble Opinion."
2.11.2008
Hey Feds: Hit the Road
By Dave Buhlman
There is a better way to fund the much needed bridge and roadway repairs in our state.
The federal government now taxes gas and diesel fuels at about eighteen cents per gallon. The State of New Hampshire, and the other forty-nine states, collects this tax money and sends it to the federal government. The federal government then sends some of this money back to the states to support transportation improvements, with congressmen and senators from the various states fighting over this revenue pie. Sometimes a state gets more than it put in, sometimes less, depending in part on the influence of a state's delegation. This is an inefficient system that can be greatly improved.
It would be sensible, and increase the number of vital transportation improvements, if the federal government greatly reduced its tax on gas and diesel. After all, the interstate highway system is complete, so the reduced federal government role in transportation ought to mirror this fact. The state Department of Transportation can design all improvements without any guidance from federal agencies. With many years of experience, they well know how to design and build roadways and bridges.
There was a discussion in Washington, DC a few years ago about reducing the federal tax to four cents per gallon. Of course, given Washington's penchant for hanging onto power, this plan did not go far. But if the federal government did undertake this reduction, this would provide the room for the states to raise their fuel taxes without increases to consumers at the pump. With the millions in additional dollars New Hampshire would realize, dollars that would stay in this state, we could undertake roadway and bridge improvements without having to beg the federal government for the funds. Then there is the great bonus of eliminating the intrusions from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and US Army Corps of Engineers, two of the cumbersome strings attached to federal transportation money. The state's Department of Environmental Services is perfectly capable of monitoring environmental impacts of projects without any guidance from federal bureaucracies.
New Hampshire's tax on gas and diesel is also eighteen cents per gallon. With a reduction in the federal tax from eighteen to four cents, New Hampshire could increase its tax by the difference of fourteen cents per gallon without causing any increase at the pump. We could also roll back the recent increases in tolls, and perhaps, even reduce the tolls. Taxpayers need a break, especially these days.
State departments of transportation can coordinate the designs at the state borders, as is done anyway, and, for the few larger projects of importance to several states, cooperation between the states can be worked out.
It's time to get the federal government out of the transportation business in New Hampshire so we can undertake our roadway and bridge improvements faster and less expensively to the great benefit of our state.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic.
There is a better way to fund the much needed bridge and roadway repairs in our state.
The federal government now taxes gas and diesel fuels at about eighteen cents per gallon. The State of New Hampshire, and the other forty-nine states, collects this tax money and sends it to the federal government. The federal government then sends some of this money back to the states to support transportation improvements, with congressmen and senators from the various states fighting over this revenue pie. Sometimes a state gets more than it put in, sometimes less, depending in part on the influence of a state's delegation. This is an inefficient system that can be greatly improved.
It would be sensible, and increase the number of vital transportation improvements, if the federal government greatly reduced its tax on gas and diesel. After all, the interstate highway system is complete, so the reduced federal government role in transportation ought to mirror this fact. The state Department of Transportation can design all improvements without any guidance from federal agencies. With many years of experience, they well know how to design and build roadways and bridges.
There was a discussion in Washington, DC a few years ago about reducing the federal tax to four cents per gallon. Of course, given Washington's penchant for hanging onto power, this plan did not go far. But if the federal government did undertake this reduction, this would provide the room for the states to raise their fuel taxes without increases to consumers at the pump. With the millions in additional dollars New Hampshire would realize, dollars that would stay in this state, we could undertake roadway and bridge improvements without having to beg the federal government for the funds. Then there is the great bonus of eliminating the intrusions from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and US Army Corps of Engineers, two of the cumbersome strings attached to federal transportation money. The state's Department of Environmental Services is perfectly capable of monitoring environmental impacts of projects without any guidance from federal bureaucracies.
New Hampshire's tax on gas and diesel is also eighteen cents per gallon. With a reduction in the federal tax from eighteen to four cents, New Hampshire could increase its tax by the difference of fourteen cents per gallon without causing any increase at the pump. We could also roll back the recent increases in tolls, and perhaps, even reduce the tolls. Taxpayers need a break, especially these days.
State departments of transportation can coordinate the designs at the state borders, as is done anyway, and, for the few larger projects of importance to several states, cooperation between the states can be worked out.
It's time to get the federal government out of the transportation business in New Hampshire so we can undertake our roadway and bridge improvements faster and less expensively to the great benefit of our state.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic.
2.10.2008
Somebody is ripping off Americans
By Ron Dupuis
Hampton Union 02-08-08
Somebody is ripping us off and many people feel it may not be only the Arab oil cartel. Speaking with an old friend the other day was an eye-opening experience as to how the general public feels about rising energy cost. My friend is a mid-level manufacturing executive who has traveled from New Hampshire to his job in Massachusetts for the last 15 years. He owns his home with a mortgage, has three children, and a wife who works part time. My guess would be that his income is around a hundred thousand a year.
"You know me," he started with a frustration in his voice that was unmistakable. "I work hard, I don't have many bad habits, I provide for my family." "Why is everyone trying to rip me off?"
"I know what you mean," I said sympathetically.
"Look at this." "I drive a mid-size car and it will take more than $40 of gas to fill it up." "Forty dollars!" "And you might as well forget about home heating oil." "If you don't have a wood stove or fire place, you're simply out of luck."
"I used to think it was the Arab oil cartel getting even for our involvement in the Mideast." "Now I'm not so sure."
"Oil company profits are up" I injected.
"Up" he shouted with that unmistakable frustration returning. "They're not just up," he said, "they're obscene."
My friend explained to me that he read where five CEOs testified before Congress the other day and tried to justify the $25 billion they made in profits ending in the third quarter of last year. Their reasoning was the combined $25 billion was based on revenues and that figure represents only a 7 percent to 10 percent profit margin. Not out of line for a major corporation. They also blamed high crude prices, hurricanes in the gulf that shut refineries for long periods, and high demand for gas during the summer months.
"So, in essence, the CEOs of five of the largest companies in the world are blaming the Arabs, the weather and our own illogical propensity for driving to work." "Give me a break."
"What do you think we should do," I asked. "What's the answer?"
He told me he was unsure.
"How about drilling in Alaska," I suggested? "Try to lessen our dependence of foreign crude imports."
"I don't feel that's the answer," he said. "Any oil reserves found in Alaska would most likely be a drop in the bucket compared to our daily needs in this country."
"Tax them more" I asked?
He said the "windfall profit act" the government tried in the '70s did not seem to produce the desired results either.
"All it seemed to accomplish is less re-investment in research by the oil companies. You know me, Ron. I'm a good Republican who believes in the free enterprise system, the open free market, less government and less regulation, however there comes a time when enough is enough. When people are being gouged by big corporations, government must intervene."
"I know this much" he continued. "This is an election year and I'm speaking out. I'm writing letters to newspapers, politicians and oil companies. I'm telling them I'm fed up because somebody is ripping me off and that I want them not only to find out who it is, I want them to see that it stops immediately."
"Do you think that will help," I asked?
"I don't know, however it will give me a sense of relief from the frustration that I feel."
My friend is typical of the emotions most Americans feel today. Not only when they are at the gas pumps, but when they also try to get past the everyday trials and tribulations of living in this great country.
Of course, this is just "In My Humble Opinion."
Ron Dupuis is a longtime New Hampshire resident, a former state representative and a freelance writer. His e-mail is drcdupuis@comcast.net. His Web site may be viewed at www.imho-nh.blogspot.com
Hampton Union 02-08-08
Somebody is ripping us off and many people feel it may not be only the Arab oil cartel. Speaking with an old friend the other day was an eye-opening experience as to how the general public feels about rising energy cost. My friend is a mid-level manufacturing executive who has traveled from New Hampshire to his job in Massachusetts for the last 15 years. He owns his home with a mortgage, has three children, and a wife who works part time. My guess would be that his income is around a hundred thousand a year.
"You know me," he started with a frustration in his voice that was unmistakable. "I work hard, I don't have many bad habits, I provide for my family." "Why is everyone trying to rip me off?"
"I know what you mean," I said sympathetically.
"Look at this." "I drive a mid-size car and it will take more than $40 of gas to fill it up." "Forty dollars!" "And you might as well forget about home heating oil." "If you don't have a wood stove or fire place, you're simply out of luck."
"I used to think it was the Arab oil cartel getting even for our involvement in the Mideast." "Now I'm not so sure."
"Oil company profits are up" I injected.
"Up" he shouted with that unmistakable frustration returning. "They're not just up," he said, "they're obscene."
My friend explained to me that he read where five CEOs testified before Congress the other day and tried to justify the $25 billion they made in profits ending in the third quarter of last year. Their reasoning was the combined $25 billion was based on revenues and that figure represents only a 7 percent to 10 percent profit margin. Not out of line for a major corporation. They also blamed high crude prices, hurricanes in the gulf that shut refineries for long periods, and high demand for gas during the summer months.
"So, in essence, the CEOs of five of the largest companies in the world are blaming the Arabs, the weather and our own illogical propensity for driving to work." "Give me a break."
"What do you think we should do," I asked. "What's the answer?"
He told me he was unsure.
"How about drilling in Alaska," I suggested? "Try to lessen our dependence of foreign crude imports."
"I don't feel that's the answer," he said. "Any oil reserves found in Alaska would most likely be a drop in the bucket compared to our daily needs in this country."
"Tax them more" I asked?
He said the "windfall profit act" the government tried in the '70s did not seem to produce the desired results either.
"All it seemed to accomplish is less re-investment in research by the oil companies. You know me, Ron. I'm a good Republican who believes in the free enterprise system, the open free market, less government and less regulation, however there comes a time when enough is enough. When people are being gouged by big corporations, government must intervene."
"I know this much" he continued. "This is an election year and I'm speaking out. I'm writing letters to newspapers, politicians and oil companies. I'm telling them I'm fed up because somebody is ripping me off and that I want them not only to find out who it is, I want them to see that it stops immediately."
"Do you think that will help," I asked?
"I don't know, however it will give me a sense of relief from the frustration that I feel."
My friend is typical of the emotions most Americans feel today. Not only when they are at the gas pumps, but when they also try to get past the everyday trials and tribulations of living in this great country.
Of course, this is just "In My Humble Opinion."
Ron Dupuis is a longtime New Hampshire resident, a former state representative and a freelance writer. His e-mail is drcdupuis@comcast.net. His Web site may be viewed at www.imho-nh.blogspot.com
2.04.2008
Nanny, may I?
By Dave Buhlman
We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." [Ayn Rand, The Nature of Government]
A list of ten is quite popular so I am going to list the ten items that need to be done to restore our Constitutional Republic with its rule of law and enshrined individual liberties. There is more that is needed to be done, of course, but these are a pretty good start to reduce government power.
1. With the interstate highway system complete, the federal government should cut its tax on gas and diesel from eighteen cents per gallon to 4 cents per gallon. This would give the individual fifty states the option of raising their tax on gas and diesel to fix roads that resemble those in post WWII Berlin, after the extensive bombing by the Allies. With the feds out of the picture each state would be free to do it their own way, to do what's best for their states. And at state borders, the states can coordinate repairs as they did before the feds controlled almost everything in the transportation world.
2. Since global free trade has been a disaster for millions of Americans, get the US out of NAFTA and GATT and end most favored nation status for Red China and other countries. And, to cut the problem at the root, get out of the United Nations, and get the United Nations out of the USA.
3. Close down all federal agencies whose existence violates the Constitutional restrictions on what the federal government is allowed to do. These would include the DOEd, the DOEn, EPA, OSHA, Homeland Security, the BATFE, and EEOC for starters. And get out of all treaties that were used as a basis for creating some of these agencies. What Washington, DC has done for years to pull an end run around Constitutional restrictions on the fedgov is to enter treaties that "require" federal involvement in certain issues within the states. The EPA is an example of one such agency. Note that the EPA regularly reviews the files of the state environmental agencies to assure that they're in compliance with EPA rules and procedures.
4. WWII has been over for 63 years so let's get out of NATO, pull all troops out of Europe, including Bosnia and Kosovo, and close all of the bases there. Pull all troops out of Japan and close the bases there too. Then we can look at pulling out of South Korea and the other hundred-odd countries where the US has bases and troops. Start a quick transition to end the undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring all of those troops home. If Islam still wants to oppose us, then start the retaliation by destroying the shrines that are sacred to them, and issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal, as described in the Constitution, to encourage/reward private entities for killing the Islamic leaders who still want to mix it up with us.
5. Repeal the Patriot Acts, the Military Commissions Act and end all other liberty-stealing efforts, including the Real ID. The 9-11 attacks by a small band of screwballs should not be used as an excuse by the government to eviscerate our Bill of Rights. If we allow that then we effectively allow Osama to determine what our system of government will be. Continue this repeal effort to repeal the many other unnecessary laws both on the federal and state levels.
6. Have the US Treasury introduce a gold and silver backed currency to compete with the federal reserve notes (dollars) to bring stability to our money system, make our financial futures much more predictable, and greatly reduce the debt load..
7. Using an actuarial model available from the fedgov, start allowing younger Americans to quit the social security system and Medicare. Then end all government involvement in the medical system, transitioning out of the Medicaid system. The trouble began when the fedgov passed the first HMO requirements bill in the 1970s, so let's start to end that trouble. Hillary is now talking about garnishing the wages of anyone who won't join her socialized health care system so this is another scary example of how far the power-mad freaks will go to get their way, while whining endlessly that it's "for the children".
8. Declare victory in the War on Drugs and end it. As it was intended to do, the main effect of the War on Drugs is to enhance federal police powers at the expense of individual rights. Let each state decide on drug issues as is required by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. This was another treaty-created intrusion of the federal government into the powers the states and the people have under the Constitution.
9. As was recently done to good effect by the state of Arizona, the fedgov should increase fines on companies that employ illegal immigrants to the point where these companies would be threatened with having to close their doors. With this threat, the companies won't hire illegals, and these lawbreakers will deport themselves. Let these folks then work to straighten out their own governments south of the border.
10. With all of the savings associated with the above, end the income tax on wages. The wages a person earns are part of his need to exist and survive, similar to the air he breathes, and thus are quite different from income earned on investments and on hiring others and making a profit on their work, for example. Let the IRS continue to collect taxes in accordance with the Constitution and the IRS code and stop threatening ordinary Americans with their awesome powers to take property and put wage earners in jail.
The above is a good start to return our country to sanity, and to a system that benefits citizens by allowing them to thrive without the burden of a central government that is operating way outside of its Constitutional boundaries. If we don't start to back the fedgov off, we will soon be asking for its permission to travel freely and attend non-approved religious services.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic.
We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." [Ayn Rand, The Nature of Government]
A list of ten is quite popular so I am going to list the ten items that need to be done to restore our Constitutional Republic with its rule of law and enshrined individual liberties. There is more that is needed to be done, of course, but these are a pretty good start to reduce government power.
1. With the interstate highway system complete, the federal government should cut its tax on gas and diesel from eighteen cents per gallon to 4 cents per gallon. This would give the individual fifty states the option of raising their tax on gas and diesel to fix roads that resemble those in post WWII Berlin, after the extensive bombing by the Allies. With the feds out of the picture each state would be free to do it their own way, to do what's best for their states. And at state borders, the states can coordinate repairs as they did before the feds controlled almost everything in the transportation world.
2. Since global free trade has been a disaster for millions of Americans, get the US out of NAFTA and GATT and end most favored nation status for Red China and other countries. And, to cut the problem at the root, get out of the United Nations, and get the United Nations out of the USA.
3. Close down all federal agencies whose existence violates the Constitutional restrictions on what the federal government is allowed to do. These would include the DOEd, the DOEn, EPA, OSHA, Homeland Security, the BATFE, and EEOC for starters. And get out of all treaties that were used as a basis for creating some of these agencies. What Washington, DC has done for years to pull an end run around Constitutional restrictions on the fedgov is to enter treaties that "require" federal involvement in certain issues within the states. The EPA is an example of one such agency. Note that the EPA regularly reviews the files of the state environmental agencies to assure that they're in compliance with EPA rules and procedures.
4. WWII has been over for 63 years so let's get out of NATO, pull all troops out of Europe, including Bosnia and Kosovo, and close all of the bases there. Pull all troops out of Japan and close the bases there too. Then we can look at pulling out of South Korea and the other hundred-odd countries where the US has bases and troops. Start a quick transition to end the undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring all of those troops home. If Islam still wants to oppose us, then start the retaliation by destroying the shrines that are sacred to them, and issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal, as described in the Constitution, to encourage/reward private entities for killing the Islamic leaders who still want to mix it up with us.
5. Repeal the Patriot Acts, the Military Commissions Act and end all other liberty-stealing efforts, including the Real ID. The 9-11 attacks by a small band of screwballs should not be used as an excuse by the government to eviscerate our Bill of Rights. If we allow that then we effectively allow Osama to determine what our system of government will be. Continue this repeal effort to repeal the many other unnecessary laws both on the federal and state levels.
6. Have the US Treasury introduce a gold and silver backed currency to compete with the federal reserve notes (dollars) to bring stability to our money system, make our financial futures much more predictable, and greatly reduce the debt load..
7. Using an actuarial model available from the fedgov, start allowing younger Americans to quit the social security system and Medicare. Then end all government involvement in the medical system, transitioning out of the Medicaid system. The trouble began when the fedgov passed the first HMO requirements bill in the 1970s, so let's start to end that trouble. Hillary is now talking about garnishing the wages of anyone who won't join her socialized health care system so this is another scary example of how far the power-mad freaks will go to get their way, while whining endlessly that it's "for the children".
8. Declare victory in the War on Drugs and end it. As it was intended to do, the main effect of the War on Drugs is to enhance federal police powers at the expense of individual rights. Let each state decide on drug issues as is required by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. This was another treaty-created intrusion of the federal government into the powers the states and the people have under the Constitution.
9. As was recently done to good effect by the state of Arizona, the fedgov should increase fines on companies that employ illegal immigrants to the point where these companies would be threatened with having to close their doors. With this threat, the companies won't hire illegals, and these lawbreakers will deport themselves. Let these folks then work to straighten out their own governments south of the border.
10. With all of the savings associated with the above, end the income tax on wages. The wages a person earns are part of his need to exist and survive, similar to the air he breathes, and thus are quite different from income earned on investments and on hiring others and making a profit on their work, for example. Let the IRS continue to collect taxes in accordance with the Constitution and the IRS code and stop threatening ordinary Americans with their awesome powers to take property and put wage earners in jail.
The above is a good start to return our country to sanity, and to a system that benefits citizens by allowing them to thrive without the burden of a central government that is operating way outside of its Constitutional boundaries. If we don't start to back the fedgov off, we will soon be asking for its permission to travel freely and attend non-approved religious services.
Dave Buhlman is a former New Hampshire State Representative, published author, and supporter of our return to the Constitutional Republic.
2.02.2008
WHEN PIGS FLY
Hampton Union 02-01-08
By Ron Dupuis
With all the furor surrounding the Democratic race for the nomination, two old sayings come to mind. “Never look a gift horse in the mouth” and “when pigs fly.”
Senator Barack Obama received a gift horse this week in the form of an endorsement from the both revered and reviled Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. I say “revered” because the good people of his home state have seen fit to send the esteemed Mr. Kennedy to serve in Congress every six years for over the past forty. I say “reviled” because in other sections of the country Mr. Kennedy is considered by a lot of voters as one of the most morally vapid individuals ever to set foot on the Senate floor. Senator Obama should not only look this gift horse “in the mouth”, he should check out the backside, which is perhaps a more appropriate metaphor for this situation. Mr. Kennedy endorsed Michael Dukakis and it did not help. He endorsed John Kerry and it did not help. He endorsed Al Gore and, again, it did not help. Why is this any different?
In My Humble Opinion Senator Obama should quietly accept the controversial endorsement, thank the good Senator from Massachusetts and move on, never to mention it again. Should he win the Democratic nomination an endorsement from Kennedy may help him is some liberal New England states where he is strong anyway, but it will fatally harm his quest for the White House in many other parts of the country.
“When pigs fly”; former President Bill Clinton is the subject of a lot of controversy concerning his vigorous campaigning for his wife Hillary. I, your humble columnist, have never been any kind of fan of the Clintons. In fact years ago when asked about some innocuous program of President Bill, I remember remarking “I’ll support that when “pigs fly.” At this very moment my office shade is down for fear of seeing a winged porker whiz by. For whatever reason, perhaps in order to enhance his meager legacy, perhaps to re-ignite the political power he once held, or even to strengthen his personal relationship with his wife, Bill Clinton has every right to be as ubiquitous as he wishes and say whatever to whomever he pleases in order for he and his wife to regain the power that they once held.
The Obama campaign is sounding like a whinny child when complaining that they feel they are running against “two Clintons.” The fact is that they are running against “two Clintons” and Bill Clinton has every right to use whatever political charm and prowess he can muster, and wave that famous “I did not have sex with that woman” finger in front of any face he desires, in order for his wife to occupy the seat of power in the White House.
Finally, and on a more personal note, you would expect when two former State Representatives get together the conversation would be about legislation, issues, or even Presidential hopefuls. Not exactly. I told former State Rep and current Seabrook Selectman Dick McCann that an hour was all the time available to discuss issues and catch up on the days we served in Concord together. As often happens with old men, the conversation began immediately about health. I took the early lead in the “stents” race with my three to his two. In the backstretch the race was tied for a moment with equal colonoscopy events and problems. Around the far turn and in the home stretch Dick took it away with his ten daily meds to my meager seven. With only fifteen minutes remaining in our meeting we were so depressed that instead of further discussion we both ordered a full breakfast special complete with sausage and home fries. It’s tough getting old.
Ron Dupuis is a long time New Hampshire resident, a former State Representative, and a freelance writer. His e-mail is drcdupuis@comcast.net. His web site may be viewed at www.imho-nh.blogspot.com
By Ron Dupuis
With all the furor surrounding the Democratic race for the nomination, two old sayings come to mind. “Never look a gift horse in the mouth” and “when pigs fly.”
Senator Barack Obama received a gift horse this week in the form of an endorsement from the both revered and reviled Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. I say “revered” because the good people of his home state have seen fit to send the esteemed Mr. Kennedy to serve in Congress every six years for over the past forty. I say “reviled” because in other sections of the country Mr. Kennedy is considered by a lot of voters as one of the most morally vapid individuals ever to set foot on the Senate floor. Senator Obama should not only look this gift horse “in the mouth”, he should check out the backside, which is perhaps a more appropriate metaphor for this situation. Mr. Kennedy endorsed Michael Dukakis and it did not help. He endorsed John Kerry and it did not help. He endorsed Al Gore and, again, it did not help. Why is this any different?
In My Humble Opinion Senator Obama should quietly accept the controversial endorsement, thank the good Senator from Massachusetts and move on, never to mention it again. Should he win the Democratic nomination an endorsement from Kennedy may help him is some liberal New England states where he is strong anyway, but it will fatally harm his quest for the White House in many other parts of the country.
“When pigs fly”; former President Bill Clinton is the subject of a lot of controversy concerning his vigorous campaigning for his wife Hillary. I, your humble columnist, have never been any kind of fan of the Clintons. In fact years ago when asked about some innocuous program of President Bill, I remember remarking “I’ll support that when “pigs fly.” At this very moment my office shade is down for fear of seeing a winged porker whiz by. For whatever reason, perhaps in order to enhance his meager legacy, perhaps to re-ignite the political power he once held, or even to strengthen his personal relationship with his wife, Bill Clinton has every right to be as ubiquitous as he wishes and say whatever to whomever he pleases in order for he and his wife to regain the power that they once held.
The Obama campaign is sounding like a whinny child when complaining that they feel they are running against “two Clintons.” The fact is that they are running against “two Clintons” and Bill Clinton has every right to use whatever political charm and prowess he can muster, and wave that famous “I did not have sex with that woman” finger in front of any face he desires, in order for his wife to occupy the seat of power in the White House.
Finally, and on a more personal note, you would expect when two former State Representatives get together the conversation would be about legislation, issues, or even Presidential hopefuls. Not exactly. I told former State Rep and current Seabrook Selectman Dick McCann that an hour was all the time available to discuss issues and catch up on the days we served in Concord together. As often happens with old men, the conversation began immediately about health. I took the early lead in the “stents” race with my three to his two. In the backstretch the race was tied for a moment with equal colonoscopy events and problems. Around the far turn and in the home stretch Dick took it away with his ten daily meds to my meager seven. With only fifteen minutes remaining in our meeting we were so depressed that instead of further discussion we both ordered a full breakfast special complete with sausage and home fries. It’s tough getting old.
Ron Dupuis is a long time New Hampshire resident, a former State Representative, and a freelance writer. His e-mail is drcdupuis@comcast.net. His web site may be viewed at www.imho-nh.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)