Yup, that's right, not only are the unemployment numbers worse than Obama's economic team predicted after the TARP, but they are worse than their prediction WITHOUT TARP!
Labels: politics
|
 Offended? Intrigued? Female? Contact my manager. |
Here begins your journey into the mind of everybody's favorite asian, and I don't mean Jet Li. What follows is the somewhat inane, mostly irrelevant, and self-important ramblings of a man on the brink of madness. Welcome... to the Chu. -Visit Extraordinary Convergence for political commentary- |
||
Friday, June 05, 2009
I wouldn't trust the government to predict the sun rising in the east tomorrow
[L]
I'll let the graphic below speak for itself (click on it to get to the article):
Yup, that's right, not only are the unemployment numbers worse than Obama's economic team predicted after the TARP, but they are worse than their prediction WITHOUT TARP!
Yup, that's right, not only are the unemployment numbers worse than Obama's economic team predicted after the TARP, but they are worse than their prediction WITHOUT TARP!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
FairTax misconceptions
[L]
An author of one of the blogs I peruse had some wild misconceptions about the FairTax - unfortunately this seems to be pretty common - but as somebody who actually, you know, read the book, I figured I'd take a shot at correction.
AFAIK, there is no requirement for tracking who purchases what - only that a sale was made, and that a tax was collected. This already happens in the routine course of business! There would be no extra personal information associated with the sale other than what we're already comfortable with (credit cards, reward cards, etc.) In fact, personal privacy will INCREASE - the IRS will not go away, but their scope becomes dramatically reduced, because they are no longer needed to collect income taxes! They don't need to collect them, so they don't need to know your income, they don't need to audit you, etc. They simply become a federal version of what states do with their sales taxes. However, the IRS will still need to know some personal information, such as your address, as they will be required to send out the prebate checks.
The prebate checks actually put the poor at an advantage compared to those above the poverty line. The prebate checks will be calculated (and here's where the possibility of things going screwy is the highest) based on the estimated consumption taxes a person or family would pay for their cost of living expenses. The reason its called a prebate, and not a rebate, is that you get this money in advance of the month ahead, rather than after the fact! Sure, it's inefficient in that a person may actually get compensated MORE than what they spend in taxes, but that's highly preferable to getting reimbursed after they spent their money. So anybody living at the poverty level effectively pays 0% in taxes. What's nice about this system is that you don't have to be at the poverty level to do this - you could earn a million dollars a year, but if you're frugal with your money you pay no taxes. But how many millionaires do you know spend the minimum to survive?
Admittedly, the way the prebates are handled seem to be a concession to the poor (rather than being completely fair), however I argue its drastically better than the methods currently in use for compensating the poor for being poor. It's not ideal, but it's negligable, and if it helps the FairTax get passed then so be it.
And this is different from these retailers collecting sales tax, how?
Now, in order to make this work, this Consumption Tax... you can't just hand it all to the retailers. This has to be tracked individually. Which means everyone from the moment of birth must have a Social Security Number, or some other National ID card with related number. Everything you do will be monitored, tracked, recorded, and taxed. You buy a carton of eggs and a gallon of milk, that is going to be recorded. You buy a new car or a new gun. That's going to be recorded. The IRS will not go away... they will be up your backside.
AFAIK, there is no requirement for tracking who purchases what - only that a sale was made, and that a tax was collected. This already happens in the routine course of business! There would be no extra personal information associated with the sale other than what we're already comfortable with (credit cards, reward cards, etc.) In fact, personal privacy will INCREASE - the IRS will not go away, but their scope becomes dramatically reduced, because they are no longer needed to collect income taxes! They don't need to collect them, so they don't need to know your income, they don't need to audit you, etc. They simply become a federal version of what states do with their sales taxes. However, the IRS will still need to know some personal information, such as your address, as they will be required to send out the prebate checks.
The prebate checks actually put the poor at an advantage compared to those above the poverty line. The prebate checks will be calculated (and here's where the possibility of things going screwy is the highest) based on the estimated consumption taxes a person or family would pay for their cost of living expenses. The reason its called a prebate, and not a rebate, is that you get this money in advance of the month ahead, rather than after the fact! Sure, it's inefficient in that a person may actually get compensated MORE than what they spend in taxes, but that's highly preferable to getting reimbursed after they spent their money. So anybody living at the poverty level effectively pays 0% in taxes. What's nice about this system is that you don't have to be at the poverty level to do this - you could earn a million dollars a year, but if you're frugal with your money you pay no taxes. But how many millionaires do you know spend the minimum to survive?
Admittedly, the way the prebates are handled seem to be a concession to the poor (rather than being completely fair), however I argue its drastically better than the methods currently in use for compensating the poor for being poor. It's not ideal, but it's negligable, and if it helps the FairTax get passed then so be it.
Everyone that sells any goods or services become Tax Collection Agents. All those people would have to register with the .Gov or they can't be in business. If they neglect their collection duties, they are in big Federal trouble. This gigantic invasion of privacy is something I find distasteful.
And this is different from these retailers collecting sales tax, how?
Almost all businesses (i'm excluding private sales for now) already have a mechanism/framework for collecting state sales taxes, unless you happen to live in a state w/o sales taxes (lucky you). So how difficult would it be for a a business to report federal sales tax as well as the state sales tax which they are already doing? I must admit I do not remember what the FairTax's policy is on private sales, but as long as an item is USED (ie not new) the FairTax should not apply to it. FairTax only applies to NEW items at its final POS.
I'll leave the question of what this means for private sales of new items (ie cottage industry) to someone else.
FairTax COMPLETELY REPLACES the federal income tax. So the salary you earn has not yet been taxed! Therefore funds going into Social Security come from the FairTax in the first place. It's a little strange here as the consumption tax goes into SS, and when you get your SS check and spend it, a portion of it goes back into SS - however i'm not sure that's that big of an issue.
And this is different from how the federal government determines income tax rates ... how? Imagine no income tax brackets. Imagine how much easier it would be to set tax levels, when all the gov has to adjust is a single rate, instead of hundreds of income brackets! Again, this is another place where things can go screwy, because here it's up to the public to keep an eye on the gov and make sure they're not a) spending like drunken sailors and b) raising the tax rates for no good reasons.
Believe it or not, this is actually a FEATURE of the FairTax as it is written. Sure, it'd be nice to throw in a balanced budget amendment, but adding that in there would exponentially increase the difficulty of getting it passed (as if it wasn't going to be hard enough). That's why the FairTax is simply written as a replacement for the federal income tax, and that's it.
I don't buy this argument. Think about how much money is spent at Wal-Mart, Best Buy, car dealers, grocery stores, malls, etc. Businesses like those never be able to skirt the law and get away with not collecting the consumption tax. Now think about the percentage of the overall economy that these businesses represent - I'm no economist, but my WAG is that they represent the non-trivial portion of it. My point is that, yes, there may be black market profiteers willing to risk it all by skirting the tax, but they would represent such a small portion of the economy that the impact would be trivial.
As a bonus, think of all the illegals living and working in the US right now. How much is the federal gov't collecting from them? NOTHING - because they work under the table and don't file income taxes. But illegal workers, drug dealers, and the like still buy food, supplies, diapers, dvds, electronics, cars, etc. - so under the FairTax, for the first time, the fed gov would actually collect from them! As a bonus, because the illegal immigrants are not registered with the IRS (like all of us hard-working citizens who pay income tax), they don't get a prebate, making it harder for them to live/work in the US illegally. They would actually be ENCOURAGED to become a legal citizen, instead of today where there is a huge advantage in being here illegally. (Now I realize that the legal immigration process here is f'd up, but that's another discussion).
Except that
1) The FairTax will be calculated so that the price of goods remains consistent. Whatever rate they set for the sales tax will be close to the rate of federal income tax embedded in the cost of each product.
2) If the price of goods remain consistent, and all of a sudden everybody no longer pays federal income tax... (for me in 2008 that would be equivalent to a 23% raise). What do you think happens to the economy when everybody gets 23% raises?
Now admittedly I've only read the first book, so I may be misinformed as well, but I found the arguments and logic presented by the FairTax to be very sound and even rooted in reality. I truly believe it is a "fair" tax (even if it is a tad skewered in favor of the poor) and worthy of honest discussion.
I'll leave the question of what this means for private sales of new items (ie cottage industry) to someone else.
If you put money into savings or if you have paid into social security, when you pull it out to spend it, you will have been double taxed on it.
FairTax COMPLETELY REPLACES the federal income tax. So the salary you earn has not yet been taxed! Therefore funds going into Social Security come from the FairTax in the first place. It's a little strange here as the consumption tax goes into SS, and when you get your SS check and spend it, a portion of it goes back into SS - however i'm not sure that's that big of an issue.
The tax rate for the "Fairness" is about 30% and the rate calculation is so vague, it's too easy for the government to raise it.
And this is different from how the federal government determines income tax rates ... how? Imagine no income tax brackets. Imagine how much easier it would be to set tax levels, when all the gov has to adjust is a single rate, instead of hundreds of income brackets! Again, this is another place where things can go screwy, because here it's up to the public to keep an eye on the gov and make sure they're not a) spending like drunken sailors and b) raising the tax rates for no good reasons.
The Fair Tax doesn't do anything to address the fiscal responsibility of the .Gov to manage the money and control the spending... this is like using your Debit Card instead of your Checks... your still spending it... your just transferring that money a different way.
Believe it or not, this is actually a FEATURE of the FairTax as it is written. Sure, it'd be nice to throw in a balanced budget amendment, but adding that in there would exponentially increase the difficulty of getting it passed (as if it wasn't going to be hard enough). That's why the FairTax is simply written as a replacement for the federal income tax, and that's it.
And now for another big reason to avoid the Fair Tax – A whole new economy will spring up almost over night... The Black Market. Organized Crime will be be the regulation there, the Mob, whoever. The Black Market will be able to service you for everything you need... Smuggling will become huge. As a result, ordinary people would easily become Tax Dodging Criminals. Or are you going to tell me that just because the tax is Fair everyone is going to all the sudden become completely and perfectly honest?
I don't buy this argument. Think about how much money is spent at Wal-Mart, Best Buy, car dealers, grocery stores, malls, etc. Businesses like those never be able to skirt the law and get away with not collecting the consumption tax. Now think about the percentage of the overall economy that these businesses represent - I'm no economist, but my WAG is that they represent the non-trivial portion of it. My point is that, yes, there may be black market profiteers willing to risk it all by skirting the tax, but they would represent such a small portion of the economy that the impact would be trivial.
As a bonus, think of all the illegals living and working in the US right now. How much is the federal gov't collecting from them? NOTHING - because they work under the table and don't file income taxes. But illegal workers, drug dealers, and the like still buy food, supplies, diapers, dvds, electronics, cars, etc. - so under the FairTax, for the first time, the fed gov would actually collect from them! As a bonus, because the illegal immigrants are not registered with the IRS (like all of us hard-working citizens who pay income tax), they don't get a prebate, making it harder for them to live/work in the US illegally. They would actually be ENCOURAGED to become a legal citizen, instead of today where there is a huge advantage in being here illegally. (Now I realize that the legal immigration process here is f'd up, but that's another discussion).
FairTax is a pretty much a direct tax on our GDP... 30% on our GDP.
You've heard the phrase that you tax what you want to reduce? Think about that. This would kill us as a nation. Look at how many business out there live for 2 seasons, Christmas and Tax Returns.
Fair Tax would damage our economy like a kick to the nuts. After it was already taken down to its knees.
Except that
1) The FairTax will be calculated so that the price of goods remains consistent. Whatever rate they set for the sales tax will be close to the rate of federal income tax embedded in the cost of each product.
2) If the price of goods remain consistent, and all of a sudden everybody no longer pays federal income tax... (for me in 2008 that would be equivalent to a 23% raise). What do you think happens to the economy when everybody gets 23% raises?
Now admittedly I've only read the first book, so I may be misinformed as well, but I found the arguments and logic presented by the FairTax to be very sound and even rooted in reality. I truly believe it is a "fair" tax (even if it is a tad skewered in favor of the poor) and worthy of honest discussion.
I couldn't agree more. Going off of the "tax collection agents" argument, an additional point is that any business that has employees already is a tax collection agent, but for payroll taxes! A sales tax would be much easier to administer than payroll. One flat rate, one place to file each month, and that's it.
Also, speaking as someone who files sales tax in multiple states, you are correct. Any business that has to collect sales tax would already have the processes in place. All they would need to do is collect an additional 23% to send to the fed.
By 
Rob, at
5/16/2009 08:34:00 PM
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Make them eat their own dogfood!
[L]
In the software industry, the phrase "eating your own dogfood" is taken to mean that a company uses its own software to do its work. Microsoft uses Microsoft products to develop future Microsoft products. You would hope that Intuit employees would use TurboTax to do their own taxes, and likewise, that the Ford CEO would drive a Ford, or more literally that an Iams employee would feed their own dog Iams products. And not because they would be getting them at an employee discount - but because they believed that their product was the best and worthy of their own use. Would you eat at a restaurant where the head chef never ate what he cooked? Would you buy a parachute that the manufacturer wouldn't use himself?
Now what if we could apply this practice to our politicians? What if we could make them eat the dogfood they force upon the rest of us? What if Barack Obama had to send his kids to public schools? What if Tom Daschle had to pay all his taxes honestly and timely? What if Hillary Clinton had to go to Canada and experience universal health care before attempting it in the US? What if Nancy Pelosi couldn't have bodyguards with firearms? What if Ted Kennedy had to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes? What if all politicians had to be audited by the IRS every single year?
Maybe they'd think twice about passing laws when they actually have to live under the same laws the rest of us do.
Now what if we could apply this practice to our politicians? What if we could make them eat the dogfood they force upon the rest of us? What if Barack Obama had to send his kids to public schools? What if Tom Daschle had to pay all his taxes honestly and timely? What if Hillary Clinton had to go to Canada and experience universal health care before attempting it in the US? What if Nancy Pelosi couldn't have bodyguards with firearms? What if Ted Kennedy had to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes? What if all politicians had to be audited by the IRS every single year?
Maybe they'd think twice about passing laws when they actually have to live under the same laws the rest of us do.
Labels: politics
Good points. On another note, you might enjoy my YouTube series titled, "Quick Questions For Gun Control Advocates." I ask direct questions and sometimes use a little humor to get my point across.
Here is a link to my playlist. http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1EF58BC51B8F23CE Feel free to rate, comment and pass along my videos to others.
Friday, December 05, 2008
Hah! 3
[L]
Plaxico Burress shows off his new touchdown dance
A pistol in the waistband of sweat pants? What was Plaxico thinking? Probably the same thing his mother was when she named him.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
Dayton Daily Democrat strikes again
[L]
Check this out (go to picture #3):
(screencap below)
I don't think anyone can rightfully call Alaska a "tiny" state. Out-of-the-way, sure, but at 656k square miles (4x California, 2.4x Texas), it certainly isn't "tiny".
Undoubtedly they probably meant to imply the population of the state was tiny; however, I think their bias shows through, as DDN tries to belittle the state of Alaska, and therefore Sarah Palin's experience.
(screencap below)
As the political community turned desperate for any clues about the potential running mate of Republican Presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., speculation moved toward several dark horse candidates including Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the so-called "hockey mom" credited with reforms of her tiny, out-of-the-way state.
I don't think anyone can rightfully call Alaska a "tiny" state. Out-of-the-way, sure, but at 656k square miles (4x California, 2.4x Texas), it certainly isn't "tiny".
Undoubtedly they probably meant to imply the population of the state was tiny; however, I think their bias shows through, as DDN tries to belittle the state of Alaska, and therefore Sarah Palin's experience.
Labels: politics
It's.... Sarah Palin?!
[L]
McCain's running mate is Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin.
Brilliant political move by McCain, as it has a good chance of luring Hillary supporters away from the Democrats' affirmative action candidate. But is it a good move for conservatives?
Here's Top 10 reasons for Sarah Palin as VP.
The stately Fred Thompson is on board, so I'm sold.
And I even may be falling in love...
Brilliant political move by McCain, as it has a good chance of luring Hillary supporters away from the Democrats' affirmative action candidate. But is it a good move for conservatives?
Here's Top 10 reasons for Sarah Palin as VP.
The stately Fred Thompson is on board, so I'm sold.
And I even may be falling in love...
Labels: Fred Thompson, politics
Cool, you're still alive. Picking Palin was the smartest damn thing McCain could have done.
By 
, at
8/29/2008 05:38:00 PM
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Card-carrying NRA member
[L]
I've been an NRA member for almost a year now, thanks to Taurus' free year deal. However, I actually had to carry my NRA card with me today because I went down to Louisville for the NRA's Annual Meeting. It was pretty nifty getting to see just about everything to do with guns, and being able to ask the company representatives questions about their upcoming products.
My notes:
Ruger: If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Kel-Tec should be feeling very flattered by Ruger's LCP. The construction seems a lot nicer and the overall build quality better than the P-3AT, at an equal MSRP. The LCP also has a slide lock of dubious functionality, as it doesn't hold open on an empty mag. Kel-tec may be forced to refresh their P-3AT line to compete with Ruger (much like Springfield had to do with the XD after the S&W M&P).
Springfield: Their main feature this year was the new XD(m) line. Where the original XD borrowed heavily from the Glock design, the XD(m) borrows a bit from the S&W M&P and adds other improvements in. The XD(m) is both performance-enhanced as well as ergonomically-enhanced, kind of aiming at both the run-n-gun as well as the ccw crowd. It is performance-enhanced with a match-grade barrel, lessened trigger-reset, extended magazine release, and higher round capacity (16rds in 40 S&W). It is ergonomically-enhanced with a frame redesign, cut-down slide (very melted/rounded feel), interchangeable backstraps (a la M&P), melonite finish. It doesn't have an ambi-safety like the new XDs have, but i'm guessing they have it in the works. In handling it, my overall impression is that it felt halfway between a Glock and a Walther.
Magpul: Couldn't find them at first, but there was a Magpul rep at the Bushmaster booth. Magpul Masada is now the Bushmaster ACR. Magpul designed it, and they sold the rights to produce them to Bushmaster. Interestingly enough, the rep was actually a Masada designer - unfortunately Magpul was at another gov't/DoD exhibition across town. The ACR is nice in that it doesn't require any tools to field-strip, is very modular and can be easily adopted for multiple roles. Bushmaster is planning for Q1 2009, but the Magpul rep encouraged us to pester them in chances of getting it earlier, perhaps by November. Also unfortunately, the flip-out smg did not make an appearance.
Sig-Sauer: If I can't wait for the ACR, well then the Sig 556 is still nice.
DSArms: When I was first looking at battle rifles, I originally wanted a FAL from DSArms but after seeing them at the exhibition, I found them too heavy for my tastes.
Hornady: They had good reps there who sold me on their Lock-N-Load progressive press. I gotta say that they were very helpful and informative, unlike some of the other exhibitors at the show. I'll probably pick one up, $450 for the press, $50 for a shellplate & dies.
Crimson Trace: I talked with a rep about their new laser grip for the Kahr MK9, and if they had plans for a PM9 laser grip: good news, it's in development and we can expect it in 12-18 months.
Taurus: They introduced a new slimline pistol coming out in November. It's the PT709SS/709B, 8+1 capacity, 3" barrel, 6" OAL, very short SA trigger, manual safety, very slim and all the edges had a melted feel. My only concern is the manual safety and the hair-trigger, but otherwise it looks like it'd be a great gun for the ladies in our lives.
Vortex: if their Strikefire lives up to expectations, it will be awesome. It's 1x magnification (comes with a thread-on 2x lens), both red and green mildot, comes with mounting ring. Should be in stores in a month w/ a street price of ~$120. Much to my dismay, they didn't have a working demo model for me to play with, but i'm already sold on it.
Leupold: Holy crap, their scopes are BRIGHT and CLEAR. When I start looking into rifle scopes, I'll definitely start with them first.
NRA: there's an NRA WINE club?
Notable sightings:
Ted Nugent, Glenn Beck, Oliver North, Wayne LaPierre, Ronnie Barrett, Todd Jarrett, the guy from Midway USA who shows up on American Rifleman, and the host/editor of American Rifleman.
My notes:
Ruger: If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Kel-Tec should be feeling very flattered by Ruger's LCP. The construction seems a lot nicer and the overall build quality better than the P-3AT, at an equal MSRP. The LCP also has a slide lock of dubious functionality, as it doesn't hold open on an empty mag. Kel-tec may be forced to refresh their P-3AT line to compete with Ruger (much like Springfield had to do with the XD after the S&W M&P).
Springfield: Their main feature this year was the new XD(m) line. Where the original XD borrowed heavily from the Glock design, the XD(m) borrows a bit from the S&W M&P and adds other improvements in. The XD(m) is both performance-enhanced as well as ergonomically-enhanced, kind of aiming at both the run-n-gun as well as the ccw crowd. It is performance-enhanced with a match-grade barrel, lessened trigger-reset, extended magazine release, and higher round capacity (16rds in 40 S&W). It is ergonomically-enhanced with a frame redesign, cut-down slide (very melted/rounded feel), interchangeable backstraps (a la M&P), melonite finish. It doesn't have an ambi-safety like the new XDs have, but i'm guessing they have it in the works. In handling it, my overall impression is that it felt halfway between a Glock and a Walther.
Magpul: Couldn't find them at first, but there was a Magpul rep at the Bushmaster booth. Magpul Masada is now the Bushmaster ACR. Magpul designed it, and they sold the rights to produce them to Bushmaster. Interestingly enough, the rep was actually a Masada designer - unfortunately Magpul was at another gov't/DoD exhibition across town. The ACR is nice in that it doesn't require any tools to field-strip, is very modular and can be easily adopted for multiple roles. Bushmaster is planning for Q1 2009, but the Magpul rep encouraged us to pester them in chances of getting it earlier, perhaps by November. Also unfortunately, the flip-out smg did not make an appearance.
Sig-Sauer: If I can't wait for the ACR, well then the Sig 556 is still nice.
DSArms: When I was first looking at battle rifles, I originally wanted a FAL from DSArms but after seeing them at the exhibition, I found them too heavy for my tastes.
Hornady: They had good reps there who sold me on their Lock-N-Load progressive press. I gotta say that they were very helpful and informative, unlike some of the other exhibitors at the show. I'll probably pick one up, $450 for the press, $50 for a shellplate & dies.
Crimson Trace: I talked with a rep about their new laser grip for the Kahr MK9, and if they had plans for a PM9 laser grip: good news, it's in development and we can expect it in 12-18 months.
Taurus: They introduced a new slimline pistol coming out in November. It's the PT709SS/709B, 8+1 capacity, 3" barrel, 6" OAL, very short SA trigger, manual safety, very slim and all the edges had a melted feel. My only concern is the manual safety and the hair-trigger, but otherwise it looks like it'd be a great gun for the ladies in our lives.
Vortex: if their Strikefire lives up to expectations, it will be awesome. It's 1x magnification (comes with a thread-on 2x lens), both red and green mildot, comes with mounting ring. Should be in stores in a month w/ a street price of ~$120. Much to my dismay, they didn't have a working demo model for me to play with, but i'm already sold on it.
Leupold: Holy crap, their scopes are BRIGHT and CLEAR. When I start looking into rifle scopes, I'll definitely start with them first.
NRA: there's an NRA WINE club?
Notable sightings:
Ted Nugent, Glenn Beck, Oliver North, Wayne LaPierre, Ronnie Barrett, Todd Jarrett, the guy from Midway USA who shows up on American Rifleman, and the host/editor of American Rifleman.
Labels: guns
In what ways did Springfield have to change the XD after the M&P? I'd love it if they went full ambidextrous.
I added my thoughts on Springfield's new XD(m) line.
As far as the XD line, they just added the ambi-safety as an option, ambi-mag-release has been there from the beginning, however they haven't done any ambi-slide-lock yet and I haven't heard of any plans to do so.
They went after the M&P in their new XD(m) line with the interchangeable backstraps. If they added an ambi-safety to their XD(m) line then it would be very much like the M&P.
By Chu, at
5/19/2008 09:09:00 AM
Thanks for adding your comments about the XD.
Hmm... If they are wanting to capture the M&P crowd, why not go full ambi like the M&P does?
As for the new safeties, I think they are worthless. The XD already has two external safeties, plus, If you follow the four rules....
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Voted Today
[L]
Only voted in a couple races - the Republican Primary, and the US House district 7.
I was pleased to see that Fred Thompson was still on the ballot, and thus proudly voted for him. Sure, it's nothing more than a protest vote, but I could not in good conscience vote for either of the remaining 2 Republican candidates. I have a sneaking suspicion that many conservative voters will be doing likewise. It will be interesting to see how many votes go to the candidates who have already withdrawn.
I also voted for Ron Hood against Steve Austria in the primary for US House of Representatives district 7. I don't really know too much about either one, but I did really like the mailer that Ron Hood sent out explaining his beliefs and positions. He seems to be a solid conservative candidate, and a cursory google search seems to back that up.
Steve Austria, on the other hand, seems to be a career politician - not the kind of person I'd like to vote for. He's also sponsored by the Dayton DailyDemocrat News, which tells me all I need to know right there.
In all the other races, I didn't really know anything about them, so I abstained from voting. Not voting is the most responsible thing to do when ignorant. It's my fault really for not studying up a little more on the issues, but I don't get paid for politics.
I was pleased to see that Fred Thompson was still on the ballot, and thus proudly voted for him. Sure, it's nothing more than a protest vote, but I could not in good conscience vote for either of the remaining 2 Republican candidates. I have a sneaking suspicion that many conservative voters will be doing likewise. It will be interesting to see how many votes go to the candidates who have already withdrawn.
I also voted for Ron Hood against Steve Austria in the primary for US House of Representatives district 7. I don't really know too much about either one, but I did really like the mailer that Ron Hood sent out explaining his beliefs and positions. He seems to be a solid conservative candidate, and a cursory google search seems to back that up.
Steve Austria, on the other hand, seems to be a career politician - not the kind of person I'd like to vote for. He's also sponsored by the Dayton Daily
In all the other races, I didn't really know anything about them, so I abstained from voting. Not voting is the most responsible thing to do when ignorant. It's my fault really for not studying up a little more on the issues, but I don't get paid for politics.
Labels: Dayton, Fred Thompson, politics
What's wrong with Ron Paul? Definitely a better choice then Thompson, even if for a protest vote.
By Alex Nagy, at
4/01/2008 08:10:00 PM
^^^ speak up ^^^