The Uncomfortable Truth

Last week the Supreme Court ruled that sticking a pair of scissors into a baby’s skull seconds before birth was a proper thing for the US Congress to legislate.
HUGE mistake. For a couple of reasons.
First, nowhere does the Constitution authorize Congress to make laws governing abortion. Therefore, it is up to the several states to decide the issue.
I realize this would result in a patchwork of laws, but that’s the way the rules were written. If we keep ignoring the Constitution, we will have fascism.
Second, it will probably sidetrack the upcoming elections from the real issues.
If you are one of those people who choose your candidate based on their abortion stance, you should probably stop reading. This blog is for thinking people only.
I personally believe that life begins at conception. Maybe you believe something different.
I believe that if you don’t like abortion, don’t have one. You might disagree.
I believe if someone has an abortion, it’s nobody else’s business—except the father’s. Perhaps your view differs.
I believe that the folks who parade around abortion clinics should start worrying about the log in their own eye, rather than the splinters in the eyes of others. You might dissent.
I believe abortion to be a sin. I also believe God forgives sins, so who am I to question God and judge others? Your spiritual views may cause you to reject The Word.
That’s OK.
It’s good for people to hold differing views. It makes for lively discussion.
However, it is just plain stupid to allow the abortion debate to take away from the real problems facing America.
Abortion has always been a wedge issue. It is supposed to be a wedge issue. We are supposed to be arguing about something that affects a tiny percentage of Americans so we won’t even think about what really ails us.
Last week’s decision made the front page everywhere. I am unsurprised that the corporate media would focus attention away from one of the real problems facing America—corporate control of the government.
The San Francisco Chronicle opined last week that pro-choice advocates had better be wary of attempts to further erode Roe v. Wade.
Pro-choice advocates had better be wary of a country that is seriously in debt to foreign nations. They need to watch for a total abandonment of liberty. They need to be on guard against leaders who would sell us out in the name of “international relations” and “free trade.”
Of course, those who hold pro-life views should just as vigilant.
Whether abortion is legal or illegal, the future of this country does not depend on it.
It’s time we started discussing what is really important.

Posted by Quentin Colgan at 07:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

The tragedy this week in Virginia saddens me, as it saddens everybody, I am sure.
This time should be a time for reflection, and if it works for you, prayer.
Unfortunately, there are those who cannot resist any opportunity to impose their tyranny upon us.
Sure as winter follows fall, comes now the cry for more control on guns. Granted, it hasn’t been as loud as in the past—most of the attention is being given unfairly to Virginia Tech administrators—but ‘the usual suspects’ are making their usual noise. By the way, don’t mistake these fools for liberals. Real liberals believe in the rights of the people over the government.
I don’t need to repeat all the evils of gun control—Right Wing radio does that just fine.
What does need repeating is the intention of the Founding Fathers when they wrote the second amendment.
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
James Madison, writing in The Federalist Papers (no. 46) described a militia as, “. . . citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties . . .”
In the eighteenth century, that’s what a "militia" was. Any group of men (sorry ladies) that organized to protect itself qualified as a militia. Back then, “well regulated” meant well trained. “State” meant condition, as in “State of the Union,” not one of the states in the country.
Written in modern English, it would say, “In order to secure their freedoms, it will be necessary for citizens to arm themselves, organize, and train. Therefore the right to own arms shall not be infringed.”
The second amendment was written to protect us from the government these men were constructing. They knew that in time, governments devolve into tyranny. They left a method for the people to prevent that. They knew that it takes firepower to keep your personal liberties. Notice that they wisely left out the definition of “arms.” They knew something better than a musket would come along.
Personally, I believe that if the government has “arms,” then the people should have those same arms to protect themselves from the government. I believe that was James Madison’s intention.
An extreme view, perhaps.
However, as the great Barry Goldwater once said, that is not a vice.

Posted by Quentin Colgan at 09:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

It seemed appropriate to present my plan to fix the tax code this week.
A plan that would make taxes fairer. A plan that would make taxes voluntary. A plan that would actually raise more money for the Treasury. A plan that would save the billions of dollars Americans spend trying to figure out their taxes. A plan that could rapidly lower the National Debt—which just happens to be the largest threat to our security. A plan that would stimulate the economy. A great plan. Unfortunately, it is a plan that will never happen if the people do not lead.
Some background: If you go to
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2006/tables/06s0464.xlw
(you will need Excel to view it), you will find that the government received 1.1202 trillion dollars from income taxes, personal and corporate, in 2005. This is the last year for which numbers are available.
I did some checking around and I found that the value of all the assets traded in all of the American stock and commodity markets totals over twenty trillion dollars annually.
Let’s do some math: 1.1202/20=.05601.
If our government taxed the purchase of stocks and commodities at a mere 5.6%, they would raise the same amount of money they do now.
If the tax rate was 10%, the extra 879.8 billion dollars every year could retire the National Debt in a little over ten years.
A simple plan.
As it is now of course, most people pay more than 10% of their income in income tax. Many corporations end up paying far less than that amount, and would naturally be opposed to any changes in what they themselves have wrought with their corruption of Congress.
The plan is voluntary in that no one would be forced to buy stocks or commodities. Of course, most people would probably want to invest their money, having more of it.
The corporate media will say that a tax on investment reduces investment.
Does a tax on working reduce working?
The corporate media will say that this plan is inflationary.
Don't believe it. (What causes inflation and what it really is are the subjects of another essay.)
Gains on stocks and commodities are currently taxed at either regular income or long-term capital gains rates—which are both higher than 10%.
As more people invested in America, the revenues to the Treasury would increase. The revenues to the businesses traded would increase, stimulating the economy—honestly, not like it is now with manipulation. The capital that would spread among “We the people,” would raise the standard of living for all Americans—not just the few. The concentration of wealth would ease.
Besides corporate America—and the multinationals traded in America—there would be strong opposition to this idea by other powerful interests.
The instruments of the National Debt are held mostly by banks and foreign governments (you would be amazed if you knew how much we are in debt to China!). Some of these instruments pay interest of close to 15%, but if we were to use a modest figure of 5% interest overall, we are paying just about 445 billion dollars a year in interest. The folks on the receiving end of that 445 billion are going to oppose anything that would threaten their golden goose.
General Motors bought a car company a few years ago for 67 billion. With this plan, they would pay 6.7 billion in taxes—far more than they have ever paid, but closer to their fair share. They would be against it.
Finally, let’s not forget the people who make close to twenty billion a year figuring out taxes. I’m sure they would oppose this idea too.
The odds are against us—unless we speak up.
If you don’t think this is a good idea, I want you to do something. Your personal share of the interest on the National Debt comes to just over four dollars a day. Take four dollars for every person in you family and flush it down the toilet. Do this every day for a year. What will you have to show for it?
Exactly what we have to show from paying interest on the debt. The debt doesn’t go down one bit. In fact, it’s climbing about 23,000 dollars every second. If we don’t tame the debt—and soon—we have damned our future as a country. When the creditors come calling, and we don’t have the money to pay them, they own us.
If you think this is a good idea; a fair idea, forward it to everyone you know. Ask them to forward it to someone else.
Maybe if enough people heard about it, something good will come of it.

Posted by Quentin Colgan at 09:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)