Is the IRS an immoral agency?

I have been having an interesting debate over on my friend Christopher's blog http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ But since I do not want to hijack his blog I had hoped to move the debate over here.

The debate has taken several turns and I expect it to continue but right now we are discussing the idea of taxes and the IRS. The crux of the debate appears to me to be the idea that what the IRS does, since if you do not pay tax's you get arrested. Me opponent feels that the threat of arrest means that you are being forced to pay these and therefor it is an immoral and criminal action on their part.

My basic position and one I am trying to flesh out is the feeling that since I receive services in return for the money I pay in tax's it is not theft. If I did not receive services in return for the tax's I pay then yes I would feel that it was theft. I suppose if their was a way to not pay tax's and in some way opt out of receiving these services then I might be inclined to consider the possibility. But for me part of living in a society is paying for and receiving these services, that is part of being in a society.

I would love for any and all of you to come and join in the debate, and once we solve this issue :) perhaps we will move to an easy one like why we should continue to fund the United Nations.

It is all about Perspective

I found this interesting. I am not saying it is all true it is just thought provoking. Comments?

The Spin

Black teen pregnancies? A 'crisis' in black America.
White teen pregnancies? A 'blessed event.'

If you grow up in Hawaii you're 'exotic.'
Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, you're the quintessential 'American story.'

Similarly, if you name your kid Barack you're 'unpatriotic.'
Name your kids Trig and Track, you're 'colorful.'

If you're a Democrat and you make a VP pick without fully vetting the individual you're 'reckless.'
A Republican who doesn't fully vet is a 'maverick.'

If you spend 3 years as a community organizer growing your organization from a staff of 1 to 13 and your budget from $70,000 to $400,000, then become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review,create a voter regstration drive that registers 150,000 new African Amerian voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor,then spend nearly 8 more years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, becoming chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, then spend nearly 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of nearly 13 million people, sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you are woefully inexperienced.
If you spend 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, then spend 20 months as the governor of a state with 650,000 people, you've got the most executive experience of anyone on either ticket, are the Commander in Chief of the Alaska military and are well qualified to lead the nation should you be called upon to do so because your state is the closest state to Russia.

If you are a Demoratic male candidate who is popular with millions of people you are an 'arrogant celebrity'.
If you are a popular Republican female candidate you are 'energizing the base'.

If you are a younger male candidate who thinks for himself and makes his own decisions you are 'presumptuous'.
If you are an older male candidate who makes last minute decisions you refuse to explain, you are a 'shoot from the hip' maverick.

If you are a candidate with a Harvard law degree you are 'an elitist 'out of touch' with the real America.
If you are a legacy (dad and granddad were admirals) graduate of Annapolis, with multiple disciplinary infractions you are a hero.

If you manage a multi-million dollar nationwide campaign, you are an 'empty suit'.
If you are a part time mayor of a town of 7000 people, you are an 'experienced executive'.

If you go to a south side Chicago church, your beliefs are 'extremist'.
If you believe in creationism and don't believe gobal warming is man made, you are 'strongly principled'.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years with whom you are raising two beautiful daughters you're 'risky'.

If you're a black single mother of 4 who waits for 22 hours after her water breaks to seek medical attention, you're an irresponsible parent, endangering the life of your unborn child.
But if you're a white married mother who waits 22 hours, you're spunky.

If you're a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton, the right-wing press calls you 'First dog.'
If you're a 17-year old pregnant unwed daughter of a Republican, the right-wing press calls you 'beautiful' and 'courageous.'

If you kill an endangered species, you're an excellent hunter.
If you have an abortion you're not a christian, you're a murderer ( forget about if it happened while being date raped)

If you teach abstinence only in sex education, you get teen parents.
If you teach responsible age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.is interesting. I am not saying that it is all true just that I found it interesting.

Is $700 Billion worth it?

The last time I checked, America was not a Socialist nation. But, if we are not Socialist, then why is the federal government moving forward with a plan to bail out the financial market. Such a move amounts to nothing more then corporate socialism.

I am not here to blame President Bush for this nor am I here to make excuses for the presentt administration. I think that this problem is coming from years and years of bad financial policy and criminal behavior by the banks and corporations that are now in trouble. So the problem does not lie just with him. It lies with the American government as a whole and people who insist on taking loans out to buy things that they can't afford and do not need.

The action that is being planned by the government goes completley against what America was founded on and will do nothing but reinforce continued bad behavior by the parties involved. I do not have a solution except for to live within my means and try to work my way out of the school debt and life debt that I am in right now.

I just hope that this does not spell the start of another actual depression for us all.

How Do You Tell When A Politician Is Lying?

Simple answer: There lips are moving. It is sad to me that it really does not seem to matter to politician's if what they are repeating or even what they are talking about is the truth or not. They conveniently forget what they have said in previous speeches or interviews and depending upon who they think their audience is they will say something completely the opposite of what they have said before. Then when they are caught in the lie. They just put the deny machine in motion, knowing that the American people will soon forget or get caught up in the latest reality tv craze.

It does not seem to matter either which party the candidate is from either. The goal appears to get elected and the cost to ones soul is not an issue. The link in the title is an article about McCain and all the hoopla surrounding Obama's "Pig in lipstick" comment about Sarah Palin. The phrase is one that gets used alot and is not a sexist remark. But as per usual the opposing side will run with it trying to get all the traction they can to get themselves a few extra soundbites on the tv.

Everything is so corrupted right now it makes the bile rise and makes me want to wash my hands of the whole process.

The List: McCain’s 10 Worst Ideas

This is part II of the Foreign Policy magazines article on McCain and Obamma's 10 worst ideas.

"Creating a League of Democracies

What he said:“We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact—a League of Democracies—that can harness the vast influence of the more than one hundred democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests.” —Speech at the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, March 26, 2008

Why it’s a bad idea: As Thomas Carothers argues in the July/August issue of FP, “[T]he idea that democracies naturally align is only half right and risks being a dangerous oversimplification.” Carothers and other critics have noted that such a league might further weaken the United Nations. For the most part, world leaders have been cool to the idea, and rightfully so. A previous iteration, the little-known Community of Democracies, founded in 2000, has stumbled into irrelevance."

For me this just highlights how out of touch McCain appears to be when it comes to foreign affairs. And really how out of touch most Americans are when it comes to things like the United Nations and what it is that they do. It isn't that the United Nations is without flaws because we all know that, that just isn't the case. The United Nations is rife with scandal and abuses but if we as the USA one of the founding member of the group do not stay involved and work to fix these problems then the United Nations will become far more of a problem for us then they are now. I do not think the answer should ever be throw your hands up in the air and walk away.

So that is it for me, please read article or parts of it and let me know your thoughts.

The List: Obama’s 10 Worst Ideas

I read pretty regularly a magazine called "FP: Foreign Policy". I find it very interesting and since I am a political science major and am involved in Model United Nations at school it often has information that I find useful for papers and other things. Along those line they just published a list of Obama's 10 worst ideas and McCain's 10 worst and I hoping to highlight both lists in no particular order and am hoping that some of my readers will share their thoughts on it as well.

"Renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement

What he said: “I will make sure that we renegotiate. … I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.” —Democratic primary debate in Cleveland, Feb. 26, 2008

Why it’s a bad idea: Trade agreements take years to negotiate, and Mexico and Canada would almost certainly seek new concessions of their own in a new round. Obama is right to argue that more economic development in Mexico will lower illegal immigration; he’s wrong to think that bashing NAFTA is the right way to address the Rust Belt’s economic woes. Happily, since the Ohio primary, Obama has backed off his harshest criticisms of the agreement."

I agree with this assessment to a certain point but I feel that NAFTA has not benefited America as much as it has benefitied Mexico and Canada. I am also in favor of the idea that to help control and limit illegal immigration the goal needs to be to help Mexico build its infrastructure and use its boundless mineral resources rather then just continue to have a government that is completly corrupt and unwilling to help themselvs.

Please follow the link and read the rest of the 10 and let me know what you think.

On to Part II and McCain's 10 worst.

McCain picks Palin as his VP?

I just do not get it. Obama picks a life time politician as his VP choice and McCain turns around and in a seeming attempt to one up Obama in the ''Hey, look everybody I can make a bad choice to" category. Picks the Governor of Alaska--Sarah Palin for his VP. What......WHAT.......WHAT is going on?

Is this what politics has become in America? Candidates picking VP options based on behind the scenes maneuvering and political gamesmanship. How honestly do either of these VP options benefit either their parties or America in general? I would love for a conservative to help me answer this.

It is not that I have a problem with her being a woman. That is really a non issue for me. My problem is a lot the same problem that I have with Obama. A distinct lack of experience. What has she done?

Lets see--- She is 44, has a BS from the University of Idaho.......(Thats it). Has held a grand total of three public offices she was elected to the city council of Wasilla, Alaska and held that from 1992 to 1996. Then she was elected Mayor of the same city from 1996 to 2002. Then she was elected Governor of Alaska in 2006.

That is it folks. That is the sum total of her experience in public office.

Could someone please explain to me why she is the choice?

Obama picks Biden for VP

I just do not get it. Obama has been positioning himself as the new Democrat the new politician and a new type of leader. He has been pretty successful at portraying that image to the American public.

So why turn around and pick for your VP a man who has been sucking at the political teat of America since he was 29 years old. Joe Biden is 65 years old and in one move Obama has opened himself up to the same criticisms that his party has been making of Bush.

Namely that Bush, by bringing Cheney along as his Vice President, was just continuing to run things the same way that they had been run, which is exactly what happened. Then he also grabbed Rumsfeld, both of whom had worked for President Ford. Funnily enough it was during the Ford/Nixon administrations that Biden was first elected.

I just frankly do not understand the point of Obama's picking Biden for the ticket. It is as if nothing has changed and we are once again going to go back to businness as usual despite the obvious desire of people on both sides of the political isle for a change.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It is just like the WHO said "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Typical Politician

This is so typical of the people who run for office in this country. I wasn't a fan of the man to begin with but this does not surprise me at all.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

McCain gets $1,930 a month from 'broken' Social Security system

San Francisco Business Times

Republican presidential candidate John McCain cashes his monthly Social Security checks despite calling the federal program "a disgrace," the Associated Press reports.

"I'm receiving benefits," McCain told campaign reporters, but added, "the system is broken."

In 2007, he received benefits of $23,157 from Social Security, approximately $1,930 a month. The maximum monthly benefit under Social Security is $2,185. Social Security benefits are determined by age at retirement.

McCain, who is 71, has received benefits since he was 65.

Last week, McCain told observers at a town-hall meeting in Portsmouth, Ohio, "Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers ... and that's a disgrace."

B.J. Jarrett from the Social Security Administration said that individuals can refuse retirement benefits.

In 2006, McCain's wife Cindy earned $6 million, and has a net worth of approximately $100 million.

Confused

"Pockets of lucidity" appear here and there throughout profane history, as the divine light is prolonged through time. In hindsight, an "Arc of Salvation" becomes recognizable, a sort of rolling horizontal revelation to go along with the vertical. In this regard, we can indeed trace a continuous line -- or wave -- of light, say, from the Hebrew prophets -- and the ancient Greek philosophers -- to America's founders. Looking down, I see these waves lapping at my feet as I type this. The water is both warm and transparent."

The paragraph from up above comes from a blog called http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/ I really enjoy it quite a bit and while I do not often agree with his mix of eastern mysticism and western religion I do feel that he often has some valid points to make. But this last section there about "Pockets of lucidity" and running a vertical path of enlightenment from Hebrew Prophets all the way up to America's founders. I just do not get. I am not even sure how one can justify the concept. I guess for me it has always seemed like America came out of a need for a few people to not want to pay taxes and a desire to not be controlled by the institutional Church of England. Not that they were after freedom of religion, of all religions, just the freedom of their religion and I really do not see how one gets from that origin to the idea that the founding fathers were somehow touched by God. When a fair amount of them were Diest and would have thought the idea that God was giving them a direct current to knowledge preposterous. I just am interested as to what others think of this.

The Future of Federalism?

So the question for my class this week is what do I think the future of Federalism looks like for America? I think that is an interesting question given that over the last decade the world has seen several federal republics fall apart. One reason for this is when you look at William Riker and his conditions for a federal republic to form. These are the military condition and the expansion condition and these must work together to shape the formation of the state. I would argue that the need for protection from a larger state has faded that colonialism is not an issue in the world so the military condition is not as important as it used to be. Which is a major reason why Yugoslavia has fallen apart. Now that the Soviet Union is no more Yugoslavia was able to revert back to its natural order and become smaller countries based on their separate religious and ethnic origins. I would love to hear anyone else's thoughts on the subject.

"ON LIBERTY"

John Stuart Mill in his ON LIBERTY raises some interesting points about what is freedom and what is society's role in protecting freedom as well as protecting the individual from being hurt by others. Is it morally relevant to limit an action that only affects others? Where do you draw that line for when a society can intervene? Is it the responsibility of society to prevent harm from being done to others? Should people be allowed to hurt themselves as long as it isn't hurting others? Who decides where the line is drawn for appropriate societal behavior? Is it the Church or Government? Should people just be left alone and should we let the world sort itself out? These are all questions that I am pondering at the moment and anyone who wants to join the discussion please feel free.

Supreme Court as a centralizer?

Today in class we talked about the role of the Supreme Court in centralizing the power of the Federal Government. It was an interesting discussion the main point of the lecture being that over the years pretty much regardless of the political makeup of the court. They tended to move to rule on cases in such a way to give legitimacy to Congress and the office of the President. They most often showed this when they would rule on cases where states made attempts to limit federal power with most of this involving Constitutional state law. An example the Professor gave was Brown vs the Board of Education. He contended that really what the Supreme Court is doing is to rule in such a way that it often drags more reluctant states along so that their laws become more consistent with the rest of the Nations laws and the laws of other states. As always I am open to anyone thoughts?

Heating up!

Well thanks to my little debacle with Van I have noticed more people visiting but no one is saying hello. I will try to post more of my political thoughts just for the sake of dialog if nothing else. But that is a two way street so I hope some people join in to the discussion. Lets see what to bring up? Today in Federalism we talked about the power of the Presidency as a unifying force for nationalism. One of the interesting things was that even when a President has campaigned on a platform of smaller government. They still have enlarged the system by giving either their enemies or friends a stake in the system. Sometimes the stake comes in trying to work within the system to fight a President often when people try to amend the Constitution. I just found this to be an interesting process.

IOWA CAUCUSES

Obama and Huckabee win their respective caucuses in Iowa and the results raise some interesting questions. What does this mean for Clinton she finished third? What does this mean for Romney as I believe this was a surprise for him? This adds up to making New Hampshire more interesting for both Romney and Clinton. I think Fred Thompson has to be happy with his finish. The upcoming race should be very interesting.

Should We Still Fear Iran?

The Economist thinks we should. When I first heard the news about the latest intelligence report concerning Iran I was a little surprised by a couple of things. First, I was surprised that the Bush administration let the word get out. Two, at the response of both Mr. Bush and the American Press. The article that I refer to contends that while Iran may have dialed back their nuclear plans it does not mean that the capability is not there. I think that is a key point. Iran is fully able to transport a warhead as far as they need to. They have figured out the hard part of the equation. As long as Iran continues to run uranium through Natanz's centrifuges the closer they get to weapons grade. The danger isn't over but this may be a chance for America to practice some rare diplomacy.

1st day of school!

Today was the first day of my second year at Western Oregon University. I am glad to be back, last year was a good and interesting one. I was in the Model United Nations club and really enjoyed it. I am involved again this year and was elected president of the club. I really like the process of diplomacy and working within the context of a rules system to achieve goals. While it is true that there are some flaws within the United Nations and some people are using the system to help themselves. The intentions of the UN are both honorable and just and if followed will only help the world to be a better place. I urge people to look into it.

The High Cost of Smoking

The above link will take you to a blog that has an anti measure 50 commercial on it. The ad wants us to vote no on 50 because it changes our state constitution. I myself could care less if it affects our state constitution. The reality is that smoking is a horrible habit and one that leads to the smokers death and often the death of those around the smoker whether or not they smoke. Anything that is that destructive should be done away with. But what about free will then. Fine don't outlaw just put the smokers on smoker reservation. Then the non-smoker will not be forced to smell and breath the foul stink of the burning carcinogenic agent.

Oregon State Fair

I have been working at the state fair. Now I am not a carny. First of all I have all my teeth and I don't have little fingers. Though I do have a penchant for underage girls. But that is beside the point. I up until tomorrow will have worked 20 days in a row. It was a pretty amazing run and one that almost led to my collapse but I think the skills I learned have been worth it. I now know how to drive a forklift and a front loader so those should come in handy in the future. The job itself doesn't pay much and isn't really very rewarding but it is interesting to see the fair come together. If you are reading this and live in Oregon I would encourage you to check it out.

What is Evil?

What does evil mean? Labeling an act evil is a dangerous thing. Peoples perception's of good and evil are different all over the world. The majority of Americans saw 9-11 as a "evil" act but there are entire countries that would disagree with us. People say murdering a child is evil but the same people might think that abortion is ok. Many, if not all, people would say that Hitler was evil but had Germany won the war all of our perceptions would change. It seems that in America we as a country need a "evil" enemy to justify our military and our imperialistic actions. We first called England "evil" during the revolutionary war and then the Axis countries in WW I and II. Then communism and now Muslim extremists and terrorists. Evil is a subjective term and used as a blanket to cover up all kinds of American wrongs. Think about that? I am not saying that only America acts that way worldwide all countries seem to have a flexible grasp on "evil" depending on what they are trying to accomplish. Perhaps I shouldn't say countries but empires. Because (and make no mistake here) America is an empire it is just up to us wether or not we become an "evil" one or not.