All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Patty Murray & Her Newest Dishonest Campaign Ad


Originally posted as Patty on Dino on Boeing on the Seattle Times opinion page, by Bruce Ramsey

In a new ad, Sen. Patty Murray has charged Dino Rossi with not caring about Boeing jobs, which is ridiculous. The ad goes like this:
Announcer: Illegal foreign subsidies are threatening Boeing jobs, putting the Air Force tanker contract in jeopardy. When Dino Rossi was asked if he thought Boeing workers should have a level playing field, he said…

Dino Rossi: No, not as far as I’m concerned.

Announcer: Dino doesn’t get it… He doesn’t care enough about our jobs going overseas. Dino Rossi - just not on our side.

Sen. Murray: I’m Patty Murray and I sponsored this ad because the men and women who defend our country should be flying planes built in America.
This ad pulled a Rossi quote out of context. He said it in an editorial board at the Tacoma News Tribune. Here is how it went:
QUESTION: On the issue of trade, I wanted to ask Mr. Rossi about WTO rulings that have come out both against the EU and the US - and I realize we’re still sorting out the U.S. and how bad that may be. But if it does come out as it appears, at least from the US side, that Airbus got harder than Boeing did, do you believe that should have a factor - be a factor in the awarding of the tanker contract?

ROSSI: We need to fight for the tanker contract no matter what. The ruling, how it ever comes out - the reality is that the Boeing company since 1977 has lost 30,000 jobs in our state and we have to make sure we fight hard for that. You know, I’ve had a family member working continuously for the Boeing company since World War II and I - talk about a Boeing family, you want to talk about a Boeing family. And unfortunately there - this is, I think, where we - where I divert from Senator Murray on a number of different things. The Boeing company, they don’t want things like - that Senator Murray’s sponsoring such as card check, which is eliminating the secret ballot for unions. They don’t want the $150 million tax increase that they calculate as going to be coming from the health care bill. These are the sorts of things that are going to hurt the Boeing company.

I will be there. I will fight the, obviously fight for jobs. The reality is that we have to make sure that we have the right playing field to do that. And I will be, you know - strong on those issues.

Q: When you say “fight for it,” and “you want a level playing field” - I’m not still understanding if you’re saying that that WTO ruling should have a factor in the tanker bid?

ROSSI: No, not as far as I’m concerned, no.
Is the questioner asking about the WTO ruling against Airbus earlier this year or the WTO ruling against (and also for) Boeing just released? The question is not clear. The Boeing ruling is news; the Airbus ruling isn’t, so it’s more likely the questioner is talking about the Boeing ruling, and that Rossi is saying that it not be a reason to deny the contract to Boeing.

Rossi’s spokeswoman said that’s what he meant. The Murray campaign assumed otherwise, and issued a statement that began this way:

"Seattle, WA , Sept. 20- Instead of standing up for Washington state Boeing workers as Senator Patty Murray has always done, constant candidate Dino Rossi today said that illegal, job-killing WTO subsidies given to Airbus should NOT be taken into account in awarding the next Air Force tanker contract.

"The next day, a Rossi spokeswoman was asked whether Rossi would have the Air Force ignore the French subsidies to Airbus as well as the U.S. subsidies to Boeing. (The USAF has said it is ignoring both rulings, but nobody was asking them.) And the Rossi spokeswoman said she'd have to ask Rossi."

Which was reasonable. If the spokeswoman doesn't know, she shouldn't make stuff up. The Murray camp immediately put out a press release saying:

Dino Rossi’s first instinct was to throw Washington workers under the bus and even upon reflection he’s not so sure whether job-killing subsidies should be considered in the tanker bids. He doesn’t understand or doesn’t care..."

And then the Murray camp went on the air with their ad accusing Rossi of not caring about Washington workers.

This is nonsense. Dino Rossi did not express an uncaring sentiment; he was for Boeing "no matter what." And further: as a senator from Washington he would have to be. No senator from Washington, Democrat or Republican, would put the interests of France, Spain and the U.K. ahead of the Boeing Company.

The senator's ad is dishonest. It is preposterous.

In slamming Murray's ads, I am not defending Rossi’s. He has one that blames Sen. Murray for Boeing setting up 787 assembly plant in South Carolina, and also for moving its headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, implying that it was her job to prevent those acts. They were corporate acts, and Murray cannot be blamed for them. Nor could any other senator. So those, in my view, are misleading. But they are not as grossly malicious as the Murray ads.

~~~~~~~~~

Patty Murray issued the video "Airbus" repeating her lies about Dino Rossi. Power is so important to Patty Murray she will repeat a distortion even after the lie is exposed. She ought to retire from the Senate.

Monday, September 20, 2010

Patty Murray is lying about Dino Rossi.



In this official campaign ad, Murray claims Dino Rossi sold himself to Wall Street Financial interests.

Patty Murray is lying.

The Facts
According to the Federal Election Commission, Dino Rossi got donations from 30 Political Action Committees, for a total of 6.4% of all of his campaign donations. Almost 87% of Rossi's campaign donations come from individual donations. But...

Mr Rossi got no banking PAC donations at all.. None. Zero. Zilch.

On the other hand, according to the Federal Election Commission report on her, Patty Murray got donations from a total of 1219 Political Action Committees, 1121 of which are out-of-state. Patty Murray received 24.3% of her campaign funding from PACs. Only 75.7% came from individuals.

Senator Patty Murray took in $11,600 from 3 different banking PACs. If you count non-banking financial institutions, this amount goes much, much higher.

Patty Murray's claims are so outrageous they call for investigation. Washington State voters have to decide if they like Patty Murray lying to them.

Did Patty Murray help?

Senator Patty Murray boasts she backed all the bailouts and small business "tax breaks." (See YouTube) Despite what CNBC and like Party controlled cheerleaders say, its clear the bailouts have prolonged the economic malaise.

Normal economics require re-allocation of productive assets and labor be done freely. In normal economics this hurts for a short time. But free markets are very quick, then everyone is back to work again. Patty Murray worked to freeze the economy instead, causing a longer agony.

The "tax breaks" have been so intricate they applied mainly if the small business was already flush enough they could afford to hire the staff necessary to comply with the breaks. In other words, the only businesses who could afford the breaks were businesses which didn't need them. The other way a business could obtain a "small business tax break" is by towing the "Democratic" Party line, i.e. kickbacks and corruption.

Patty Murray has helped to push the nation deeper into debt. Murray has saddled the children with a monster debt burden for decades to come, but Patty doesn't care. She has power and she boasts about it. This is the "Democratic" Party's main failing: Eating the young.

Get State Government Out of Liquor Sales

The forces arrayed against Initiatives 1100 and 1105 are lying through their teeth. They claim the initiatives will ruin small, privately owned wineries. Talk about fear mongering.

Wineries will be unaffected. Bottled wine is already sold through grocery stores and other licensed retailers. Taverns and restaurants already dispense wine by the glass or bottle. The distribution of wine will be unchanged.

The only thing the initiatives do is reduce the state's control of hard liquor sales through the State Liquor Control Board owned stores. Retailers would still be licensed and required to operate according to the rules. Liquor taxes are unaffected.

The State Liquor Control Board is an artifact of the national attempt in the 1920s to eliminate alcoholic beverages. The 18th Amendment prohibited sales of any sort of spirits and the Federal Volstead Act underscored prohibition with federal enforcement. 1920s government control of society was set to soar.

It didn't work out that way. Instead, gangsters got their foothold in American society. Nearly all modern crime problems and government gun control got started during the government's effort to change society morals.

When national Prohibition failed, the US Government recognized it and in 1934 repealed prohibition. Ever backwards, Olympia immediately instituted the State Liquor Control Board for control of -- and to profit from -- Demon Rum.

Its time to eliminate the State Liquor Control Board altogether and get the state out of the liquor trade. The legislature will still set liquor taxes. I-1100 will do this.

I-1105 is a half-hearted attempt which will close the State Liquor Control Board retail operations; the SLCB will still exist and administer prices and distribute profit. (That explains why the SLCB has never made any money)

The Impolite should vote for I-1100.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Reasons To Vote No on I-1098, the Income Tax Initiative

In a television advertisement, Bill Gates Sr. came out in favor of Initiative 1098 -- the income tax initiative. Mr Gates is not as wealthy as his son, the Microsoft Bill Gates, but the senior bill is a pretty wealthy lawyer. There is nothing wrong with being wealthy; I'd like to try it too.

But a rich guy is for it: Does this mean I-1098 income tax is good for Washington State? Or does it mean the rich Gates Sr. thinks he can dodge income taxes? Would anybody sincerely try to increase his own taxes?

1098's real hazard is in the details. Washington State's constitution effectively bans income tax. In order to get around the ban, the initiative would legally redefine your income as not your property, but rather a purchase subject to excise tax. This is so nutty most people can't believe it, but its there (See the section 501 pdf)

The other hazard of I-1098 is the legislature will not be satisfied with the tiny amount of tax collected from the rich people. Washington's constitution allows the legislature to change initiatives after a two year waiting period. The legislature will have a voter approved tax. The legislature's recent history shows they will extend the income tax to everyone who makes an income.

If you're tired of paying taxes on nearly everything in Washington State, you should vote against new taxes on income. They'll get around to taxing you with whatever you vote for. Vote No on I-1098.

~~~~~~~~
Afterword

The top five donors to the Initiative 1098 campaign, according to Ballotpedia

Most revealing is the government bureaucrats' union, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), gave $1,237,954. The Washington State Federation of State Employees gave $100,000. The union bosses will be delighted to tax you.

Bill Gates Sr. gave $500,000 to sponsor I-1098. The other two major donors are Nicolas Hanauer at $250,000 and Ann Wyckoff, $200,000.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Legislators fiddle while Washington burns

Governor Gregoire has announced she will authorize across the board cuts to state agencies starting October 1. We won’t know how big those cuts will be until Thursday’s quarterly revenue forecast update.

The state has collected about $190 million less than expected since the June revenue forecast. (This is no surprise. Taxes depress economic activity, a point the "Democratic" Party mulishly refuses to get --- BQ.)

Thursday’s forecast is likely to be bad enough to wipe out the state’s remaining reserves, and to push the budget into the red. Hence, Governor Gregoire’s executive order for budget cuts.

Posted by Amber Gunn at Liberty Live

Friday, September 10, 2010

Senator Patty Murray Heroically Saved Jobs?

Not at all.

Senator Patty Murray is lying about ObamaCare in truly creative ways.

Patty Murray's latest campaign ad tries to take credit for leaving privately owned medical facilities somewhat less clobbered by the feds.

Her target in this particular propaganda is Wenatchee Valley Hospital. The Hospital is also called the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center, a privately owned medical center in Wenatchee, Washington. Wenatchee is in the esophagus of Washington State, sort of.

Senator Patty Murray claims the "[T]he Wenatchee Valley Hospital was in danger of closing its doors. Senator Patty Murray fought to restore funding and saved 1,500 jobs in Central Washington." By "fought" she means she was mud slinging again.

Senator Patty Murray conveniently forgot she and her "Democratic" Party cronies are the cause of the pending shutdown. ObamaCare prohibits privately owned hospitals. After bilking the Hospital and voting for ObamaCare, Patty Murray agreed to champion a change in federal regulation which "saved" the Hospital.

Pure extortion.

Of course the ad spins it differently. Patty Murray got 3 of the dozen or so Democrats on the hospital staff, plus the establishment-liberal mayor of Wenatchee, to agree that she saved the Hospital. The truth is, Congressman Doc Hastings(R) has been working to save the clinic from stupid legislation since 2007.

Senator Patty Murray should check with the rank and file employees of the hospital, who despise her for using their job security so deceitfully.

Report filed via Bob1, from Wenatchee

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Patty Murray saved us all --- yawn

To hear Patty Murray tell it in her campaign advertising, she single handedly saved us from "Wall Street Bankers" The "Wall Street Bankers" threaten our way of life so the "Democratic" Party controlled government had to restrict the bankers from lending us money. You see, Patty Murray knows we the People are too stupid to mind our own business.

So Patty Murray voted for financial regulation (FINREG) which richly rewarded "Democratic" Party operatives with positions of great power. Yay, Patty Murray.

Naturally, Dino Rossi thinks we can be trusted to mind our own financial affairs, so he would like to reverse the FINREG. Boo... Hiss....

I can't believe the stupidity the Democratic Party expects from their own supporters.

~~~~~~~~

Now if only Patty Murray would save us from the "Democratic" Party economic platform.

Since the Democratic Party took control of Congress (where the laws are made) in 2007, U.S. unemployment rates have increased dramatically. Here's an month by month overview


The chart shows the last ten years of data. You can download the raw data spreadsheet for yourself from the US Government Bureau of Labor Statistics. The link is rigged to download the latest spreadsheet, so the data will grow next month.

The chart shows the economy began to get worse within 12 months of the "Democratic" Party taking control. The immediate impact is the same magnitude as the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, which shows in the 2002-3 employment statistics.

The "Democratic" Party damage gets worse the longer it goes on. The clear cut cost of having the "Democratic" Party control Congress and the White House shows as an increase in unemployment of over 4% --- from under 6% to 9-10%.

Millions are out of work thanks to the "Democratic" Party. That much unemployment is a lot of human misery.

Friday, September 3, 2010

Gun Control's Senator Patty Murray

When Senator Patty Murray was elected in 1992, the very first thing she did upon being sworn in was to propose a 10,000% ad valorem excise tax on ammunition. That bill died, since it would dramatically increase the cost to local government of outfitting police forces (Apparently Murray wouldn't mind this).

Then Patty Murray voted for the Brady Law, which gave us national waiting periods and the “Instant” Check. Senator Patty Murray also voted for the “Violent Crime Control And Law Enforcement Act Of 1994,” which gave us magazine bans and the so-called "Assault Weapons Ban."

Her contempt of self-defense goes even farther. That same year, Senator Patty Murray introduced legislation that would raise the handgun tax to 25 percent and extend the tax to all intermediate transactions — from manufacturer to distributor through retailer to consumer. The total tax would be a 95% added to the cost of a firearm.

~~~~~~~~
Gun Control by Taxation Archives

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Lying Politicians

I really shouldn't watch television at all. Lying politicians tick me off.

Incumbent Senator Patty Murray's lying is fevered in intensity. Now Murray's ads assert candidate Dino Rossi is somehow going to prolong the economic depression Patty Murray voted to start.

Murray takes this stand because she sold herself to the Union bosses.

The union bosses insist she defend monster raises for the rank and file government workers so operatives like Gov Christine Gregoire raise taxes on the people of Washington State to pay inflated wages to State union employees.

Presently the state employees make about 22% more per hour than citizens who are lucky enough to have a job. Plus deluxe medical, dental, eyeglasses, etc. The kind of stuff we get to pay for, especially under Obamacare, another Patty Murray backed people restriction.

Senator Murray is doing nothing other than pushing the addiction to federal control and government intrusion.

~~~~~~~~
American jobs are being shipped to China because of Patty Murray and the rotten policies she votes for.

1. The present administration has gotten us deeply into debt with the Chinese. They want payback, and Senator Patty Murray has voted for those programs.

2. Senator Patty Murray has repeatedly voted to enslave private enterprise to the federal government. This raises the cost of US domestic production to the point it the doors of the factory must be closed.

3. Senator Patty Murray never met a tax she didn't like to tax us with.

4. Senator Patty Murray voted to impose ObamaCare. The "Democratic" Party now admits ObamaCare will raise everybody's cost of medical care.

Senator Patty Murray, you got to go. Your kind of government is way too costly.

~~~~~~~~
For more about “Democratic” Party gun control efforts, see Just Facts


Vote Against Income Tax

Its another tax
If passed, Initiative 1098 will impose an income tax on Washington State wage earners making more than $200,000 per year.

The Legislature is greedy
Despite the fact that the drafters of I-1098 stipulated income tax would be imposed only on high wage earners, the State Constitution says the legislature can change that restriction after 2 years. Want to bet the legislature will make all income taxable? Remember this is the legislature which threw out I-960 tax restrictions as soon as they could. All other accountability and transparency measures in I-1098 are just as vulnerable.

If 1098 is passed, what you earn is not yours.
Income taxation is not the most pernicious part of 1098. In order to get around the State Constitutional restrictions (Article 7, section 1 requires uniform, not "progressive" taxation on property), I-1098 re-defines your income as not your property, until you take physical possession of the income. This is obscene.

Vote NO on 1098.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

The Myth of Wage Inequality.

Washington State voters are going to vote on I-1098 to decide whether the state gets to tax our income.

The statistic keeps popping up that the top 20% of wage earners earn 9, 10 or 11 times as much as the bottom 20% of wage earners.* Governor Christine Gregoire and her buddy Bill Gates Sr. would have us believe this requires a state income tax to set straight.

What we have to pretend is that if someone finds himself in the bottom 20% of wage earners, he's stuck. There is nothing he can do to get increased income. This assumption is bogus.

The most important thing you can do to increase your income is get older. The bottom 20% of earners is overwhelmingly inhabited by young people. A special example of a young person getting a lower annual wage is the college student who works only in the Summer.

Generally, the young wage earner is most likely the newest person on the job. That makes him or her least experienced and least productive. As people gain experience, they also gain income, unless they decide to stay with perpetually low income jobs by frequent quitting.

As a worker ages, he or she gains experience and stability. Both of these qualities makes the worker more desirable and productive. The employer will pay more to retain the better worker.

Compare age versus income, 2008 **

There is no such thing as an income tax on the rich in America. Riches are always property, not income. There is only a tax on better workers, better producers. The drop in average income after age 65 is presumably based on the effect of retirement form the work force. By the age of 65, you hope to be rich enough to be able to pay for the remaining years of your life.

In order to justify "progressive" income taxes, the politician must pretend to be interested in social justice or similar lies. In fact, politicians are greedy to take more of the peoples' money.

More taxes means less sales, less sales means fewer jobs, fewer jobs means no recovery anytime soon.

~~~~~~~~

* The precise multiplier is dependent on whether the statistician compared pre-tax wages or post tax wages. You see, politicians love to find new excuses to raise taxes so they can take more of the peoples' money for themselves.

** table based on ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/ce/standard/2008/age.txt

What other people read on this blog

Effing the ineffable - Washington State elections sometimes have been rigged.

“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
-- Joseph Stalin