.

"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever." - John Adams
Showing posts with label chuck donovan for senate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chuck donovan for senate. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Vote for Shane Bruce, Libertarian Candidate for Insurance Commissioner in GA
















Ralph Hudgens, Republican candidate for Insurance Commissioner in Georgia on the left.
Hank Hill, Republican from Arlen, TX on the right.

They both sell propane and propane accessories.

Have you ever seen the two of them in the same room together? I thought not. It may be possible then that Ralph Hudgens is actually Hank Hill, and therefore a cartoon character. Actually, I'm sure he's not a cartoon character, but he is a career politician and part of the problem in government today. Mr. Hudgens has taken campaign contributions from lobbyists representing the very businesses he wishes to regulate as Insurance Commissioner. During the debates on GPB last Sunday, he even defended taking those contributions as not being any sort of conflict of interest. This makes his stance on the office a bit of a mockery, somewhat cartoonish, if you will.

This is why you should cast your vote for a real man, a man's man. Someone with principles founded in Liberty and the Free Market. No more back room dealings, no more bribes....uh, contributions from those he would be regulating.




Shane Bruce, Libertarian Candidate for Insurance Commissioner in GA.

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Johnny Isakson, Himself, Is The Biggest Reason To Vote For Chuck Donovan!

Financial Matters

Based on the his Feb, 2009 Fundraising Letter, Mr. Isakson’s prior statements and materials posted on his website, Mr. Isakson is a zealous fighter for financial responsibility, lower spending, tax simplification and free markets. However, his voting record (which can be found at www.votesmart.org) and other facts prove the opposite is true. The following facts indicate the opposite is true:

  • Before the Democrats took control of Congress (in 2007), Mr. Isakson consistently voted for tremendous increases in the national debt.
  • When the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House and spending increases averaged greater than 7 percent per year (while the economy was growing at slightly under 3 percent per year), Mr. Isakson consistently voted with the Republican Party’s leadership with respect to budget, spending and tax matters, including a period beginning on July 19, 2001 and ending on October 7, 2004 during which he never voted against a budget, spending or taxes bill (with 75 “yes” votes); during the 2001-2006 Republican controlled period, federal debt increased by approximately 50 percent.
  • Every year Mr. Isakson has been in Congress, non-defense spending has grown, both in real dollar terms and in inflation adjusted terms (and Mr. Isakson has voted in favor of this growth all years his party has been in power).
  • Mr. Isakson has never proposed, nor voted in favor of, a substantial cut in federal spending; however, he has voted in favor of: (a) many substantial increases in federal spending; and (b) tremendous annual deficits.
  • Mr. Isakson voted in favor of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which added Medicare Part D; then Comptroller General David M. Walker (head of the GAO) called the legislation “probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s”.
  • Mr. Isakson has consistently voted in favor of farm subsidies (which are contrary to market forces), and has consistently voted against reducing subsidies for wealthy individuals.
  • tax system changes Mr. Isakson has voted in favor of have greatly complicated the individual income tax system, as evidenced by the increase in time necessary to assemble an individual tax return from 2000-2007 (found in the instructions to Form 1040 for these years).
  • Mr. Isakson voted against allowing negotiation of group discount rates with respect to drug purchases under Medicare Part D.
  • Mr. Isakson voted against including future military expenditures for Iraq and Afghanistan in the regular budget (where they belong) instead of in emergency supplemental bills.
  • Mr. Isakson voted against creation of a special committee to investigate awarding of contracts in Afghanistan and Iraq taking into consideration: bidding, methods of contracting, subcontracting oversight procedures, allegations of wasteful practices, accountability and lessons learned.
  • When the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, Mr. Isakson consistently voted against “pay-go” bills, which would have necessitated spending increases be coupled with spending decreases or tax increases to pay for the spending increases.

Recently, Mr. Isakson has said the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts need to be made permanent. However, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has reported that making those cuts permanent without spending cuts would cause the national debt to increase by an additional $3.9 trillion (i.e. $3,900,000,000,000) over the next 10 years. By way of comparison, the federal government’s total revenue for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 was approximately $2.1 trillion. Prior to the TARP and the ARRA, the GAO foresaw our nation’s debts “spiraling out of control” under either major party’s leadership. Mr. Isakson’s voting record is what it is. If you believe our nation’s debts, government expansion and unfunded liabilities are significant problems, then having Mr. Isakson as one of our U.S. senators is a significant problem.

Civil Liberties

Mr. Isakson wishes for people to believe he respects the Constitution, including the rights provided by the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. His voting record provides otherwise. Evidence follows (all of which can be verified at www.votesmart.org). Mr. Isakson voted:

  • in favor of the Patriot Act, which allows spying by the federal government on U.S. citizens without a search warrant; he later twice voted for reauthorization of the Patriot Act
  • to allow the FBI to conduct roving wiretaps and access business records without a search warrant
  • in favor of immunity for electronic communication surveillance providers
  • against making the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) the exclusive means by which surveillance can be conducted on domestic wire, oral and electronic communications
  • against a bill that would have required the Director of the CIA and others to report to congressional committees every three months on detention, interrogation and rendition programs.

Illegal Immigration

Mr. Isakson desires people to believe he is a strong fighter against illegal immigration. In reality (based on his voting record), the only thing he has strongly fought for is a wall on the Mexican border with troops to man the wall. When it comes to setting up a system to stop employment of illegal aliens by penalizing companies that hire illegal aliens—an effective means of solving the existing problem and future problems—Mr. Isakson has consistently refused to do anything. Perhaps the money he draws from the companies prevents him from acting. Proof is available at www.votesmart.org.

So you can clearly see from his voting record that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Johnny and his Democratic Challenger, Michael Thurmond. If you want leadership that is really different, you have to vote differently. Vote Chuck Donovan, Libertarian Candidate for US Senate.


Thursday, September 16, 2010

AGAINST ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC

Today is Constitution Day 2010 and I wonder how many Americans will notice. The first thing a Senator does once elected, is to swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, “against all enemies foreign and domestic”. Just how does a Senator or an American take a leadership position in the defense of the Constitution?

The Constitution begins by forming the structure of the government. Note that the separation of power and the checks and balances are all on the government. There are no such limitations on the individual.

As I read the Bill of Rights, I notice the two most striking things about the Constitution. The first is the amount of negative language with clear commands. Look for phrases such as “Congress shall make no law…”, or “…the right of the people to…, shall not be infringed.”. These make it clear that “We the people” are dictating to the government, not the other way around. We tell the government what to do in a commanding tone. The second thing is the way the Constitution discusses rights. Specifically it never states the word “right” without preceding it with the word “the”. This is a clear acknowledgement of the framers recognition that our rights preexist government.

However, the Constitution does not enforce the law all by itself. It cannot take action to stop a Congress from enacting laws that violate Constitutional principles. That action has to begin with a proper understanding of what our rights really are and how important a limited government is to the preservation of those rights. Words written on a piece of paper won’t enforce law or stop tyrants. Individual people do that. Without action by the people of the United States, the Constitution is meaningless.

The responsibility is clearly upon us. Will we read the actual words of the Constitution ourselves our sit passively while others do the work for us? Will we accept slick marketing that delivers self-serving interpretations of the Constitution? Should we accept ideas like those of Alexander Hamilton who suggested we read “between the lines” of the Constitution looking for expanded government powers, or will we remember Jefferson’s retort that he had checked very carefully between the lines and found only, “blank space”?

My challenge to you is to pick one day a year that you set aside to read our beautiful Declaration of Independence and Constitution. These documents are the envy of the world. The least we can do is spend a little time each year, maybe Constitution Day or maybe July 4th, and read the words that make some of the best things in our way of life possible.

Knowing the words and the message of our founding documents will not just keep them alive, but will keep them alive in the most important place where the Constitution must reside – in our hearts and minds. This is the best defense we can give our law, our country, and our fellow Americans, “… against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”