Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

GOVERNMENT: Officials betray their oath of office

Letter by Thomas J. Marble, Spanaway on July 15, 2011 at 1:54 pm with 45 Comments »
July 15, 2011 1:54 pm

Our federally elected leaders solemnly swear (or affirm) to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. In my opinion this endless political game of partisan politics whose object is to support the party (take your pick) rather the people is a violation of that oath.

If our government goes into default we will suffer grievous harm to our nation, our identity, our system of government and our Constitution.

I wish it was possible to perform a mass impeachment, except that the judges and jury, conveniently, are the very ones who are about to betray us. The only other recourse that I can see is to firmly commit to refuse re-election for any incumbent from either party and to have single-term public servants until we can hold a constitutional convention and change the system our elected officials have created in our name.

Leave a comment Comments → 45
  1. ALL politicians are slime these days, no matter which side of the fence they’re on. They just tell the public what they want to hear, get elected, then change their colors like a chameleon….. Nobody has any REAL honor or integrity anymore. Like I’ve always said “if you have to use those two words to convince people you have them, you don’t !!! “

  2. Misunderestimated says:

    If we ever have a ballot with “None of the Above” as an option, None would win in a landslide.

  3. GHTaxPayer says:

    Thomas – you’ve fallen into the trap of believing Obama and the left wing media. There is ZERO chance of defaulting on our debts even if we don’t raise the debt ceiling. There is PLENTY of money coming in for tax cheat Tim Geithner to pay our creditors, pay the military and SS and Medicare. What will need to be cut is approximately 40% of other BS functions of government.

    It’s way past due to start cutting the bloated Federal Government.

  4. GHTaxPayer is exactly right. A new tea party slogan catching on right now is “It’s Timmy’s choice.”

    It really will be painful to straighten this mess out. The secret to solving it, in my view, is to cutoff all fed grants to the states except food stamps and medicare. This transfers the problem in 50 pieces to the states to solve on their own.

    Once those domestic promises are broken, the rest of the world will relax about whether we will pay our overseas bills because the feds will probably have a surplus cashflow at that point.

  5. Add medicaid to that list. Sorry for typing before coffee.

  6. “There is PLENTY of money coming in for tax cheat Tim Geithner to pay our creditors, pay the military and SS and Medicare. What will need to be cut is approximately 40% of other BS functions of government.”

    Those four items make up about 55.7% of the spending. That doesn’t leave much to spend on Medicaid, Homeland Security, VA, pensions, disaster assistance, and about 20 other major government functions.

  7. “It really will be painful to straighten this mess out. The secret to solving it, in my view, is to cutoff all fed grants to the states except food stamps and medicare. This transfers the problem in 50 pieces to the states to solve on their own. ”

    Why are you exempting Medicare and food stamps?

    Also what is your solution to the moochers? The ones who move to the state with the best benefits when it’s in their best interest.

  8. scuttlebutt says:

    Sorry to inform you Thomas but we have already left the constitution behind. We we can find our local, state and federal governments listed on Dunn and Bradstreet as businesses.

  9. No Spin Facts;

    Federal Gov
    August payments = $330 billion.
    August income $220 billion.
    Short fall $110 billion.

    Wall Street is set do down grade US credit rating is Debt Limit is not raised.

  10. aislander says:

    so…xring…IF we are $110 billion short, it is the fault of the politicians who put us into this position. Why should taxpayers and the private economy suffer for the malfeasance of politicians?

    Besides if I were in debt in proportion to what the Fed is and I had an income of, say, $220,000 and I was obligated to the tune of $330,000, what do you think MY options would be? I can assure you my creditors would not raise MY credit limit.

    They would force me into bankruptcy and make me deal with reality. Sorry to say, but that’s what America needs if we are going to be healthy in the future. We can’t afford everything for everybody.

    NOW they’re talking about a new Marshall Plan for Egypt and others–WHEN WILL IT EVER STOP?

    I don’t doubt that not raising the debt limit will cause pain, but not dealing with our spending addiction is going to cause it, too. There will be pain.

  11. aislander says:

    As for taxation: If you add the local, state, and federal taxes we pay, our overall taxation is greater than the European socialist nations. We are Taxed Enough Already…

  12. GHT and pgroup;
    BS functions like:
    subsidies to oil, gas, and agro businesses,
    bloated no-lose government contract,
    unnecessary defense spending, and
    tax codes that favorite big business and less than 1% of the public.

    Islander,
    Forget how we got here – the fact is we are and need to do something – lowering the debt by $4 trillion would be a start.

    Do we really want to find out what happens if the US defaults or goes bankrupt?

    I side with Wall Street and the Bankers who are warning both Parties of dire consequences if the Debt limit is not raised.

    ‘when will it stop’ when both sides start working for all citizens and not for special interest groups.

    “Marshall plan for Egypt” let them talk. And you and I can send post cards to Congress and the White House saying PUT AMERICA FIRST and LET MURBARIC PAY!

    Some of us are over taxed – others are not taxed enough.

  13. aislander says:

    Who doesn’t pay enough, xring? The rich? We have the MOST “progressive” taxation of any major industrialized nation…

  14. aislander says:

    Besides, if we “forget how we got here,” we’ll just keep going down the same path, trying to provide everything for everybody. We just can’t keep doing that.

    As for taxation: when has Congress used new revenues (I’m not saying there will actually BE any from a tax hike…) for anything but new spending? Ever?

  15. Misunderestimated,
    If each position on a ballot had ‘none of above’ there would be a lot of postions with no winner – which would not be a bad idea.

    Islander
    Sure would like to pay my income tax at a 15% like a super rich hage fund manager.

    How we got here is overspending by both parties and tax cuts.

    When has congress used new revenues for anything but new spending’ 105th and 106th

  16. qballrail says:

    RIGHT ON!!

  17. aislander says:

    xring writes: “How we got here is overspending by both parties and tax cuts…”

    Sorry, xring, but your math just doesn’t work. Even the most extravagant estimate of revenue “lost” due to the lower tax rates doesn’t even come CLOSE to the size of the deficits we’ve been running. It is, was, and will always be, a spending problem until we kick our addiction to spending. We can’t do everything for everybody…

  18. alindasue says:

    aislander,

    Several year ago, my husband and I went to a credit counselor. We had about $15,000 in credit and medical debt that only continued to grow despite the fact that we were making regular payments. We worked with the counselor on a plan to eliminate our debt over a three year period. We worked together to see how we could further reduce our spending. After that, the counselor suggested that we find a way to increase our income. My husband took on a second job. We are out of debt and doing fine now.

    I relate this story because like our family had, but on a much larger scale, this country has a lot of expenses and quite a bit of debt that it needs to be paid off. Yes, there are still some places where spending can be cut. However, we (as a country) need to spend a certain amount to function as a society and maintain our basic infrastructure, so we can only cut so far. We may need to increase our country’s “income”.

    Right now, the United States has more than enough debt. It may not be politically popular, but we have to face the fact that any plan to stabilize our economy and reduce (rather than add to) our debt will have to include an increase in income of some kind – most likely through taxes.

  19. aislander says:

    alindasue: Tax rates and tax revenue are two VERY different things. It is popular with the wealth-redistributionist crowd to do something called “static scoring,” in which one looks at current revenues, calculates how much more revenue is needed, and then raises rates accordingly, as if that raise will have no effect on the economy. Sorry, but that DOES NOT WORK. Revenues ALWAYS range between 14 and 20% of GDP, regardless of rates. Right now GDP is down, and many people have dropped into lower brackets. Therefore, revenues are around 14% of GDP. If rates are raised, economic activity will slow, and revenues will stay about the same or decrease. Proof? Revenues increased with the Kennedy tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the Bush tax cuts. Revenues didn’t fall under the Bush tax rates until the advent of the current economic contraction.

    It is not likely that revenues will increase appreciably (they may in fact fall) with a tax-rate increase. We need to stimulate the economy in a real way if we want to 1) get out of this economic malaise; 2) balance the budget; and 3) pay down the debt. Economic growth is the only thing that can save us, and I am not persuaded that the party holding the Presidency is in favor of that.

  20. menopaws says:

    Here we go again–it’s all about politics………Honoring our debts and setting an example of keeping our word to our children and to the rest of the world gets lost in the partisan vitrol………Not media hype if our bond rating is downgraded….That is the talk of the uniformed……..Pay attention—we lose our credit rating, interst rates go up for our debt and if you want to buy a house, a car, think 18% percent, like it was in the early 80’s……….This is NOT some political or media game. This is very, very serious stuff……….And, I’m tired of listening to people point fingers and blame…..Just tell these elected morons to quit flapping their mouths for TV cameras and remember who they work for…….It isn’t their favorite lobbyist or the oil companies……who, actually at this point are also scared because their interest rates are going to also rise when they need to borrow…….Bunch of amateurs in the House and I hope they are gone in 2012–even the Republicans in the Senate are ready to puke……..these people have no grasp of basic economics………The tea party has literally ruined it’s chances of being a force—people are regretting their votes…….I feel sorry for regular Republicans—they embraced the snake and it bites in a way that frightens most of them………Tea party is NOT mainstream–not smart enough to understand basic economics……….

  21. aislander says:

    Menopaws: Is the Federal government spending too much or isn’t it?

  22. Islander,
    Of course Bush’s tax cuts don’t equal the Debt. But they are a major factor.
    Five myths about the bush tax cuts:

    1. Extending the tax cuts would be a good way to stimulate the economy.
    2. Allowing the high-income tax cuts to expire would hurt small businesses.
    3. Making the tax cuts permanent will lead to long-term growth.
    4.The Bush tax cuts are the main cause of the budget deficit.
    5. Continuing the tax cuts won’t doom the long-term fiscal picture; entitlements are the real problem.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/07/30/AR2010073002671.html

    What’s popular with the foxbat mob is to talk about tax rates as if there were no tax loopholes.( Income – loopholes) X Tax Rate = tax paid ( or tax refund ).

  23. After severely cutting taxes in his first year in office, why did Reagan raise taxes 11 times during the rest of his time as POTUS?

    Because, try as he might, he couldn’t find a way to cut the federal budget enough to make up for the revenue lost to his 1981 tax cuts.

    http://www.pastforwardpolitics.com/2011/02/myth-of-reagans-tax-cuts.html

  24. aislander says:

    1) You’re right. Maintaining the status quo is not stimulative. We need new tax cuts.
    2) You’re wrong. Subchapter S corporations (most small businesses) report as individual taxpayers, and the majority show incomes over $250K, even though the owner doesn’t come close to keeping that money. Every dollar that goes to government is a dollar that’s not paying a worker or expanding the business.
    3) Tax rates are just one component leading to economic growth, but raising them certainly hurts growth.
    4) Agreed: that’s a myth.
    5)MAY not “doom” growth, but are an unnecessary millstone, since revenues don’t vary in proportion to rates as a percentage of GDP.
    6)I would love to do away with ALL “loopholes,” and go to a simplified flat tax or consumption tax to replace the income tax.

  25. aislander says:

    Reagan was promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. It sounded like a good deal to him, but that’s what you get when you believe a Democrat. Incidentally, someone close to me was with the State Department and participated in the four-power conferences after WWII. She swore one could never trust a Russian. Same goes for Dems, who have a common world view with our former allies…

  26. wealth-redistributionist crowd

    Cute…..but, when one looks at what has actually happened it seems clear that, as Kucinich has pointed out, the wealth-redistributionist crowd are working to redistribute the money upward to the top bracket – not the other way round.

    http://www.truth-out.org/debt-political-theater-diverts-attention-while-americans-wealth-stolen/1310741026

  27. Whether we cut spending or increase taxes, or a combination of both, it’s a game of musical chairs until we stop exporting jobs and money. We need to plug the giant hole in our economy bucket.

  28. menopaws says:

    The government is currently spending billions a month on two wars—-and yes, it is too much. But, I didn’t hear one damn Republican complaining about it when George Bush was flapping his mouth about the weapons of mass destruction that never showed up…….Raised the debt ceiling SEVEN times. So, there is hypocrisy in lecturing people about the debt ceiling and spending by people who rolled over and played dead for the Iraq War and all the lies associated with it. I refuse to be lectured by people who weren’t bright enough to stop two wars OFF THE BOOKS, during the Bush years. They made sure those deficit figures were lower by some “creative” bookkeeping. They fail to impress me with their new fervor now.

  29. Islander,
    1. The myth (falsehood) is that extending or increasing tax cuts stimulate the economy .

    The truth is they do not.

    2. The right claims 23 million small-business owners make more than $250,000 per year.

    The truth is that the vast majority do not.

    http://factcheck.org/2008/07/mccains-small-business-bunk/

    For the rest of your counter points – rather than burden us with your opinions give references.

    Regan taxes – I’ve heard the 3/1 myth before – but have not seen references for it.

    Besides Reagan was not interested in spending cuts – He was almost as big as Bush

  30. “Even the most extravagant estimate of revenue “lost” due to the lower tax rates doesn’t even come CLOSE to the size of the deficits we’ve been running. It is, was, and will always be, a spending problem until we kick our addiction to spending. We can’t do everything for everybody…”

    Just keep making stuff up ailander, so far your credibility has gone from zero to several dregrees less than zero.

  31. aislander says:

    Well, tax cuts did and have. Maintaining the status quo (current tax rates) does not, xring…

    “Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.”

    As for my other points: I either agree with you, or I have supported them in other posts.

    Here’s what Krugman said about the Reagan era: “The secret of the long climb after 1982 was the economic plunge that preceded it. By the end of 1982 the U.S. economy was deeply depressed, with the worst unemployment rate since the Great Depression. So there was plenty of room to grow before the economy returned to anything like full employment.”
    Well, yes…By that standard, we should REALLY take off after Obama…

    beerBoy: Catch the recent dialogue between Rep, Jim Moran (D-VA) and one of his constituents. Priceless!

  32. aislander says:

    xring and beerBoy: Apparently your comrade in charms failed math…

  33. aislander says:

    Oh–did I fail to attribute that first quotation about the effects of tax cuts? That was John Fitzgerald Kennedy…

  34. Keep making it up aislander, we are all getting a big laugh out of you.

  35. aislander says:

    Here’s Jim Moran on redistributing wealth:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIix40JJSGo

  36. aislander says:

    On page 11 of today’s NY “Times” is a report by IMF citing a large number of economists, stating that the single most damaging move that a government in the position of ours overseeing an economy in the position of ours is to raise taxes. Countries that cut spending without raising taxes do much better. Cheers!

  37. aislander says:

    Left out the verb: “…the single most damaging move that a government…can make is to raise taxes” is what it should have read.

  38. Raise taxes on the right group and they won’t have as much money to send our jobs overseas.

  39. aislander says:

    Gee, xring: THAT sounds like cutting off one’s nose to spite his face. In any case, a majority of economists (including one from UC Berkeley!) state that raising taxes harms the economy

  40. Roncella says:

    Hold the presses, Didn’t that financial wizzard President Obama state recently that raisng taxes when the economy is falling is wrong, wrong, wrong, and will cause more un-employment ????

  41. The IMF!!???!!

  42. aislander says:

    Yes, the IMF, which does economic studies. Below is a link to the NY “Times” article that refers to the IMF study, and below that is a link to the actual study.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/us/18econ.html?scp=1&sq=tax%20increases%20hurt%20economy&st=cse

    http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2010/020410a.pdf

  43. aislander says:

    :Why, yes he DID, Roncella, when he argued for extending the current tax rates…

  44. Islander,
    The Constitution gives Congress the right to levy taxes, and gives the government the right to spend money. Al this BS about the government stealing money is just that – BS.

    Stopping jobs from going overseas is the only way we can survive as a first rate nation.

    I seem to remember the neocons wanting to pull the US out of the IMF.
    Now they are quoting in as Holy Writ.

    Fact check – Obama never augured for extending the bush tax rates for those earning over $250,000 per year. What he said was extending the bush tax rates for those earning over $250,000 per year (about 2% of the population) was wrong.

  45. aislander says:

    I’m not advocating the mission of the IMF, merely quoting a study it commissioned. But nice try playing the hypocrisy card!

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0