Link...

First of all I say give Obama a chance in spite of my conservative beliefs. He would be hard pressed to top Bush's destructive tendencies. However, I do have several topics to take issue with:

1. How can Obama embrace the vision of our founding fathers? He stated that the constitution is a "negative charter".

2. I don't think our founding fathers envisioned an America with so many deadbeats. I thought our founding fathers came here to escape religious persecution and her majesty's taxing appetite. It appears to me that Obama's social political beliefs run counter to those of our founding fathers. Obama's plan of wealth distribution is nothing more than glorified welfare.

3. Obama's call to responsibility. Exactly who was that aimed at? It couldn't possibly be the tens of millions of illegal immigrants, or the tens of millions on welfare rolls. I guess what he meant is that those of us who are already responsible need to ante up a little more and be more responsible. I'm sorry - I'm already choking on a heavy tax burden and I don't think I can possibly be more responsible.

4. I know, I know..you progressives call this greed. However, what I know is that on top of my tax burden I still managed to give more money to charity than your vice president elect - per his tax disclosures.

In conclusion, America will not be able to compete in the future global market unless the following things occur:

1. Fair Tax

2. Term limits

3. Alternative energy

4. Federal debt reduction

5. Expulsion of all illegal aliens

6. Reduction of entitlement programs

7. Improve our education system

8. STOP paying drug addicts, drunks, losers, lazy asses, thugs, illegal aliens and somehow keep these knuckleheads from contributing to the gene pool!

Somehow, when people use the term "fair tax" they mean they don't want to pay taxes themselves. I see the graduated income tax as being extremely fair.

I am curious as to your plan to sterilize "losers", C-man. Would that mean the George W. Bush would have been sterilized? Or just the people who voted for him and put our country in is current situation?

You know I don't mind paying taxes. I just want the losers to get a job and pay some too. We don't have to sterilize the losers, just get them off uncle sams titt so they can they can either sink or swim. Most people are losers because they choose to be. I concede there is a portion of society that needs government help and by all means we are obligated to care for them. The problem is the government entitlement net is sheltering an overwhelming majority of deadbeats. Go to walmart and check out all of the handicapped people that walk in and out. Very few are handicapped. How many welfare recipients are driving around with a $5,000 set of rims? Too many. What percentage of food stamps are used to buy drugs? Too many. What is the percentage of americans that pay no taxes? Too many. How many of our hospitals are going bankrupt due to illegal immigrants? Too many. Its not just a problem, its a societal cancer that is dragging down our nation. Again, WC I submit to you that your progressive income tax is not working.

As for Bush I voted for him twice and I'll be the first to admit that mistake. Our problems did not just start 8 years ago. They started with the "Great Society". We have been through 11 defined recessions since the great depression, not the least of which was the "Carter Recession". Recessions are a byproduct of free market capitalism. They have occurred during watches of both parties and will continue to do so. You know that. You're too intelligent to believe that Bush is to blame for all of our problems. I have a question for you WC. When progressive taxation and entitlements get to the point where america's productive citizens pay 100% of their income to facilitate government is that progressive or socialism? If you look at the trends from 1776 to present that's where we're headed.

When progressive taxation and entitlements get to the point where america's productive citizens pay 100% of their income to facilitate government is that progressive or socialism?

There are any number of models in our history where we've grown the economy, reduced unemployment, and had increased entreprenurial activity. All of them have been during periods of higher taxes on higher incomes. They have also tended to be, though this is not universally treu, during periods with strong unions.

Cutting taxes for the richest of people simply hasn't worked. We were much better off before.

...Get you a gift that keeps on giving. I'll convert you yet!

There is a misconceptiion about social welfare. Somehow some media has managed to convince a lot of people that half their income goes into the pockets of lazy, unemployed but capable people.

Yes, there are people who take advantage. But welfare figures presented often include every entitlement program under the sun, some even include social security.

So I would like to ask folks to use caution when reading or hearing the inflated numbers. Some programs receiving our dollars, like veterans benefits, assistance to the severely disabled, health departments, college grants, public transportation, etc., etc., etc., are necessary programs, sometimes programs we all use.

We certainly should cut out all of the abuse. But it doesn't really account for much in the big picture. Even if we were to completely cut all AFDC and food stamps, the program that serves the neediest, it would provide less than 1% of the federal budget, and about the same to state budgets.

The income gap is growing, and wages aren't rising as fast as the cost of living. Times are especially tough.

No where in President Obama's plan did I read about an increase in welfare or redistribution of wealth. Building infrastructure and job creation is part of the plan.

I wish the media would be more responsible. Providing manipulated information just continues to divide us.

If there was ever a time to unite, today is that day.

Well I understand your job magnifies your view of this type of fraud. I have worked in case management and seen it myself. The 1% is not the fraudulent part. It's the whole part of AFDC and food stamps, including the majority who transfer in and out of the system every 6 to 18 months, i.e, those who use the system properly, during bad times until they get on their feet again.

The fraudulent part is much less than 1%. It's just that we see it every day so it appears that everyone but us is on welfare. But southern states are really the worst offenders. You would see less in other states. New England and the western states actually provide more revenue than they receive, while poor southern states receive more than the give. We have more poor people, more single white Mom's. That's not to say we should ignore their children, though.

And if you work in an industry that charges the government $400 for a part you or I can buy for $30, then you see an entirely different form of fraud. Defense contracts really suck up our dollars.

I guess what I'm saying is we shouldn't form opinions on just our personal exposure in our small corner of the country, or our self-limiting information sources telling us only what we want to hear and believe.

We should approach waste and fraudulent use of our tax dollars on real numbers provided from our own government. Granted, those numbers are not always easy to find, and sometimes two years old and difficult to extrapolate. But it is more factual than radio talk show hosts, "news" stations, and limited personal experiences.