Beyond the Cusp

December 2, 2017

“Not My President” Stance Explained

 

We have all seen the posters by now, as we have had almost a full year of active demonstrations against the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency. We thought the time had come to try and explain what we have observed and the ruminations we have had over the broad spectrum of the “Not My President” movement and rallies, the “Revolution” as some have referred to these protests and oppositions to the President. The very first thing we have observed has been the majority of the mainstream media and the coverage. The “Not My President” rallies and proponents have been far more graciously received and have been given benefits and less critical oppositions than were those who opposed President Obama. Many will point to the “facts” that the anti-Obama people were racists with no real proof or actual accusations which withstood the investigative media while the investigative media has backed and verified every single accusation against President Trump. We would like to add one small observation, namely that the criticisms of President Trump have by and large been character assassinations with varying degrees of validity and the closest charge against the actual electing of President Trump has been the claim that he lost the popular vote by three-million plus votes.

 

That may be true but it is not valid as he won the Electoral College vote and that is what the Constitution states elects the President and as far as the Electoral College not representing accurately the popular vote, that is a problem which must be remedied state by state one at a time. The Constitution simply states that the Electoral College will give each state one elector for each house seat plus two, one for each Senator and that the District of Columbia gets three electors and that each state and the District of Columbia may designate any method they deem proper for selecting their electors. This permits the winner take all, state legislatures choosing electors, each district electing an elector with the two remaining going to the winner of the state or the candidate with the majority or minority of electors, whatever they decide is fair. As the Federal Government is precluded from selecting the method and it is assigned the states, the states individually must decide and that is where that fight must be fought. President Trump won the election fair and square, by the book, under the rules known ahead of time and just because California voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, that does not mean she should have won and may be part of why she lost, she won three or four states overwhelmingly but lost around a dozen states by a slim margin by comparison, and that is why Trump is President and Clinton is not. Now people can accuse the President of any of a multitude of character faults and flaws, that does not mean he cannot be President. Once he was sworn in the only means of removing him were wait for 2020 or impeachment with a guilty verdict from the Senate. The second option will remain unlikely unless something drastically changes even should the Democrats take the Senate as it takes more than a simple majority of the Senate for a guilty verdict. The other question for the “Not My President” crowd would be, who exactly do you believe would become President should Trump be removed? If you believe it would be Hillary Clinton, then you are horribly mistaken. The next in line would be Vice President Pence and on down the Line of Succession should Pence be removed before the Senate approved his choice for a new Vice President. If you research the Line of Succession, you will not find Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or any other top Democrat and the first non-Republican is General Mattis, an Independent. Those are the hard factual truths.

 

Not My President Protests

Not My President Protests

 

The other thing we have noticed is while the people opposing President Obama were willing to work to reach agreements where such were possible such as in budgetary matters and numerous foreign policy points, the “Not My President” crowd demands that everything be opposed unless complete surrender to their ideas is accomplished. There can be no compromise or meeting the other side part way, it is their way or no way. This is not politics but the start of fascism as this has been the stand at the beginning of every fascist movement be they straight fascists or Communist, their first step is the closure of debate and a strict demand that their politics must be the only politics permitted to pass through the legislature and administrative branches of the government and if they hold power or even sufficient strength to prevent other ideas, then they will demand their people representing them stand as one against all other ideas. Thus far, this has been exactly how the Congress has been progressing. As there are a number of “Never Trump” Republicans willing to stand with the Democrats, and a few more Republicans, who more often than not stand with the Democrats and have chosen to join the “Never Trump” Republicans or some joined the “Not My President” Democrats, nothing is being accomplished.

 

Oh, perhaps we should give mention to the fact that the Democrat Party, especially in the Senate, had stood as a single entity with every member of the Party voting exactly as the Party leadership instructs them to vote. This is quite impressive as the Republicans only managed such unity against one piece of legislation during President Obama and his eight years in office, and that was his Patient Care and Affordable Healthcare Legislation, also called Obamacare. That passed with no Republican support, and was pushed through without allowing for debate or editing exactly as it was received from the White House. Some have pointed out that the legislation as it came from the White House had not followed through on all the concepts and was intended as a work in progress, not a final act and was roughed out for the Congress to write the minutia, something which was never accomplished and thus why many areas required clarification from the White House which was highly irregular and some points were technically illegal. Despite these modifications from the White House being factually illegal, they would never have cleared the Congress and the passed legislation did not give actual means for accomplishing many provisions in the legislation; there had to be operational and substantive modifications if Obamacare was to be usable. We are not realizing that even with these adaptive alterations that plan is failing and doing so very quickly as more and more items are discovered which have no means of being accomplished making the entirety unworkable as a result.

 

There will be nothing like that passing under President Trump as so far nothing is passing under President Trump. The only effect President Trump had managed, despite holding a Party advantage in both houses of Congress, has been to counter many of President Obama’s executive actions which President Trump has been methodically overwriting or simply making them void through cancellation. That has worked some miracles according to numerous leaders in manufacturing and may have saved the United States coal industry, for better or worse. Another area President Trump has afforded change have been at the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory Agencies where his directives have driven big government types insane of which the most obvious has been the requirement that for every new regulations written, two older regulations must be scrapped permanently. This has been intended to accomplish two objectives, clearing the rolls of obsolete and useless unworkable regulations and to lighten the burdensome tasks of following every regulation even including contradictory regulations where one is damned of they do and damned if they don’t. Talk of a no win situation, imagine being required to perform a task for the EPA which was forbidden by the BLM, which one do you please and which one do you risk alienation? Tough choice, isn’t it? So President Trump is having some effect in the tangled webs of regulation by cutting away many of the strands trying to clear a walkway where business can operate outside of government meddling. That would produce millions and allow for more start-ups and possibly allow the United States to retake the per-capita lead in start-up companies, a title currently held by Israel we believe. We understand that many people are anti-Trump simply because he is pro-business. We hope we can explain how being pro-business is also being pro-individual and pro-tax reduction.

 

Many people believe that corporations and businesses pay taxes. That is an incorrect assumption, as businesses do not pay taxes; they collect revenue at a cost for the government. Only people pay taxes and the only things which alters is in which way the people are made to pay taxes and for the costs of collecting these taxes. President Trump realizes that only people pay taxes, the tax on any producer, manufacturer, retailer, store, Mom & Pop storefront, major corporation or anything in between results on two things, higher process and loss of efficiency. At the very least, the purchaser will pay the tax, as whatever the seller must pay in tax will be added to the cost to the public. In most instances, whatever the total cost, including any taxes, is put through a cost formula which determines the final price thus whatever their markup on the base price is often also used on the taxes paid thus the tax actually leads to a greater profit in most cases. Stated simply, the taxes paid at any point in the process bringing any product to the public is passed along that line to the end product or service provided the public. That means only the public pays any and all taxes in the end result. This means that by lowering taxes on producers, corporations, companies, retailers and any other form of seller, the people will benefit and a general tax break is best possible means for lowering prices for the public. Tax breaks for the corporate sphere is actually a tax break for the people. This simple formula is refused by leftists, as they honestly believe that any tax placed on corporations is paid solely by those corporations and the price increase caused by any tax is not added to the price of the final product. That is Pollyannish thinking. No part of adding to the cost of a product will inevitably not add to the cost of the end product. This is part of why the price of the same item at the new, high price mall is more than the price of the same item bought at an older store in the low cost areas of downtown providing the taxes are equivalent. Further, the price of that same item is even lower way out in the country where there are lower taxes. That is simple economics.

 

The Democrats in Congress have decided that tax cuts for corporations, manufacturers and other businesses is simply giving tax cuts to the wealthy because ever business owner is, according to the Democrats, a multimillionaire and not in need of any tax reduction as they can afford to pay the extra taxes. This ignores the inconvenient fact that any taxes they pay is passed on to their customers who may or may not be millionaires. When asked if the people who buy these businesses’ products could use a tax break, the democrat response is that the best way to do this would be to increase the tax return given to people who do not pay any taxes to begin with. They demand that the federal earned income tax credit or earned income credit (EITC or EIC) be increased while taxes on businesses and people earning over $60,000 for individuals and $75,000 for couples should be increased as they are wealthy and can afford to pay more. To translate this to plain and simply English, those paying taxes should be made to pay more and those who do not pay taxes need a greater tax return. This is the Democrats means of increasing welfare payments through other means and finding their path to the perfect society where everyone is made even in wealth with one small exception, themselves. This is made simple by their exempting themselves and their selected sides and advisors from being charged with insider trading when it comes to stocks and other investments. This is the reason most in Congress enter office of moderate wealth and leave office a decade later as multi-millionaires and set-up for life. This is another way in which those who represent the public are not forced to play by the same rules as those who elected them. Why should we be surprised by such news, they have their own healthcare plans, play by their own rules in the stock market, have different rules when investing in the commodities exchanges, and exempt from parking and moving violations when driving if going to a vote or any other business, meetings or appearances. Their lives are made legally exempt from the rules you and we must live under. No wonder they lose the ability to identify with the lives of us normal people, no wonder.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at WordPress.com.