Would you pay more?

Tax

Tax (Photo credit: 401(K) 2012)

What is the fixation on Romney’s Taxes? After all the demands to release Mitt Romney’s tax returns, the Romney campaign finally did. And……..?

I guess the Obama camp thought that this would prove once and for all that Romney made a lot of money? But we all already knew that. So why the fuss?

Perhaps the democrats thought this would be an excellent opportunity to show how greedy a business person like Mitt Romney was? Lo and behold, it turns out that in addition to the taxes Mitt Romney paid, he donated an additional almost $4 million to charities, more than 19% of his 2011 income. Hard to label that as greedy. The best one could do is complain that the money didn’t go to the charities where you wanted the money to go, but I don’t see any takers emerging on that front. Not even Harry Reid.

Perhaps they thought they would find that he didn’t pay all the taxes he owed? I can’t imagine someone running for president would be so ill prepared as to leave themselves exposed like that. Although, I guess we have had presidential candidates withdraw for plagiarism and all sorts of scandalous activity. But no, it appears that all the taxes are in order and there is some general confusion regarding how to use this information by the Obama campaign. Charges that he doesn’t pay enough taxes were quick to emerge. Hmm. What is “enough” exactly? And who decides? I thought that was decided by the tax codes? So Mitt Romney paid over $3 million in taxes in 2011…all the taxes he is legally obliged to…and someone thinks he should pay more? So is the argument we are hearing that he paid his taxes and in addition donated 19% of his income to charity , but he should have paid more tax?

So let me ask, how many of you are paying more? Who has signed up and said, “well, I owe 25%, but I think I will pay an extra 5% this year? If you use an accountant, have you told him or her lately, “don’t worry about all those deductions, I would like to pay a little more this year?” I am pretty certain you haven’t.

So if we add this latest bit of information to the supposed reasons Mitt Romney should not be President, the list is kind of shaping up like this:

1. He was successful in the business world
2. He was successful in the political world, and operated in a non-partisan way
3. He was successful in making the Salt Lake City Olympics come together
4. He is a very generous man
5. He abides by the law and pays his taxes

I don’t know about you, but that list sounds a lot like 5 really positive attributes I would like to see in a President!

How about you? I would like to hear your thoughts, and in your comment, be sure you open up with whether or not you have volunteered to pay extra taxes! Just click on “Leave a comment” below this post. And don’t forget, text highlighted in green is a link to additional information – click them and see!

Advertisements

Who are the Job Creators?

I recently read what I must admit was a well written opinion on who creates job in our economy – who are the real job creators. The writing style itself was clear and easy to follow. The post did a surprisingly fine job at avoiding insults and outright attacks on a person. The core message, however, was that businesses don’t create jobs, the consumers do. A little bit of the chicken and egg argument, but well expressed, wrong though it might be. The writer opined the business owners unfortunately had the luxury of sulking around, hoarding their money, and waiting for better times. Our writer goes on to express that if the writer and the writer’s followers had some extra incremental income, a couple hundred or thousand dollars a month, “they” would pump that back into the economy on dinners, or movies, glasses or shoes for their kids, not speculating and investing in derivatives, which is to be assumed what all the “job creators” do with money when it falls into their hands. So instead, they would use this extra money to create extra jobs by, well, spending it.

Now it isn’t perfectly clear where this windfall would come from, but with a reference stating that the author and residents of this particular neighborhood probably haven’t moved any of their excess wealth into offshore tax shelter, we can guess the money would be transferred from the current owners to a new breed of job creating consumers. After paying the sales and local property taxes and income tax, the occupants are just short on “excess wealth”. Evidently, there would be more if they didn’t have to pay these onerous taxes.

One of the points made is allegedly by a business owner who when asked what was important to keep his small business afloat responded without hesitation, “Customer Demand.” The author inquired about the impact of tax breaks, and small business owner rightly responded that tax breaks don’t encourage hiring of more people or expansion of business. The point was followed by a disdainful comment regarding the “sanctity of small business and job creation”, leaving little question where the author’s point of view on the topic is.

I have to pause for a moment here and comment. I have a number of friends and colleagues that are current or former owners of small businesses. My spouse and I have also been owners of small businesses and are well aware of what it takes to own, operate or keep a small business afloat. The small business owners I know are interested in fewer paperwork and administrative burdens. Simpler codes. A less aggressive anti-business stance by the government. And yes, taxes are an issue. If you have run a business, you are well aware of the dizzying array of taxes and programs that you must comply with. And just because a tax credit isn’t what drives hiring and expansion, a tax increase can certainly suppress it by reducing cash flow and adding administrative burden.

I don’t understand why there appears to be so many people right now who believe that small businesses don’t create anything. Or why small business owners didn’t build their business. Job creation comes from government support? And now it comes from the consumers if we would only give them a little more of the “excess money” people have lying around. It seems job creation comes from everyone but the business owners. The perception is that everyone has handed everything to the small business owners, they just happened to be the poor souls running the businesses. If they were but a little more intelligent, they could work for the government and really create jobs. Or better, get an income redistribution and create jobs. On a blog response the other day I actually read a comment where a reader stated that they couldn’t help it if a struggling business owner is “too stupid” to just apply for an SBA loan. In this particular commenter’s opinion, everyone who applies gets a loan! The fact of the matter is large businesses almost always had to start as a smaller business. And small businesses are run by people who put everything on line to get ideas going. They make sacrifices to follow those dreams, often exceptionally long hours, risking their savings, giving up many of the things everyone takes for granted, sometimes going through long stretches of time without a paycheck. Only to face the derisive comments that prevail today – they didn’t build it. They don’t create jobs. They make too much money. They don’t pay enough in taxes. This is simple. People go into business to make money, and they start a business in hopes that the risk and effort pays off for them. There also must be a demand for the product or service. If not, the business will not exist. This is in no way supportive of a position that businesses do not create jobs, nor is it supportive of position that we should tax businesses further to redistribute wealth.

Who are the job creators? Do you believe that it lies in the hands of consumers? Do you believe that if we simply handed a subset of the population couple hundred dollars a month more, that would drive robust economic growth?

Don’t forget to click on comment below and let us know your thoughts.

Wake up America and be heard – the silence is deafening

Awake Tea: 2

Awake Tea: 2 (Photo credit: basheertome)

Where is the outcry? In the short period of time after the attack on our embassy in Libya that resulted in the death of our ambassador the only thing we have heard is an apology for a movie trailer and the slow changing of position by the white house under intense pressure to finally admit the attacks were a terrorist act. But again, where is all the outrage here in the United States?

Where are the Free Speech Advocates? They come out of the woodwork to support the people who want to burn the flag, or display Jesus face down in excrement, or to protect individuals who want to arbitrarily protest at the funerals of our military deceased. But where are they now? I don’t hear anyone coming out to protect those rights of free speech when we are faced with multiple calls for censorship of any speech that muslims might consider offensive. Evidently, they are all fine with that. Perhaps, they feel if the muslims have their way, free speech will be protected?

Where are all the women? We heard “reproductive rights” are the #1 concern for the democratic party. Really? Bigger than the economy? Bigger than national security? That ship has sailed. We have Roe vs. Wade already and have for years, and have heard and debated every possible avenue of that argument. Perhaps we feel that women will have more access to equal employment and compensation, education and status in a society governed under muslim laws? Perhaps free contraceptives for all will be a serious concern?

Where are all the Hollywood stars and directors? I hear nothing but crickets. No support for rights to express oneself, regardless of how tacky and misguided the movie might be? Nothing? Perhaps they are thinking that if we are all guided by muslim laws we will be able to produce more insightful and controversial movies and documentaries? We can see how that plays itself out for the countries in the Middle East.

How about something from the Atheists? No? I am sure that whether or not you have to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance or face the horror of being affronted by a nativity scene over the Christmas Holiday will be the least of your worries.

Where are all the musicians who are so quick to support freedom of speech through music and support the current President? Bad news Jay-Z and Beyonce; I am thinking your music might be a little suppressed under muslim guidelines. But perhaps you have some inside information to the contrary? If not, explain the stunning silence coming from the music sector.

Where exactly is the outrage and defense of our freedoms and actions by the President of our country? This is a man that has been called the greatest orator of our generation. He sure doesn’t want to talk about this. Is it because he is too busy apologizing? I don’t actually think President Obama really wants our country to become muslim, despite what the evidence may indicate. Despite the fact that he has stated that the muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world. I just think the man is completely confused, with a myopic world view and doesn’t know what to do. He is in over his head, and is incompetent. As I have mentioned in earlier posts, he has brought the entire Middle East to the brink of war through weakness, indecision and lack of any real direction.

We now have countries in the Middle East so emboldened that they use our own words to try to rationalize eliminating our freedoms and even here in the United States people are saying that free speech that criticizes Islam is a security threat to our country. A free country and freedom of religion means you are free to practice the religion of your choice or no religion at all if you wish. It doesn’t mean you are free to impose your will and the strictures of your religion upon everyone around you. Yet the United States is not viewed democratic because it doesn’t censor media that insults religion.

It is time to wake up and smell the coffee and make yourself heard. We have already tried to take the path of a President with no real qualifications for the job. Instead, we are worried that we might elect someone who has been too successful? Wake UP!

Blaming our troops? The real cause for the spread of intolerance in the Middle East

“Speak when you are angry – and you will make the best speech you ever regret”
Lawrence J Peter

If these links don’t make you angry, nothing will:

Blaming our Troops

Soldier had to apologize to the Afghan who eventually killed him

I am very angry, but I hope this isn’t a post I will regret. Paul Sperry, posting for the New York Post writes that Pentagon officials are blaming our troops. While Mr. Sperry only goes on to quote Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey as saying “There’s a percentage [of attacks] which are cultural affronts”, he does not provide any real substantiation of his claim that the Pentagon is blaming our troops. He does state that the Pentagon has “stepped up Islamic sensitivity training” for our troops. And that is what really gets my goat. I am not certain that this or even Chairman Dempsey’s quote means the Pentagon is really blaming our troops. What I do know is that the so-called sensitivity training is indicative of this current administration’s approach to foreign policy and the Middle East and is wrong beyond comprehension.

I need someone to help me understand why we are tiptoeing around on eggshells. The last I checked we are in Afghanistan because they hosted, aided and abetted a terrorist group that pulled off the most horrific attack to occur on our soil. I think that gives us a free pass to not have to submit to their customs, especially if these beliefs are a direct affront to our own beliefs and freedoms. Again, I will point out that the United States has a presence in Afghanistan because their country hosted the attack I noted above. I don’t have an issue with being respectful of others. I am fortunate to work in a multi-national organization. I have friends and co-workers from Germany, Italy, India, Indonesia, Belgium, Spain, Brazil, the Dominican Republic and other locales spread across the globe. We all get along with each other. We all respect each other and many of us are friends outside of the workplace. We don’t demand that others give complete deference to whatever our own personal beliefs may be. Complete deference to others beliefs is obedience, not respect. We certainly don’t kill each other or advocate murder as an appropriate response to perceived affronts.

Instead of forcing our troops to submit to the religious customs of the country that hosted our attack, perhaps we should be spending time teaching the Afghans tolerance. Instead of making our troops put aside their own beliefs and forcing them to treat with deference customs that include oppression and humiliation of women, violence, classification of our troops and citizens as infidels to be slain, we should be demanding that they respect the customs of our men and women. Instead of promoting a society and beliefs that entail looking for a multitude of reasons to find and react to any affront, perhaps we should help them to understand how respect the views of others. Is that too much to ask?

Paul Sperry quoted General Sher Mohammad Karimi, the Afghan National Army chief of staff earlier this month as stating “both sides need to do more to teach foreign troops Islamic traditions and values to reduce the chance of violent reactions to cultural slights. It is our duty to teach this to them. Our indifference causes the incident.” Maybe someone should teach the Afghans that “violent reactions to cultural slights” are unacceptable behavior that will not be tolerated.

It is an absolute travesty that we are forcing our own men and women who put their lives on the line to submit to the teachings of Islam, and forcing them to give up their own freedoms. What happened to what we stand for – freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equality for all? While our troops can’t be seen with a bible or wearing a cross, they have to handle the Koran with surgical gloves? Does the soldier doing repairs on a piece of equipment have to worry that while kneeling down to do repairs someone might see the bottoms of their shoes and thereby have grounds to kill them? The Muslims choose to fast, so I must fast as well or I am offending them? Our troops ought to be able to eat a full course meal whenever they want. Is it so farfetched to think that we are over there for no other reason than we were attacked without provocation and you know what, it offends us when you engage in practices representative of the bloodthirsty killers that came to the United States and slaughtered thousands of civilians? We can be considerate, but we should not put their beliefs in any way ahead of the freedoms and beliefs that we and our troops hold dear. Anything less is cowardice at best.

This type of wrongheaded, apologist thinking is rife in our current administration and puts people’s lives and loyalties in jeopardy, and is the kind of approach to diplomacy that has spread ever more intolerance in the Middle East and brought the entire area to the brink of a monumental war. We can not afford four more years of this blundering, inept attempt at diplomacy through capitulation. The only apology that should be required here is one from the President of United States to our troops and our people.

The consequences of capitulation…

Over a dozen embassies across the world are under siege or attack from protestors. Four United States citizens including a U.S. Ambassador are dead in Libya as the result of a coordinated attack, arguably slaughtered in an act of war. Most news agencies as well as our government act surprised that this could have happened and are seemingly blaming these actions on a stupid, junior hack job “movie” that has been out for months. The President denounced the act only under duress, and in the mildest terms possible, naming the attack an act of “senseless violence” – elevating this attack to roughly the same level of international importance as a gang shooting.

Why are we acting surprised? We all knew what was happening when the “Arab Spring” was underway, replacing one set of oppressive dictators for possibly even more oppressive leaders. Even more interesting, the United States had advance warning that something was happening and our people across the Middle East were possibly at risk. Other than campaigning, what the heck was the President doing? Perhaps this was one of the security briefings that he allegedly misses on a regular basis?

Why are we even giving credence to the possibility that these incidents are as a result of the “Innocence of Muslims” movie? This isn’t about a movie – most of these protestors probably haven’t even seen it. And why the double standard? Muslims can post videos of decapitating a man with a penknife and we are supposed to be ok with it? This has nothing to do with the film – the film is a convenient excuse to disguise an open attack on the United States.

We must make a clear statement – we stand for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Get over it. It is a movie. Regardless of whether you think it is offensive or not, it is a movie. Don’t watch it…you have that option. We will continue allow people to make statements and movies, even though we may not like them. We will continue to allow people to criticize our government and other governments around the world. In the United States, you can practice the religion you wish, or speak out against any religion you wish. That is what happens in a free democracy. Are some of these groups and their statements rude? Maybe. So here is the deal – we aren’t about to apologize for Michael Moore, Spike Lee, Mel Gibson or anyone else who might be off center or ruffle feathers. And you need to get over it. Sodomizing and killing a peaceful Ambassador and dragging his body through the streets is not an acceptable response. Ever. You want to kill your own people? We wish you wouldn’t, but that’s ok. Mess with a U.S. Embassy or the United States – there should be consequences. Period. A clear message backed up by serious and uncompromising consequences is what is required. Not apologies.

Our inaction and appeasement have only encouraged countries in the Middle East and radical Islamists by appearing to show weakness. Lets be clear – this attack is an act of war. Peaceful protest outside any embassy should be tolerated as free speech. However, acts of destruction or violence against the embassy or any of the occupants should be considered an attack.

We must reestablish appropriate diplomatic guidelines for the treatment of embassies. First of all, as a host country we consider you responsible for the safety of our people. Aggression against our embassy will result in consequences beginning with the immediate loss of U.S. aid up to and including massive counterattack on the area and the country’s capital. No government or terrorist agency takes us seriously right now, and will not until we clearly communicate what our expectations are and demonstrate that they are not simply empty words and that we will not tolerate this type of activity. Once this happens once or twice, I can assure you, people will lose interest in that game. Speak softly and carry a big stick. Please do not debase the memory of all those people who have died defending our freedoms by apologizing for those freedoms.

I know there will be some people out there who still argue for appeasement. You can actually see some of them on television now. They will argue that we cannot hold the people accountable because they don’t have the weapons to stand up to the terrorist. In the meantime, these same people “stand up” to the police, take pictures and videos, and then go boast in the Hookah lounges afterward, but they cower in their houses when the terrorist are around. That leaves us two conclusions: they are either terrorist sympathizers, making them legitimate military targets, or they are actually afraid that the terrorists will actually do something to them and their family. Clearly communicate your expectations and your consequences. Whether you agree or disagree with the message or consequences, it is obviously well understood.

Another argument for appeasement is that Israel has used a tit for tat strategy for years, but it does not appear to have any real impact, thereby demonstrating that this strategy is ineffective. Why doesn’t this work in Israel? Mainly because the responses are too restrained. On an international level, the expectation is that the response is to be measured and not excessive, effectively equalizing the antagonists in the Israeli conflict. Most peace loving countries build an arsenal in order to discourage any aggression against their country’s interests. You hope to never use them, but understand you may have to do so. If you merely stockpile weapons but never use them, or only use them to match the level of your aggressor, there isn’t much point in the stockpile, is there? In fact they aren’t even a deterrent any longer.

Some will argue that these are the actions of a small minority – I don’t think so. But if it is, then this will be easy – the host country can easily take care of the issue with the majority of the people supporting them. I am sure the alleged vast majority world wide will lend their vocal support to the host governments.

Finally, we have the argument that then “they” will hate us and want us dead! Really? Hello! They already hate us and want us dead!

And what about Iran – do you think they will be emboldened? Don’t you think they will see the wide level of protests and believe the U.S. will make no response to anything they might want to do. Do you think they might want to use that nuclear weapon?

The policies of our country must change to protect our people, our country and our freedoms. That includes the art of diplomacy, clear communication and the will to act when we must. Diplomacy is more than the act of agreeing and apologizing. This administration has failed miserably in the both the finesse of diplomacy as well as the actions required to protect the freedom we stand for.

“Two Different Paths For America”

Even the President agrees that the choice in the election is more than just political parties and candidates. He stated in his acceptance speech at the democratic convention that it will be a choice between two different paths for America. It is interesting that he followed that pronouncement by claiming that, “Ours is a fight to restore the values that built the largest middle class and the strongest economy the world has ever known”. Wow. Great rhetoric. I can only assume he is talking about the values of the WWI and WWII generations – one of which has famously been labeled “the Greatest Generation”. So here is the part that is challenging. I am pretty certain that generation doesn’t share any of the same “values” that the current administration and the Democratic party are touting.

Now, the President, as well as some of the earlier speakers went on to talk about sharing in pride and success, hard work and responsibility that gets rewarded – actually for a brief moment I thought the President was going to confess he had become a Republican, or at least a conservative. Heck, I thought, next he will start invoking God or the creator. Of course, we all know to our astonishment, he actually did. However, just saying something and believing, or acting on it are two different things. Ultimately, it was about the same old rhetoric, the same empty words, and the same tired arguments as always. In fact, if you take the time to look at this speech, it really is the same – the same as his other speeches in past elections, with the few added phrases noted above sprinkled in at a weak attempt to manage the poll results without totally abandoning the message of “from each according to their ability and to each according to their needs.”

Every election comes down to choices. And in this one, perhaps more than any other election I have experienced, the direction between candidates could hardly be more different. The Convention made it very clear that this election is a choice between a party led by President Obama that wants to keep on the same path, is delusional about whether we as a country are better off and wants to consolidate and centralize power and build dependency, and a party led by Mitt Romney who believes that our country needs a drastic change in direction including fiscal reform, a robust private economy and a democratic process.

Mitt Romney has a track record of success in the private sector, as a governor and his work with the Salt Lake City Olympics. Ironically, this seems to be one of the biggest issues that the democratic party has with him – success. I am not sure about you, but since one of the largest issues confronting us is the economy and jobs, I would very much prefer to see someone in a leadership position with both some experience and success in how business works. Say what you want, but Mr. Romney helped start a very successful business, and Bain Capital has a pretty darn good track record of success with the businesses that they have been involved with. This is a guy that fixes things. And I don’t believe that Mitt Romney is the kind of person who is running for office because he needs a career in Politics – he has a successful career. I believe Mitt Romney is running for President because he wants to make a difference and be a public servant. I think it also says a lot about the man to note that he didn’t take a salary from the state of Massachusetts while he was governor.

Contrast that with President Obama. The President has a record of success in …. well…. I guess he has been successful at getting elected and spending other people’s money. This is a man who has lived out the rock star life as President, making sure he has plenty of time for golf and work-life balance, while the first lady pays an entourage of planners almost $1.6 million of tax payers money. That is million in case you missed it the first time. Honestly, ask yourself, how concerned can this man be? $1.6 Million for people to arrange the first lady’s schedule? And he is screaming about income disparity and perks of the wealthy? I wonder how much we are paying for gardeners to maintain the first garden and brewers for the “home brew” the President is so proud to note is being brewed in the White House basement? This is a person that prior to his roles as President has never in his career been in a position where he was in charge of anything important, and certainly not where he has the all critical, “final word” – and unfortunately, he acts like he still isn’t. This President has spent the better part of his career spending and living off of other people’s money. A life that is worlds away from the lives of the job creators and business people of the country. No wonder the Republican Party has taken him to task over his position on small business and his ability to create job growth. No wonder almost any small business person you talk to believes the President places no real value in what they do, nor places any value in the business sector except as a source of income to be redistributed. Especially after his public position regarding who actually built the successful small businesses in this country.

President Obama is trying desperately to recover from his gaffe – “you didn’t build that” – and position himself as a friend of small businesses I have watched the “you didn’t build that” speech a number of times. The democrats claim it was a line taken out of context. Look, every small business owner out there worth his or her salt understands that you need raw materials and roads, and a population to sell to. To try and state that the road is what built the business is ridiculous at best. Every business owner out there also knows that you really need a product or service that is valued by customers, you need a plan on how to get that product or service into the hands of customers, you need the expertise to create an organization and the processes to support that product, and an almost unlimited drive for success and then most importantly; funds. You need financing to work the dream. I can not think of a single business owner I know who started off rich. The story is usually the same – an idea, long hours, borrowed money and low wages. And while the business is growing and paying suppliers and employees, the owner is working tirelessly and for next to nothing. When you watch the President work himself up before his infamous line is delivered, you see a man driving home a point he wanted to make – “you didn’t build that.” I have seen enough public speakers in my day to know this was not a line taken out of context, this was the President making a point. A point, that I do truly believe he would like to retract – not because he doesn’t believe it; on the contrary, because he does deeply believe it and has given us a glimpse at “the man behind the curtain” and what he holds in esteem.

Some other key points from the President’s address I want to touch on:
• The President indicates his budget proposal will reduce the deficit by $4 trillion. According to who? The Congressional Budget Office claims the President’s budget will add trillions to the deficit. Which is probably why it was voted down unanimously by both parties
• Europe’s Crisis must be contained – by spending beyond our means? Walter E. Williams noted on Townhall.com that the debt to GDP ratio of Greece is 160, Italy’s is 120 and Ireland is 104. The United State’s? 106. Higher than Ireland. That’s a little uncomfortable, isn’t it?
• Saving the auto industry – First it is a global industry in a global economy. He certainly didn’t save the entire auto industry. He let GM and Chrysler go bankrupt and then gave them a boat load of money. So they are still afloat and undoubtedly in a better position financially than before bankruptcy. And now the US citizens own $27 billion of GM stock that is worth roughly $10 million. So he allowed GM to restructure their debt, gave them tax payer dollars to work with and in return we own stock at a loss. Sorry, I am not very impressed.
• Romney isn’t ready for diplomacy because he insulted “our closest ally” by expressing some concerns over reports of readiness for the London Olympics. I am not sure that is all that insulting, first of all, especially from someone who happens to have some experience at pulling off the Olympics. An insult is to speak with contemptuous rudeness or insolence, or to affront. Once again, I am sorry, I am not seeing that.

But perhaps the most telling information that came out of the democratic convention was the now infamous vote to put God back in the democratic party platform. Not for the reasons most of you are thinking. This particular vote at the convention was an unvarnished look what democracy looks like to the President and the democratic party . They asked for a vote three times, and when the vote was clearly short of the 2/3 majority required, the party just went ahead and did whatever they wanted anyway…despite the expressed will of their own party.

The President was right about one thing last week – it will be a choice between two different paths for America. I know which one I will choose. It won’t be for the party that chose the old communist and Marxist slogan “Forward” for their own.

Republican Values? Or American values?

Thought that might get your attention. The message coming out of the ruling party’s camp in recent days has been that we should all be dismissive of the individuals that spoke at the Republican Convention. Think about that for a moment. What is it exactly that is so “bad” about all these people?

• That they are “successful”?
• That they are articulate?
• That they seem to be caring and involved?
• That they are daughters and sons of immigrants – some first or second generation?
• That they had strong supportive words for family and the family members that positively influenced them?
• That they are fiscally responsible and in case after case, righted budget deficits. Many times without raising taxes?
• That they are polite?
• That most, perhaps all, have a religious affiliation?
• Many were businessmen and women, or were sons and daughters of entrepreneurs?
• That the messages they received from family and mentors when growing up was one of hope, dreams, drive and accomplishment?
• That they have held jobs and earned incomes?
• A positive attitude that we can make things better?
• That many were minorities?

Am I missing something here? These would seem to me to be qualities to emulated, not to be embarrassed of, right? I mean really, who among you thinks, “You know, I really hope my child doesn’t have any economic success when they grow up?” Or perhaps, “I hope my child grows up to be a self- centered jerk and I sure hope they are rude. And, wow, that whole optimism thing really gets on my nerves, you know? Actually, I hope they never have job – I mean really, the dream is to have someone give you the money. You know, someone who actually cares about us?”

For three days, I heard people relate positive vision, inspirational stories. Not how “someone” is trying to keep you down. I heard intelligent young people telling me how they took action to make things better in states and districts where they come from. I heard about people who came from humble backgrounds and through the efforts of grandparents and parents and family made their way to success and that wanted something more for their children and were willing to work for it. Not the language of hate and division. I heard stories of people that were not defined by race, gender religion or social class, but by the visions they had and the passion in their heart to achieve.

I surely can’t imagine the Democrats they would have issues with the fact that many speakers were of a differing ethnicity or female, right? I would hope the fact that it was a diverse group would be uplifting to everyone. Where else in the world could we see something like that?

Or is the issue simply that they are all Republican? Ok, stop hooting and hollering here. The point isn’t that they are Republicans. The point is Republican or Democrat is simply a political viewpoint. The point is that if you do accept all those qualities I listed at the beginning of this discussion – success, caring, responsible, and so on – as “positive”, and further, if you accept that those are qualities we would hope to see in our children, then really the only thing that is “bad” about this individuals, is that they are “Republican”. So does the sum of whether you are a good or a bad person, whether you lie or tell the truth, comes down not to content, not to the “body of work” of your life, but simply, which political party you belong to?

A number of news sites and political wonks have denigrated the group of individuals that participated in the Republican Convention, being so crass as to use terms like “trotting out brown faces” and other racially charged statements to try to take away from the accomplishments of these men and women. Suggesting that they accomplished nothing, and that only through tokenism are they in the position to speak. Essentially suggesting that they “didn’t build that”. Really? That is the legacy you want for your party? If you are diverse and a success, but you don’t vote for my party, you only got to where you are because of “special favors”, not because of your abilities. That is pretty offensive.

The news we have been getting from the Democratic Party is dominated by language divisiveness and of meanness. Ok, let me say there are some jerks out there on the left and right. I think we all know that, and most of the people out there tend to try to filter out those on the far left and the far right. They are extreme views, and yet they can be jerks. But I think a party chairperson is selected for the purpose of being representative of that party. These aren’t accidental; there is some deliberation that goes into this selection. The individual selected by the Democrats is one of the meanest, nastiest people I have heard in a long while. This individual is so far to the fringe, she has been taken to task by CNN media for her views and citations. If you haven’t already seen this clip from CNN, check out this link of Debbie Wasserman’s view for a very interesting view as to why accurately quoting someone or telling the truth doesn’t matter. Really?! The types of appointments can tell you a lot about the person. What does this tell you about our current President and the administration? I have yet to hear this person say a kind word about anyone. And the same goes for a positive word – everything is negative.

Ultimately, I hope everyone makes informed decisions about candidates during something as important as a national election for our President. But there is a huge volume of how much a candidate represents me, which in the media speak of the day means how much the candidate seems to be like me. Go back and look at the qualities I listed at the top. Do those feel like qualities that represent you? I know that they resonate for me. My spouse and I are the children of immigrants. There are entrepreneurs and employees in our family. My own grandfather started as a janitor and studied chemistry books in the evening so he could learn enough to work his way up to a Plant Superintendent position so my family would have some of the opportunities that we have today. I hope that next generation has that sort of opportunity and our children exhibit those very qualities demonstrated by the speakers.

I would love to hear the stories of your families and positive influences they have had on you.