The Way Forward

Some have asked what they can do to help. Some have expressed a wish that I was running in their district. Some have pointed out that a successful campaign needs a campaign warchest, a large one considering the opponent.

Until an expert on Campaign Finance steps up, I will not be asking for, nor accepting donations to the campaign. That is why there is no method of donating to the campaign. But dollars are only a means to presenting the message. The biggest political campaign warchest does not ensure Victory at the ballot box.

But as Bart Gordon so aptly demonstrates, that money comes with strings. His loyalty is to those that have contributed to his continued presence in Washington, not to the people of the 6th District, not to the people of Tennessee, and not to the Nation.

What can you do? Spread the word. Send this page to your neighbor. Follow me on Twitter: TnNTaylor. RT my tweets when you find them interesting. Email the articles of this page to your fellow Tennesseans, with the link. Comment on what you find interesting. Ask questions about concepts if my words are unclear.

Elections are won by who receives the most votes, not who has the most money. If it were about money, I'd not stand a chance. Money is simply the tool to get the message out. The internet allows you to have more power than do the Corporations that have bought Gordon.

It doesn't matter if the people you know agree with your positions, with my positions, with our positions or not, send them a link. Allow them a voice and a place to make their case. There is no harm in hearing the words of those that oppose me. On the contrary, I have actively fought to preserve them that right.

Hypothetically, a campaign could be victorious without any money spent. I'm not sure I'd wish to try that, but I do know I will not be able to outspend Bart Gordon. As we move forward, we'll identify more ways to help put a Common Sense Citizen in Congress, but first and foremost, spread the word.

Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

US Navy And Taxed Out of Shipping

Sometimes, it's the unnoted things in a news story that provide the most insight. Sometimes timing of an event provides the greatest irony. Four solitary pirates have tested the world's superpower and the new leader. Twenty great Americans demonstrated resolve and valor. One ship's captain has gone above and beyond.

And Vice President Biden's prophecy is on the verge of being proven, again. When tested, President Obama has consistently fallen short. But he cannot continue on a course of economic and military destruction without the willing approval of Congress.

And Congress cannot rubber stamp the wrong headed policies of the executive without the Whipped Blue Dogs, including our very own Representative Gordon, who only seems to represent earmarks and Washington insiders.



The US Navy has already been cut in half, primarily in the 90's. The New Administration aims to cut it even more. Reprehensible Barney Frank called for the cuts in October. Reprehensible Murtha called for the cuts this year. The 2010 DoD budget proposal from the Administration hides the cuts by adding the costs of Our Current Conflicts to the regular budget without increasing the actual budget. It is an $87+ Billion cut in defense spending from its own 2009 proposal.

Instead of spending money Constitutionally on the Common Defense of the States, the Administration is funding ACORN, Planned Parenthood, and buying US Corporations. The Whipped Blue Dogs are following the whims of Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Obama.

But this is only part of the story. They are calling for higher taxes on investors, smokers, corporations, and employers. And this too has a tie to the piracy of the Maersk Alabama. With the first case of piracy against a US Flagged vessel in two centuries, we also see the results of increased tax and regulations on one of our traditionally strongest industries:

"There are fewer than 200 U.S.-flagged vessels in international waters, said Larry Howard, chair of the Global Business and Transportation Department at UNY Maritime College in New York. " AP, APR 08, 2009 US Aid Ship Fights off Pirates

The only US Flagged vessels on the high seas today are US Navy Vessels and those required by US Government contract to be US Flagged. Taxes and Regulations have made it simply too expensive for shipping companies to hoist our Flag. Instead, shipping companies flag their ships in places like Kuwait and Liberia, which collect the fees and regulate more sensibly or not at all while providing no protection of their own.

When the US Government continues to increase taxes on our employers, they will continue to move overseas, continue to lay off Our Workers, and more of our great industries will be lost to foreign nations. We must send a Common Sense Citizen to represent Tennesseans in 2010.

While David Evans has correctly called on Representative Gordon to return the money the US Government paid for Gordon's personal European Vacation (or demonstrate it was official business), I am focused on the Billions and Trillions of dollars the Whipped Blue Dogs are wasting of Our money.

While General Evans is concerned with the personal largesse of our opponent, I am concerned with Representative Gordons willingness to undercut Our National Defense in a time of Two Wars and even greater threat than we have seen since 1990.

Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

Behavior Control Through Taxation

I've spoken out against the immorality, illegality, and unconstitutional retroactive taxation blackmail of the AIG (now AIU) executives. I've clarified that it is not illegal but immoral that they accept those bonuses. Senator Dodd and Timothy Geitner were directly responsible for the legislation that allowed the bonuses, in the CEO Bailout Bill sold to us by then Senator Obama and rammed down our throats by Representative Gordon, Frank, & Pelosi.

But the 90% tax Representative Gordon voted to exact on the political embarrassment is only one such attempt to legislate behavior through taxation. It's perhaps the most obvious, but its far from the oldest.

It has long been the practice of Congress and State Legislators to put special taxes on cigarettes. Regardless of how you feel about smoking, it is legal and it is a personal decision. In the early days of this special tax, it was designed to alter behavior. When politicians realized that smokers are addicts, they began to see it as a cash cow. Recently, they increased the cigarette tax by, not to, $8.00 a carton. The government now makes more money off the tobacco industry than do the manufacturers.

Adding to this, the State of Tennessee is imposing "minimum" prices on cigarettes as of April 1st.

The 111th Congress is considering the implementation of the Chicago Politician's special tax on energy. What is the result of such programs, including the desired result of decreased energy usage? Increased energy costs and higher energy bills.

Not convinced? Pull out your most recent water bill and electric bill and compare both the price per unit and the base service charge to a 2007 bill. Compare your usage of these services as well. Many of you will find that you pay more for less service now. Utilities must achieve a certain amount of gross profit to cover the costs and they are monopolies, necessary monopolies, but monopolies nonetheless.

Many Representatives were even calling for a tax hike of 50 cents/gallon on gasoline during the $4/gallon days of last summer. With our gas tax dollars already being swindled from the upkeep of our roads, this tax was not designed to provide better roads, but make it economically unfeasible for you to drive as much as you currently do.

And despite all of this taxation, the government continues to be in centuries old debt and racking up record deficits. The 111th Congress, including our Representative Gordon plans to increase the federal debt in their short two years than did the previous 5 Congresses.

The Whipped Blue Dogs are voting exactly as Speaker Pelosi of California Idealism tells them to vote. It appears as if they are trying to bankrupt Our Nation.

The entire tax code is designed to alter behaviors, with credits for what politicians deem good behavior and penalties for what they deem bad behavior. And yet in the midst of this, Congress is considering increasing the taxes paid on charitable donations. This is mind-boggling and the conclusions that can be drawn from it are not very flattering.

It is indeed time for a new tea party. Taxes, penalty by taxation, and behavior control by taxation are out of control. We pay more now in taxes, in real dollars, in inflation adjusted dollars, in percentage of income, than did our Founding Fathers when they threw off the chains of Britain.

It may be time for Nationwide Recall Petitions of Congress. This Congress is out of control, under the whip of Pelosi. The Blue Dogs, our last hope for rational legislation, have been whipped into submission by fringe elements of a once great party that abandoned the people.

Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

"Toxic Assets"

The media, markets, and Congress are abuzz with "Toxic Assets." They're also attempting to rename this "legacy loans." It simply sounds better when you're talking about using taxpayer money to "buy it."

But what exactly are we talking about with "toxic assets?" Those are the predatory loans made by the greedy to the greedy based on unrealistic rises in real estate values. These are the loans that should never have been made. These are the risks that corporations took in a belief that they would make astounding profits, that failed.

Simply, they are bad loans, foreclosed loans on real estate not worth the borrowed amount.

Your "representatives" think that you, the taxpayer, should pay 2005 inflated prices in order to get the banks out of the trouble they got themselves in. It will have the marketed effect, the banks will be better off. Their stock prices will go up. It will benefit the corporate constituencies of our elected officials.

This comes at a cost to you, the taxpayer. It is wrong. Capitalism is a system of personal and professional responsibility. It allows individual choice and freedom. It rewards good decisions and holds each responsible for bad decisions.

An underlying but unstated right of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Capitalism is the right to be wrong and to let the world know that you are wrong. If you decide to pay $100,000 for a 2010 Ford Mustang believing you can sell it to your neighbor for $150,000, your friends may tell you you're out of your mind. But that is your money and your decision to make.

If the neighbor pays the $150,000 for it, we'll shake our heads in disbelief, but if you end up selling it to him for $50,000, it is not our responsibility to make up the difference. And that is what Congress is doing. They're making us pay the difference in the losses of banks.

To be a bit more accurate, it would be like a single person bidding and purchasing an entire estate at auction regardless of bid price, selling everything that could make a profit and then coming to their neighbor and expecting them to pay the price bid for the items not worth the price he paid at bid. Now imagine that it was the richest man in town that did that and exacted the losses on every worker in town.

It is not right. It is not Constitutional. It is not moral. It is not capitalism. It is not the American way.

These corporations took the risks. They got greedy. And they got burned. It is NOT the responsibility of the taxpayer, i.e waiters, factory workers, and Soldiers to pay for the bad risks that the corporations made.

Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

The Blackmail Worked

The government, led by the US House of Representatives, has learned the tactics of the Mafia: Blackmail. Even as activists and capitalists are setting up tours of the homes of AIG executives for angry mobs, Government Lawyers are offering to keep the names quiet of those that return the money, with a clear implication that those that retain the money will be made public.

The Government has made the executives "a deal they can't refuse." When Chris Dodd (Senator-CT) & Timothy Geitner (Treasury Secretary) finally admitted that they had personally had a hand in the language of the CEO Bailout Bill allowing the bonuses, the House of Representatives had their back. The House, believing themselves to be riding a tide of populism, voted for a 90% tax on Specific Individuals.

While such a targeted tax on money earned prior to the legislation would not likely pass the Constitutionality test in the court system, the cost of legal representation (lawyers) would have cost more than the new government employees had earned.

It is now being reported (CNBC) that most if not all of the US executives that received a bonus have "voluntarily" returned it. Most of the remaining executives keeping the bonuses are foreign residents, i.e. not subject to the targeted tax of the US House of Representatives.

Was all of this hoopla, was this blackmail by the government worth the $50 Million returned or even the $165 Million paid in bonuses? Or was this simply something to divert our attention from the fact that Congress paid out $700 Billion to their CEO Constituencies from the pockets of the common worker? Even if all of it is returned, that's still $699.8 Billion paid out of OUR pockets.

At what cost did these executives return the money? The check came with their resignation. In the midst of turmoil at the now Government owned AIG, now AIU (they changed the name), the top managers have decided to walk out. For some, we might say "good riddance." For others, their knowledge, expertise, and experience with the problem itself may mean, we need them. We simply don't know anything about who was there, who was paid a bonus for what, and hence who left.

Those that left were targeted because of their earnings, not their performance, which may or may not be tied to their performance (should be). If the bonuses worked the way they should have, they would have been paid to those that did the most to keep the corporation in the black. But we don't know, do we?

There is a bit of good news in this: Corporations have learned that Government is not a good business partner. The entire affair has been more akin to an Organized Crime operation than what I expect of government. Several Corporations were forced into the "deal they could not refuse." Once in, they found themselves bullied by politicians that have a record of losing money.

But there is a winner in all of this: Warren Buffett, a major contributor to the Obama campaign. Buffett, through his corporation, Berkshire-Hathaway, is known for his market prowess. Even as Congress first began considering the CEO Bailout Bill, Buffett expressed a wish that he could get in on just 10% of it. Meanwhile, he had $50,000,000,000 sitting on the sidelines, waiting for just the right moment to jump in.

And as the financials market plummetted with the acts and talk of Congress, he found his mark. It wasn't the "toxic assets" and failing banks that Representative Frank and Representative Gordon were forcing the American taxpayer to buy. It was the best of breed, Goldman-Sachs, that had to be co-erced into the bailout that he bought into.

We don't know when exactly he bought in, but on November 3, 2008, GS was selling at $89.09/share and on November 20th at $52.00/share. As of March 23, 2009, it is selling at $111.93/share. That's a gain of 25% to 115% gain in less than 6 months on a stock still considered undervalued by the very system that Obama supporter, Warren Buffett uses.

Warren Buffett is an astute investor and one of the richest men in the world. Many people shook their heads when he so forcefully backed both Hillary and Obama last year in the campaign. Who would have thought then that the tens of thousands he personally donated would earn him literally billions of dollars? Should there be a targeted tax on his earnings? Will there be politicians riding a tide of populism to call for it? NO.

As immoral as it is to back a political candidate for personal profit, it is not illegal. Though it may be satisfying to "tax the rich," to "stick it to the man," to forcefully recover those profits through targeted taxation, it is not Constitutional. It is not legal, nor should it be.

But there is more to this story. Goldman-Sachs, which was bullied into accepting taxpayer money it didn't want, has realized that Tony Soprano would be a better business partner than the US Congress. They didn't want the money. They didn't need the money. And they are working on ways to get rid of the dirty money as quickly as they can.

Goldman-Sachs is looking around at the strings and demands being made on others. Perhaps, they will also pick up the best and brightest from AIG executives, even as they rid themselves of the strings tied to government money.

And a final note on AIG, which is now 80% owned by the US Taxpayer. It is no longer named AIG. It is paying large amounts of (taxpayer) money to change its name to AIU, though many are preferring a more appropriate name IOU, for the failing US Government owned company.

Meanwhile, the US Department of Treasury, parent of the IRS, has grown to a prominence and to power, previously unknown in this Nation.

And I cannot help but find poetic justice in Code Pink having turned on Barney Frank and other of their allies that used them in the anti-Iraq campaign.

Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

The 8th Amendment -

As with other rights, it is fashionable to only quote part of it. We often hear activists quote the "no cruel and unusual punishment" clause.

Amendment VIII
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

But how often do we hear of multi-million dollar bail being imposed? And Congress has recently voted to impose a 90% tax on certain members of certain corporations, which amounts to excessive fines.

There is little outcry over excessive bail because we usually hear about it when a serial killer is being tried. We don't want him running the streets during his trial, so we aren't all that sympathetic. The answer? No Bail in such a case.

Meanwhile, fringe elements of the world try to argue that all kinds of things are "cruel and unusual punishment." Those things allowed by law in 1790 were clearly not "cruel and unusual" according to the writers of the Bill of Rights, including capital punishment, including the holding of prisoners of war.

"Cruel & Unusual" would be being "drawn and quartered" as was the practice in England. It would include being "racked." It does not mean that prisoners have a right to cable and the internet. They don't.
Tennessee Taylor©2009, TNT, all rights reserved

Common Goals

It is early in the 2010 campaign, but already at least one challenger has joined the fight. Should we end up on the ballot together, opposed to each other, it may come down to names and parties, of which I have only the former and none of the latter. I stand steadfast, independent of all parties, sworn only to the values and ethics taught me by my Tennessee Father and reinforced by decades of military service.

When two Veterans meet, stories will follow, and yesterday, two Veterans met. The stories we shared did not stop with Desert Storm, and they barely touched on the terrain of Afghanistan. They stepped back to the Civil War, when our ancestors and relatives likely stood face to face in battle and shoulder to shoulder against brothers, fighting the bloodiest war in Our Nation’s History. Our lives have paralleled as have the lives of our ancestors.

And General Dave Evans is an astute gentleman, and clearly a worthy adversary. He’s an observant man who recognizes not only the symbols but knows the meanings behind them.

We share not only similar backgrounds, but similar positions. He holds the Constitution and Bill of Rights dear. And why wouldn’t he? We’ve spent much of our adult lives defending them.

He understands the Pelosi-Reid-Obama alliance cannot withstand opposition of the real Democratic party of Jackson. He understands that our current whipped “Blue Dogs” are supporting Pelosi and Murtha and Barney Frank and that without that support, the elitists would fail.

Our parents were Democrats. Our fore-fathers were Democrats. But today’s DNC is not the party of our forefathers. It is not the party of our fathers.

We both stand on principle. It comes not only from our ancestral roots of Middle Tennessee but from Army Values. He is as concerned with Congressional largesse of Congress as am I, even if he has focused more pointedly at different aspects of it.

But there are also differences. Minor differences, really, but they are there. He was a Voluntarily Enlisted Private in the Marine Corps in 1968, during the hot period of the Viet Nam War. I was a Voluntarily Enlisted Private in the Army in the Cold War. I arrived in Germany at a time when we were still considered the “trip-wire,” there only to slow the Soviet hordes long enough for reinforcements to arrive and push them back over our bodies.

He chose the path of a Commissioned Officer (and a Gentleman, by an act of Congress), and I maintained the path of a Non-Commissioned Officer. (“I work for a living!”). He has more respect for General Shinseki than do I. (I have none, nor must I demonstrate any, anymore.) After Desert Storm, he went to Bosnia. I trained until I was sent to Afghanistan, grateful not to be sent to Bosnia.

He has a good 20 years on me, which still makes me more experienced than when Gore gave the district to Gordon. Both General Evans and I have more in common with Andrew Jackson than does Gore or Gordon, but Jackson and Evans were both Generals and I avoided the Officer rolls.

I’m thinking he was appalled to realize that Tennessee Tax Dollars are being used by Planned Parenthood to fund abortion. I doubt he knew that Bart Gordon had voted for it. Then again, I didn’t know that our Representative had taken a trip to Europe on our dime.

I’d venture to say I’m more internet savvy than is he. I have little doubt he is more politically astute than am I. It is amazing we haven’t crossed paths before. We’re certain to cross paths many times in the future. I know I’ll need to be well prepared for the debates, particularly if his attention is not diverted by Gordon’s presence. I’ll be sure to invite lots of cameras. Bart always seems to be where the cameras are.

In the meantime, the choice between General Evans and myself is likely to rest on personality, on style, rather than substance. When I face Bart Gordon, it will be all substance. It is a choice for the good citizens of Middle Tennessee to make. It is time for YOU to weigh in. And you can tell us now, that you know, or you can tell us that you need to see more of us.

But one thing is certain, neither Dave Evans nor myself are career politicians. Neither Evans or myself will continue the 6th District vote for Obama. Neither Evans nor myself will give Pelosi the free rubberstamp that does Gordon.

This is not an endorsement of Evans, but it is recognition of our Common Goals. It is recognition that he is a worthy opponent, a gentleman with Tennessee Values, rather than the panderer to Washington Insiders that we have now.

I’m a bit more rough around the edges. I did take off the John Deere hat before I met him and his wonderful wife and I dressed up in a polo shirt while he dressed down in suit jacket.

He has a party behind him, and I do not.You can contact me TNTaylorFor-TN6th2010 @ yahoo.comLet me know your thoughts. Are we ready to send Common Sense to Washington? Are we ready to ask Rep Gordon to enjoy retirement? What are the issues you want addressed?TNTaylor©2008, TNT, all rights reserved.