DCPolitics

Nancy Mace Unveils “Empower American People” Plan

U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE ADDRESSES TERM LIMITS, TAXES, LIBERTY, TECHNOLOGY AND THE ROLE OF AMERICA’S MILITARY  U.S. Senate candidate Nancy Mace rolled out a five-part agenda in her campaign against incumbent “Republican” Lindsey Graham this week – an “Empowering the American People” plan that represents her first substantive foray into the…

U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE ADDRESSES TERM LIMITS, TAXES, LIBERTY, TECHNOLOGY AND THE ROLE OF AMERICA’S MILITARY 

U.S. Senate candidate Nancy Mace rolled out a five-part agenda in her campaign against incumbent “Republican” Lindsey Graham this week – an “Empowering the American People” plan that represents her first substantive foray into the policy realm.

“The federal government has grown far beyond the scope of its intent. Yet, the American people are left with little but record debt and uncertainty,” Mace said. “It is time we limit the federal government and empower the American people.”

Mace’s plan includes term limits, tax reform, eliminating the National Security Agency (NSA)’s domestic spying apparatus, technology upgrades to government and a redefining of America’s global military presence.

“Our great men and women in uniform should not be put into harms way just so the career politicians in Washington can make headlines,” Mace said, a clear shot across the bow of Graham’s incessant warmongering.

On term limits, Mace said “we do not need a ruling class” in Washington, D.C. and vowed to serve no more than two terms if elected.

On tax reform, she proposed eliminating the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and replacing America’s “antiquated, top-down model with a consumption based tax that allows every American to be treated the same.”

On the NSA spying front, Mace said she would “fight to stop the data collection by the NSA and other US government agencies, and work to guarantee the legal process is followed when an American is suspected of wrongdoing.”

“We are a nation of laws, and we cannot allow our government to pick and choose which laws they follow and which laws they will disregard,” she said.

In addressing America’s use of military might overseas, Mace criticized U.S. President Barack Obama for “looking the other way” while China and Russia challenged America’s national interests. However she also singled Graham out for calling for military action “at every turn.”

“We cannot be the police of the world,” she said.

That’s for damn sure …

Additionally, Mace argues that no military action should be authorized without a formal declaration of war from the U.S. Congress – a position we also support.

Mace’s rollout is long on rhetoric and short on specifics, but in a race dominated by sound bites and pandering to the lowest common denominator we’re willing to give her points for taking the time to stake out some sensible ideological ground. That’s certainly more than most of her opponents can say.

Graham is facing five GOP challengers in his bid for a third six-year term in the U.S. Senate – Mace, Columbia, S.C. pastor Det Bowers, S.C. Sen. Lee Bright, Upstate businessman Richard Cash, Afghan War veteran Bill Connor and Columbia, S.C. attorney Benjamin Dunn. None of these challengers have been able to galvanize the virulently anti-Graham wing of the S.C. “Republican” electorate, though, and Graham is widely expected to win the GOP nomination on June 10 with more than 50 percent of the vote.

Should Graham fail to hit the 50 percent threshold, he would face off against his closest challenger in a head-to-head runoff election on June 24.

Graham’s biggest potential hurdle to reelection? The emergence of former statewide official and reality television star Thomas Ravenel as a possible independent challenger in the November election. The Charleston real estate developer has said he will run against Graham in the event the latter wins the GOP nomination and match him “dollar for dollar” in spending. That prospect has prompted South Carolina Democrats – ordinarily quite friendly to Graham – to push the candidacy of S.C. Sen. Brad Hutto (D-Orangeburg).

Related posts

Politics

Jeff Mattox: Give Anarchy A Chance

FITSForum
Politics

Carlton Huffman: Nikki’s Fall, Nancy’s Rise

FITSForum
Politics

Palmetto Political Stock Index – 7/16/2024

FITSNews

143 comments

Rocky June 4, 2014 at 9:19 am

“term limits” – she’ll back track on as soon as she’s elected
“tax reform” – which she’ll say is too hard once she’s elected
“eliminating the National Security Agency (NSA)’s domestic spying apparatus” to make Amerca less safe
“technology upgrades to government” – a $50 billion spending bill
“redefining of America’s global military presence” – a $200 billion spending bill

Nice rack – no brains.

Reply
Norma Scok June 5, 2014 at 3:05 pm

saggy kid induced rack. Fried egg style.

Meh.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 9:53 am

Consumption based tax is just a way to say we want to cut the taxes on the richest and increase the taxes on everyone else. Just like they did in North Carolina recently. No one has ever proposed a “fair” consumption based tax. The reason is the wealthy donors always want to be sure to exclude what is important to them from the tax. As a result the middle class gets gored with increased taxes and the rich get richer.
For a consumption based “sales tax” to be fair you must include sales of services, sales of real estate, and sales of stocks and bonds. So when you spend a million dollars on your mansion, you need to cough up $100,000 for your 10% sales tax. When the Koch Brothers spend a $100,000,000 buying a competitor out they need to pay $10,000,000 in sales tax. When you invest $50,000 in the stock market you need to pay $5000 in taxes. When you pay your lawyer $500,000 to handle your high profile divorce, you need to pay $50,000, in sales tax.
But that will never happen, because that is not the plan. The plan is to cut taxes on rich people.

Reply
CNSYD June 4, 2014 at 10:09 am

Stop with the facts already! Sic Willie and Mace don’t appreciate them.

Reply
Smirks June 4, 2014 at 11:07 am

That’s the whole point.

1) Cut taxes for the rich on the backs of the lower/middle class.
2) Tax reforms generate massive shortfalls.
3) Claim we “can’t afford” the spending we have now, even though we used to.
4) Cut programs for the lower/middle class, but leave ones that benefit the rich untouched.
5) Call for cutting taxes again.

The whole point is to end up with a government that does nothing but scratch the backs of the rich and taxes the rich as little as possible for it. The closer and closer you get to this goal, the less government works for the people, and the more support you get from gullible voters that we need to shrink government even more.

They -think- they’re getting a bargain on a Lexus when they’re getting swindled on a Pinto. They’ll end up with slightly lower taxes, but far, far less government services and even poorer quality of those services. And they’ll never figure out why, they’ll just keep asking for more cuts.

Grover Norquist isn’t drowning government in a bathtub, he’s drowning us.

Reply
Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 11:27 am

Why do you socialists always worry about what somebody else has?
If you want more why don’t you socialists just get off your asses,work harder,invest smarter and quit advocating for policies that steal other peoples wealth EVEN after they die!…????

Reply
Jack June 4, 2014 at 12:43 pm

Why don’t you fake conservatives stop using all the services the government provides. Then we would not need taxes. You just want the government to pay for what you want it to pay for. Typical hypocrites. You would be the first to scream if the government shut down the road in front of your house to save taxes.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 12:48 pm

“Conservatives” always exaggerate the taxes they are paying and underestimate the benefits they receive. It’s always someone else that is the problem. Corporate welfare dwarfs welfare for poor people.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 12:59 pm

“Liberals” are liars.They always lie about EVERY issue to pursue their ultimate goal of turning America into a socialistic/Marxist dictatorship.
They can’t be trusted.They are no different than the muslim traitor soldier that muslim Obama just payed the terrorists to free.

Jack June 4, 2014 at 1:03 pm

Fake conservatives like you are both liars and dumb. You can’t think for yourself, so you spew the hate and fake information you get from listening to Rush and Beck. You lie not only to everyone else, you lie to yourself and pretend you do not get more from the government than you pay in. Typical hypocrite.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:22 pm

Libs tend to be soulless creatures that delight in murdering/butchering the unborn, destroying the moral/cultural foundations of this country and supporting our enemies abroad.
Humorless and thinskinned as well.
Hey I believe I just defined your god Obama!

Rocky Rollin' June 4, 2014 at 1:27 pm

I don’t delight in people having abortions any more than I relish in smokers getting cancer. But as a liberal Catholic I may suggest you give your brain the opportunity to learn the guiding principal of our new Pope – “who am I to judge?” So my question to you is – “who are you to judge?”

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:50 pm

I am not judging anybody. If you want to attend a church that advocates and supports abortion go for it.
If killing ones own child is not a sin, what is?
As Mother Teresa once said…’If a mother can kill her own child, what can be next?”.
Abort away comrade.

Rocky June 4, 2014 at 2:03 pm

You judge those who are not “conservatives” – as you clearly articulate. But anyway, got better things to do right now. Happy hour is in three hours and I need to get a new bottle of gin.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 6:35 pm

But as a liberal Catholic I may suggest you give your brain the opportunity to learn the guiding principal of our new Pope – “who am I to judge?”

TBG is an agnostic.

If the Pope can’t identify and condemn sinners and sin…what is the whole purpose of Catholicism…Christianity…religion… in general?

Soft Sigh from Hell June 4, 2014 at 8:14 pm

“Libs tend to be soulless creatures that delight in murdering/butchering the unborn, destroying the moral/cultural foundations of this country and supporting our enemies abroad.
Humorless and thinskinned as well.
Hey I believe I just defined your god Obama!”
.
Doesn’t Tango already have this shtick?

Jan June 5, 2014 at 10:24 am

I think they are the same person. GT was being ignored and needed a new persona.

Gregory Geddings June 5, 2014 at 11:02 am

He has a twin sister…a Siamese one…an intimate Siamese one…

Godslayer June 5, 2014 at 10:22 am

And right wing white trash you like are too fucking stupid and ignorant to realize how fucking stupid and ignorant you are. You are a pig and deserve the fate of pigs.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 3:58 pm

Poor people, rich people, and “fake conservatives” all get more from the government than they pay in?

Either some other group is paying in a lot more than they are benefiting or you,sir, are an economic doofus of epic proportions.

Jack June 4, 2014 at 6:32 pm

I guess that depend on how you define value, doofus. Yes it is possible for everyone to receive more in value than what they paid in. Value in does not have to equal value out.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 6:46 pm

I guess that depend on how you define value, doofus. Yes it is possible for everyone to receive more in value than what they paid in. Value in does not have to equal value out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iiryJwvDtc

Rocky June 4, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Well, that’s a nice well thought out tirade. As a registered Democrat I was unaware of my pledge to turn America into a socialist/Marxist dictatorship. Guess in your world it’s a good thing someone put a bullet in JFKs head – right – else we might have become the northern state of Cuba. And – apparently I’m a muslim traiter (Catholic actually but probably the same to you) – and finally, the President is apparently a Muslim. I assume you also feel Lindsey Graham is a traitor.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:31 pm

Don’t wish violence on anyone.
JFK was a fraud. Democrats stole that election in Texas and Cook County, Illinois.
Anwar Sadat was a ‘closet’ Christian. Did you see the smile on Obama’s face when the muslim traitor soldier’s father started praising Allah in Arabic?muslim Obama was so pleased he stopped groping the mother. :-)
Graham is pro-life.A hero for the unborn and a protector of the sanctity of life.

Rocky June 4, 2014 at 1:39 pm

Stole the election? I guess you feel the same way about 2008 and 2012? And 1992 and 1996.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:44 pm

No.Democrats can’t win elections unless they lie,cheat and steal.

Rocky June 4, 2014 at 1:46 pm

Tisk, tisk, tisk. Again, repeat after me – “Who am I to judge.”

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 6:55 pm

Guess in your world it’s a good thing someone put a bullet in JFKs head – right – else we might have become the northern state of Cuba.

*For the sake of argument, TBG makes the BIG assumption that LHO was the lone gunman*

50 years…and you leftists still can’t wrap your heads around the fact that it was one of your fellow travellers that offed JFK.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/11/10/kennedy-dallas-anniversary-column/3458061/

Soft Sigh from Hell June 4, 2014 at 8:11 pm

“their ultimate goal of turning America into a socialistic/Marxist dictatorship.”
.
The private life is dead, comrade.* To “the camps” with you.
.
*Zhivago

IDK June 4, 2014 at 2:31 pm

“”Conservatives” always exaggerate the taxes they are paying and underestimate the benefits they receive.”

Ok, let me start by saying that changing the tax system to anything that is “revenue neutral” is nothing more than a BS shell game that doesn’t nothing to actually reduce government, it’s just a political talking point.(aside from the fact it will never happen, PERIOD)

So in a weird way, you and I are in agreement with a consumption(or “Fair”) tax being a bad thing, we just come at it from different places.

That being said, there are copious amounts of tax being paid by someone….and it’s not the welfare class…so it seems a bit disingenuous to suggest ‘conservatives'(whatever that means anymore) are exaggerating their taxes.

Most ‘conservatives’ aren’t CEO’s of GE’s, Google, etc., living off the corporate welfare scheme or able to do the Dutch Irish sandwich, they are usually just hard working people that are disgusting by gov’t waste and the fact they are paying for it.

Tom June 4, 2014 at 6:51 pm

You are right, most are not CEO. That does not change my assessment. One mans waste is another mans benefit. I think the all the bridges to those Charleston beaches and beach renourishment programs are a total waste. But all the millionaires with beach houses on Sullivans Island and Isle of Palms, don’t think so. I still think “conservatives” underestimate the benefits they derive from government and overestimate what they pay for those benefits.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 12:52 pm

Hmmmm…I was thinking more along the lines of cutting off your food stamps,medicaid and the voucher you get for section 8 housing.
While we are at it cutting off the Earned Income Tax Credit check you receive and did not earn.
Leave my road alone.I paid for it!

Jack June 4, 2014 at 12:54 pm

Buddy, I pay taxes. I receive none of those things. But I would still rather shut down the road in front of your house than let a poor child starve. You are a typical hypocrite. You receive far more in benefits than you pay for, and continue to bitch others receive too much.

Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:09 pm

Why shut my road down? Get your wallet out and go feed the starving kid.
You are making me pay for a million abortions year!

Guest June 4, 2014 at 1:26 pm

You are making everybody pay for the road in front of your house.

Barney Beaver June 4, 2014 at 1:40 pm

Shut my road down and I will move in with my mommy!

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 1:27 pm

You are making me pay for a million abortions year!

*Whistles softly*

Dayum….Your tax bill’s got to be about a half billion a year.
No wonder you’re pissed off. TBG would be, too.

On the other hand….Where do you work and ARE THEY HIRING?????

Jack June 4, 2014 at 2:15 pm

Because you are worthless. Society would not suffer from lack of access to you.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 3:51 pm

You just want the government to pay for what you want it to pay for.

Just to be perfectly clear, Jack……

You don’t want the government to pay for what you want it to pay for?

or

You just want the government to pay for what you don’t want it to pay for?

vicupstate June 4, 2014 at 12:54 pm

It is not about what they HAVE, it is about HOW THEY GOT IT.

To the extent that they compete fairly and came out of top by providing something the market preferred, no one has a problem with that.

But to the extent that they collude, are anti-competitive, bought off congressmen and media outlets to enact their agenda, and used their money/lobbyists/paid-for-political-whores to stack the deck in their favor, THAT we have a problem with.

You are their pawn in their game of chess, and you are too stupid to realize it. .

The NC government is all you have to look at to see everything smirks says does indeed happen. Tax cuts (income) for the wealthy, tax increases (sales) for the middle and lower classes, resulting in revenue shortfalls. Art Pope is the puppet master and your ilk are his puppets. Some thing for Wisconsin and any other similarly controlled GOP state.

There is abundant data to show that the wealthy have continuously grown wealthier for decades while the middle and lower income classes have flat lined or lost ground, even though productivity has soared over the same period.

Reply
Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 1:04 pm

Stupid? It must be sad to get up everyday bitter,angry and envious of those that have a nicer house or car or can afford to send their kids to a NON state controlled school.
Makes you feel like a failure? Bless your heart. :-)

vicupstate June 4, 2014 at 5:40 pm

I didn’t think you would have anything of substance to say in response. You are consistent of nothing else. I don’t begrudge anyone there HONEST gains.

You have some valid points June 4, 2014 at 2:22 pm

For whatever it’s worth, inflation is the biggest contributor to the income disparity….then regulation probably next…which most wealthy people buy their way around so it’s only the small business people that get smacked with regs….

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 1:22 pm

How about we take the Federal budget , divide it by the number of citizens and send everyone an *equal* bill?

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 2:11 pm

Because everyone cannot pay and everyone does not benefit equally from the money expended. The wealthy benefit far more from government than the poor.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 3:37 pm

The federal government is supposed to protect our inalienable rights (life, liberty, property) from enemies foreign and domestic.

Do the *rich* have rights have some different rights that TBG wasn’t taught about in the Reservation’s civics classes?

Note: TBG *gets* that rich folks have more property than poor folks, for the government to protect. You, of course, realize that *the rich* pay more to the private sector (private security, gated communities etc) than us po folks.

Also, when TBG hits the corner store for some “Firewater” [PBRs and/or Manischewitz] and pulls the old “Cannot um.. pay” routine…Achmed always tells TBG to GTFO.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 5:16 pm

This will be difficult to explain to you, but lets start with:

“The federal government is supposed to protect our inalienable rights (life, liberty, property) from enemies foreign and domestic.”
Where did you get the phrase “from enemies foreign and domestic.”

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 6:27 pm

Where did you get the phrase “from enemies foreign and domestic.

“The Oath of Allegiance for citizenship?

The Oath for enlistment in the armed services?

In simple terms, a “core function of government” is protecting your and my lives, liberty, and property from fellow citizens of the criminal type, as well as foreign armies.

Tom June 4, 2014 at 7:22 pm

As usual of the libertarians you view everything as a struggle among people. To you the role of government to arbitrate disputes. It has no other place. But that does not comport with our history or our founding documents.
That phrase you used relates to the defense of the constitution by those taking the oath. Not defense of you and your money. The phrase is unrelated to the obligations of government or inalienable rights.
The founding documents list three inalienable rights. The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now there may be more, but we will stick with those for now. According to Dec. Of Independence the purpose of government is to secure these rights. Therefore it is the obligation of the government to not only protect a person from having his rights taken by others, but to actively take action to secure his or her rights. For example, ones life can be ended by an attack from a person or an attack from a disease. The government has an obligation to deal with both. If healthcare is essential for life, it is the obligation of the government to provide health care. All actions necessary to secure the inalienable rights of the people are core functions.
PS. Property was not a delineated inalienable right. Property rights are secondary in nature to inalienable rights.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 9:03 pm

For example, ones life can be ended by an attack from a person or an attack from a disease. The government has an obligation to deal with both. If healthcare is essential for life, it is the obligation of the government to provide health care.

/facepalm

Original Good Old Boy June 6, 2014 at 2:48 pm

Some things you have to read twice just to make sure that is what was really written.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 9:05 pm

Property rights are secondary in nature to inalienable rights.

Without property rights…you are property.

Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:08 am

Another straw man by you. I never said there were no property rights. I said property rights were secondary to inalienable rights. The core purpose of government, as defined in the Declaration of Independence is to SECURE the inalienable rights of the people. In order to secure the inalienable rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the government must create and protect other rights. Property rights, while not inalienable, are a necessary part of the governments role of securing our rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore our Constitution provides protection of those rights.

Likewise the government has an obligation to secure the rights of the people to life. Social “Conservatives” have no problem seeing this in the context of abortion. But beyond that they seem to be totally blind to this inalienable right.

When a created right becomes incompatible with an inalienable right, the created right must give. Ergo taxation is not theft if the action the government is using the money to achieve is necessary to SECURE the inalienable rights of the people.

This makes constitutional theory complex, but no one should ever have thought otherwise. That is why we have courts.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 9:11 pm

As usual of the libertarians you view everything as a struggle among people.

Dammit, Jan!

Don’t you even read your own Manifesto?

Hint:
Chapter 1.
First couple sentences.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 9:19 pm

TBG swears the post he was responding to was attributed to Jan…but now says Tom….

Possibilities:

A) Tom and Jan are the same poster.
B) Disqus is FUBAR
C)TBG has lost his mind.
D)Some combination of A,B and C.

Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:31 am

I will accept the dammit as applicable to me. But I am not a Communist or a Socialist. I believe the economic system chosen by our country should be the one that best secures the inalienable rights of the people. I believe that to be reasonably regulated capitalism. I believe both communism and laissez faire capitalism, are incompatible with the inalienable rights of the people.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 5, 2014 at 8:02 pm

This will be difficult to explain to you,…

…already we are in agreement, amigo.

Jan June 4, 2014 at 6:20 pm

I think you need to review your founding documents there. The inalienable rights listed are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Unless of course you are implying happiness and property are the same. Sort of like money and speech are the same.

The Colonel June 4, 2014 at 8:36 pm

I think the line says something about “…among these…”

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 9:14 pm

You might notice TBG didn’t use quotes, but, yeah, it was poorly phrased.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 3:40 pm

The wealthy benefit far more from government than the poor.

Oy vey!!!!

Seems like you are implying that radically downsizing government would make things “fairer”.

TBG’s work here is done.

Reply
Yep! June 4, 2014 at 10:16 pm

Yep, he just answered his own question to his own dilemma, unknowingly none the less! lmao…now I’ve seen it all on these boards

Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:49 am

If all government functions were shut down tomorrow, who would see their lifestyle change most. The guy with the business paying him a million dollars a year and a million dollar house in the suburbs or the guy who lives in a slum?

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 5, 2014 at 8:00 pm

Life expectancy of slum guy…..less than 72 hours.
Life expectancy of suburb guy…48 hours to two weeks.

PRO TIP:
When the shit hits the fan, don’t be anywhere near the cities.

Tom June 6, 2014 at 6:44 pm

Then I rest my case.
Life in the slums has always been tenuous. A stray bullet here, a gang war there, always life on the edge. Not much would change except the lack of electricity and water. Unchallenged by police, the gangs would take over quickly and establish a form of order. Most likely a warlord system would evolve and they would begin raiding the suburbs for resources.

The guy in the suburbs expects order. The garbage is to be collected. The food available at the local store or his favorite restaurant. The grass is to be cut, the car garaged, the kids at the ready for the weekend at the cape house. Computers and cellphones to keep him constantly in touch with his business, and airplanes to fly him here and there. His money secure in the bank and the resources of civilization at the call to assure no one from the slums invades his slice of America.
The day after the shutdown, all semblance of his prior existence ceases to exist, along with his now worthless money and stock certificates. Stripped of their wealth and power, he and the neighbor he argued with a year or so ago along with little Buffy and Jody must prepare to face their former inferiors on equal terms to negotiate the price of the food in their pantry.

Pro Tip – when the shit hits the fan the city will come to you.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 4:37 pm

So when you spend a million dollars on your mansion, you need to cough up $100,000 for your 10% sales tax. When the Koch Brothers spend a $100,000,000 buying a competitor out they need to pay $10,000,000 in sales tax. When you invest $50,000 in the stock market you need to pay $5000 in taxes. When you pay your lawyer $500,000 to handle your high profile divorce, you need to pay $50,000, in sales tax.

TBG has no problem with any of this.

The reason it will never be done is not to benefit the rich (even though it would). The reason is that the average Joe has no clue as to the cost of government and TPTB want to keep it that way.

For example, when TBG’s buds go to Wal*mart and spend $100…they hardly notice the $7 in sales tax. On the other hand, if when they were through jewing down (TBG can say that.) the car dealer on their new $30,000 jacked up truck or Prius…they would apoplectic if presented with a $2,100 sales tax bill, as opposed to the current $300 cap. Revolution would soon be in the air, Homie.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 6:58 pm

How would the sales tax on the purchase of everything benefit the rich over the poor and middle class? The “fair tax” and all sales tax proposals I have ever seen clearly do, but that is because they are designed to do exactly that.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 10:37 pm

How would the sales tax on the purchase of everything benefit the rich over the poor and middle class?

Ambiguously phrased. TBG’s bad. Should have put it more like this:

“Having exemptions to the sales tax obviously benefits the rich: but, ITBGHO, that is not the main reason for the exemptions. The reason is that the average Joe…”

Reply
Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:43 am

I think you are wrong. The impact of the sales tax on the average Joe, could be solved by having him pay it over time.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 5, 2014 at 11:15 am

The impact of the sales tax on the average Joe, could be solved by having him pay it over time.

Heh!
That means you think TBG is right!!
This is also the reason why income and FICA taxes are withheld. Writing the check for Quarterly Estimated Taxes will convert you to the limited government team in no time.

Tom June 5, 2014 at 11:27 am

I think TBG is right about what?

euwe max June 5, 2014 at 2:11 pm

what’s up with you today? You’re all *libertarian* and shit!

Norma Scok June 5, 2014 at 2:53 pm

I regret I can only give TBG one thumbs up for this. Once contracting I failed to give the gubmint anything in taxes during the year. After penalties, I had about a $30K tax bill. If all of America paid a one lump sum as I did that year, there would armageddon in the streets.

Lee Padgett June 4, 2014 at 5:28 pm

Ring Ring, Hello! Tom! The shortbus is calling and wants to you get back on. That is exactly what a “fair tax” or consumption tax does. It is collected at the point of sale so some billionaires like Warren Buffet cannot find any loopholes to get their base rate down to 17%. Read up on it. We make a purchase of goods and services and the tax is built
in. When one buys a yacht one pays the tax immediately and does not get
to write it off as a company necessity. Learn about it and quit trying to simply say “Tax the Koch Brothers” more and more (who also give to Democrats who also willingly take the contributions and are just as beholden-ed to them). They will find a way out of taxes unless we simply have a form that says Earnings ____ x 10% = _____. Please send a check! and that aint neva gonna happen with that corrupt lot in DC. They owe too many favors.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 5:47 pm

Ring, Ring, Hello Lee, you are wrong!!! The “fair tax” only applies to “the final point of purchase of new goods and services for personal consumption.” It excludes purchases of real estate, stocks, bonds, investment assets. The whole purpose of the so called “fair tax” is to reduce taxes on the wealthy and increase taxes on the middle class.
The wealthy pay a significantly lower percentage of their wealth and income for consumable goods than do poor people and middle income people. The result is a shift in the percentage of the tax burden. By making all purchases including real estate, stocks, bonds, investments subject to the tax, there can be a much lower rate and the tax will be fair. But fairness is not what the “fair tax” is about. The fair tax is a scheme to lower the tax of wealthy donors at the expense of primarily the middle income taxpayers. And by middle income I mean people making less than about 200k a year.
Maybe next time you will make an attempt to understand the fair tax and my comments before you are rude.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 6:58 pm

The wealthy pay a significantly lower percentage of their wealth and income for consumable goods than do poor people and middle income people.

No shit, Sherlock.
So fucking what?

Reply
Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:26 am

If you believe the wealthy are currently overtaxed and the middle class is currently under taxed, your question is valid.

Lee Padgett June 4, 2014 at 9:35 pm

Yes I am rude. I get pissed every time someone spouts off about the Rich paying more taxes when all that does is hit me in the wallet. I do not make alot of money, if I did I would certainly have better things to do than to read Fits and debate with you. Let me ask do you support the new FDA regs that just were executively ordered? If so then thanks–because the people that will affect are people like me. Those that cannot afford higher fuel rates. Those of us that try to live on a steady budget but the f’ing Gov cannot quit tweaking things and causing market upheaval and leaving some of us flopping like a fish outta water. You Democrats think you have the poor and middle class in your best interests and Repubs think they have the middle class and rich in their best interest and both are fucking wrong. It all screws the middle class and no wonder it is shrinking. Mentalities like yours and GrandTango (do you share DNA?) are what is taking this country to hell and doing so quite quickly.

Reply
Tom June 5, 2014 at 10:40 am

This response makes no sense. I am not even sure how to respond, since i don’t even know what Food and Drug Administration regulations you are talking about. That said, unless you number yourself among the top 3% of people in the country, nothing I have said should concern you. If you do number yourself in that group, I think you probably underestimate the benefits you receive from government; or you just don’t care.

I am an independent by the way, not a Democrat, and Republicans do not think they have the best interest of the middle income citizen in mind. They want you to think they believe that.

Lee Padgett June 5, 2014 at 3:34 pm

Many pardons.. EPA not FDA.. some friggin Gov acronym..All a waste of money. No I am not in the 3% and no independent wants to punish the hell out of some one for making money. So please id yourself as a hardcore Democrat. Be honest..

west_rhino June 5, 2014 at 11:16 am

so the po’ folks that buy that $7,000,000 yacht or 120,000 Mercedes or Lexus need to pay up on those high dollar luxuries. Move everything that is hidden in a “schedule C” on to the realm of not depreciated and being a tax shelter for those po’ ol’ rich folk that really don’t own those status symbols they keep around, y aknow the ones the company owns and thay use as a gratuity they selected.

Reply
Tom June 5, 2014 at 11:25 am

I don’t mind addressing this post, but I don’t really understand the point. Just to be clear, I am not advocating a consumption tax. I am only pointing out that all consumption taxes currently proposed are not designed to be fair, they are designed to shift more of the tax burden onto the middle income taxpayer and away from higher income taxpayers. I was simply saying that if you want a “sales tax” to be fair you need to apply it to the sale of everything, not just consumer goods.

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 10:06 am

Should this plan have been announce on day ONE of the campaign..??

My backside….!!!!! ( Fist Poundzzzz…)

This “empower America” plan is a stunt that Reverend Darby would pull if he was running against Jim Clyburn…!

Stop and think…..What if you read this statement….

“…Darby’s plan includes term limits, tax reform, eliminating the National Security Agency (NSA)’s domestic spying apparatus, technology upgrades to government and a redefining of America’s global military presence…..”

Does this sound exactly like a crusade that a challenger to Clyburn would say….??

One thing is for sure……….a fine lobbyist for Graham cash will look very favorably on this statement when hiring support staff after the “election”…..!!!

We highly wager a call has been made to some real estate agents in Georgetown already………….wonder if Fits can get the phone records..?

Reply
Recovering Lobbyist June 4, 2014 at 10:08 am

I never know what you’re trying to say.

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 12:36 pm

…..maybe you need to pick up the phone and call……..Wil Folks…

…or Brian Hicks at the Post and Courier…..

….or Nancy Mace……….

……or Jay Carney………

…….or anyone who has sent messages from Qatar to the White House…..

….or a fellow Lobbyist who has chatted with Graham in the last two hours…..

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 1:36 pm

…….or anyone who has sent messages from Qatar to the White House…..

TBG’s calls to the EMIR always go straight to voicemail and he never returns calls. Due to some computer glitch (TBG assumes…), we are not even Facebook “friends” anymore.

Reply
Keep your mitts off June 4, 2014 at 2:39 pm

He told you holmes, they were HIS concubines.

Buz Martin June 4, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Philip is just a special kind of crazy. That’s why I relate to him.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 4, 2014 at 2:47 pm

OK, I am so glad to know it wasn’t just me. THANK YOU!!!!!!

Reply
Silly Nancy Fits June 4, 2014 at 10:28 am

6 days before the election? Yea right, she’s a serious candidate ain’t she? FITS, your and Mace’s silliness has reached sublime proportions.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 4, 2014 at 10:52 am

I was thinking the same thing. What has she been doing for the last 6 months?

Reply
Sandi Morals June 4, 2014 at 11:36 am

Graham will win.Haley will win.Period.Neither race will be close as SC voters will not take the chance of electing a Democrat that would help Obama continue his agenda of destroying this country.
Obama knows public opinion has turned on him and that he will never regain the public’s trust.With that in mind he is now free to implement fully his socialist agenda to destroy our economy and shred the Constituition without consequences.
Just that simple.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia June 4, 2014 at 2:43 pm

Uhhhh…, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Graham might as well be a Democrat. He ALREADY has been helping Obama continue his agenda of destroying this country, with his support of amnesty and worse for illegal invaders, support for anti-freedom measures such as NDAA-2012, Patriot Act, etc, support for questionable Obama Supreme Court Nominations, demands that WE cough up even MORE money for third-world shit hole countries that at best are ambiguous in their intent toward us so they will like us, etc.

Are you kidding me? He is a Democrat pretending to wear Republican clothing. Boehner, McCain, and Grahamnasty, are part and parcel of Obama’s agenda to destroy this country.

Reply
Cicero June 4, 2014 at 10:29 am

“The federal government has grown far beyond the scope of its intent.” NONSENSE PHRASE. WHAT ‘INTENT’? ORIGINAL INTENT? WHOSE SCOPE? “Our great men and women in uniform should not be put into harms [HARM’S—POSSESSIVE] way just so the career politicians in Washington can make headlines.” “We are a nation of laws, and we cannot allow our government to pick and choose [REDUNDANT PHRASE] which laws they [THEY? THIRD PERSON SINGULAR OR PLURAL PRONOUN SHOULD NOT GO HERE; YOU USED ‘GOVERNMENT’ AS YOUR NOUN, NOT, SAY, ‘POLITICIANS’] follow and which laws they [AGAIN] will disregard.”

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 4, 2014 at 10:52 am

She’s been running for how long?

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 4, 2014 at 10:54 am

“Graham’s biggest potential hurdle to reelection? The emergence of former statewide official and reality television star Thomas Ravenel as a possible independent challenger in the November election. ”

LOL what? Ravenel’s 2% of the vote won’t hurt Graham in the least.

Reply
CNSYD June 4, 2014 at 11:06 am

Sic Willie left off felon, coke head, etc.

Reply
Pickens June 4, 2014 at 12:28 pm

The last time I heard Ravenel’s name come up there was a curse in the same sentence. Women actually despise him and they’re, what, 50% of the vote? Hutto is an obese, physically unattractive ambulance chaser most people have never heard of. Graham is also obese, but he’s in good shape for this election.

Reply
Jackie Chiles June 4, 2014 at 2:17 pm

I mean I hate graham, but Fits is kidding himself if he thinks anything Ravenel does will hurt Graham’s reelection chances.

Reply
Smirks June 4, 2014 at 10:59 am

I suppose she’s preferable to Graham on a lot of fronts, but there’s plenty that does concern me about her. Replacing the IRS with consumption-based tax? Hmm… Yeah, uh, no thanks. Considering the obscenely rich use every loophole and shelter in the book to dodge taxes to the degree they do now, I’m sure they’ll find a way to do it even better.

Every time we talk cutting taxes, the middle class gets shafted on the tax cuts and the rich get the break. Why the fuck would this be any different?

Reply
Rock-eee June 4, 2014 at 11:25 am

Well at least one front.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 1:30 pm

One of the selling points of various consumption tax proposals is that it would close most loopholes.

Reply
Tom June 4, 2014 at 2:21 pm

There has been no fair consumption tax proposed. Period.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 3:45 pm

@ “Fair” tax lol and Tom

The word “fair” appears nowhere in TBG’s post. Period.

Get y’alls effing strawman off of my lawn!!!

Reply
"Fair" tax? lol June 4, 2014 at 3:48 pm

Fair enough, explain the difference to me.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 4:23 pm

Fair enough.

The FAIR TAX is a consumption tax proposal floated by Congressman Linder of Georgia and pushed by “libertarian” talk show host Neal Boortz.

While, not even being close to the panacea they presented it to be, FAIR TAX is much simpler than the current tax code and would, theoretically, broaden the tax base by confiscating revenue from those who operate in illegal cash based enterprises. (Drug dealers and pimps buy a lot of shit.)

There is a provision in it to refund a set amount to all citizens to correct for disproportionately effect that a consumption tax would have on “those that spend a greater portion of their income on ‘living'”.

PRO TIP:
Real libertarians don’t get their undergarments wet thinking about “more efficient” government and “more efficient” forms of taxation. In fact, it scares the bejesus out of us.

"Fair tax?" lol June 4, 2014 at 9:57 pm

Soooo….what’s the difference between a consumption tax and fair tax?

It seems you’ve described the same thing.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 4, 2014 at 10:16 pm

The FAIR TAX was a specific proposal.

Put it this way…the FAIR TAX is a consumption tax… but all consumption taxes (except for one) are not the FAIR TAX.

Fair Tax? lol June 4, 2014 at 10:19 pm

ok….not really sure it changes my original point….didn’t really intend a strawman either….but ok.

In the end(metaphorically, for Big T), I agree with you so I’ll let the deceased horse remain free of kick marks for now

Tom June 5, 2014 at 11:46 am

And all currently proposed consumption taxes are not fair.

"Fair" tax? lol June 4, 2014 at 2:24 pm

“One of the selling points of various consumption tax proposals is that they would close most loopholes.”

and one of the selling points against is that a consumption tax disproportionately affects those that spend a greater portion of their income on ‘living'(food, cars, etc.)

Reply
Colonel Angus June 4, 2014 at 1:42 pm

She’s hetersexual and better looking than Graham – that plus her promise to stay in DC only 2 terms – that’d make me vote for her.

Reply
The Colonel June 4, 2014 at 11:08 am

A partial transcript from Nancy’s last campaign stop:
“…First I’d like to thank all both of you for showing up, you two guys are really appreciated but I’m only going to tell you one more time Fat Jim, I will not sleep with you for your vote and Lester if you try to shoot another up skirt photo I’m going to punch you in the throat…Now for today,The federal government has grown far beyond the scope of its intent. Yet, the American people are left with little but record debt and uncertainty…”

Reply
Beartrkkr June 4, 2014 at 1:39 pm

Wouldn’t have been easier for Mace to just call those two guys that were in attendance and save them all the time and effort of coming to see her speak?

Reply
southmauldin June 4, 2014 at 6:11 pm

I just saw Mace’s commercial up here in South Mauldin, and she needs to put down Homer Simpson’s makeup shotgun. I thought I was looking at a completely different person, albeit a person with the same crazy ideas.

Reply
Thomas June 4, 2014 at 2:51 pm

Hi Nancy…all good points. In my opinion, the debate this Saturday is big one. This is a real good chance to break away. I think you can not out debate Graham on most issues since he reads the NY Times…LoL. We will need to anticipate some questions on matters in the headlines from the last three months or so. Ok…what we need is a zinger, something that hurts Graham and helps you. I have it!

After Graham bloviates on any issue you feel strong in…try this: “Senator Graham, have you asked a woman for her point of view? We are not that bad, and you will like us eventually.” ” You need to get a woman’s point of view, you can’t do it by yourself or get it from other men all the time”. To follow up, “Well this woman has a point of view and it is this…”.

Please use it. For you, free of charge. Use it throughout the debate. To T-Rav…advice for a possible campaign will be 100k upfront, 500.00 an hour after that.

Reply
Buz Martin June 4, 2014 at 2:53 pm

Many commenters seem to assume that the majority of FITS readers are liberal or libertarian. Check out this site’s poll on the senatorial primary candidates. You might be surprised at who is far ahead of everyone else.

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 2:58 pm

Ya know……….we would love for her to ask Senator Graham about the similarities between the tank SCAM here… https://www.fitsnews.com/2014/04/05/anatomy-superb-scam/ ….and the burn pit fiasco that will have impact on our VA system..!!

We wonder how much info US Senator Graham has received on ground contamination from concerned citizens…?

Reply
Bible Thumper June 4, 2014 at 8:48 pm

Don’t know what the tank scam has to do with Graham, but a friend just received their $1600 underground tank insurance bill. It was several hundred dollars higher with very stiff $300 penalty if paid late.

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 10:24 pm

Well…”Thumpa”……..considering that it is highly wagered that there is federal oversight and reporting of SC-DHEC environment issues across our state that has implications on policy in other federal departments, we feel sure if Graham is NOT aware then he has a problem. If he was aware and looked the other way, we still have a problem. Just as the SC National Guard info is reviewed at the DoD. Its very well known how certain info being harnessed via twitter and Facebook are actually circumventing the legacy reporting timeframes. The same can be held against our very politicians. The “Superfund” fiasco from the seventies is very telling in a court of law dealing with burn pit or tank leakage or landfill “plumage”. Your statement revealing a HIGH tank insurance bill is a sure sign that their is historical HIGH RISK that determines the rates. When you go back and map out every location of gas stations since 1940 alone and then overlay a Google Earth map for everyone to see………guess what will happen at the VOTING Booth. You would be shocked to see how many public schools and parks are located ON or very close to old tank locations. Guess where they get the water to sprinkle the playground.

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 10:37 pm

Thumpa………

Read this and ……THINK….

http://www.epa.gov/region4/superfund/sites/npl/southcarolina/atlphosc.html

this is just one site…..and not a leaking gas tank.
Exxonmobile is not the boogeyman but they are spending money that will pay off how…..??

Reply
Philip Branton June 4, 2014 at 11:04 pm

Thumpa………one more thing to think about.

When you go to this web page..

http://www.epa.gov/region4/superfund/sites/sites.html

most all of the info recorded and actions taken where right before the internet “age”. How is that for public awareness timing…
….and people wonder why manufacturing moved off shore.

Soft Sigh from Hell June 4, 2014 at 8:08 pm

“we do not need a ruling class”
.
We need to hear more of this.

Reply
Mike at the Beach June 4, 2014 at 9:04 pm

“…represents her first substantive foray into the policy realm.”

I guess five days or so prior to the election is as good a time as any to wander on over into some policy stuff.

Reply
RogueElephant June 4, 2014 at 9:57 pm

WOW, Nancy has been listening to Bill Connor’s speaches, and taking notes. Great. Better late than never. RESTORE HONOR VOTE CONNOR.

Reply
Recovering Lobbyist June 5, 2014 at 10:19 am

Be part of the 1% he’s pulling.

Reply
Jill June 5, 2014 at 11:49 am

Does honor includ honoring wedding vows?

Reply
Matt June 5, 2014 at 12:13 am

Wouldn’t be a normal week on this website without a pointless story about both Mace and Loftis.

Reply
Hint June 5, 2014 at 12:17 am

What really angers South Carolinians? Amnesty for 30 million illegal aliens. And Graham is a major supporter of AMNESTY for criminal cockroaches. Any of those running against Graham should really pound upon Grahams PRO amnesty agenda. It will turn voters away from him fast!

Reply
Philip Branton June 5, 2014 at 11:20 am

Nancy Mace …….by GOD, if you do not understand how to surround yourself with some kids in a TEXAS border patrol cell…..then you do not need to be SENATOR…!!!

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/06/05/Leaked-Images-Reveal-Children-Warehoused-in-Crowded-US-Cells-Border-Patrol-Overwhelmed

I bold FACE dare you to pick up the phone and call Oprah about helping build some schools in Texas for these kids….since GRAHAM won’t…!!!

This is DYNAMITE……!!!!!

….and you need an informational IED to place on the GRAHAM trail…!!!

Reply
GrandTango June 5, 2014 at 11:29 am

FITS still avoiding his lord-god’s implosion…I LOVE seeing the news-idiots on MSNBC and CNN in trance-like dis-belief that Obama F*#ked up so much on the Terrorist-for-Traitor” debacle. Andrea Mitchell looks like she’s under HEAVY medication over it…
FITS is in exile, unablele to bear Obama’s coming-out collapse…LMAO…
Anyway: Graham is a moderate, liberal-tarian. They can accept about any policy or politician, based on what they call being “open-minded” and more in line w/ pop culture. Like FITS, except in DC.

Liberal-Tarians see being liked by the barely-conscious masses, as more important than doing the right thing for our country. Not sure where Mace is any different than Graham.

Reply
Jum June 5, 2014 at 12:55 pm

Waste of time I thought it said Nancy Mace unveils shes not wearing panties…..dammit

Reply
Common Sense Tells Us June 5, 2014 at 2:35 pm

Graham’s latest statement about Obama and impeachment, I would be swinging a baseball bat and beating him into the dirt with it. Then his amnesty ideas ….. Americans want fighting … and if you give them a show, you will beat Graham easily.

Reply
Bible Thumper June 5, 2014 at 3:57 pm

Mace is airing radio ads attacking Bright’s financial history.

Reply
Teaissour June 5, 2014 at 6:32 pm

This idiot is nuts typical Teabagger pandering

Reply
Mike at the Beach June 5, 2014 at 10:30 pm

Ravenel is the “biggest potential hurdle” to Graham’s reelection?! Jesus, man. You have genuinely lost your mind.

Reply
HD June 6, 2014 at 8:40 am

Mike – Folks is either paid to write this sort of nonsense or he actually believes it. (I suppose both could be true on occasion). So, he’s either a whore, an idiot, or sometimes both.

Reply
Mike at the Beach June 6, 2014 at 10:34 am

You are probably right, but Will’s not a dumb guy. Ravenel?! No one can be that blinded.

Reply
Limbaughsaphatkhunt June 6, 2014 at 12:00 am

Achtung T-baggers!!! Graham is going to win. Plain, simple, fact.

Move along now.

Reply
jefferyj June 6, 2014 at 4:03 pm

That would suck. He’s been there to long…he needs to move along

Reply
Fuck Nancy June 6, 2014 at 12:47 pm

Mace is a capital BITCH!!!

Reply
jefferyj June 6, 2014 at 4:05 pm

So is lindsey

Reply
Vulva Itch June 7, 2014 at 6:31 pm

does anyone know if she is lesbian ? would look to lick that thang

Reply

Leave a Comment