First off, how about a $5 discount for using the online service?  That's call an "incentive". Penalizing people for going to a branch is called a "deterrent".  We all know that the greedy, grubby hands down at the RMV, DOT, and governor's office wouldn't think of offering to charge less for something. That's just silly.  Secondly, you should be giving the poor people who have to go down to a RMV branch $5 just for having to deal with some of the state's worst employees. Most of the people I have dealt with down there are nasty and rude, not to mention they seem put out when you ask them to do their job. There have been some exceptions, but they are by far the exception.

This has to stop. The state just keeps asking for more and more and continues to give less and less. We need to start holding our elected officials accountable for this nonsense. Unfortunately I believe we need to remove them from office.  The fact is the elected officials today have a mindset that they can do anything they want and the people of this state will just take it. We need to start sending messages to beacon hill, continue your nonsense and you'll be out of a job.

Next time you vote I hope you remember all the fees and taxes the state charges you and the very little you get in return.  I know I will.

Ref: Effective March 1, Online, Mail & Automated Services Will Cost Less than Branch Services

Anyway, I thought I'd do an attack ad with the equivalent intellectual prowess the “This Bush is Brown” ad.  Here it is:

This Martha is a crook.  This crook is a Martha.

Both of these women have robbed people of their personal property.  One by lying, cheating, and being downright dishonorable. The other by lying, cheating, and being downright dishonorable. By continuing to support either one you send the message that lying, cheating, and being dishonorable is how you want your country to be.  It will continue to corrupt our great country and continue to cost us more.  Here is a quick comparison:

As you can see, neither Martha is right for this state.  Make sure on January 19^th you don’t pick a Martha.

Did this guy deserve his sentence? Maybe. Highly likely even.  That's not really the point.  The point is the government is saying the government doesn't need to keep its promises or honor its agreements.  Ask a 5 year old, he'll tell you that isn't really fair.  It is just another example of how we can't put our trust in the government.

Link: Court rules for government in plea deal dispute

"To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a 100 percent tax on bonuses paid by businesses that receive TARP assistance and are majority owned by the Federal Government."

via H.R. 1542: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a 100 percent tax on bonuses paid by... (GovTrack.us).

Peopel to thank:

Am I the only one who sees the government acting a little tyrannical lately.  If they take back this personal property from these AIG employees what will stop them from taking your personal property?  Don't even pretend it's not "personal property" either.  As soon as it left the government's grubby little hands and went into the hands of AIG one could argue it became AIG's property.  Certainly when it left AIGs hands and went into the hands of the employees it became their personal property.

If the government wants to make some legal argument against the AIG employees and prove that they broke some laws they can recoup the money that way, however, abusing the tax system to take it back forcefully is wrong.  Just like it was wrong to give AIG the money in the first place.  Just like it was wrong to ignore the warning signs of Fannie and Freddie.  Let's stop the wrongs, please, before I have to explain to my preschooler how, while 2 wrongs don't make a right, sometimes 16 or so do (at least if you're a liberal.)

Link: Schumer: AIG employees should return bonuses or face high tax - CNN.com

This was when I discovered, “if you want to know the truth, evaluate the raw data yourself”, and I live by that today.  I am constantly picking apart articles and news reports for potential skewing of the data.  (Whenever they show  “deaths caused by (big bad) guns” I ask, what is the number of deaths by guns used in a legal manner per year?  Good luck finding it.) 

Anyway, stripping away the BS is the point and that is why I like this site: http://www.govtrack.us/

 It tracks the votes of our U.S. Congress and it’s open source!  Sure there are summaries that are skewed a little (but not much), still you can get to the raw data.  That actual text of a bill, not a summary.  Who voted how or who didn’t vote.  You can see what is really going on.  It gives a good picture of what the democrats are supporting, what the republicans are supporting, and what votes are really bi-partisan.  (Sorry Nancy, getting 5 republicans to support your crazy idea is not “bi-partisan support”.)  It has RSS feeds too so you can track changes with ease.  I suggest everyone go check it out, you deserve to know what is really going on.

However, this really isn't about Apple and iPhone, this is about the DMCA in general.  This stance, if it is approved by the courts, set a precedent. That precedent is that you can't use stuff you buy the way you want. So most people will just say "so what."  With iPhone I kind of agree.  Apple gives a majority of the people what they need and a slightly majority what they want via iTunes.  Still, what about other things you buy.

Think about a few items in your house right now and imagine if all of a sudden the makes tell you how to use it.  Your coffee maker will only take coffee from certain makers.  Your toaster will only toast certain brands of bread.  Your car will only allow you to put in "super" grade gas.  It may seem ridiculous but I bet 50 years ago people would look at things today and find a few of our everyday experiences ridiculous.

Link: Apple Says iPhone Jailbreaking is Illegal | Electronic Frontier Foundation

Reality: Having less police and firefighters is YOUR CHOICE!

It is true that public services are funded partially by state taxes, however, when that money doesn't come in it is up to the local municipalities what services get cut.  It's not automatically police and fire departments that get the axe, your elected officials make these choices.  If you don't like the decision they make you can vote for someone else and basically "fire" them.

In addition, if you read my previous post, you would know that nothing needs to be cut!  You, the people, have the choice to fund your police and fire department via a prop 2 1/2 override.  Now depending on where you live and how much state aid you were getting you may need to pay more or less to make up the gap, however, I'd be willing to bet more of your dollar will go where you want it when it stays local then when it goes through the state "middle man".  They aren't stretching the buck like our local towns and cities are.

There is another benefit to funding your own municipal services.  Real estate is a product, just like anything else you would buy, in a store or otherwise.  This means its price is based upon its value and if you fund better services then your neighboring towns and cities then your real estate value should be higher.

So the whole "people will die" was just a fear tactic used to trick people into continuing to fund a legislature that already has us in dept and continues to be fiscally ineffective and irresponsible.  Still, it looks like the people gave then a stamp of approval to just continue doing what the have been doing, wasting our hard earned, but easily given away, money.

Reality: If question #1 passed your property tax would have gone up 2.5% and now it's going to go up (*drum roll*) 2.5%.

Massachusetts has a law (Mass. General Laws Chapter 59 Section 21C) that limits the amount a municipality can raise property tax annually to 2.5% without a majority vote on a municipal referendum, often referred to as a "Proposition 2 ½."  In my recent memory the municipalities I have lived in have always raised taxes by, guess how much, 2 ½% annually.  Then they often put a "referendum" on the ballot of a special election to request an override and get more money.  This gives the people a choice, annually, on how much taxes they pay.  Not only that, it provides local money that is used locally. In addition, these referendums are often multiple choice.  This means you can approve a ½% increase, a 1% increase, or whatever specific amount they have on the ballot.

Personally I would rather pay property taxes then state income taxes.  The money is used locally, I have more control over it (via the aforementioned referendums), and it is easier to oust a bad politician at the local level then at the state level (umm, Cynthia McKinney).  In addition, increased property tax, properly used at the local level, should lead to increased property values.  This would then provide increased tax revenue for the municipality, a win-win.  They only down side is that property tax exempts out of state residents who work in MA and I do believe if they travel here to work, on our roads, they should provide something to the state (and I am against toll booths unless MA plates get a rate of $0.00).

So to summarize, the outcome of question 1 had no impact on property taxes.  This was simply a fear tactic, just like the "people will die because there will be no emergency services" tactic used to convince people to do the wrong thing.

So, nationally, I wait for the realization to occur.  I think most of us saw the woman at the Obama rally waiting for her free gas and for Obama to pay her mortgage (link), and what is even more sad then this woman wanting a handout is that I truly believe that she believes what she is saying.  You have the black panther "security" guard in Philly (by they way, not a member of the Black Panther Party from the 60's and 70's but a member of the "New Black Panther Party", a  black supremacist organization founded in Dallas, Texas in 1989) guarding the polling place with a nightstick (link) saying that a black man is going to win this election.  Then there was the election official, I believe in IL, saying he would "wait and see" how many votes Obama needed before reporting his district.  I get the feeling like millions of Americans out there think Obama is some kind of savior, that he'll be offering handouts, and by electing him president all the hate and pain of racism and minority oppression is going to be wiped clean from this country.  This is not going to happen and when that realization occurs I fear it is not going to be pretty.

Locally, here in Massachusetts, we had failures all around.  Okay, I don't think anyone believed Kerry would lose his senate seat and I guess the fact that he lost 30% of the votes isn't a complete failure so we can have some solace in that.  It sends a message that while the liberals flee to NH in an attempt to avoid the taxation they inflicted on the state and screw up NH politics the conservatives are building power here in MA...slowly but surely.  On question 1 though we completely lost out.  70% of you wanted to keep the higher taxes!  This is how I figured it played out. 65% voted to decriminalize marijuana and I am figuring a good portion of you don't really pay too much taxes or are too high to even know what you pay in taxes.  So this means 65 of that 70% who voted yes on question 1 were the potheads and the other 5% of people were just plain stupid.  At least you weren't too high to realize you shouldn't re-elect moron Diane Wilkerson back into her state senate seat.  Then again, she was a write in, and it's a lot easier to fill in the little circle next to "Sonia Chang-Diaz" then write in all those complicated letters.

Dogs were the only winners in MA this year.  Dog racing was outlawed with question 3 and while I am happy for the dogs (personally this was the only line item that went my way), I have to wonder why the fear of lost gambling income and lost jobs at the race track wasn't deemed "irresponsible" like low taxes.  I guess they didn't realize we'll need that extra income to pay for all the overhead from various problems the "decriminalized" pot is going to cause.  Or maybe these people think dogs are more important then humans.  In any case, I'm still happy for the dogs.

So, as this hangover subsides, I'll get ready with the questions for my liberal friends, like "where is my free gas", "wow, I'm glad the economy rebounded" and "how about those tax breaks?"  I also can't wait for the first video of some idiot here is MA telling a cop, "Dude, it's okay now, they, like, decriminalized weed so it's cool for me to smoke this in public."  (Just on a side note, if you are caught with marijuana under the new law it is a $100 fine but if you dive into Massachusetts waters and pluck out a lobster it is a $1000 fine.)  Finally, when all of you are ready to admit you made a mistake sometime late in January we'll take you back.  After all we'll have another chance to set things right in 4 years from now.

Good luck Obamerica!