So much has been written about Barack Obama's slippery-slope of his so called "middle class tax cut." The very latest has Bill Richardson on the radio earlier today setting the bar at $120,000 (this is down from $250, $200, and $150k).

Aside for the 'all kinds of wrong' I see with the principals and reasoning behind Obama's "plan," I want to take a moment to point something out.

Barack Obama has tax and budget ideas. We've all heard about them. Many of us scoff at them; others of us praise them. But we would all be wise to remember how things REALLY work.

Presidents don't write laws (including bugets, taxes, etc). They have to ask Congress for these things.

Should Obama be elected to serve as our next President - God forbid - he will have to forward his ideas to Congress.

Whether or not we elect a (gulp) filibuster-proof Democrat majority, leaders Pelosi and Reid will take Obama's plan and use it as a STARTING POINT.

By the time the final package gets to a Prez Obama's desk, you can be sure that the spending will be higher, the tax thresholds will be lower (as evidenced by the already lowering thresholds).

If you think Obama's budget schemes are oppresive now, hang on to your wallets, guys. It's just the beginning.

The fallout from these ill-advised policies would be catastrophic to our economy.

By the time the Axis of Taxes gets through with us, we will long for the breezy fun days of President Carter. (those of us who will there will shiver appropriately)

Don't let it happen. Say no to the Axis of Taxes. Vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

UPDATE:Today, Nov 1, an Obama surrogate and former campaign manager for Dick Gephardt (remember him??) was interviewed on FOX News and refused to give any amount as the threshold for Obama tax cuts.

I saw a report today about the good, 'ol "Halloween Mask Poll." Conventional wisdom says the whosever likeness sells best is the winner of the election.

The report said that Obama masks were out-selling McCain masks by 54-46%. But there's a twist. There were no numbers for the Palin costumes.

So here's the question: Don't you think there will be at least 10% of Halloweeners dressing as Sarah Palin?

I think it will be much more.

This is a link to the youtube clip of the audio of a Roger Hedgecock radio show where he interviews the TX marine (ret.) who got an in-person visit by the Secret Service.

Why? An Obama supporter called her cell phone to as for her vote. She replied that Obama is a Socialist and that the caller should spend her time doing something more productive.

The Caller made a false claim to the Secret Service indicating the TX woman threatened the life of Obama.

The clip is about 9:50min.

To say the least, there is a disturbing trend emerging with regards to how the Obama campaign handles tough quesitons and contrary viewpoints.

Take it away, Zo...

I couldn't say it better...

This is a reposting of Kelly McParland and Lorne Gunter's excellent post. It appears below in it's entirety.

This is one of the most compelling pieces of video I've seen of someone talking about their politics.

It's a little lengthy at 9:49min, so get a refreshing beverage, sit down and enjoy the ride as this guy takes you through his thoughts about what matters to him in thes election season.

When I settled in to watch John McCain's speech at the Alfred E Smith Charity Dinner in New York, I was expecting a couple of yuks and a lot of misfired jokes from McCain. Was I wrong! His speech was funny. I mean, really, really laugh-out-loud funny, and warm, heartfelt, sincere, and thoughtful.

He skillfully wove a tapestry of one-liners and out-right skewers. My overall impression was that watching McCain speak was like watching a master juggler twirl an array of knives - while occasionally throwing one. Delightful. The house agreed. McCain had them laughing, howling, and applauding the whole time.

There was a story I read once called "Lathe of Heaven." It its about a man who's dreams alter reality. In short, his dreams come true.

But in that peculiar way that minds work, his dream come true in ways that are unexpectedly... direct. It turns out his ability is like that of a genie: sure, you get what you want, but in the end, do you want what you get?

* * *

During the Carter Administration, there was an idea that it would be a good thing to make homeownership a right. After all, shouldn't everyone own a home?? As a means to that end, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was created and signed into law. It basically made it a little easier for those people "on the bubble" to afford to buy a home.

In 1995, President Clinton signed into law a major expansion of the CRA that strong-armed banks into lending to uncreditworthy people. And it worked - people were able to buy a home with "no money down."

But what this action by the Democrats did was to effectively guarantee that home prices would rise. Everybody's homes became instantly more valuable because that pesky 20% down payment was no longer required.

Nobody really noticed until the tech bubble popped.

When 1999 changed to 2000 and a Yahoo stock dropped from $300 to $30, a lot of the money that wasn't lost found it's way into the real estate market. Why wouldn't it? A lot of very smart people realized that there was a ton of money on the table. They were right.

As the real estate sector rallied, competition for those mortgage dollars increased, the guidelines were loosened. More and more and more people could qualify for no-doc loans.

It was a win-win: Banks were investing in the value of the property, not the borrower. As annual appreciation rates broke through the double-digit barrier, the banks were happy. So what if a borrower failed? They'd just sell the property for 15-20% more than they paid for it last year. The bank's debt is cured, and the borrower can take that money, buy another home, and try again.

Even though President Bush sounded the alarm in 2000, and McCain sounded the alarm again in 2003-4, Democrats consistently shouted them down. They said, in effect, "Move along, move along... there's nothing to see here..."

In the fall of 2005, the first whiff of trouble rippled through the real estate market. By 2006, the slowdown was palpable. In 2007, real estate professionals knew the jig was up. The ones who didn't sell in '06, sold their homes, rented, and waited.

Now, in 2008, we are in full-frontal crash mode. We could have done something to stop this crash, but the Democrats blocked every attempt. Their zeal to give away homes to a minority of people who couldn't pay trumped their oath to serve and protect all their constituents.

So, wish number one was "gee, I wish it was easier to buy a home" Granted! But now home prices have risen to crazy-high levels because money's so cheap.

Wish number two was "man, home prices are so high; I wish they would come down!" Granted! The real estate bubble has burst, and home prices have fallen as much as 60% in some areas.

* * *

Meanwhile, people said, "boy, I wish the minimum wage was higher... that would be sweet."

At the same time, people thought that one of the things contributing to the American trade deficit was an expensive dollar. I wished the dollar would come down in price so that American goods would be more competitve in the world market. We'd sell more and better products to the world market and that would be a good thing.

Granted! But the combination of many things, including falling dollar and higher labor costs contributed to higher oil prices (oil is priced in dollars), an overall CPI increase of, like, 6% in one year, and an unemployment rate of 6.1% (up from 4.8% last year). Ask a small business owner why this matters.

* * *

Then people thought, "You know, these gas prices are crazy - I wish they would come down. There's no way oil should be at $130 a barrel; it should be at, like, $80"

Granted! The price of oil started to fall... a lot! Yesterday, it traded in the $80-90-per-barrel range. Oops, the price of oil dropped so drastically because of (well-founded) fears of worldwide recession.

* * *

So here we are, 20-something days from the 2008 elections. I hear a lot of people saying, "Gosh, I wish things would change. I want change so much. Change, change, change, change, change..."

Well, here are the choices: one guy who has done a lot over a long time versus another guy who has done very, very little over a very small amount of time. Both guys talk about 'change.'

Considering the realities of this election, there will certainly be change.

What we need to consider, however, that we choose the right change.

So, the moderator of the Vice-Presidential debate Thursday night has a vested, commercial interest in the success of an Obama win. It's been announced, with only a couple of days before the debate, that her book, Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.

"Oh, but she's fair, she's experienced, she's done this before..." Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've heard it all before. Even if she is as fair as Solomon and as balanced as Lady Justice herself, she still has a vested, commercial interest in the election of a running candidate.

I've heard some chatter about how the McCain campaign didn't know about the book - like somehow that matters. My question is, how incompetent is the The Commission on Presidential Debates? Did they not know about Ifill's book? Or did they just not care? Did they not think the fact that the moderator of the debate - the one who is responsible for framing the debate by the questions asked - who has a direct, personal, business interest in the outcome of the election - would be an issue? For goodness sakes, the woman's publisher is releasing the book on Inauguration Day!

Imagine for a moment if Brit Hume were set to moderate the vp debate, and he announced a book called, The Hero in Office: The Life of John McCain. My ears are already ringing at the caterwauling we would hear on the Left. And you know what? The Right wouldn't like it either. And you know what else? They would both be right!

Some would say that any complaining about this clearly bogus (or incompetent - you pick) decision by the Commission to allow Gwen Ifill to take the stage for tomorrow's debate is a sign of weakness or low confidence. To use a phrase I've heard a little bit this election cycle: Spare me.

I am so sick and tired of the Right being given a hot, steamy pile of dung and then getting chastised for saying, "Hey, this is a hot pile of crap!" Well, it is!

Look, nobody said life was fair - but Americans should absolutely expect - demand! - that certain things in their life be fair. These things include:

Media Presentations called "News Reports"
Debates
Elections
Judges
Job & Housing Opportunities
There's more, I know but you get my gist

The Commission on Presidential Debates should work swiftly to replace Gwen Ifill. Actually, Ms Ifill should step down citing a conflict of interest - but I wouldn't expect her to do such a magnanimous thing.

The person running this whole thing, apparantly is the elusive Janet H Brown - Executive Director. Her email address is: jb@debates.org; her Phone# is (202) 872-1020 . Why don't we take a quick moment to let Ms. Brown that giving the moderator job for a vice-presidential debate to somesone with a person money interest in the outcome of the election is a (a-hem) BAD IDEA.

Of course, after reviewing the Board, it's no great surprise that things are working out this way...

Here's a short piece Ms Ifill did recently to promote her book...

The Breakthrough: Gwen Ifill - The most amazing videos are a click away

Who might be a good replacement? Well, how about Brit Hume? Hugh Hewitt? Fred Barnes and Mort Kondrake? Chris Wallace? Ben Stein?  Joe Lieberman?

If you have a suggestion, let me know!

Ms. Executive Director, if you're too busy, email me directly at cosmoxgram@gmail.com, leave your direct phone number so I can get the pertenant details, and I'll set the new moderator up myself. Heck, I'll even pay for the plane tickets! (if anybody else would be willing to chip in, let me know...)

As the Democrat nominee likes to say a lot: Enough is enough. And I, for one, have had enough.