One week

We’re a week away from the election. In a number of states, including Missouri, people have already voted. In Missouri, it absentee voting. The other states have early voting, a scheme by democrats to make vote fraud easier.

Easier? How?

It’s simple. Most county clerks really don’t do a passable job. For them it’s best to just ease along, not making any waves. When people register to vote, they don’t cross check to see if the person is already registered with another name. For instance, I, like most Americans, that three names. Let’s make up one, John Thomas Roberts. Mr Roberts could be registered as John Roberts, Tom Roberts, John T. Roberts, J. Thomas Roberts at 123 Main Street. If the clerk mistypes the address, some of those entries could be at 123 Main Street, others at 124 Main Street—and everyone version would be registered as a real voters. Mr. Roberts could, therefore, vote four times—more if he voted early and then showed up at the polls as well. You see, most county clerks never cross-check, nor remove early voters from the poll registry. Mr. Roberts could, theoretically, vote eight times.

In areas in Kansas City, St. Louis, and other liberal bastions across the state, the local poll judges wouldn’t be able to stop them. In times past, some judges were blocked from the polls, or intimidated by thugs. Kansas City’s past history in the last decades has had both.

Polling station with paper ballots

Can we eliminate vote fraud? No, not completely. What we can do, however, is make vote fraud much more difficult. First, require voting by paper ballots. In my county, we mark our choices in black ink on the ballot and then it is scanned and read. Fool proof? No. If the ballot is improperly marked it could be misread. The scanner can have basic logic to reject ballots that have no votes, two votes for the same office, or marks outside of the selection box. But, if there is a question later on the vote count, those paper ballots are still available for a real person to check.

What else can be done? Photo Voter-ID, using a photo taken at the time of registration. Liberal claims to the contrary, if a photo ID is required to cash a check, there is no reason why a photo-ID can’t be required to vote. All claims to the contrary are just tactics by liberals to preserve their ability for vote fraud.

What else? Eliminate early voting. The democrat adage, “Vote early, vote often,” is real. Should we eliminate absentee voting? No, there are legitimate reasons for absentee voting. Citizens in the military, deployed  outside the country or based in other states, retain their right to vote and to have their votes counted. There are mechanisms in place for the military to vote. There are also legitimate reason why others, not in the military, cannot be present to vote at their polls. But, in those cases, the absentee voter should present and sign an affidavit attesting to their reason for not voting at their home polling station, such as travel or illness to name two.

Our Republic is based on the fundamental right of its citizens who meet the established requirements for a voter. That means that aliens, non-citizens, whether here legally or illegally, do NOT vote. The democrats want those illegal votes, it dilutes the votes of citizens and the democrats believe those illegal votes can be bought. The legality of voting is irrelevant to them. Voting is nothing more than a means for them to gain and retain power. If they thought they could get away with it, and if we don’t fight them, one day our right to vote and have it counted, will be no more.

This election appears to be leading to a ‘Pub victory in many areas of the country and in Missouri. Let’s work with our legislators, local and national, in the 2015 session to pass, and override vetos, for some real voter security—paper ballots, audits of the voting rolls and insuring they are clean, passing Photo-IDs for registration and voting, and putting some real teeth in penalties for vote fraud. In many instances, vote fraud is only a misdemeanor. Vote fraud should be a felony with a long prison term and heavy fines.

The United States is a republic, not a democracy nor a mobocracy. We must have the tools to insure it remains a republic. Else, we will have not a republic, not a democracy, but the rule of elites of a single party—just like the old USSR.

A divergent path

If you are a long time reader of this blog, you will have noticed I’ve been somewhat quiet since the election.  There are a variety of reasons for that reticence…long delayed chores, commitments to friends, and just a bit a depression that I think has afflicted all of us.

I like to call myself a political observer. That is what I call myself when around my ‘Pub friends. I’ve disappointed a few that wanted me to be more active in the political process. I was active this year supporting friends who were running for office. I’m glad to say they all won their offices.

Still, it wasn’t enough to win on the larger state and national scale. There have been many who have pontificated where the failure occurred—we didn’t address the moderates, the independents, the Hispanic voters. We needed to address woman and modify our pro-life stance. We should embrace all the illegals like the democrats and further continue to dilute our voter base.

Those are the opinions of the Washington GOP and their political toadies like Ann Coulter, Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer. Each of them have sold their souls to the GOP establishment. I want nothing to do with them. Whenever I hear them speak, I understand they really have no concept how the rest of the conservatives really think. They don’t understand why we oppose them—after all, they are the party elite!

No more.

At the core, the Republican Party is fragmenting. The conservative base feels betrayed. Why? Because we believe the party elite crammed a vulnerable candidate down our throats whose conservative credentials were weak at best. Then they modified the party’s convention rules to further weaken conservatives, those not of the establishment to maintain the establishment’s control of the party’s primary, caucus and convention process. The result was that many conservatives shifted to 3rd parties or didn’t vote. It was enough to lose those “swing” states.  Democrat ballot box stuffing didn’t help either.

The party elites believe they can continue as before. That won’t happen. In the states and among political pundits outside of Washington, forces are moving. Here’s just a few comments from a couple of well-known conservatives.

Laura Ingraham unloaded on her radio show with this comment.

Laura Unleashed

Lousiana Governor Bobby Jindahl offers the Republicans some simple advice in the wake of crushing losses on November 6. Be smart…be the ideas party…offer intelligent solutions. This sounds obvious, but approach, language, strategy all have to be carefully considered in the wake of Mitt Romney’s defeat and the loss of Senate contests that should have been gimmes for the GOP. As for those Republicans who believe that the party needs to moderate or change its core beliefs to survive, go for it. I think that is both a political fools errand and and bad policy. Most people are conservative because they believe free markets and limited government, borne out of our Judeo-Christian tradition, represent the best hope for America. Those are the principles I will continue to advocate for, regardless of intra-party squabbling or the panic of the moment.

Bobby Jindal had this to say.

Jindal: End ‘dumbed-down conservatism’

By JONATHAN MARTIN | 11/13/12 4:22 AM EST

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal on Monday called on Republicans to “stop being the stupid party” and make a concerted effort to reach a broader swath of voters with an inclusive economic message that pre-empts efforts to caricature the GOP as the party of the rich.

“We’ve got to make sure that we are not the party of big business, big banks, big Wall Street bailouts, big corporate loopholes, big anything,” Jindal told POLITICO in a 45-minute telephone interview. “We cannot be, we must not be, the party that simply protects the rich so they get to keep their toys.”

He was just as blunt on how the GOP should speak to voters, criticizing his party for offending and speaking down to much of the electorate.

“It is no secret we had a number of Republicans damage our brand this year with offensive, bizarre comments — enough of that,” Jindal said. “It’s not going to be the last time anyone says something stupid within our party, but it can’t be tolerated within our party. We’ve also had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being simplistic, we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters.”

Jindal, a Brown Graduate and Rhodes Scholar, is already a favorite of conservative intellectuals and his assessment that Republican difficulties owe as much to economics as demographics will be well-received by right-leaning thinkers. Since last week, a sort of backlash to the backlash has sprouted up, with some conservatives castigating what they see as too much knee-jerk pandering on immigration and not enough discussion of what they see as the party’s unimaginative, donor-driven fiscal policies.Jindal, the son of Indian immigrants, said the GOP “must reject identity politics” and “treat folks as individuals, as Americans, not as members of special interest groups.”

Raising Romney’s damaging comments about voters who don’t pay income taxes, Jindal urged the GOP to make clear they want the support of every American.

“The Republican Party is going to fight for every single vote,” he said. “That means the 47 percent and the 53 percent, that means any other combination of numbers going up to 100 percent.”

Bobby Jindal will be the incoming leader of the Republican Governors Association. There’s more at the website if you wish to follow the link. 

Across the country, groups of conservatives are organizing, planning and gathering. Some call for a new 3rd party. Others point out that we already have conservative 3rd parties and none have been able to draw double-digit percentages in elections at any level. More, this time, believe as I do that change to the Republican Party must come from within. To do that, we must weed out the establishment drones at the local and state levels. Then we can seize the national central committee.

Those who used our support this last election cycle must declare their stance now. Are you for us, the conservatives who worked to get you elected or for the establishment? The time to choose is coming. Choose wisely.

OK People! Listen up!

We are less than two months from the election and what do I hear? Romney is gonna lose. Akin is gonna lose. The ‘Pub establishment, FOX, and the MSM says we’re gonna lose. Everywhere I turn it’s the same.

We’re all losers!!!

That’s exactly what the dems and libs want you to think.

Well, lissen up! It’s time to stop the temper-tantrums. It’s time to pull up your big-boy pants and grow up. I know Ron Paul didn’t get the ‘Pub nomination. No, it wasn’t stolen from him. He wasn’t even close to being in the running.  His aim was to influence the party platform and he was successful.

I also know that Romney is the nominated candidate. Yes, he’s a Mormon. I’m tired of all the bigotry—from our own side, claiming they won’t vote for a Mormon.  Even faintly veiled bigotry is still bigotry. I don’t agree with Mormon doctrine. But even with our disagreements, Mormonism is miles better than the atheism and humanistic socialism preached by Obama and the dems.

I belong to a number of Facebook and e-mail groups. I constantly read about how someone isn’t going to vote for Romney because he isn’t conservative enough. I suspect some of you aren’t conservative enough to suit me either. So what are you going to do? Vote for some third-party candidate? Not vote? Leave the President box unchecked?

If you think a third-party is the answer for President, you’re about a decade too late.  There’s been several attempts at a 3rd-party run for President from George Wallace in 1968 through John Anderson and Ross Perot. Every single one of them failed.  For a 3rd-party to be successful it has to build from the bottom up—win local elections, county elections, state elections and when your 3rd party has won and controlled several states, then have your perfect candidate run for President.

A decade of infrastructure building may be insufficient. It may take longer. Until that time, you’ll lose and just waste our time and resources.

Do you hate the ‘Pub establishment so much you’d rather have Obama elected for another four years than vote for Romney? Would you allow Obama to win a second term just to spite the ‘Pub establishment? Because electing Obama for another tern is exactly what will happen if you don’t vote for Romney. And if Obgama wins you’ll blame the ‘Pub establishment, Mormons, RINOs, everyone and everything except yourself—you who didn’t vote for Romney.

Let’s be clear here. No, Romney isn’t all that we’d like. Neither is Paul Ryan. He’s screwed up some congressional votes too. No one, certainly not Romney nor Ryan, is perfect.

The point is to remove Obama. Send him back to his $2.5million dollar mansion in crime-ridden Chicago. Let him be an activist among the gangs and druglords. He should feel at home. Vote for ABO, Anyone But Obama if you find Romney so distasteful.

I don’t care if you hate the ‘Pubs because they’re not conservative enough to suit you. Do you hate them enough to put Obama back in the White House? If so, then you’re no conservative and we can do without you. If you are that unbalanced, you’d not be an asset for conservatism anyway.

We have fifty-six days left if I’ve counted correctly. Get to work! When the pollsters call, answer and tell them the truth. Show how badly Obama really fares. An if you still hate the ‘Pub establishment, send a big donation to Todd Akin and poke a finger in Karl Rove‘s and RNC Chairman Reince Priebus‘ eye.  You’ll feel better for donating and you’ll help remove Obama from OUR White House.

What’s going on in Cass County? (Updated)

The Harrisonville Democrat-Missourian has an editorial this week that brushes off the nepotism charges levied against Janet Burlingame and Pam Shipley.  Mr. Beaudoin, the publisher said, “I get that as auditor, Johnson has a duty to watch and protect the county coffers. But soon, and maybe it’s already happening, people are going to start to suggest he’s taking the fight to a different level, an ugly one that will further divide this courthouse.”

Mr. Beaudoin appears to be ignoring the corrupt practices being followed in the county government. He ignores the Auditor’s report on the pay raises given by Ms. Shipley and says instead, “…seems to have gotten an across-the-board raise just like everyone else in that office when extra duties were divvied out.” The Auditor’s report however, clearly shows the raises were not across-the-board. When the distribution of raises is examined, it’s $3000, $3000, $3000, $4500.  Guess who got $4500 when the others only received $3000?  Yes, Ms Shipley’s relative.

An editorial by the paper’s publisher has no requirement for being factual nor accurate.  It is an editorial, an opinion piece and everyone has their own opinion.  I understand that a report on certain county operations from an outside auditor is due soon. Will Mr. Beaudoin’s opinion change or will he continue to be partisan following the oligarchy’s party line?

If County Auditor Ron Johnson can discover evidence of nepotism and mishandling of funds, I would expect the outside auditor will confirm that evidence. Will the county oligarchy of both parties claim the outside auditor is on a “witch-hunt” too?

When corruption is discovered and exposed, watch to see who squeals the loudest. Those are the guilty ones.

UPDATE: I’ve been told some readers are unable to follow the link to Facebook to the Auditor’s Report. As an alternative, I’ve acquired images of the first eight pages of the report.  Some of the images are poor quality and may be difficult to read.

UPDATE-2: The link above is to a folder now includes a .PDF of the Cass County Auditor’s report on the Collector’s office.

A Gathering Storm?

I came across the column below accidentally.  I was looking for a different article but fat-fingered the link and end up with this one.  It bears disseminating because I’ve many friends in the ‘Pub establishment and I know they’ve never considered what may happened if the ‘Pubs in DC screw up…again.

July 9, 2012

The Gathering Storm within the GOP

By Daren Jonescu

Though all conservative hands must be on deck for Mitt Romney between now and November 6, there is little doubt that from that day forward, America will witness the final foundation-shaking battle in a long war — namely, a fight for the heart of the Republican Party.  Either the current, longstanding GOP establishment will finally cede control of the official banner of political conservatism, or the traditional two-party system, and with it the American republic, will dissolve.

That there is a GOP establishment ought to go without saying, although this self-evident fact has been vehemently denied by a few of the establishment’s most prominent representatives.  These denials ought to be a heartening source of amusement to anti-establishment conservatives, as they confirm the extreme degree to which the old guard fails to recognize its exposure, and the severity of the light that has been cast upon it of late.

The track record of the Washington ‘Pub establishment, like McConnell and Boehner, is abysmal.  Last year, Boehner said they would not approve a debt limit increase.  Then McConnell broached an idea, which Boehner agreed, that gave Obama and the dems exactly what they wanted. A free ride that increased the debt limit, no budget submitted, a Bi-partisan committee to set spending cuts and a default if the dems, as they did, refused to cooperate. The result was an increase in debt, few spending cuts—except for the military which received the largest portion—so large that it endangers our national security, of the cuts.

The people were outraged by the ‘Pub establishment’s betrayal of our conservative ideals.  The establishment members, however, didn’t care. As long as they toed the establishment line, they were secure in their positions.  McConnell and Boehner may as well have said, “Conservatism be damned! We have ours!”

The definitive quality of an establishmentarian is, of course, the quality of being “established.”  Being established, in general usage, means having a secure place, and being firmly entrenched in one’s respected status within a social structure.  Being a member of a political establishment entails being aligned with, and firmly entrenched within, the presiding power structure. 

The primary argument used to deny the existence of a Republican establishment is to point out that there are differing opinions among its alleged members.  In fact, internal disagreement does nothing to countervail the reality of an establishment, as it is a given that any broad group of people in the business of creating, advocating, and defending policy positions will be beset with factionalism among its members. 

The situation is as bad at the state and local levels as it is in Washington.  Time after time we see mediocre candidates being pushed for office—candidates often unqualified by training, profession or experience for the office.  Those candidates, however, “paid their dues” following the traditional process and thus expect, and receive, support from the state and local establishment.

These people, collectively, define the parameters of the Republican Party, which party, in turn, serves as the official representative of conservative principle for electoral purposes — i.e., for the purposes of voicing conservative aspirations within the realm of law-making and leadership.  In short, the Republican establishment has a monopoly on defining conservatism at the all-important levels of public policy and mainstream discourse.  Thus, the hopes and concerns of non-establishment conservatives and libertarians are given, at best, a muted hearing in Washington, whether within government proper or among the professional conservative pundit class.  Under present circumstances, this means that the truest voice of constitutional republicanism — which ought to be the dominant concern on all sides of a proper American political establishment — is being choked out in favor of the “go along to get along” model of political survivalism that has typified the Washington GOP for several decades.

Let’s be perfectly clear about this.  The problem is not the existence of an establishment, per se.  There will always be an establishment; it is the nature of human social endeavor gradually to elevate certain people or schools of thought into pre-eminence.  Societal development requires this. 

The problem is the nature of the current establishment, and its recalcitrance to fundamental change.  More bluntly, the problem is the current establishment’s refusal to accept responsibility for its failure, and to step aside for the good of the country.

Playing by the present GOP establishmentarians’ rules, almost without exception, for forty years (I am referring to the actual men who constitute today’s establishment, not the broader GOP trends which of course go back much farther), has brought America to the brink of complete national collapse.  America is no longer financially tenable; it is teetering on the edge of moral dissolution; it is today only nominally a constitutional republic; and through milquetoastism in the face of a determined leftist assault on America, the GOP has relinquished the societal reins to a man whose mentors, advisers, and cohorts include numerous Marxist and post-Marxist revolutionaries.

Such a prolonged, abject failure as is embodied by the GOP establishment is possible only in the sphere of electoral politics, in which entire viewpoints are represented monopolistically by one party.  Imagine, by analogy, hiring a contractor to build your house.  Now imagine that it is forty years later, and you return to the property to find that the builders have thus far erected only parts of two walls, which they are in the process of tearing down for the eleventh time, as they have yet again forgotten to lay the foundation.  This predicament is impossible in ordinary reality, of course, at least until the left completes its fundamental transformation of the U.S. economy.  And yet it pretty closely approximates the nature of the GOP establishment’s performance in defense of individualism, liberty, and the Constitution over that same forty-year span.

As many have pointed out, it is absurd that the fate of liberty in the United States of America should hang in the balance of a 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court.  Consider, however, that even if Romney is able to defeat Obama in November, and thus prevent the full implementation of the radical “social justice” agenda that Obama has promised for his second term, his margin of victory will be even slimmer than that 5-4 ratio that everyone was hoping for from SCOTUS.  In addition to, and almost regardless of, winning elections, the increasingly emboldened leftists who now constitute the Democrat Party establishment are winning the broader culture war, through a combination of corrupt education, media, and entitlement-inducing policy.

This is not some fantasy created by Daren Jonescu, the writer of his article. it is the unfortunate reality of our current ‘Pub organization in Washington. The establishment is fighting the emergence of grassroots conservatism as much, or perhaps more, that it fights the libs and socialism.  At times, it appears that the ‘Pub establishment would rather embrace socialism than it would embrace the conservative ethos of the Tea Party and other home-grown organizations.

The reason for this strange twist — the GOP trying to quell the enthusiasm of its, and the nation’s, potential saviors — is as old as man, and as clear as the meaning of the word “established.”  Those who see themselves as privileged, who have long enjoyed (or just recently come to realize) the benefits of being men of consequence and the vanity-stroking perks of pre-eminence, are loath to give them up.  And then there is the extraordinary public shame of having one’s near-cataclysmic failure thrown so unceremoniously at one’s feet.  The long-privileged class can hardly be expected to take this well.

And as the two-party system grants them the strategic advantage of a monopolistic hold on public conservatism, they can attempt to withstand the Tea Party threat to their privilege by challenging grassroots conservatives to a game of “king of the hill.”  As they are the ones at the top of the hill, the long war of attrition greatly favors them.  In practical terms, they have the elected offices, the bureaucratic offices, the national airwaves and op-ed pages, and all the perceived legitimacy that such things bring, while their opponents are, by definition, outsiders who lack these trappings of respectability. 

Constitutional conservatives will not win through a third-party challenge — or at least not in the foreseeable future.  This is not to defend the entrenched two-party system as such.  The first president sounded the proper warning in his farewell address against precisely the form of party politics that has evolved. 

In the 236 years since our Declaration of Independence, our political structure has become exactly that which Washington warned us to avoid.  The organization in Washington named by some as “The Ruling Class,” is apolitical. Political philosophy is irrelevant to them as is the two political parties except when a philosophy can be used to maintain their personal power and advantage.

I urge to you follow the links and read Jonescu’s entire article. It provides food for thought and consideration.

United we stand. Divided…

Those who really know me understand that I’m not a talker.  I listen. You can pick up jewels by listening. One phrase I continually hear is the hyphenated-American—African American, Mexican-American, Asian-American and many others.

Every time I hear one of these I wonder why they believe they’re only half American?  My Father was born in the UK. My paternal grandparents were too. On that side, I’m a second generation American.  Some on my mother’s side were from Germany. We’re not sure about the rest although family lore says one of my great-grandmothers was a Blackfoot.

The point is that none of my parents nor any of my extended family thought of themselves as anything but American.  I remember seeing my Grandfather knock a man down for calling him a “Johnny Bull“. My Grandfather said he was an American and had the papers to prove it!

When the great Immigration, as some call it, occurred during the last half of the 19th Century and the first decade of the the 20th, immigrants fled their homelands coming here for a variety of reasons.  Most came here for a fresh start. They came to this nation to start anew, create and grow families. Many sent funds back to the Old Country to bring other family members to the United States. Few returned home.

My ancestors were no different. They fled a life to make a new one.

The common pursuit, once here, was to become an American—not German-American nor Polish-American nor Swedish-American, just an American. It was a personal insult to imply they were only half-American. My Grandfather didn’t hesitate to make his displeasure known with his fists.

All that has changed. For sixty years, progressives, liberals, have been working diligently to divide our people. We’re no longer Americans, no we must now be something-American. Half-American.

Historians  look at that period of our country, from the end of the Civil War to the beginning of WW1 as the period of greatest growth of our nation. People came to the United States to renew themselves and seize the opportunities available through diligence and hard work. The only thing they expected was the freedom to make the best of those opportunities.

Look at the difference now, since the end of WW2. What was once a united country is being Balkanized. There are forces within this country, call them Socialist, Marxist, Progressives, or liberals, who believe that dividing this country provides an opportunity for them to seize control. They believe they can reform the country into an image of central control—with them at the top controlling everyone else.

If one can receive favor via “entitlements” or other benefits, by being half-American, that increases division. Being different is now a benefit. And increases division. Divisiveness disrupts the common American culture. The half-Americans feel alienated and unable to relate to the core beliefs of the immigrants of a century ago…the ones who built this nation. It is easy to manipulate those alienated from the common culture.

The progressives, the elitists, cannot seize control when the country is united. No, it must be divided into groups and factions, factions who view themselves as half-Americans. They are disunited and vulnerable…and easily controlled and ruled. The country must be Balkanized for them to succeed.

United we stand. Divided we fall. I am not a half-American. I am united with that vision of our Founders and of my Grandfather. I am an American. What are you?

Gulag America

Gulag America.  Senator Schumer (D-NY) must have been re-reading his communist history. After WW II, eastern Europe was losing population to the west. Rather than live in the Communist paradise, Eastern Europeans fled to escape the oppression. The communists retaliated. Churchill named the creation of that retaliation the Iron Curtain. A few years later they added the Berlin Wall.  If anyone was captured (rather than killed outright) trying to leave, they were sent off to the Gulags where no one was able to escape. That is what Senator Schumer and Senator Bob Casey want to create—Gulag America where no one can escape. Paying taxes, that is.

Schumer has introduced a bill, called the Ex-Patriot Act by some, that would punish anyone who gives up US citizenship to save their asset from Schumer’s taxman.  Schumer doesn’t mind people leaving. In fact in bill prohibits them from returning.  No, he just wants them to leave their money behind…at least 30% behind.

Why is Schumer doing this? Because Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook, renounced his U.S. citizenship last year and moved to Singapore. If he make a few billion off the Facebook IPO, Saverin would pay taxes in Singapore, where there is no capital gains tax.

The nerve of Saverin! Leaving the country just to preserve a few billions of dollars. It’s immaterial that Saverin pays taxes in Singapore. No, Schumer wants this non-citizen, who doesn’t live in the US, to pay US taxes.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., accompanied by Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington on Thursday after unveiling legislation inspired by Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin's scheme to renounce his U.S. citizenship in order to dodge taxes on profits he will collect when Facebook goes public. The bill will harshly tax people like Saverin should they depart America to save on business taxes.

Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.) announced legislation on Thursday designed to punish people who renounce their citizenship in order to dodge taxes.

Their bill, the Ex-Patriot Act, is a direct response to Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook, who renounced his U.S. citizenship last year. The news became public last week.

“Eduardo Saverin wants to de-friend the United States of America just to avoid paying taxes. We aren’t going to let him get away with it,” Schumer said at a press conference Thursday where he announced the new legislation.

The citizenship move will save Saverin, who was born in Brazil and now lives in Singapore, an estimated $67 million to $100 million in taxes. That amount could increase if Facebook’s stock price rises.

Schumer called Saverin’s actions “outrageous.”

“Saverin has turned his back on the country that welcomed him and kept him safe, educated him and helped him become a billionaire,” Schumer said.

Casey called Saverin’s plan an “insult to the American people” that “cries out for some basic justice.”

Under the bill, anyone who renounces their citizenship and has a net worth of $2 million or an average income tax liability of $148,000 over the last five years will be presumed to be trying to dodge taxes. The person can appeal that designation to the Internal Revenue Service.

But if the IRS determines a person gave up their passport for primarily tax reasons, all of the person’s U.S. assets will be taxed at 30 percent, double the usual rate of 15 percent.

The person will also be barred from ever entering the United States again.

Instead of punishing Saverin and others like him who are leaving the US for better tax waters, perhaps Senators Schumer and Casey should be asking themselves WHY people are leaving this People’s Paradise?  Perhaps if they would try to resolve that question people wouldn’t have a need to leave.

How about that Chuckie, old boy?

Nah, you’ll never do that, will you Chuckie. You’d rather be a Socialist elite.  After all, it’s the State’s responsibility to control the economy. It worked so well for the Soviets.