90PercentVote.com - Register to vote and vote. If in doubt vote against the incumbent!

Hate politicians? Let me give you a reason to vote

2008-02-05T12:11:00.001-08:00

Don't waste your vote!

Do you hate politicians? These days it seems most of us do, which is why many Americans don't vote. We just don't think it makes a difference.

Well, just because you hate politicians doesn't mean you can't make a difference with your vote. Vote against your incumbents. Send a message that you are not happy. Even better, vote for a third party candidate. Again send a message that the status quo of Washington for the last few decades is no longer acceptable.

Don't buy into the primary hype

2008-02-01T09:36:00.000-08:00

The President is just a puppet

By all means get out and voice your opinion in the primary, it's a good habit. Still, don't buy into the hype that a new President is going to change much in America. Congress creates legislation, not the President, so start thinking about your Congressional vote.

My advice: Vote against ALL Congressional incumbents!

If you're happy with the state of America then vote for your favorite candidate. If you're unhappy with the state of America, don't believe for one second that simply voting for a new President is going to change much. You must send a message to your Congressional representatives!

40.6 billion reasons why Americans should register to vote and vote

2008-02-01T09:10:00.000-08:00

$4.00 gas is cheap?

So, ExxonMobil profited $40.6 billion dollars this year. That's plenty of money to keep buying Congress, as oil companies have been doing for decades.

But I don't care about $46.6 billion.

In the 1990's it cost America more money to secure and transport oil from the Middle East than the oil from the Middle East was worth. Yet, Americans don't pay for the security costs of oil at the gasoline pump. In fact, if Americans paid the real cost of gasoline at the pump, gas would probably cost $10.00 or more per gallon.

Environmental costs would probably push this cost even higher.

Yet, not one Republican is really addressing this issue, nor are any Democrats. Despite the fact that military-industrial complex that runs our government via cheap oil has created two wars in the Middle East, 9/11 and created massive pollution, not one mainstream politician is taking real action to change this.

OUR government has failed us, and voting 100 percent Democrat or Republican won't change that fact. Democrats have run Congress and the White House. Republicans have run Congress and the White House. Little has ever changed.

Vote against the incumbent in 2008!

Register to vote!

$40.6 billion reasons for Republicans to vote against Republicans?

2008-02-01T09:02:00.000-08:00

$4.00 gas is cheap?

So, ExxonMobil profited $40.6 billion dollars this year. That's plenty of money to keep buying Congress, as oil companies have been doing for decades.

But I don't care about $46.6 billion.

In the 1990's it cost America more money to secure and transport oil from the Middle East than the oil from the Middle East was worth. Yet, Americans don't pay for the security costs of oil at the gasoline pump. In fact, if Americans paid the real cost of gasoline at the pump, gas would probably cost $10.00 or more per gallon.

Environmental costs would probably push this cost even higher.

Yet, not one Republican is really addressing this issue, nor are any Democrats. Despite the fact that military-industrial complex that runs our government via cheap oil has created two wars in the Middle East, 9/11 and created massive pollution, not one mainstream politician is taking real action to change this.

OUR government has failed us, and voting 100 percent Democrat or Republican won't change that fact. Democrats have run Congress and the White House. Republicans have run Congress and the White House. Little has ever changed.

Vote against the incumbent in 2008!

$40.6 billion reasons why Democrats should vote against Democratic Incumbents

2008-02-01T08:38:00.000-08:00

$4.00 gas is cheap?

So, ExxonMobil profited $40.6 billion dollars this year. That's plenty of money to keep buying Congress, as oil companies have been doing for decades.

But I don't care about $46.6 billion.

In the 1990's it cost America more money to secure and transport oil from the Middle East than the oil from the Middle East was worth. Yet, Americans don't pay for the security costs of oil at the gasoline pump. In fact, if Americans paid the real cost of gasoline at the pump, gas would probably cost $10.00 or more per gallon.

Environmental costs would probably push this cost even higher.

Yet, not one Democrat is really addressing this issue, nor are any Republicans. Despite the fact that military-industrial complex that runs our government via cheap oil has created two wars in the Middle East, 9/11 and created massive pollution, not one mainstream politician is taking real action to change this.

OUR government has failed us, and voting 100 percent Democrat or Republican won't change that fact. Democrats have run Congress and the White House. Republicans have run Congress and the White House. Little has ever changed.

Vote against the incumbent in 2008!

Is political spending out of control?

2007-10-15T20:17:00.001-07:00

$3 billion+ this election cycle

"A wide-open presidential race and a willingness by candidates, interest groups, unions and corporations to buy TV time will lead to historic spending for political and issue-advocacy advertising in the 2008 election cycle, an analysis shows.

The cost to try to influence the 2008 election could exceed $3 billion, according to TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group, CNN's consultant on political television advertising.

This is nearly twice as much than what was spent in 2004 when political and issue-advocacy television advertising rang in at $1.7 billion. In 2006, $2.3 billion was spent on political and issue-advocacy TV commercials."

Is it worth it? Maybe an election lottery would be better? Wouldn't that really be a Democracy?

Rate political spending - Is it out of control?

Armenian Genocide versus Iraq - Dirty Politics?

2007-10-15T13:08:00.000-07:00

Can America stay in Iraq without Turkey?

In the early 1900's, some of Turkey's mullahs essentially ordered the genocide of more than 1,000,000 Armenians. Today, more than 100 years later, there is a movement in Congress to ratify a resolution acknowledging this genocide.

What would such a resolution accomplish, aside from $100.00+ barrels of oil, for example?

Might the resolution also push the Turkish government to disallow the U.S. to utilize its airports, airspace and land to supply the effort in Iraq? Since 70 percent of U.S. supplies move through Turkey, can the U.S. continue the War in Iraq without Turkey's help?

Are Democrats using the Armenian Resolution to covertly force a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq? If so, is such a move a good idea, or dirty politics?

Marijuana and Old Fart Republicans?

2007-10-09T12:41:00.000-07:00

Is medical marijuana really so dangersous?

Yet, old Republican farts, such as Mitt Romney - even Giuliani and McCain - refuse to give Doctors the right to prescribe a medicine that has scientifically been proven to have medicinal benefits because of the insane war on drugs that is hurting Americans more than it is hurting the drug trade.

Wake Up you OLD FARTs! It's time to think differently about hemp and marijuana, especially medical marijuana.

Read more about marijuana and old fart Republicans. Also, should medical marijuana be legalized?

Bush, Congress achieve record lows in polls

2007-10-04T11:13:00.000-07:00

Do voters even care about voting anymore?

"Public approval for President Bush and Congress has sunk to the lowest levels ever recorded in The Associated Press-Ipsos poll," according to Breitbart.com.

So, will voters do something radically different in '08, such as Vote Against All Incumbents, or we just going to do what we always do and expect different results?

I expect insanity, or no vote at all from most Americans. Isn't democracy grand?!

Is partisanship making America better?

2007-10-04T10:35:00.000-07:00

Red state, blue state divide: One party will never rule!

"Despite Democratic promises that the House Rules Committee would operate much differently in the new majority, it is as partisan as ever," writes the Hill.

"Furious with how the powerful panel has been directed this year, all four Republican members of the Rules Committee took to the floor Tuesday night to air their grievances publicly."

Wow! Who woulda thunk partisanship wouldn't stop just because Democrats took office?

The partisanship between the left and right hasn't abated in decades. Each side wants to rule America supremely and, therefore, constantly seeks to tarnish the image of the other side, even at the expense of needed legislation. And, every piece of legislation that does pass is riddled with earmarks, pork and other special projects - costing average American taxpayers billions and billions of dollars.

Of course, whom can blame them?

Average, centrist America has let the radical right and left control both major parties. Thus, average Americans continue to get screwed by Congress and the White House, and nothing is going to change that until America Votes out all Incumbents, or both parties begin to realize that their job is constructive consensus, not violent partisanship.

Is partisanship a necessary evil in politics or the sign of a dysfunctional political system?

2008: The Vote Against Incumbents Campaign

2007-10-02T08:37:00.000-07:00

Could a fresh start be any worse?

Partisanship. Is there a better word to describe Congress? Unfortunately, it isn't just Congress, it's the radical left and right of the citizenry as well.

It's either their way or no way, yet neither the far left nor the far right represent the views of the MAJORITY of Americans. These two groups of extremists, however, are the most vocal, organized and funded, so they significantly shape the voice of their respective parties because the majority stays silent.

I say screw both Republicans and Democrats. America is neither 100 percent Republican, nor 100 percent Democrat and it never will be! In fact, if all the non-Voters voted as a bloc for an Independent Presidential candidate, he or she WOULD win.

Sure, politicians do need to stand for their Party sometimes, but politicians are supposed to represent the People, not the Party. Today, however, the Party is more important than the people.

Most Americans Do Not, on a daily basis, think of themselves as Democrats or Republicans. We think of ourselves as AMERICANS just trying to survive from paycheck to paycheck as our tax dollars pay for ever more earmarks and pork-barrel projects. Democrats and Republicans, unfortunately, could seem to care less about AMERICANS that do not think exactly as they do. Shame on you.

WE, The People, however, don't stop and ask to which Party someone belongs when help is needed.

Screw Democrats. Screw Republicans. And, especially, screw the incumbents. Seriously, how much worse could our political monopoly become?

A new ProLife Third Party?

2007-10-01T10:10:00.000-07:00

A Third Party based on abortion?

"Alarmed at the chance that the Republican party might pick Rudolph Giuliani as its presidential nominee despite his support for abortion rights, a coalition of influential Christian conservatives is threatening to back a third-party candidate in an attempt to stop him." (NYTimes)

Generally, I support the idea of Third Parties, but this one has me stumped. In most cases, I think Third Parties should be about a different way of doing things, particularly a way that isn't so funded by lobbyists. However, a Third Party largely based upon one issue, such as abortion, seems like a bad idea.

While I believe that abortion is tragic, I do believe it is also a woman's choice.

Despite my opinions about abortion, a Third Party driven by abortion also seems stupid. How would dividing the Republican Party and guaranteeing that a pro-abortion rights Democrat becomes President accomplish the Conservatives goals? Ultimately, anti-abortion Christians do not represent a majority of America, and nothing is going to change that.

I wish Christians didn't make abortion their primary political concern because I think it ostracizes them from the rest of society, but standing up for your beliefs is hard to argue against.

Rate the idea of a ProLife Third Party

Foreign oil dependency: Bush versus Clinton

2007-09-25T12:47:00.000-07:00

Foreign oil dependency, Iraq and Bush

Today, there is an article on CNN's Political Ticker, The Donald: Time for Bush to go into hiding.
In the article, Donald Trump reiterates his belief that George W. Bush is probably the worst President ever - a sentiment which seems intrinsically linked to the War in Iraq.

Yet, would the War in Iraq have happened if not for America's foreign oil dependency? Would 9/11 have happened?

How responsible is Bush for America's foreign oil dependency? How responsible are other politicians? How responsible are the people of America?

Finish: Foreign oil dependency? Is Bush the worst President ever?

Does Congress represent you?

2007-07-31T14:51:00.000-07:00

Rate whether Congress represents you. Rate Congress.

U.S. automakers and politicians selling out America?

2007-07-04T11:44:00.000-07:00

Is China more important than America to U.S. automakers?

GM has a significant and growing footprint in China. Obviously, China is an important market for any automaker thinking about the future. Nonetheless, could the Chinese market become even more important than the American market for U.S. automakers?

Even more alarming, in the very near future, could it become more cost-effective for U.S. automakers to completely outsource automobile manufacturing to China?

While that idea sounds a bit crazy today, the fact that Chrysler is going to partner with Chery to sell Chinese vehicles in America proves the reality of such a possibility.

Will America soon not only be dependent upon foreign oil, but on foreign-built gas-guzzlers?

Thus, it seems obvious that America's auto manufacturing future rests upon next-generation technologies, such as hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles and fuel cells.

Ultimately, America cannot compete with the world's supply of cheap labor. Only skilled, technologically advanced labor has a chance.

Ironically, we are already importing many of these skilled laborers from China and India - almost funding their advanced eduction before they return home. How long can this go on before it's too late?

Congress wants a payraise?

2007-06-29T10:34:00.000-07:00

"Despite low approval ratings and hard feelings from last year's elections, Democrats and Republicans in the House are reaching out for an approximately $4,400 pay raise that would increase their salaries to almost $170,000." (MyWay)

Are you kidding me?

If Congress is so unhappy with their pay, perhaps they should retire from office?

Foreign oil dependency: Jobs versus National Security

2007-06-29T10:06:00.001-07:00

Can America survive a couple more decades of foreign oil dependency?

So, the Senate has already watered down their original CAFE plan, and more diluting should be expected in the House, as Detroit-influenced lobbyists storm the halls of Congress. When all is said and done, you'll probably be able to drive a fleet of Hummers through all the gaping CAFE loopholes.

Obviously, Detroit has no choice. When around 70 percent of your business comes from selling the most fuel-inefficient vehicles, the phrase 'fuel economy' becomes fighting words. Besides, isn't Detroit just trying to protect American jobs and an important part of America's economy?

Yet, are those jobs more important than National Security? When a line can be drawn from the first Persian Gulf War to Bin Laden to 9/11 to Afghanistan back to Iraq because of foreign oil dependency, isn't it time to start asking serious questions and to take serious actions?

Automakers using cylinder deactivation to trick EPA?

2007-06-25T09:03:00.001-07:00

Does real world fuel economy matter?

An article in USAToday notes that many automakers are now using cylinder deactivation to increase fuel economy.

Great news right?

"Every little bit helps. But I think it's for marketing reasons," says David Champion, director of auto testing for Consumer Reports magazine. He figures the systems are tuned to deliver their biggest benefits during the federal fuel-economy test cycle. That's the test that generates the mileage numbers posted on new vehicles' window stickers.

"We've found that in most driving conditions, it's always in full-cylinder mode, not cutoff," Champion says. "It's a sub-10% improvement, maybe 13 mpg instead of 12" on a big pickup.

Consumer Reports gets fuel-economy readings by splicing a meter into a vehicle's fuel line to "measure the exact amount of fuel consumed in three very strictly controlled tests," he says.

Senate shows some bipartisanship on CAFE

2007-06-22T16:24:00.000-07:00

Can bipartisanship in Senate transfer to the House?

While the CAFE plan passed in the Senate wasn't as strict as many would have liked, it is far better than nothing. Additionally, it was nice to see some bipartisanship for once. Can this sentiment transfer to the House when it takes up the same legislation - probably sometime this Fall?

Sure, there will almost certainly be a plethora of loopholes for automakers to exploit, but at least fuel economy is becoming an important discussion in America. Hopefully, that will push more and and more American consumers to do their part as well.

Bloomberg and Unity08 in talks?

2007-06-22T09:30:00.000-07:00

Does this look Presidential?

While Michael Bloomberg continues to deny that he is interested in a run at the Presidency, others claim he his at least interested in exploring the possibility of an independent run.

"Although there has been no decision to run yet, sources tell CBS 2 that Bloomberg has a loose group of advisers figuring out exactly what it would take to gather 700,000 signatures, get on the ballot on all 50 states, and select potential electoral college delegates."

In addition, there have also been conservations between the Bloomberg camp and the Unity08 group.

Regardless of whether Bloomberg runs, I like his rhetoric. "I believe we can turn around the county's wrong-headed course, but only if we base actions on ideas, shared values, and a commitment to solve problems without regard to party."

Ralph Nader to run for President in 2008?

2007-06-20T14:07:00.001-07:00

Setting up a real Independent debate

Ralph Nader made a small hint at running for President according to some at the Take Back America Conference.

Imagine an Independent Party debate between Ralph Nader and Michael Bloomberg - that might actually be interesting.

Fuel economy tearing Congress apart?

2007-06-20T13:48:00.001-07:00

Can she lead the House on fuel economy?

Forcing automakers to develop significantly more fuel efficient automobiles is proving to be no easy task - something which should be a surprise to no one.

According to Reuters, "The U.S. Senate struggled on Wednesday to reach a compromise on proposals to increase vehicle fuel efficiency, a major sticking point in broad-based energy legislation." In addition, " Unable to reach a consensus among Democrats, a House of Representatives committee said this week it would delay consideration of its fuel economy and global warming proposals until autumn."

Gallup: America thinks both parties suck

2007-06-20T13:23:00.001-07:00

Congress can't get no respect

"The honeymoon phase is over for the new Congress, as the public's ratings of Congress are down again this month. The latest congressional job approval rating (24%) is the lowest for the institution since Democrats took control of both houses in January, and is far below the 37% registered in February. The decline has been most evident among Democrats, whose ratings of Congress now match those of Republicans."

Time to tax big oil?

2007-06-19T15:52:00.000-07:00

Senate passes $29 billion tax package

The Senate Finance Committee passed a proposal to tax big oil almost $30 billion dollars. The tax revenues will then be used to fund clean technologies, such as hybrid cars, wind power, and clean coal. Now the proposal will be added to the energy bill and go before the full Senate.

$22 billion? Sounds like pocket change for big oil considering their profits in the last few years.

Bloomberg blasts Presidential debates, partisanship

2007-06-19T11:44:00.001-07:00

Is partisanship destroying America?

NY City mayor, Michael Bloomberg, blasted the Presidential debates and the U.S. press yesterday at Google's headquarters.

"They have absolutely nothing to do with the job and the qualifications. And they don't tell you anything about whether or not any of those candidates would be good or bad presidents. What they really say is, did they memorize their notes of ‘What to say if …' and whether their staff was able to anticipate," the mayor said. "If you look at both debates, they pandered, what I would argue, the same ways."

In addition, Bloomberg had strong words about Washington's addiction to partisanship.

" Washington is sinking into a swamp of dysfunction….We're talking about a serious and harmful addiction here," Mr. Bloomberg was to tell attendees at an opening session last night, according to a prepared text released by his office. "Unfortunately, there's no ‘Promises' clinic for partisanship."

(New York Sun)