Bio Link
John Matyi has actively promoted a conservative perspective since 1968 when he registered with the Republican Party in his home state of Connecticut.
John graduated cum laude from Southern Connecticut State University with a BS in 1985, and then from Fordham University in NYC with a Masters of Social Work graduate degree (MSW) in 1986.
He served in the US Army with the infantry in Vietnam (199th Separate Light Infantry Brigade, 4th/12) where he was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart, Bronze Star ("V" device), and the Combat Infantry Badge in 1967.
John had decided to eventually move to the South while he was stationed in Georgia and Mississippi for military training. After graduating from Southern Connecticut State University he began his career with the Department of Veterans Affairs (1985). In 1986 he moved to Alabama where he continued with the VA in Birmingham (Psychiatry-Mental health Clinic).
He retired from Government service in 2004 and continues to reside in Alabaster, Alabama with his wife Dorothy of 41 years along with his German Shepherds Cheyenne and Maximus. He has two daughters and four grandchildren
Even in the conservative "Bible Belt" he found that Liberal ideas were attempting to establish a foothold and he continues to fight radical socialist ideas disguised as the platform of many "Liberal politicians."
In 2003 he began his volunteer efforts as a Grass Roots team leader to help reelect George W. Bush. Raised as a Catholic, although no longer able to be active in church services, his Christian beliefs are still very strong
Don't you wish we had this much information on Obama? :-)Feed List
Alabama Legislative Session Update - Eliminate the Grocery Tax [Unlikely].
| Here is a quick preview of the upcoming week in Montgomery. This week will be a standard legislative schedule for the House. We will be in session on Tuesday and Thursday with committee meetings scheduled for Wednesday. The House will take up a ten minute calendar this week. A ten minute calendar is designed to give every member of the House to pass a bill this session. The reason it is called a ten minute calendar is because a member is given a maximum of ten minutes to pass their bill or else it must be carried over. This requires the bill to be non-controversial and also no one comes and objects to the bill. Any member can speak for up to ten minutes on a bill so if one member has a problem with a bill it will be carried over. These calendars often include non-fiscal issues that are agreed to by all parties before ever coming up for a vote. In addition to the ten minute calendar the House will continue to have short agendas with only five or six bills being debated each day. The membership seems to enjoy the shortened calendars and is in agreement that they do not wish to go back to the days where we just passed every bill that was brought up on any given day. There are some rumblings that the House will take up the removal of sales taxes on groceries again soon but that appears unlikely considering the fact that the bills seems to have lost votes in the off season. Still expect at least one day soon to be devoted to discussing this issue. Rep. John Knight has made this his passion for quite some time and both parties agree to the need to eliminate the grocery tax but the sticking point is whether small businesses should be required to pay more in taxes to make up for the lost state revenue. After what seemed like a session long fight over gambling, the Senate now appears poised to move to other issues after the Sweet Home Alabama plan failed to get the necessary 21 votes last week for passage. Senator Barron has hinted in news accounts that he plans to bring his road construction bill back up for a vote again soon. It is believed that commitments were secured during the gambling debate that should allow for Barrons bill to now pass the Senate. If it does pass most observers believe it will have an easier time in the House than it did upstairs. Finally like everyone else, I have been campaigning on the weekends when we are not in session. My daughter is now old enough where she can join me out on the trail as well which makes for a lot of fun. This past week she seems to have gotten the hang of campaigning better than me. If I just had her energy then I could be everywhere at once. Unfortunately I dont have her energy so I tend rely on old faithful caffeine to help me keep up!
|
Paid for by Committee to Elect Cam Ward, Post OfficeBox 1749, Alabaster, Al. 35007
What’s behind the Democrats push on health care?
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent ExaminerRuminations, March 7, 2010
What’s behind the Democrats push on health care?
President Obama has stated, “The [health care] bottom line is, our proposal is paid for." According to Senator Joe Lieberman (D, CT), “this legislation would reduce the federal deficit by $132 billion over the next ten years and will continue to reduce costs by billions more in the following decade. This bill will also extend the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund for an additional nine years.”
That sounds great and, if
you parse every word and its meaning, it’s not false. However, in order to say
that the “proposal is paid for” or that it “reduce[s] the federal deficit,” the
Democrats and the President have had to go to extraordinary lengths.
- The
numbers show ten years of revenue and balance it against six years of
expenses. According to Douglass Emmendorf, Director of the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO), the government plan would collect some $500 billion
in revenue and $500 billion in Medicare cuts over 10 years. Costs,
however, are projected over six years. So, comparing the last six years of
revenues to the last six years of expenditures, the $132 billion in
deficit reduction becomes a $268 billion deficit increase.
- The $500
billion in Medicare cuts will be something that Congress will not let
stand. It will be added under another bill. But putting the $500 billion
in another bill does not make it disappear. It will still be spent by the
government. So now the $268 billion increase over the last six years
becomes, proportionately, $568 billion.
- It also
has some dubious revenue sources. For example it counts some $52 billion
in Social Security revenue as an offset. Wait a minute. Social Security is
an unfunded liability now and we are reducing Social Security revenues to
pay for this health plan? And here’s an interesting footnote from
Emmendorf’s memo to Senator Harry Reid (D, NV) on the effects of the
health care plan on the budget: “Off-budget
effects include changes in Social Security spending and revenues as well
as spending by the U.S. Postal Service.” The
- According
to Richard Foster, Chief Actuary for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services, the net result (i.e., after additional revenue and taxes have
been taken into account) will be an increase in costs of $222 billion over
ten years, and since expenses are only taken into account for six years,
the actual results may be much worse.
- The
Medicare Trustees’ projection for long-term cost growth has been tinkered
with by the Obama Administration to make the long-term health care costs
without the proposed bill look worse and at the same time it reduced the
number of aging people entering into the program to make the future
demands of Medicare look better.
- Medicare
reimbursements to doctors are scheduled to be cut by better than 20
percent. The effect of these cuts would be that doctors would treat fewer
Medicare patients. To avoid this scenario, Congress will offset the cuts
and provide the necessary funds, estimated by the Administration at $245
billion over 10 years. But the funds will be provided in a separate bill.
While these funds are undoubtedly health care related costs, Democrats
have excluded them from the health care estimates.
- Last Friday, the CBO, even with the restrictions of evaluating the limited set of data Congress gave it, projected the health care bill will “increase … the federal budget deficit by $239 billion over the 2010-2019 period."
It’s clear that we cannot afford the proposal in Congress. Why do the Democrats continue to push it? Why do they continue to jigger the numbers in an attempt to make them appear to be something that they are not?
Could it be that pro-Obama
columnist David Ignatius of the Washington
Post reflected the Democrat’s attitude when he encouraged them to forget
about the numbers and make health care a moral crusade? Could it be that he
wants to do what he thinks is right
regardless of the implied consequences because, being
Or is there something more devious at work? In order to pay for the Obama health care program in the future, we will have to cut something. Could it be that Democrats accept the bogus health care numbers because they anticipate that (1) once enacted, people and the economy will become so dependent on it that it can never be rescinded, and (2) the money will be found elsewhere through drastic cuts (for example, – the Defense Department’s budget for 2010 is over $663 billion) or higher taxes?
The Democratic health care proposals are economically unsound. Are the Democrats oblivious to these numbers or are they just devious? Maybe they are just so focused on the political process that they are not paying attention.
<< MORE >>
KAY IVEY BLASTS NEGATIVE ANTI-CHARTER SCHOOL TV ADS
KAY IVEY BLASTS NEGATIVE ANTI-CHARTER
SCHOOL TV ADS
“This is another case of the state’s
biggest teachers union protecting its monopoly at the expense of students and
the people who foot the bill for education: we taxpayers.”
(MONTGOMERY, AL – MARCH 4, 2010)
State Treasurer and Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey today strongly
condemned two new TV commercials aimed at keeping charter schools out of
Alabama.
“The claims made in these negative ads are
intellectually dishonest,” Ivey said. “They allege charter schools don’t
work. If that were true, then why do they have a proven track record of success
in 40 states? They claim bureaucrats in Washington want to push charter schools
on us. My personal experience is totally opposite; I find parents all over
Alabama are pushing to get charter schools. They want choices and alternatives
to make sure their children learn at high standards, and charter schools are
one of the best alternatives available for that. Where underperforming
public schools don’t work, charter schools can.”
Ivey noted the ads are sponsored by the Alabama
Education Association.
“This is another case of the state’s powerful
teachers union protecting its monopoly at the expense of students and the
people who foot the bill for public education: we taxpayers. The AEA realizes
charter schools are a direct assault on its powerbase. Instead of being open to
innovative ways to improve our woefully struggling education system, the
teachers union is stiffening its neck and saying ‘No!’ The parents of children
who are trapped in poorly performing schools, and everyone who pays for those
schools with their hard-earned tax dollars, deserve better.”
Additional information:
You can see the TV commercials at www.nocharterschoolsalabama.org
For more on my strong support of charter schools,
visit my campaign website at http://kayivey.org/CurrentIssues.html
Paid for by the Kay Ivey Campaign for
Governor
P.O. Box 771, Montgomery, AL
36101-0771 ∙ (334) 293-9300 ∙ www.kayivey.org
KAY IVEY STATEMENT ON GUN OWNER’ RIGHTS
KAY IVEY STATEMENT ON GUN OWNER’ RIGHTS
“Alabama gun owners will have one oftheir own defending their rights with Kay Ivey in the governor’s office.”
(Montgomery, AL March 2,2010) Statement from State Treasurer and Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey regarding the McDonald V. Chicago case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
“While public attention is largely absorbed by electronic bingo, we must be vigilant about other important issues. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments today in a case that could directly impact hundreds of thousands of people here in Alabama.
“I want Alabamians to know how I stand. I am a proud gun owner and a Life Member of the National Rifle Association. A quote from me in Monday’s (Mobile) Press-Register summed it up this way: “I got the (NRA) belt buckle. I got the jacket. I got the gun, too.” So I fully recognize and appreciate just how important gun ownership is to countless people across our great state.
“The Supreme Court is deciding McDonald v. Chicago. City law makes it almost impossible to own a gun in Chicago. The Second Amendment of the U.S.Constitution guarantees us the right to bear arms. Justices will decide whether city and state governments can limit gun ownership. It could very well be one of the most important decisions the high court hands down this year.
“We the People, the body of everyday citizens, have a fundamental, constitutional right to protect ourselves. As former Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote long ago about our rights as armed citizens, we are ‘the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections and domestic usurpations of power by rulers.’
“Our state’s motto is Audemus Jura Nostra Defendere, which means “We Dare Defend Our Rights.” We must dare defend our right to own guns and resist those who want to chip away at the Second Amendment and whittle it down to a powerless stub. That won’t happen on my watch. Alabama gun owners will have one of their own defending their rights with Kay Ivey in the governor’s office.”
For more details, consult this editorial in today’s New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/opinion/02tue1.html?ref=opinion
# # #
Paid for by the Kay Ivey Campaign forGovernor
P.O. Box 771, Montgomery, AL 36101-0771 ∙ (334) 293-9300 ∙ www.kayivey.org
Ruminations, February 28, 2010: Is Eric Holder right? The politics of global warming
Robert
Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information
systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford
Independent ExaminerRuminations, February 28, 2010
Is Eric Holder right?
Attorney General Eric Holder has taken some hits lately from both the left and the right for his proposals on handling of terrorist trials – and the hits are not without merit. He has upset many by his decision to put 9/11 plot planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) on trial in New York City in a civilian trial in public court rather than in a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay.
In one sense, the selection of New York City struck a defiant tone toward al Qaeda: Holding the trial within blocks of the site of the 9/11 tragedy was an in-your-face kind of attitude that Americans like. On the other hand, there is the enormous cost – estimated at more than $250 million – and the location of New York would make it and the millions of people who work and live in the area, a more tempting target for al Qaeda.
Ruminations, February 21, 2010; Will Republicans emulate Democrats? China’s in a pickle. Number 2 Taliban killed
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.Ruminations, February 21, 2010
Will Republicans emulate Democrats?
Over the past five years,Americans have been remarkably consistent in their political orientation.That’s what a poll reported, according to Gerald Seib, writing a month ago inthe Wall Street Journal. Had theDemocrats read and understood the poll, they might have avoided the tacticalerror that has been a strong contributor to their current apparent decline inpopularity. Are the Republicans about to make the same error? It could be.
The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll showed that over the past five years,23 percent (give or take a percent or two) describe themselves as politicallyliberal and 35 percent describe themselves as conservatives. Self-describedmoderates make up 37 percent of the cohort. If these figures have been soconsistent, why did the electorate vote liberal/Democratic in 2006 and 2008?
That’s easy. According toSeib: “That shift in preference toward the Democrats can be attributed to, amongother things, the declining popularity of President George W. Bush; acombination of ethical problems, drift and over-spending by Republicans inCongress; war fatigue; and the genuine and widespread popularity of Mr. Obama.”It did not mean that the electorate had become more liberal.
Why have the Democrats become sounpopular lately? They read the results of the election as a mandate for moreliberal programs, bigger government and more spending. And they’re wrong. Infact, according to a Rasmussen poll, 75 percent of Americans view theDemocratic leadership as liberal –more than three times the number of Americans that view themselves as liberal.
Should current polls prevail in Novemberand the Republicans sweep into power, how will they read the numbers? Judgingby the statements many on the right are making, they could be the mirror imageof the Democrats; that is, they will read the results as a mandate for moreconservative programs. It is truethat voters want a more conservative program and smaller government than theDemocrats have proposed but, the question is, how much more conservative? Ifthe Republicans go too far to the right, the positions might be reversed for2012 – a distinct possibility since, according to the same Rasmussen pollmentioned above, 61 percent of Americans see Republican leadership as conservative as compared with 35 percent of Americanpublic who see themselves as conservative.
However, there are some signs thatRepublicans will not veer to the far right. John McCain (R, AZ), the bête noirof the far right, has been endorsed by two leading conservatives: Senator ScottBrown (R, MA) and Sarah Palin.
The problem that bothparties face is that once in power, they find that it is against human natureto deny your political predilections.
The expression “in a pickle”has been around for 600 years or so and describes a difficult situation. Whybeing “in a pickle” is a less critical situation than being “in the soup” – areally bad situation — I don’t know. But let’s accept the wisdom of the ages.
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, February 14, 2010: A dangerous New York Times? The American and Greek economies. Don't ask, don't tell.
A dangerous New York Times
Back in June, 2006, The New York Times published a front-page story calling attention to the fact that, under a secret arrangement, foreign governments were cooperating with the United States to track al Qaeda financial transactions through SWIFT (the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication).
President Bush and other government and non-government officials had made the case to the Timesbefore it published the story that the information gathered made the United States safer from terrorism and that disclosing these government operations to the public could compromise them. Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, said that he and the Times staff listened seriously to the administration and then decided to publish the information to the public — and thereby to al Qaeda.
Since al Qaeda then became aware of the SWIFT arrangements, it stands to reason that they would then use more discretion and subterfuge in executing money transfers making it more difficult to track their transactions. Furthermore, since the tracing of these transactions were secret, their public exposure could cause concern among some Europeans and perhaps thwart future cooperation.
Keller, at the time, said he found "puzzling" the government’s claim that the Times disclosure of America's financial tracking of terrorists could cause European nations to cease cooperation.
Then, in July 2006, the European Union Parliament solved Keller's puzzlement: They voted 302 to 219 to demand that the European Central Bank "explain fully the extent to which they were aware of the secret agreement" between SWIFT and the United States. Although it is clear that no American banking laws were broken, Belgium, where SWIFT is headquartered, investigated to see if any Belgian laws were violated.
Last week came the clincher. The European parliament voted 378-196 to reject the cooperative agreement. This time, it was not the Bush Administration that argued vociferously for keeping it in force but the Obama Administration.
The New York Times duly reported the vote last week but made no mention of the Times’ or Editor Bill Keller’s initial involvement in the imbroglio.
Foreign governments often operate in their own self-interest, be it political, economic or defensive; however much we may disagree with their actions, we have no control over what they do. But when our own Americans work against us, it is deplorable.
An apology from the Times would not make us safer; nor would an admission of wrong doing. Perhaps the most we can hope for is that the Times and Keller – and the rest of the media, for that matter — learn from their dangerous disclosures. But don’t bet on it.
The United States and Greece
Last week we compared the economic prospects of the United States with Poland and found the comparison showed brighter prospects for Poland. This week we’ll compare the United States with Greece.
Greece, as you may have read, is in dire straits and needs help to avoid a national economic disaster. Greece’s government has been spending at record levels and has shown no signs that it has a viable economic plan to lower its deficits and soaring debt. The only alternatives it has are to abandon the euro, revert to the drachma and devalue it (which will wreak havoc with the euro and the European Union), or to have someone (i.e., Germany and maybe France, too) come to its rescue. Whoever that savior is must insist that Greece embark on a program of fiscal austerity and amend its profligate ways; if not, the governments of Germany and France will never recover the loans with which they plan to rescue Greece. And, if a program of fiscal austerity is not implemented, everyone would be in the same position that they are today, albeit much poorer.
Here come the numbers. Greece, has a Gross Domestic Product (GDP – the total value of goods and services produced in a year), according to the World Bank, of $357 billion. It owes (the national debt) more than $400 billion. Paying off a debt that is more than 100 percent of GDP would put a severe strain on the economic growth of Greece. It is fortunate that Greece has found, in Germany and France, a “sugar daddy” with a combined GDP of $6.4 trillion.
In the United States, according to White House forecasts, the projected GDP for the year 2013 will be $16.7 trillion and the total debt owed by the United States will be $17.1 trillion. We will owe $400 billion more than we can produce during a year. It’s starting to sound like Greece. Of course, as a percentage, our debt would “only” be 102 percent of GDP as compared with Greece’s 108 percent plus. Furthermore, that White House forecasted GDP assumes that the United States economy will grow at over 17 percent over four years; doable, but last year the economy shrunk by 2.4 percent.
The rosy scenario for Greece is that there are bigger economies around that can rescue them. There is no one around big enough to rescue us.
We Americans should have sympathy for the Greeks who have had to live under a government that has put their nation in economic crisis. On the other hand, the Greeks should have sympathy for us, too.
Don’t ask, don’t tell
In his campaign and the State of the Union address, President Obama stated a conviction that the “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) law should be repealed.
<< MORE >>
KAY IVEY SIGNS ‘NO NEW TAXES’ PLEDGE IN DECATUR
For Immediate Release
Contact: J. Mark Powell
Communications Director (334) 804-8434
KAY IVEY SIGNS ‘NO NEW TAXES’ PLEDGE
IN DECATUR
“I will tell the politicians who come begging for new taxes,
‘Not One Penny More’!”
(DECATUR, AL – February 12, 2010) You rarely see $151 worth of pennies piled up in one place. But State Treasurer and Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey used the small coin to make a big point in Decatur today.
“There’s an old saying that goes ‘If you watch the pennies, the dollars will take care of themselves,’” Ivey said. “For decades, politicians in Montgomery ignored that saying. The pennies grew into dollars, and the dollars became millions of dollars. Because we ignored the “pennies” —the small items hidden in every nook and cranny of state spending— we now face a very big problem. When the last of the Federal Stimulus money runs out later this year, the General Fund will be left with a projected revenue shortfall of more than half a billion dollars.”
Ivey explained that February 12th, 2010 was the 151st anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth. Since Lincoln appears on the penny, she assembled $151 worth of pennies to make a point: even the smallest tax increase would hurt everyday Alabamians.
“If your taxes were raised just $3 a week, this is almost exactly the amount that would be taken out of your paycheck in a year. How many tanks of gas can you buy for your car or truck with $151? How many meals can you feed your family with for $151? With this recession dragging on and on, can you afford to give $151 more to the government? Of course not!
“The answer isn’t to keep shoveling money to Montgomery,” Ivey said. “The answer is to find and eliminate the wasteful spending that bloats our state’s budgets, and to tell the politicians who come begging for new taxes: “Not One Penny More!”
Ivey then matched her words with actions. “I am a candidate who says what I mean, and I mean what I say.
KAY IVEY EMPHASIZES VALUES-DRIVEN LEADERSHIP DURING CHRISTIAN COALITION DEBATE
Kay Ivey, CHRISTIAN COALITION DEBATE
MEDIA
ADVISORY
Kay Ivey To Launch “Not One Penny More!”
campaign;
will sign No New Taxes Pledge in Decatur
on Friday, February 12, 2010
State Treasurer and Republican
gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey will have the following event and media
availability on Friday:
· 11:00 am
North
Entrance of Morgan County Courthouse
301 Lee Street NE, Decatur
Friday is Lincoln’s 151st birthday, so Kay Ivey will appear beside $151 in Lincoln pennies to announce her “Not One Penny More!” in new taxes campaign. Kay’s remarks will conclude with her signing the Americans for Tax Reform’s “Tax Protection Pledge.”
Visuals for TV and
still photos:
Two large graphics on easels, a stack of $151 in
rolled pennies (weighing more than 100 pounds!), and a large cardboard copy of
the No Taxes Pledge that Kay will sign.
For info
Contact: J. Mark Powell, Communications Director
Kay Ivey Campaign for Governor
(334) 804-8434
In Full: Former Alaskan Governor and Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin gives the keynote speech at the first national Tea Party convention
KAY IVEY TO ATTEND NATIONAL TEA PARTY CONVENTION IN NASHVILLE THIS WEEKEND
KAY IVEY TO ATTEND NATIONAL TEA PARTY CONVENTION IN NASHVILLE THIS WEEKEND
Will post dispatches from event on website and via Facebook & Twitter
(MONTGOMERY – February 4, 2010) State Treasurer and Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey is heading to Nashville for the very first national Tea Party convention this Friday and Saturday, and she plans on keeping Alabamians informed on what’s happening there.
“The Tea Party movement is shaking up the political landscape all across the country,” Ivey said. “Its members were a key force in Scott Brown’s upset Senate victory in Massachusetts a few weeks ago. And they’re certainly adding an exciting new dimension to politics here in Alabama, too. I’m proud to stand alongside these modern-day patriots.”
Ivey and some staffers will attend convention meetings at the Opryland Hotel in Nashville. Ivey will periodically update her supporters on happenings through blog postings on her campaign website and via Facebook and Twitter.
“The Tea Party movement brings passion and commitment to the political process,” Ivey said. “These folks are doers, not talkers. They are genuine conservatives and they care passionately about the same thing I care about, such as getting the government off our backs and keeping it out of our pockets. My campaign for governor is based on making government work more efficiently and more effectively with fewer tax dollars. The Tea Party movement wants that too. I’m happy to share everything that will be going on at this historic gathering with folks in Alabama. We have a long road ahead of us as we set about reclaiming our government. But I am confident we can make it capable of responding to the people’s needs and desires once more.”
# # #
Paid for by the Kay Ivey Campaign for Governor
P.O.
<< MORE >>NEWS RELEASE: Kay Ivey emphasizes conservative principles during Lee County GOP forum in Opelika
Contact: J. Mark Powell
Communications Director (334) 804-8434
KAY IVEY EMPHASIZES CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES
DURING GOP CANDIDATE FORUM
Offers Conservative Leadership with Effective Results
(Opelika, AL – January 28, 2010) State Treasurer and Republican gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivey emphasized her strong conservative principles during Thursday night’s Lee County Republican candidate forum in Opelika.
A large crowd filled Opelika High School’s Performing Arts Center where several GOP candidates for governor appeared on stage. Ivey repeatedly stole the spotlight by staking out firm positions on such issues as restoring financial responsibility to state government.
“People are looking for a genuine, committed conservative to fix our broken government and to lead us out of this financial mess,” she said after the event. “I’m telling them about my record of delivering results, about the nearly $5,000,000, after proration, that I have saved taxpayers while increasing efficiency in the Treasurer’s office. Folks understand our next governor must not only be serious about making all of state government work better with less money, she must know how to make that happen. And I can do it.”
Ivey explained how her work as Assistant Director of ADO (where she brought jobs to Alabama and helped existing companies expand and create new ones), plus her time working as a classroom teacher at the start of her career (where she learned the need for making sure tax dollars actually reach the teachers and students who need them most), make her uniquely qualified to lead Alabama through the challenges of the next four years.
“Tonight I got to share my message directly with the people of Lee County. I told them about my plans for bringing more good paying jobs to Alabama, for reducing the pork spending that bloats our state budgets and wastes our tax dollars, about the need to get students learning at high standards and the steps we must to take – including bringing charter schools here — to make that happen. I offer conservative leadership with effective results, and I’m ready to deliver for the people of Alabama!”
More candidate forums are coming up soon for the Republican candidate. Ivey is scheduled to appear in Monday night’s forum on education issues in Huntsville.
# # #
Paid for by the Kay Ivey Campaign for Governor
P.O.
Ruminations, January 17, 2010: Franklin Delano Obama, The magic of health care financing,
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.Ruminations, January 17, 2010
Franklin Delano Obama
Franklin Delano Roosevelt is considered to be one of our most successful presidents. Roosevelt has been credited with successfully leading the nation during World War II, restoring the confidence of America during the early years of Depression and establishing a safety-net for many Americans through unemployment insurance and Social Security.
Roosevelt was not perfect, however. The American economy never did return to anything close to its pre-Depression levels during Roosevelt ’s first two terms. In fact, the unemployment rate averaged 18.7percent for Roosevelt ’s first eight years. One of the keys in the lackluster economy was the reluctance of business to invest and expand. That reluctance was understandable, given Roosevelt ’s tax programs that punished risk-taking and permitted little reward, a perceived plan to nationalize utilities, labor laws that increased costs of production and a generally hostile attitude toward business, at times accusing them of immoral conduct. In fact, it got to the point where economist John Maynard Keynes, in a 1938 letter to Roosevelt , admonished that, “It is a mistake to think businessmen are more immoral than politicians.”
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, January 10, 2010: The expense of health care; Alberto Napolitano; Plea bargaining with Abdulmutallab; Clinton on the presidency
Robert
Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information
systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford
Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, January 3, 2010
Ruminations, January 10, 2010
The expense of health care
One of the drivers of health care reform is its high cost. Critics of President Obama’s health care initiative say that it is a government take-over of one-sixth of the economy (actually, according to the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, the figure is close to one-eighth but why ruin a good story?) Supporters of the initiative say, at one-sixth or one-eighth of the GDP, we spend too much on health care.
We spend a lot on health care. Is that necessarily bad? Maybe and maybe not.
Looking at it historically, University of Chicago Nobel economics laureate Robert Fogel examined just where Americans have been spending their money. He found that in 1875, 75 percent of consumers’ income went to food, clothing and shelter.. By 1995, the amount spent on food, clothing and shelter dropped to 12 percent.
Why the drop in the percentage we spend on food, clothing and shelter? Did we all go on diets?
Ruminations, January 3, 2010: The war on whatever, Obama’s credibility gap, Banned words
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, January 3, 2010
The war on whatever
On September 11, 2001, the United States went to war. It was unlike our previous wars. We had no named opponent as we had in our previous wars – even those wars that were not officially declared had named opponents. In World War II, we fought Japan , Germany and Italy . In the Korean and Vietnam undeclared Wars, our enemies were the North Koreans and the North Vietnamese. On September 11, we went to war against … somebody. Who?
For lack of a better name, it was decreed to be the War on Terror. But the War on Terror is a bad name. Terror – or more accurately, terrorism — is a technique. You can’t declare war on a technique because the technique will always be there and never surrenders. In fact, it’s not even a war on all terrorists. Timothy McVeigh who bombed the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City and killed 168 people was a terrorist and so was “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski who killed three people – but, while not giving them a pass, we are not at “war” with the likes of McVeigh and Kaczynski: We don’t send tanks, aircraft and Marines to take these people out.
Are we truly at war with terrorists in Afghanistan ? What is the definition of a terrorist? According to the Princeton definition, a terrorist is one who employs “the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) againstcivilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear,” (my emphasis).
This isn’t the first time we have taken military action against an amorphous group that had no country.
<< MORE >>
America Rising An Open Letter to Democrat [ALL] Politicians
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, December 27, 2009: Health insurance lives saved vs. lives lost
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, December 27, 2009
Health insurance lives saved vs. lives lost
The
Although this analysis is speculative, it is an interesting and worthwhile exercise to examine the potential effect of health insurance on longevity. Rather than focusing on the dollars and cents side of the health care debate, perhaps adding an additional balance sheet focusing on lives would be worthwhile.
Saving 22,000 lives per year is based upon 30 million of people who are currently uninsured obtaining insurance and thus being able to afford to see their doctors once a year. If 30 million more people will go to their doctor once a year and, according to some estimates, a doctor and an assistant (nurse, physician’s assistant, or another doctor, etc) can see and examine 2,000 people per year (one visit per person). That means we’ll need 30,000 new medical professionals to see 30 million people. Where will they come from? They won’t materialize from thin air. With current staffing levels, regardless of insurance, we won’t have enough medical professionals to see these people. So maybe, unless or until we can expand our medical professionals, the 30 million people currently uninsured still won’t be able to see a doctor and 22,000 lives we estimated that would be saved will be lost anyway.
While accepting the estimate of 22,000 lives saved in one year, let’s consider the number of lives that the new health care bill may cost. For instance, won’t cutting nearly $500 billion from Medicare over 10 years have an adverse affect on the life spans of 46 million seniors? That’s an average cut of $10,000 per person over 10 years. It seems that by reducing health care by that amount, for a group whose earning power is limited and whose advancing years makes their health precarious enough without the cuts, will contribute to the lives lost count. Will it contribute to the premature death of more than 150,000 over ten years? Could be.
And, while we are on the subject of saving lives, there is no doubt that American medical innovation over the last decades has saved millions of lives. In fact, it is so advanced and superior, that, according to Deloitte & Touche, last year 400,000 people came from foreign lands to get health care in the
So, on balance, will the new health care bill in Congress save lives? Maybe not.
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, December 13, 2009: Blazing Cap and Trade, Our credit rating
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, December 13, 2009
Blazing Cap and Trade
In the 1974 movie Blazing Saddles, Cleavon Little portrays Sheriff Bart, a black sheriff who has been given jurisdiction of the town of
The humor in the situation, as if it needed explanation, lies in the non sequitur; I don’t want you to kill me so I’ll kill myself if you don’t stop trying to kill me. I never thought that I would see such outlandish humor outside a Mel Brooks’ movie until last week.
Last week, an unidentified spokesman for the Obama Administration said to Congress: "If you don't pass this [Cap and Trade] legislation, then . . . the EPA is going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way [i.e., Soviet style]…”
Remember that President Obama is the leader of the Administration and the leader of the Democratic Party that controls Congress. So, in effect, the Administration pulled a gun, pointed it at its own head and said: “If I don’t pass legislation that will wreck the economy I will make the country a replica of the failed
In Blazing Saddles, after Sheriff Bart made his escape, he said to himself, “Oh, baby, you are so talented!” And then, thinking of the towns people, added, “And they are so dumb.” I wonder if, in the eyes of the Administration spokesman, we are just as dumb as the citizens of Rock Ridge.
Cap and trade, European style
Some, on the left, say that Cap and Trade will provide a market for speculators and not make a significant reduction in pollutants. Does their argument have any merit? Well, in
Let’s take the case of
Well, we all know how that goes. A company makes an investment in a plant and it doesn’t work out. Too bad for Tata, they made a bad investment. Or did they?
We’ve all seen the melodramatic movie where a tearful protagonist holds up an insurance policy and says, “I’m worth more dead than alive.” In this case, Redcar Steel Works is worth more to Tata dead than alive – and hold the tears.
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, December 6, 2009: Afghanistan strategy, Pakistan, Drill, baby, drill,
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, December 6, 2009
In reviewing President Obama’s strategy for the war in
Developing a new strategy for
Obama made the point of why it is in our national interest to win in
“The status quo is not sustainable”
According to Obama, General McChrystal has reported “that the security situation is more serious than he anticipated. In short: The status quo is not sustainable.” Status quos are seldom sustainable but even if this one were, would we want the status quo – continuing attacks on NATO troops and Afghan civilians, the coercing of the civilian population and the continuing protection of al Qaeda – to be sustainable? Probably not.
<< MORE >>
Ruminations, November 22, 2009, Eastern Europe defends itself, The currency battle with China, Show trials
Robert Kulak received his undergraduate degree in mathematics and economics and his graduate degree in insurance. An Air force veteran,he has consulted nationally and internationally in information systems. He has written international publications on subjects as diverse as political commentary,humor and healthcare. His articles are also regularly published on Examiner.com where he is the 'Hartford Independent Examiner.'Ruminations, November 22, 2009
In 1921, the resurrected country of
With that in mind, he sought to diplomatically restore the boundaries 17th
When those diplomatic efforts failed,
Recently,
<< MORE >>