Obama Fear Removal

This is for my fellow conservatives who are "very concerned" about the Obama victory last night. Let's get a few things off our chest so we can breathe easier and not get caught up in the partisan stalemate before his term begins.

1- Daniel 2:21; God is on His throne. This has not changed. Therefore, everything will be alright and frankly, there is nothing new under the son (Solomon).

2- Presidency; one of the biggest things that drove me nuts over the last 4 years was the Democratic Party cheering for Bush's downfall. Congratulations, you got it. Now look where we are as a country. We need to rise above this (as McCain instructed his followers to do). You measure the success of a coach by the success of the team. Obama is our new coach. We are the team. We should all be praying Obama has a hugely successful presidency! It has an absolute DIRECT impact on America.

3- Obama is not the Antichrist. Demons cower and retreat at the name of Christ. Whether you believe him or not, Obama claims to be a Christian. Do you see anywhere in scripture where the Antichrist could do anything but blasphemy the name of our Lord- he can NOT proclaim it! No, Obama is no more the Antichrist than George Bush, Bill Clinton or Ronald Regan were. Besides, we all know Bill Maher really is.

4- Abortion; abortion was a non-issue in this election. Obama refused to address it but votes pro-choice. McCain is a weak pro-life candidate. If with the House, Senate, Presidency and the campaign promise to overturn RvW, George Bush, a proclaimed Christian - could NOT overturn RvW, how much more success do we really think McCain would have with a Democratic House and Senate? No chance and likely not even an attempt. Oh yeah- and the infanticide thing. Manipulation. If you're interested in details I've read the bill and the associated legal briefs (I'm weird like that). I'm open to sharing those findings. That was nothing more than an attempt to make abortion an issue when it really wasn't. Bottom line, abortion laws were not going to change in the next term regardless of the candidate.

5- Taxes; taxes are going up. We have to deal with that. Believe me, I'm not a fan of it either. At the end of 2010 the top bracket goes from 35% to 39.6%. That was a Republican law that the Dems have no intention of changing. There is NO WAY McCain could have stopped the rise with a Dem House and Senate. At best, McCain could have negotiated for a 38% rate; still a tax increase. Will Obama increase taxes? Probably, but he doesn't have to. Bush already put that plan in place back in 2000.

6- Caring for one another; I'm not a fan of "redistribution". I live in America, not France, for a reason. We'll never have the type of socialist system they have but don't think we aren't already socialistic (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid). But let's not forget we are Christians. If someone asks for our shirt we are to give them our jacket. Why are we so paranoid about giving up some of what HE has given us to begin with. We should not be hostile and fearful because of it.

7- YOU ARE POOR! Dear Christian, you own nothing; at least you shouldn't. Everything you have in this world was given over to Him who has given you an ETERNAL gift. Your home, your car, your 401k, your knowledge- it is put in your care but it belongs to HIM. Do not be troubled by what you have or do not have in this world. He will care for you. Your reward is in Heaven, not this temporary place we reside in.

8- To those who are rich; meaning you own something. If you are not in poverty due to the fact you truly own things in this world then I encourage you to reconsider the grip you have on things that will fade. Everything you hold so tightly to will one day be gone. Embrace that which will not rust, fade, tarnished or can be stolen from you. Embrace Him who can provide so much more than you could ever dream of. Is there anything in life you can truly hold forever? Your goods, your money, your family, your love for anyone or anything? It can and will all fade away. But don't despair. There are some things that won't. Some things you CAN take with you. If you want to know more about these things and if you're open to having a serious and very real conversation about it. Let's talk.

- Charles

Spending Spree!!!

I'm just wondering if anyone is keeping track of just how much NEW spending has been proposed/passed by our government over the last 6 months. Forget $700B, I count $3.01 TRILLION Here's an estimated breakdown:

Original cost of Fannie/Freddie $200,000,000,000
US guarantee to JPM for Bear Stearns $29,000,000,000
2-yr loan to AIG $120,000,000,000
Exchange rate stability funds $50,000,000,000
Increase to FDIC $500,000,000,000 (Proposed)
Authorized Fannie/Freddie to buy mortgage backed securities $500,000,000,000
RTC type portfolio for banks $845,000,000,000
Pelosi/Obama stimulus package $115,000,000,000 (Proposed)
Hurricane and Flood Victims $24,000,000,000
Detroit Automakers $25,000,000,000
Heating for the poor $5,200,000,000
Budget Increases- Pentagon/Homeland Sec/Veterans Affairs $600,000,000,000

Since none of this money actually comes in the form of payment from an account but instead the printing of additional money people need to seriously consider how inflation will be impacted in the near future.

Bottom line: Dump your variable liabilities (ARMs, credit cards, HELOCs with variable, etc). The next 10 years could easily average an inflation rate double what we are currently seeing.

Take care,
Charles

Texas Supreme Court

I just finished ready John Grisham's "The Appeal". I wasn't a huge fan of the book's ending but being a law school student it sparked my interest. The book is a fictional story about voter manipulation in the Mississippi's Supreme Court election. Interested, I decided to take a closer look at our Texas Supreme Court makeup. Uh-oh; not good. If you're interested in my findings/opinions keep reading...



How unbiased do you consider an elected body made up entirely of one political party? How much debate and consideration is given to decisions when that body unanimously agrees with itself over 90% of the time? Herein lies my struggle. In Texas, Republicans have taken total control of the Supreme Court; 9 for 9 seats. This may sound odd coming from a conservative voter who votes, most of the time, for the Republican seat. Consider what this group has looked like on paper:

• The court overturned decisions made by juries in consumer cases 81% of the time
• The court ruled against consumers 84% of the time in their last term
• The court overturned 92% of appellate court decisions
• The court overturned 70% of trial court opinions
• Between 60-75% of each individual justice's campaign finance comes from law firms and energy/natural resource companies.

[Source: www.tpj.com Texans for Public Justice]

Was some of this necessary- I'm certain it was. But the numbers are overwhelmingly against consumers. The overturning of civil jury decisions is alarming- why even have a trial by jury? One could make an argument on that but trial by jury is how our system is run.

I am all for tort reform. The most common discussion around tort reform is the capping of punitive damages, or punishment for bad/non-criminal behavior. The fact is too many times someone purposely drops a can of spaghetti sauce at a local grocery store then lays next to it feigning injury. Before you know it the grocery store is being sued for ridiculous amounts. Many trial lawyers certainly have their pockets filled by unscrupulous claims. Sadly, even for legitimate claims several lawyers aren't fighting for what's fair- they fight for what's possible (I'm referring to awards). There is abuse out there and it should be prevented where possible.

On the other side, I think we can all agree that not every company out there is completely ethical. It's true that SOME company leaders will lie, steal, cheat and defraud in order to make profits. Not that we've seen any of that lately! If a company with an unethical decision maker develops a bad product they will consider the consequences. Say the company can reign in $100 million in profits with this product. They learn of the defect or bad process and consider how much it would cost them. A recall could eliminate the entirety of those profits. A lawsuit could not only cost them the profits but could also jeopardize company assets through potential punitive damages awarded by a jury. In this case the company is better off doing the recall and the consumer is safer.

Now consider for a moment if we had a limit to punitive damages. What if the cap was, say- $10 million in punitive damages. Well, our unethical company considers the worst case scenario. $100 million in profits minus up to $10 million in damages = $90 million in profits if we get caught! The profits or the total loss via a recall? The unethical company will take the profits.

We don't have caps on punitive damages here in Texas at this time. But instead of a cap we have a Supreme Court that seems to be more than willing to institute its own version of tort reform (a job for the legislative branch by the way). The Texas Court is overturning decisions that include punitive damages awarded by juries at an alarming rate. While it is not an outright cap it certainly makes life easier for our unethical company since they know that even if they lose a judgement and incur large punitive damages for their ill behavior- they can appeal to a friendly Supreme Court which appears all too willing to reverse the lower courts' decisions.

Is the jury trial system really being used? Are companies really being held accountable? Are we, as consumers, really that much safer?

I suggest two items for consideration:

1. Eliminate elections for Supreme Court justices. The "tainted" level is ALARMING. "Tainted" is the descriptive used when one of the lawyers presenting to the court has given money to one of the justice's campaigns. In business we call that a kickback! Instead, initiate appointed positions like we do on the Federal level (FYI- many states have adopted this with mixed success).
2. Tort reform should be initiated but with limits of "% of profits affiliated with the ill-behaviour" instead of an outright dollar figure.

I certainly don't want a Democratic Supreme Court in Texas. But I don't feel very confident with an all-Republican one either. For this reason I'll be voting for two Democrats in this year's Supreme Court Justice (Houston and Yanez for those interested). Maybe with some difference of opinions the court will begin to have a little less bias in its decisions.

Thanks for listening. Feel welcome to reply. Overall, it's just intended as food for thought,

Charles