An Ode to Hillary on Music Monday

Finally. It's over. The Clinton Regime is done. We Conservatives endured 8 years of the liberal, military gutting, law enforcement hating, gun control loving, couldn't keep it in his pants, Clinton presidency. Then, we endured Hillary's progressive tenure in the U.S. Senate. Next, we endured her embarrassing, leftist foreign policy initiatives as Secretary of State. Lastly, we endured her stint as the Democratic nominee for president. Now, thank God, all of that is over.

Through all of it and unlike when things don't go The Lunatic Left's way, we conservatives didn't break and burn things, nor did we riot. Heck, we didn't even threaten to leave the country like a bunch of babies. We endured it and made the best of it.

Now, we only ask for one, simple thing - Hillary, please "Don't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away." So, on this post-2016 election edition of Music Monday, this one's dedicated to Hillary Clinton. It's Motley Crue with "Don't Go Away Mad (Just Go Away)" from their 1989 #1 record, Dr. Feelgood (click here).

Pure Evil

Up until now, The Sheepdog's been pretty silent regarding the 2016 presidential race, and there's two reasons for that:

1. I'm sick of politics. It just keeps getting uglier and uglier. The Republicans and the Democrats are basically the same - they're in it for themselves, not to serve, and are more interested in what's good for their party instead of what's good for the country. It's why I left the GOP back in 2010. The current GOP disgusts me as much as the Democrats.
2. Plus, all the candidates, from the more than a dozen so-called Republicans that started the race, to the few Democrats, to the current third party candidates, totally suck. As my friend, The Colonel used to say, "There ain't a statesman in the bunch". Not one. You disagree? Then, let's review some of them.

The so-called "Republicans":

• Bush III - really? Another one? I can already hear the Democrats if he had won the GOP nomination, "It'll be 4 more years of the same failed policies of the past."
• The anchor baby (Rubio).
• The birther (Cruz) - I still don't understand how the GOP supported this guy after raising so much cain about Obama's birth certificate. Cruz was born in Canada. Total hypocrites.
• The Billionaire, Brattish Bully (Trump)
• George Soro's boy (Kasich).
• Chris Christie - pro-homosexual marriage and governor of one of the most anti-gun states in the country.
• Lindsey Graham - not the sharpest tack in the box and the 2016 version of John McCain.

The Democrats:

• The Progressive Extremist, and
• the Socialist.

Really? Is this the best we can do as a country?

English: Khusruwiyah Mosque in Aleppo, Syria Français : Mosquée Khosrowiyé à Alep en Syrie (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

And then, of course, there's the third party candidates led by Gary Johnson. You remember him, right? He wants to be Commander in Chief and institute his foreign policies, but he doesn't know where Aleppo, Syria is, the center of the Syrian refugee crisis caused by that country's civil war. Additionally, Johnson is supposedly conservative, but yet he is "pro-choice" for abortion and wants to legalize marijuana. Neither of those stances equate to conservative principles and values. He should actually be a Democrat.

Since all the candidates suck like a Hoover vacuum, who should Americans vote for? Since a third party candidate has as much chance at winning the election as a Volkswagen Beetle does at winning the Daytona 500, and both major party nominees have more baggage than a Boeing 747 headed for Europe, it's a tough choice. That is until you are aware of the information I am sharing below. It's shocking and no one is talking about it.

In fact, what I will share the remainder of this post, regarding this presidential election, is far more important than the economy, foreign policy, gun control, jobs, and even abortion. I doubt you will see this information anywhere else, but in my opinion, it's the #1 issue to consider before casting your vote for the presidency.

Back in 2009, Hillary Clinton proudly went on record as someone who "enormously" admires Margaret Sanger (click here for video). Now, who the heck is Margaret Sanger? She was a well-known proponent of eugenics after World War I. In simple terms, eugenics is the idea that some people's lives are more valuable than others. It teaches that people with "undesirable" traits should not be allowed to reproduce and pass their "undesirable" traits to their offspring. Eugenicists desire to reduce or totally eliminate such traits from the human gene pool and are not opposed to eliminating living humans possessing these "undesirable" traits. These traits include:

1. physical disabilities,
2. mental disabilities, 
3. chronic health issues a.k.a. pre-existing conditions,
4. being poor, 
5. being an immigrant, and
6. being a members of a racial or ethnic minority.

Eugenicists consider "undesirables" as "unfit", as in unfit to live, and a waste of oxygen and / or other resources. On the other hand, eugenicists believe people with "good stock", not having one or more of the traits listed above, should be encouraged to have many children. In other words they want to build "a master race." Anyone see a problem here besides me? Eugenics is a dangerous philosophy and has it's pitfalls, such as:

A major criticism of eugenics policies is that, regardless of whether "negative" or "positive" policies are used, they are vulnerable to abuse because the criteria of selection are determined by whichever group is in political power. Furthermore, negative eugenics in particular is considered by many to be a violation of basic human rights, which include the right to reproduction. Another criticism is that eugenic policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, resulting in inbreeding depression instead due to a low genetic variation. - Wikipedia

Does any of this sound familiar? Think back to the 1930s and '40s and Adolf Hitler, the Nazis, and the Jews. The Nazis were huge proponents of eugenics which led to millions of Jews being slaughtered during World War II. The Jews were considered "undesirable", so Hitler wanted them annihilated in order to establish a master race. He might have accomplished his goal, too, if he had not been greedy, arrogant, and power hungry in deciding to go to war with the Russians, while at the same time fighting The Allies. Heck, I even read somewhere that Hitler himself admired Margaret Sanger.

English: Margaret Sanger Square is the leafy intersection of Mott St. and Bleecker St. in New York City's Greenwich Village. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Take a few minutes and Google Sanger's name. You will find that she is also the founder of Planned Parenthood. You will also find some of the things she said and  / or wrote revealing her racist ideologies and attitudes regarding African-Americans and others. She even conspired with pastors in black communities in order to get them to encourage their members to use more birth control. Her motivation was to reduce the numbers of African-Americans. She was also one of the early promoters of abortion and even spoke at women's chapters of the Ku Klux Klan (read here). So, considering all this, could it be that the original intention of abortion was not about women's freedom to choose to end unwanted pregnancies, nor the freedom to do what they want with their bodies, but it was instead rooted in bigotry and racism as a means of reducing the African-American population and others considered to be "undesirable"?

Eugenics is PURE EVIL. The Nazis proved that. It amounts to humans, sinful, fallen humans, playing God. I could provide link after link in this post showing the connection between eugenics, Margaret Sanger, racism, and other evil, but the post would run on forever. So, I encourage you to take the time and educate yourself. Get on the web, Google Sanger, eugenics, eugenicists, and do your own research. You will be shocked. You probably never knew that such evil thought processes existed in this world except in movies and TV dramas.

Typically, when someone admires another person, it is because they have something in common with them. Many times it's a shared value, principle, ideology, or goal. Since Hillary Clinton is on record as saying she admires a racist woman whose life work was in eugenics, doesn't it also stand to reason that Hillary Clinton very well may hold the same, evil views as Sanger? To me, that's the scary part of thinking about her being president.

So, what might things be like in the U.S. if a Hillary Clinton presidency were to be influenced by the values of her "hero", Sanger? In addition to the traits previously listed as "undesirable", and thinking about the above quote containing the potential problems with eugenics, consider the following:

• We already know she hates guns. In fact, some Democrats have wanted them all banned for a long time. The so-called "Assault Weapons Ban" and the Brady Bill, which became law during Bill's presidency, are direct evidence of that. Would gun owners become "undesirables"?
• She's previously expressed her contempt for Christians and their beliefs. Would Christians, and perhaps Jews, and other people of faith, also become "undesirables"?
• She's has contempt for the so-called "vast right wing conspiracy" and conservatives, because she thinks they're out to get her and Bill. Would they, or the Clintons' other political enemies, or people who disagree, with them become "undesirables"?
• Remember the section in The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. ObamaCare, regarding "end of life care"? Remember how Sarah Palin and others raised concerns about that? That section of the law is so broad that it could be interpreted to mean many things. What if that section was determined to mean that people who are elderly, have chronic health conditions, or some type of disability, whose care is too expensive, should not be given medical treatment but instead just be left alone to die because they're "undesirables"? That would be a eugenicist's utopia, and ObamaCare was basically HillaryCare once upon a time. Could it get any more barbaric than that? God help us.

Now, I'm sure someone reading this post is gonna object to this line of reasoning. They'll say something like just because Hillary admires a woman who was big into eugenics doesn't mean she shares those same ideas, or, that The Sheepdog's nuts and none of this will ever happen. Well, then consider this - do you remember the adjective Hillary used to describe Donald Trump's supporters? She referred to them as "deplorable". Sounds pretty similar to "undesirables" to me, but there's more to consider in making my point than that. Please, read on.

Hillary Clinton in Hampton, NH (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I've read reports telling of an incident, involving Hillary, which took place at the Arkansas governor's mansion during Bill's gubernatorialship. An Easter egg hunt for special needs children was held. She became frustrated and upset with the youngsters, because they were finding the eggs at a much slower pace than she would have liked. So, she popped off saying, "When are they going to get these f---ing ree-tards out of here?!? You can read more about the incident here. Additionally, within the same article, she is quoted as referring to Jews as "kikes" and one Jewish man in particular as a "f***ing Jew bastard". Plus, her temper and fits of rage over the years, culminating in furniture and other items being broken in the Arkansas governor's mansion, and the White House, have been reported in various media. So, in my opinion, if you mix her temper tantrums, with her racist remarks, and her love for a eugenicist, we have a major problem. These are not the qualities we need in the White House. It's a recipe for a disaster.

Hillary made her admiration for Margaret Sanger known about 7 years ago at a Planned Parenthood awards ceremony. Others have been influenced by evil people before and later recanted their admiration for their mentor as a mistake. Hillary has had plenty of time to do the same, but yet she never has. Therefore, it only stands to reason that she still admires Sanger and her ideals. At a time when race relations are tense in this country and people are held accountable and even ostracized for bigoted behavior and words, why has Hillary Clinton not been held accountable for her allegiance to Sanger?

Another thing to consider before voting is that if Hillary Clinton is elected president, she will likely have the opportunity to nominate more than one justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. Does it not stand to reason that anyone she nominates for the highest court in the land will likely hold the same influences, values, principles, or lack thereof (depending on how you look at it), that she does? Do you remember what United States Senator Lamar Alexander from Tennessee said when he was criticized for his vote confirming Sonia Sotomayor as one of Obama's Supreme Court nominees? He said, "Elections have consequences" (read here). In other words, he took the viewpoint that since Obama won the presidency, he could appoint whomever he wanted and get a free pass in doing so. What if a majority of Congress takes that same attitude during a Hillary Clinton presidency? Consider for a moment the ramifications? We cannot as freedom-loving, decent people allow her that opportunity and give her the power that comes with the presidency. We CANNOT do it.

The answer to the question of which presidential candidate to vote for is a hard one to swallow, especially for a conservative like me. Even with all his baggage, such as insulting people, being rude and crude, arrogant, and a bully, we must elect Donald Trump as president. There is no other way to stop Hillary Clinton from having absolute power and potentially setting up her own "Evil Empire". "But Sheepdog, Congress and the Supreme Court will limit her power through our system of constitutional checks and balances?" Really? Where have you been the last 8 years and the last few years of W's administration? Congress and the Supreme Court have set on their "assets" and allowed Obama to run wild. Heck, the Supreme Court even ruled that ObamaCare is constitutional!! Yet the power to regulate healthcare is mentioned NOWHERE in the constitution. NOWHERE. So, what makes you think those lazy bums will do anything to limit a President Hillary's power?

Now, look back over this post and review who a eugenicist, like "Hillary's Hero", would consider "unfit" or "undesirable" or a "weed". Now, is that you, or one of your loved ones? Is that your spouse, your child, your boyfriend / girlfriend, your parent, your best friend, or someone you care about? If it is, then you have ONLY one choice in this election - Donald Trump. If you stay home and don't vote, or vote for a third party candidate instead of Donald Trump, then you will be helping Hillary Clinton, an evil woman, gain absolute authority over you and the country. It's the equivalent of a chicken voting for a fox AND leaving the door to the chicken coop unlocked and standing open.

If Trump were running against anyone else, it's likely that myself and many others would not vote for him. So, here's what it boils down to for me. Donald Trump has said and done a lot of unacceptable stuff. However, I'm not aware of him even once expressing his admiration for someone like the evil, racist, eugenicist Margaret Sanger who was also admired by Adolf Hitler. Hillary has, and she's proud of it.

Now, this article should not be interpreted as my prediction that the potential scenario I've painted will definitely happen with Hillary as president. If I could predict the future that accurately, I would have already won the PowerBall multiple times. All I'm saying is that when you put all this information together, including Hillary's fits of anger, her bigoted comments, and her admiration for a racist eugenicist, it adds up to it being too risky to give her the power of the presidency.  I'm not willing to take that risk. Are you?

So, with early voting already starting around the country, The Sheepdog is endorsing, and will be voting for, Donald Trump. I do it for one reason and one reason only - to defeat Hillary Clinton and prevent her rise to power. I want to encourage everyone to do the same. Please do not stay home and not vote. Please do not vote for a third party candidate. If you do either of these things, you will be helping The Mother of All Wolves rise to power and risking her finishing Obama's "fundamental transformation" of this country.

The Sheepdog don't like wolves, and Hillary Clinton is the epitome of a wolf. Grrrrr.....

P.S. I'm sure this post has pissed off many people. However, that was not my intention. In fact, I hope in goes viral, so please share it. I am simply a patriot and am concerned that a Hillary Clinton presidency will be a disaster. America will NOT survive it. Therefore, she must be defeated at the ballot box. Therefore, I wrote this out of love for my country and am not concerned with losing, keeping, or making friends as a result of it. It had to be said, and no one else is saying it. Too much is at stake. I'm sure some will want to leave comments, which I welcome. If you do, you MUST follow my blog policy for comments (click here to read). I had the balls to put my name on what will be considered a controversial post. So, if you don't have the "cojones" to put your name on a comment, or you fill it with profanity, it will NOT be posted.

P.P.S. If I disappear from the blogosphere after this post, it's safe to assume that either "they" got me or Google and Blogger shut the blog down. Just know I fought the good fight and did what I could to save my country from a potentially Evil Empire. 

November 2014 Tennessee Governor's Race

Back in July, I posted a brief synopsis on the Republican and Democratic nominees for Tennessee governor. I also promised to briefly review those nominees and the 3rd party candidates who would be on the ballot prior to the November general election. Since early voting in Tennessee begins tomorrow, here is a brief overview of all seven candidates.

Republican Nominee

English: Knoxville mayor and Tennessee GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Haslam addressing supporters before the Highlands Town Hall Debate at Tennessee Tech University. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As expected, Tennessee's incumbent governor, Bill Haslam, won the Republican nomination. I'm not gonna spend much time rehashing my lack of fondness for Mr. Haslam. From the time he declared his intention to seek the governor's office over 4 years ago, I have pointed out that he is no conservative no matter how hard he and others try to paint him as one. He is progressive to the core. He is no friend of gun owners, teachers, and others. In my opinion, which is partially based upon a NewsChannel 5 investigative video series titled "Questions of Influence", his associates and big business have benefited more from his first term than anyone.

When I started this blog several years ago, I built it around the sheep / wolves / sheepdogs theme. Since in my opinion, Haslam is something besides what he claims to be (a progressive instead of a conservative), he is a wolf. So, just like 4 years ago, I will not vote for him.

Democratic Nominee

Charles V. "Charlie" Brown is the Democrat's nominee for governor. If I had to guess, I'd say he won the nomination based upon name recognition. I mean, who doesn't like Charlie Brown, right?

Brown hasn't mounted much of a campaign. He has a Facebook page but no webpage. I only found a little about him on the internet - he is a religious man, a hunter, and retired construction worker. He's not gonna put up much of a challenge to "Big Business Bill" Haslam.

Constitution Party Nominee

Constitution Party (United States) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Shaun Crowell is the Constitution Party candidate. Crowell ran for U.S. Senate in 2012 as a Libertarian. According to Crowell's website, he is:

• a Christian, 
• a veterinarian who owns an animal hospital,
• opposed to Common Core and Race to the Top and wants to repeal both,
• opposed to big government programs, such as the Tennessee Promise,
• a supporter of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms,
• a supporter of free-market capitalism, and
• believes the state's budget is controlled too much by Uncle Sam.

Green Party Nominee

Isa Infante is the Green Party candidate. She has a wide-ranging background. She's been a university professor, a U.S. Dept. of Education employee, a business owner, and a consultant. A brief review of her Facebook page and website shows that she's way to the left of me on the issues. For instance, she:

• supports raising the minimum wage,
• supports unions,
• wants FREE healthcare,
• supports "increased economic and political control of communities", and
• supports "social justice".

Independents

There are 3 Independents in the race, including:

1. John Jay Hooker - Hooker has run for governor before but never gains much traction. I could not find a website for him, but he does have a Facebook page.
2. Steven Coburn - Coburn is an interesting fellow with some interesting ideas. However, the major problem I see with him is that he doesn't understand the Tennessee Constitution. For instance, on his website it states that if elected he, "... will ask Tennesseans every two months to vote upon 10-15 items and if a high percentage agrees than it is the governor's job to make it happen because it was the will of the People of Tennessee." Uh no. We have State Senators and Representatives for that, according to the state constitution. Plus, we can't get a majority of Tennesseans to vote every 2 years. How the heck you gonna get them to do it every 2 months?
3. Daniel T. Lewis - Lewis is actually the Libertarian candidate but will appear on the ballot as an Independent, because there is no official Libertarian Party in Tennessee. According to his website, he supports smaller government, more individual freedom, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, state sovereignty, reducing government spending, and lower taxes. To see his other viewpoints and stances on the issues, please visit his website at http://www.lewisdt.com/.

Summary

The question you're probably asking by now is, "Sheepdog, who you gonna support?" I'm staying away from the lefties - Haslam, Brown, and Infante. While I like some of the things the Libertarian Party and candidate Lewis advocate I can never get past the Libertarians social agenda that seems to be "anything goes as long you don't hurt anyone." Though I'm not thrilled with any of my options, I'm leaning toward the Constitution Party candidate, Shaun Crowell.

Related articles

• Vote for Dr. Shaun Crowell for Governor of TN! (Fire Haslam) (victoriajackson.com)
• The Democratic nominee for Tennessee governor wants to electrocute incumbent Bill Haslam (theweek.com)
• Tenn. voters to decide on income tax amendment (washingtontimes.com)
• Third parties still fighting for ballot access (sfgate.com)
• Abortion rights proponents give big to campaign (sfgate.com)

2014 Tennessee Governors Race

Early voting for Tennessee's August Primaries begins this Friday, July 18. Bill Haslam is up for re-election as governor. I've made no secret that I am no fan of his in previous posts on this blog. A few months ago, I even posted a series of videos from a NewsChannel 5 Investigation into the wheelings, dealings, and crony capitalism within his administration.

English: Knoxville mayor and Tennessee GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Haslam addressing supporters before the Highlands Town Hall Debate at Tennessee Tech University. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Prior to his election in 2010, I said Haslam was not a conservative, despite his claims, but more of a liberal / progressive. He has proven me correct from his dislike of pro-gun legislation, to his disrespect for teachers, to the his latest big government, progressive handout program known as "The Tennessee Promise." Haslam needs to be defeated badly.

The problem is that the crop of candidates challenging him in 2014 is not very formidable, but I want to briefly highlight who they are. Today I'll cover the Republicans and the Democrats who are competing in their respective parties primaries. Later, prior to the general election, I will do a similar list that includes the Independent candidates.  If you'd like to see the entire list of Tennessee gubernatorial candidates, U.S. Senate, U.S. House, and other state office, it is available on the Tennessee Secretary of State's website by clicking here.

Republicans

1. The incumbent Bill Haslam - a progressive in conservative clothing a.k.a. a wolf. Sheepdogs don't like wolves. So, I don't like Haslam. Did not vote for him in 2010. Will not vote for him in 2014, either.
2. Donald Ray McFolin - Ran against Haslam as an Independent in 2010. Is a U.S. Army veteran who served in Vietnam. Worked in graphic arts for 30+ years. Is currently an autism advocate motivated to run for governor in order to help kids with special needs. A commendable motivation, in my opinion.
3. Basil Marceaux, Sr. - Ran against Haslam in 2010 gubernatorial Republican Primary. Has ran for Tennessee governor on multiple occasions, ran for Tennessee State Senate and the U.S. Senate, too, along with several other offices. Basil is an interesting guy. Visit his website to learn more www.BasilMarceaux.com.
4. Mark "Coonrippy" Brown - Brown's run for governor is due to his love for his pet racooon, Rebekah.

   

   Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

   Rebekah was captured by the TWRA (Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency) over a year ago. Brown has been unsuccessful in his attempts to get his pet back. So, he's running for governor in order to free Rebekah. What's not to like about guy and his raccoon? Heck, I might just have to vote for the guy (read Politico article).

Democrats

1. Charles V. "Charlie" Brown - no substantial information available
2. Kennedy Spellman Johnson - no substantial information available
3. William H. "John" McKamey - retired school teacher. Served as county commissioner and Mayor of Sullivan County. On his website, it states he supports medical marijuana. An interview published on www.Knoxnews.com shows that he supports homosexual marriage.
4. Ron Noonan - only information found says he wants to decriminalize misdemeanors and move regulation of public education from the federal to the state governments

As I said, the pickings are slim when it comes to alternatives to Haslam. However, none of the Democrats will get my vote for 2 reasons : 1) the little information I was able to find on 2 show that they are way to the Left of me on the issues, and 2) I want to vote against Haslam. So, I'm left with McFolin, "Coonrippy", or Basil. Decisions, decisions. I'm leaning towards McFolin because of his motivation to help special needs kids, but as I said earlier - what's not to like about a guy wanting to free his pet raccoon?

As crazy as politics are today with incumbents being out of touch with every day people, a guy running just to save his pet kinda seems fitting. Maybe Rebekah should have been the one on the ballot. If she won, she could pardon her self.

Only in Tennessee. Wow.

Related articles

• 'Coonrippy' running for Tennessee governor to get his seized raccoon back (timesfreepress.com)
• Mark 'Coonrippy' Brown Runs For Governor To Get His Seized Raccoon Rebekah Back (huffingtonpost.com)
• Man runs for governor of Tennessee to get pet raccoon back (newsfixnow.com)
• Spokesman: Gov. Haslam never received raccoon petition from 'Coonrippy' (timesfreepress.com)
• 2014's craziest political candidates: Part 2 (deathandtaxesmag.com)
• Off-Grid Man Runs For Governor To Get His Pet Raccoon Back (offthegridnews.com)
• Don't ignore the raccoon vote, 'Coonrippy' warns governor (watchdog.org)

Nashville = Taxville

Recently, I ran across an article listing the top ten U.S. cities with the highest and lowest traveler tax rates. I was a little surprised at what I learned. I think you will be, too. I break it down for ya below.

The article was a summary of the annual study conducted by the GBTA Foundation (Global Business Traveler Association Foundation) and can be found on their website, www.gbta.org by clicking here. The article is titled "GBTA Reveals Best and Worst Travel Taxes in Top 50 U.S. Destinations."  

Geographic center of the contiguous United States is located in United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The study looked at the total amount of daily taxes paid by travelers to various U.S. cities. The amount includes both general sales taxes and discriminatory travel taxes. Discriminatory travel taxes are taxes on things that specifically target travelers, such as rental cars, hotels, and restaurant meals. These discriminatory travel taxes are in addition to the sales tax travelers pay on the same items.

Below, I have listed, by ranking, the top ten U.S. cities, according to the article, with the highest total traveler taxes per day along with the total dollar amount of taxes incurred each day :

1. Chicago, IL - $40.31
2. New York, NY - $37.98
3. Boston, MA - $34.83
4. Kansas City, MO - $34.58
5. Seattle, WA - $34.43
6. Minneapolis, MN - $34.32
7. Cleveland, OH - $34.22
8. Indianapolis, IN - $34.19
9. Nashville, TN - $34.13
10. Houston, TX - $33.51  

Next, per the study, I have listed, by ranking, the top 10 U.S. cities with the lowest total traveler taxes per day along with the total dollar amount of taxes incurred by travelers each day :

1. Ft. Lauderdale, FL - $22.21
2. Ft. Myers, FL - $22.21
3. West Palm Beach, FL - $22.21
4. Detroit, MI - $22.37
5. Portland, OR - $22.45
6. Orange County, CA - $22.79
7. Burbank, CA - $23.74
8. Ontario, CA - $24.08
9. Honolulu, HI - $24.38
10. Orlando, FL - $24.50

Please note the four brightly colored cities, because there's some shocking stuff in there. First, consider that in a recent article on www.USAToday.com titled, "States with the Highest and Lowest Tax Burdens", California was ranked as having the 4th highest overall, out of 50 states, tax burden in the country. However, in the GBTA study, 3 of California's largest cities ranked as having the 6th, 7th, and 8th lowest daily total taxes on travelers in the country !

Nashville, TN - The raw satellite imagery shown in these images was obtain from NASA and/or the US Geological Survey. Post-processing and production by http://www.terraprints.com (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Second, the same www.USAToday.com article, showed that Tennessee has the 3rd lowest overall, out of 50 states, tax burden in the country. However, Nashville, TN has the 9th overall highest daily tax burden upon travelers of any city in the country !

Now, let's break these numbers down a little further. (Sorry, the accountant in me can't help it.) For simplicity's sake, let's round the daily total traveler tax burdens for Nashville, TN and Orange County, Burbank, and Ontario in California. Nashville's becomes $34, Orange County's $23, and Burbank's and Ontario's $24. Then, let's look at some percentages.

Let's say you originally planned to travel to Orange County, CA, but changed your mind and decided to go to Nashville, TN instead. Each day of your trip you would pay 47.8% more in taxes than if you had kept your original plans and gone to Orange County, CA [(34-23) / 23 = .478 x 100 = 47.8%]. Also, if you changed your plans from going to Burbank, CA or Ontario, CA and went to Nashville, TN instead, you would pay 41.7% more in taxes per day [(34-24) / 24 = .417 x 100 = 41.7%]. WOW !! Who would have thought that traveler taxes would be over 40% higher in Nashville, TN than in a big city in tax happy, Progressive California ? 

These statistics seem backwards, right ? I thought so, too, until I remembered the never-ending string of Progressive / Liberal Nashville Mayors. Ever since I moved into the area, Nashville's voters have insisted on electing one "Big Gubmint" lovin', tax and spend, go-into-debt Democrat after another. These Mayors have paid for project after project with more taxes on the backs of taxpayers.

First, there was "Uncle Phil" Bredesen. In my opinion, his regime could be characterized as the most pro-corporate welfare and tax increase-loving administration the city has ever known. It built a NHL hockey arena and brought in the Nashville Predators to play in it. Next, Bud "You Can Take Me At My Word" Adams and his then Houston "Loser" Oilers, now Tennessee "Thug" Titans, were recruited to Nashville. The Bredesen Regime then builds the team the nice, new stadium Bud's been wanting at a nice, fat price tag to Nashville taxpayers of over $300 Million. The NHL and NFL both came to Nashville via Bredesen and on the back of Nashville taxpayers. All to the tune of about $400 Million. Oh, and don't get me started on Uncle Phil's other big corporate welfare project - Dell Computers.

During the Bredesen Mayoral Regime, Nashville property taxes went up, up, up to pay for the Titans and Predators. Some will tell you, "No, that's not so." Well, it is so. It was one of the reasons I moved out of Davidson Co. I'm not paying for playpens for a bunch of spoiled brats. In my opinion, they should pay for it themselves. While Nashville's taxpayers were paying for professional sports teams, many other important needs of the city's citizens, such as its schools, went without.

Next up - Bill Purcell. I kinda felt sorry for him. Now, in his defense, he was the guy stuck trying to manage all the debt Bredesen's Regime piled on the city. It seemed that besides making budget cut after budget cut each year of his tenure, and reading books to the kids, Purcell spent most of his time as Nashville Mayor treading water trying to survive the debt avalanche inherited from the Bredesen Regime. It was so bad the poor guy got outta Dodge as soon as his 2nd term was up to go to Harvard and teach or something. I mean, that dude got WAAAYY out of Dodge. Can't say that I blame him. I will give Purcell credit for one thing, though - he fought his tail off opposing the new Nashville Convention Center and stopped it dead in its tracks. Unfortunately for Nashville, though, next up as Mayor was Karl "Let's Spend Some Money" Dean.

English: Construction progress of Music City Center in Nashville (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Dean is the current Nashville Mayor, and if you are an elected official wanting to learn how to spend some money, Dean is the guy to learn from. He came into office determined to build the new convention center. I thought the city's debt piled up during Bredesen's Regime, but I hadn't seen nothing, yet. Bredesen was just the warmup for the headliner, Dean. The city went in debt nearly $400 Million on the Pred-a-Thugs and Titan Thugs deals combined during the Bredesen years, but Dean topped that in one deal. The new "Music City Center" has a price tag of about $600 Million. Furthermore, according to an article titled "Nashville Gambles On Lure of New Convention Center" on www.NYTimes.com, the city is also fronting around $125 Million toward the new Omni hotel near the new convention center.

Dean is the king of Nashville's Mayors when it comes to spending money and racking up debt. He's over the $700 Million mark with the Music City Center and Omni Hotel. Now, ... that's Progressive.

The question is - how does Dean and the city plan to pay all this massive amount of debt for the new convention center ? Quite simply, they plan to do so with even more taxes on tourists. Yes, I said more. Perhaps they're not happy with that #9 ranking above.  According to an article on http://skift.com/ titled "Nashville's New Convention Center Sets Up Big Challenge for Memphis", the Music City Center debt will be paid off with :

• half of the city's current hotel / motel tax, plus
• an extra $2 per night / per room hotel motel tax, plus
• a 1% rental car surcharge (tax), plus
• a $2 tax every time as bus, taxi, or other commercial vehicle leaves the airport, plus
• all sales taxes within a zone around the building, and 
• ALL sales tax collected at both the hotel and new convention center.

Whew !! That's a lot of dadgum taxes.

All of these taxes above will be on top of all the taxes that travelers to the city are already paying. So, that $34.13 per day total travel taxes figure noted above can only go in one direction - up.

Here's the good news, though, Nashville - if that total travel tax burden per day goes up just $.71, and with the new taxes above, that's pretty much a certainty, your city will vault all the way into 3rd place, behind only the Progressive Metropolis' of Chicago, IL and New York City among U.S. cities that tax travelers the most. Yippeeeee !

Additionally, if the total tax burden on travelers goes up just $6.19 per day, and you've got a real good shot at achieving that mark, too, Nashville would jump all the way into 1st Place as the city which taxes travelers the most in the U.S. Nashville may not have a Super Bowl Trophy or a Stanley Cup, but it would become "Taxville U.S.A." As far as travelers are concerned, Nashville's motto could then be "Send 'Em and We'll Tax 'Em." Or, "Just Tax 'Em." I think I like the latter one better. It would fit on hats and t-shirts easier.

The best thing is that the city would finally be the best at something, and that's been a long time coming. "Taxville U.S.A." has had some leaders that really knew how to show the city's visitors some "Southern hospitality."

Just Tax 'Em.

Is Tenneseee's Proposed "Fairness in Ticketing Act" Really Fair ?

Back in December, I wrote a blog article about a proposed law working it's way through the Tennessee Legislature. The article was titled "A Season of Miracles" (read it here). At the time, the article's purpose was two fold. First, it contained some of my usual sarcasm in order to provide a few laughs. Second, after first learning about the bill while reading a local newspaper, I felt it was worth making others aware of it, too. More recently, I've looked into the bill even further and found that the issue is worth visiting again in more detail.

Tennessee Capitol Building at night

The bill is known as the "Fairness in Ticketing Act." Supporters of the bill claim it will curb scalping. Opponents of the bill claim it will infringe on the property rights of consumers by making it more difficult, if not impossible, to transfer legally owned sporting event and concert tickets to family members or friends. Who's right ? I'll tell you in this article.

I am a firm believer in President Reagan's mantra of "trust but verify." So, after reading various press releases, blog posts, Facebook pages, and websites applicable to the issue, I decided to go to the Tennessee Legislature's website and read the actual text of the bill. I felt like I needed to determine for myself what the bill actually did and which side was telling the truth. I want to encourage all Tennesseans who buy tickets to sporting events, concerts, etc. to do the same. A summary of the bill can be read by clicking here, and the entire text of the bill can be read by clicking here.

When I read through the entire text of the bill the first time, it reminded me of the Affordable Care Act a.k.a. ObamaCare law because of how ambiguous and complex it is. Fortunately, the bill is only about ten pages long, because I had to read it multiple times to really make any sense of it. My first impression was that it was nothing more than a progressive, big government regulatory bill, because it will require so-called ticket brokers, better known as scalpers, to register with the state of Tennessee, pay a fee (the Progressive term for "tax"), and basically get a permit to scalp tickets. I did not see the threat to regular everyday consumers, until I had read the bill a few more times and let the words sink in. I ultimately found that, like ObamaCare, the dangers with the bill are not what the legislation is saying, the devil is in what it's not saying.

There are a number of consumer-related problems within this bill. For instance, consider Section 62-45-107(2) which states :

To preserve the rights of consumers to secure tickets to entertainment events through safe and reliable means and to protect freedom of enterprise, nothing in this chapter shall prevent operators of places of entertainment, event presenters or their agents from utilizing any ticketing methods for the initial sale of tickets, through any medium, whether existing now or in the future (emphasis added).

Sounds good overall, right ? The Legislature is looking out for Tennesseans, right ? Well, hang on for a minute and let me point out what the bill says a "ticket" is. Section 62-45-103(23) of the bill states the following :

Ticket means a printed, electronic or other type of evidence of the right, option or opportunity to occupy space at or to enter or attend an entertainment event even if not evidenced by any physical manifestation of such right (emphasis added).

Now, if you're like I was when I first read these two sections of the bill, you're probably thinking, "O.k. Sheepdog. I must've missed something, 'cause I really don't see a problem here." That's exactly the problem with not only these two quoted sections but the rest of the bill as well. It's vague, open-ended, and open to interpretation.

Currently, there is a movement to go "paperless" with most event tickets. This legislation would likely accelerate that push. So then, what would we consumers use as a "ticket" to get into a ballgame or concert if it's paperless ? What type of "medium" would it be ?

Nashville Predators (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

One "medium" that might be used as a paperless "Ticket" is the credit card the ticket was purchased with. For example, let's say you buy tickets from someone, such as TicketMaster, to go watch the Nashville Predators play. You'd pay for the tickets with your credit card, then when you get to the arena for the game, you would swipe your credit card and show some form of i.d. to gain entry. Your "tickets" would be linked to your credit card. The main problem for consumers would then be if you wanted to transfer a ticket to someone else. For example, let's say you bought the tickets for someone else as a gift, or at the last minute had a scheduling conflict and couldn't make the game. Currently, you would just give the paper ticket, or maybe sell it, to someone else to go in your place. Guess what ? That ain't happening with a paperless ticket. The transfer, if even possible, will be much more difficult and potentially a real headache.

It's likely, however, that the ticket seller you bought the tickets from would be willing to help you transfer them, or perhaps refer you to an associated company who could provide that "service." In the case of a Predators ticket, currently their tickets are sold by TicketMaster. However, if, as in the example above, the tickets are paperless and linked to your credit card, you would likely only be able to transfer the tickets through TicketMonopoly .... oops, I mean TicketMaster or one of their "associates." Here's another question ? Do you think they will let you do that for free ? Of course not - just like with the airlines, everything, especially changes, costs money. No free lunch here.

Let's talk about TicketMaster for a minute. They are reportedly major supporters of this bill. I hate those guys. It's nearly impossible to buy a sporting event or concert ticket without going through them. That's why I refer to them as "TicketMonopoly." Plus, sometimes the so-called "service fee" they attach to each ticket can be nearly as much as the ticket itself. They've got a real lucrative racket going.

Image via CrunchBase

Remember my example above about the process involved if you wanted to transfer a ticket if this bill passes and tickets go paperless ? Here's something else you may or may not know about TicketMaster. They already own a "ticket broker" company called TicketsNow. TicketsNow is part of the secondary ticket market putting owners of previously purchased tickets with prospective buyers. TicketsNow basically does the same type of thing that the individual "ticket brokers," or scalpers, you see walking around on the streets and sidewalks holding up handfuls of tickets outside sporting events and concerts are doing. TicketsNow and their competitors, such as StubHub, just do it on a much larger scale. Now, can you guess who TicketMaster might use to provide the "transfer service" on those tickets you want to transfer ? C'mon guess. Ding, ding, ding. I think you're right. I'm betting it would be TicketsNow, too. Amazing isn't it ?

Back to those Preds tickets you bought. Let's say you bought those to take your family to a Preds game. This bill is law. One week before the game, something comes up and you and your family of four can't go to the game. You contact TicketMaster to transfer the tickets to a buddy and his family. TicketMaster directs you to TicketsNow who then charges you a fee to do the transfer. TicketMaster has just made money on both the original ticket purchase and the transfer. They've basically double-dipped. I'd also be willing to bet that TicketsNow would not only charge you a transfer fee but also another "service charge" like you paid on the original purchase. You getting pissed, yet ? Well, you ought to be, because you just got ripped off. If this bill passes, be sure to write the General Assembly and thank them for allowing it to happen.

Tennessee State Sen. Ken Yager

Personally, I believe the scalping problem is one that is easily fixed with a solution that is already in place - it's called the "free market." However, apparently the bill's sponsors, Sen. Ken Yager and Rep. Ryan Haynes, other members of the General Assembly, and the bill's supporters do not. They think "the gubmint" needs to step in and fix the scalping problem. They even said as much in Section 62-45-102(5) which states :

The general assembly must act to ensure a free market for tickets whereby consumers know what they are buying, artists and teams have the ability to ensure that fans have access to great seats at fair prices, and deceptive, anonymous resale and deceptive internet marketing practices are prohibited (emphasis added).

Tennessee State Rep. Ryan Haynes

They think they must protect us. Really ? I, for one, am sick and tired of the big government loving, progressives thinking they have to step in and fix everything. I also like the way they bring up the "free market" when it suits their purpose, but then quickly forget about it later when it doesn't. By the way - did I mention that both Sen. Yager and Rep. Haynes are Republicans ? Well, they are, proving once again that the GOP is not immune to the plague of progressivism, but I digress.

Personally, I think the main reason for this bill, besides enlarging TicketMaster's monopoly even more, is because is gives "the gubmit" more control. The bill will force every "ticket broker" to register with the state, pay a fee a.k.a. tax, and basically get a state issued permit to resale tickets. However, just like with ObamaCare, there is an exemption in the law regarding the resale of tickets. Can you guess who qualifies for it ? Ding, ding, ding. Man, you guys are good - you got it right again. It's TicketMaster.

Before I forget it, let me get back to the TicketMaster / TicketsNow relationship for a minute. Back in 2009, these two found themselves in the middle of an alleged scandal. It came about when some folks attempted to purchase tickets from TicketMaster's website to a Bruce Springsteen concert, but were re-directed to the TicketsNow website. There, these people found that the same tickets they tried to purchase from TicketMaster were being sold at "a premium price." Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that sounds like "scalping" to me. What about you ? Some alleged that TicketMaster did it intentionally, too. TicketMaster's defense was that it "was a glitch."

So .... let me get this straight - the General Assembly, with the support of TicketMaster, tells us that they "must act" and pass this legislation to protect "us" from the type of activity that TicketMaster and TicketsNow were alledged to have participated in ? Sounds like the fox telling the hens that he'll make them a great deal on a security system for the hen house. Hmmmm. (Read more about the alleged "scandal" by clicking here and here.) I ain't buying what they're selling. Are you ?

I've got a better, two-part solution. First, since according to Section 62-45-102(2) quoted above, "artists and teams," as well as the General Assembly, want fans to have fair access to tickets in the free market, how about if the ticket industry policed itself ? Why is additional government regulation needed ? The ticket industry could just stop selling the huge blocks of tickets to the scalpers and only sell the tickets to individuals. Plus, they could limit the number of tickets that can be purchased at one time by these individuals to maybe 4, 6, 8, etc. Doing so would give everyone wanting tickets a fair shot at getting them. Leave the government out of it. Nobody forces the ticketing agencies to sell the huge block of tickets to the ticket brokers. They choose to do so for one simple reason, and it has nothing to do with being fair to the fans - "It's all about the benjamins." They really don't care who buys the tickets as long as they get them sold and the money in their bank account.

The Scalpers Are Cheating The (Vancouver Folk Music) Festival (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The second part of this solution is where we, the fans, come in. We live in a free market with free market principles. We don't need government regulation to fix this problem. The simple law of "supply and demand" will fix it if we let it. The scalpers supply event tickets at huge markups, because we demand them. So, let's stop demanding them. Don't pay the outrageous prices. Then, the scalpers will have to lower their prices, or they'll still be stuck holding them when the game or concert is over.

Personally, I would not be surprised if it was found that many of the scalpers actually work for some of the artists, teams, and arenas. The reason I say this is because when I was attending the University of Tennessee in the late '80s, there were rampant rumors that the folks outside Neyland Stadium and Thompson Boling Arena scalping football and basketball tickets were actually hired by the UT athletic department. I do not know for sure if it was true, but other actions taken by the university led me to believe it was so.

The solution to the scalping problem in Tennessee cannot be solved with this lousy piece of legislation anymore than the meth problem was solved by a piece of lousy legislation. That one moved the decongestants behind the pharmacy counter making us "register" our purchases of cold medicine each time. You may remember that the General Assembly and law enforcement told us it was the ultimate fix. Now, that law has been such a dismal failure that they are considering passing another law which would require all decongestants to be available by prescription only. You know what that means ? Yes, you will be required to go see the doctor each and every time you get the sniffles if you want a decongestant. Most Tennesseans have allergy problems, so such legislation would result in a ton of extra doctors visits. Since they were wrong on the meth bill, why should we trust them on this one ? But, I digress, again.

In my opinion, we shouldn't trust them on this one either, especially when you consider that the bill is anything but "fair" to us, the ticket consumers, because it will infringe upon our freedom to transfer tickets we have purchased with our money. The only people it will benefit are the state's coffers and large ticket sellers like TicketMonopoly. Sorry, I did it again. I mean TicketMaster, but you knew that already. Bad Sheepdog.

I've addressed the highlights of what, in my opinion, is wrong with this bill. I could go on and on. Now, can I say for sure that the projected possibilities I've used in this post will come true if the bill passes ? Of course not. However, the supporters of the bill, likewise, cannot tell you with absolute 100% certainty that I'm wrong, either. That's the problematic part of the whole piece of crap legislation. There is so much ambiguity that we don't know exactly what it will and will not allow to occur. That's why it must be defeated. One thing I can guarantee is that it will not stop scalping. The scalpers will find a way around it.

Photograph of the Tennessee State Capitol on a sunny day, the central cupola soaring against a clear sky. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If Tennesseans want to remain free to do with their tickets what they please, then it is imperative that they contact their elected representatives. If you don't know who your State Senator and State Representative are, you can find out by clicking here. I can guarantee you that the folks with the money who support the bill, such as TicketMaster, are contacting the legislators. If we, Tennesseans, don't contact our representatives, it will be hard to defeat this bill. Plus, don't forget - this bill brings with it additional tax, ... oops, I mean fee, revenue. Politicians really like "the benjamins" and that makes the bill very appealing to them.

Therefore, we have to let them hear from us, because we have something that they like even more than revenue, and that's ....... our votes.

P.S. Here's one other little tidbit for you to think about. Section 62-45-110 of the bill states that, "A ticket represents a revocable license, held by the person in possession of the ticket, to use a seat or standing area in a specific place of entertainment for a limited time."

Tickets are already licenses, but this legislation reinforces that more. Additionally, if you flip over your sports or concert ticket, somewhere in the fine print it will say something along the lines of "no refunds or exchanges." Therefore, if this legislation becomes law, and you don't follow it to transfer a ticket purchase, the ticket can be revoked by the issuer without giving you a refund. Now, think about that the next time you buy those $100-a-piece professional sporting event tickets.

Man, wouldn't that suck if those tickets were taken away from you and no refund offered ? You might want to call your representatives now.

Related articles

• Citizen Uses Baltimore's Old Scalping Law To Give Ticketmaster A Swift Kick In The Pants (consumerist.com)