The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act will extend the definition of federal hate crimes and create additional penalties for violent crimes motivated by the victim’s “actual or perceived” gender, “gender identity,” sexual orientation, or disability.

In other words, a crime isn’t just a crime anymore.  The punishment is now determined on what the court decides the perpetrator was thinking at the time  of the crime. I’m not sure what method will be used to look at a person’s thoughts and determine whether or not that person “perceives” another person’s gender”. Sounds like a slippery slope to me.

HR 2647, The Defense Authorization Bill, didn’t originally include the Hate Crimes language. Back in June, the House passed HR 2647 with a vote of 389 YES and 22 NO (Roll# 460).

It was then sent to the Senate where the “Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act” was added and sent back to the House for a vote. The House voted to pass the Defense Authorization Act, including the “Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act” with a vote of 291 YES and 146 NO (Roll #770).

Although 120 members of Congress had the courage to stand firm and stay consistent against Hate Crimes legislation being inserted into a Defense spending bill, Gene Taylor did not. When it came down to it, Gene Taylor voted in favor of HR 2647 saying he was not going to vote against it because the Hate Crimes Act, “…is only a small part of this bill.”

While it’s true that the number of pages that the Hate Crimes Act takes up in the overall bill may be small, it’s actual language is a HUGE step towards infringing on our Constitutional right to free speech and freedom of religion and lays the groundwork to similar legislation that has been enacted in Europe.

Hate crimes legislation is already being used in parts of Europe and Canada to punish Christians who “offend” others by speaking openly and publicly about their Christian values. Even in Pennsylvania 11 Christians were arrested under similar state legislation for simply passing out flyers and reading the Bible at a Gay pride parade in 2004.

The Hate Crimes language in HR 2647, that Gene Taylor voted for, hands out federal money to states and local governments in pursuit of “preventing” hate crimes. It creates federal protections and privileges for homosexuals and other alternative lifestyles but denies those protections to other groups of citizens.

In essence it removes the blindfold from lady justice and creates a higher and lower class of citizens in the eyes of the law and the punishment handed down. Even U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister’s sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn’t be.

Does this represent you south Mississippi? Is 20 years enough – or should we give Gene Taylor another term? How will you vote in 2010 to make sure that we have someone fighting for us in Washington DC?

From the Laurel Leader Call:

But, there’s a state law that says I have to have collision insurance to operate a car in Mississippi. The federal government also requires those that live in the flood plain to have flood insurance. Removing that exemption would contribute to substantial savings.”

According to insureme.com, Gene Taylor’s assertion that Mississippians are required by state law to carry collision insurance is simply not true. Your lender (if you have a lender) may require you to carry collision coverage, but the great State of Mississippi only requires you to have liability insurance to operate a vehicle.

So why is that a big oops you may ask? Well, that kind of mistake could cost some families in Mississippi over $1500 per year.

The image above shows 2 different insurance quotes from esurance.com that an average family would expect to pay.

• The first quote is for a used 1987 Toyota Corolla that’s paid for. According to state law, you would only be required to carry liability insurance. The total cost is $89.42 per month.
• The second quote is for a 2010 Toyota Corolla that’s financed through a lender. According to state law you have to carry liability insurance. Plus, since you’re having to borrow the money to buy the new car, your bank will require you to carry collision insurance too. Your total cost for insurance is now $218.98 per month.

So, one of the added benefits of having a good used car that’s paid for is the fact that you aren’t required to pay the added cost of collision insurance. In this situation, Gene Taylor’s Cash for Clunkers scam would cost you an extra $1554.72 per year for the next 48-60 months.

Maybe Gene Taylor should’ve looked into the added costs of insuring borrowed money before voting to bribe hard-working folks to send perfectly good used cars to the scrap yard and take on more debt in a worsening economy with his cash-for-clunkers program.

I know Mr Newsom has only a limited amount of time and space, so I’d like to address the ending couple of paragraphs which contained a comment by Congressman Gene Taylor:

From the SunHerald.com article:

“What’s interesting is I have voted against cap and trade and I have already committed against the Obama health care bill,” Taylor said. “So what’s the beef?” Taylor, who voted for Nancy Pelosi to become House Speaker but often opposes her policies, said those who attempt to link him to the left-wing members of Congress and his party are untruthful.

“I detest liars,” Taylor said. “I really do. I have zero patience for liars. No matter what they’re lying about. Whatever the motivation, if somebody is lying about me, I have no respect for them.”

By the way, anyone that knows me knows that I share Gene Taylor’s sentiments on liars. I have no use for them. And, I live my life in a way that doesn’t require lies and untruths to account for what I’ve said and done.

Anyway, I made a comment to Mr Newsom that would have directly addressed Gene Taylor’s assertion that those who point out his associations to the far-left liberal members of Congress are being “untruthful” – even calling us “liars”.

The only reason I feel compelled to address this is because Gene Taylor made similar statements in an interview on Mississippi Editionn (mp3) and directed them at FireGeneTaylor.com.

You see, it’s not that we are associating Gene Taylor with the most far-left, big bloated government, socialist members of Congress – Gene Taylor obviously did this himself. It looks like he’s found himself in the familiar situation where he’s left with nothing left to do but call people names and accuse them of lying.

For 2 years at a time, Gene Taylor has total control over which members of Congress he decides to support and how he votes on big bloated government legislation. You and I have no control over his decisions until the end of each 2-year term. Let’s take a look at who Gene Taylor supports when he gets up to Washington DC and how he tends to vote. Maybe this represents you and maybe not:

Gene Taylor was the one voted for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House – not me.

Gene Taylor was the one who voted for Barney Frank for Chairman of the House Financial Services committee – not me.

Gene Taylor was the one who voted against investigating Charlie Rangel for tax evasion as well as voted against removing him from the House Ways and Means committee – not me.

As to Gene Taylor opposing Nancy Pelosi’s policies, he voted with her 71% of the time – not me. I also didn’t vote with Barney Frank 82% of the time or Charlie Rangel and Henry Waxman 84% of the time. In the words of John McCain, it was “that one”.

I’m not calling anyone a “liar” or “lying sacks of scum” (my mom would wash my mouth out with soap for that one), but rather than putting himself in the position of having to call FGT and conservative watchdog groups ugly names and completely deny the truth in order to defend the liberal associations he’s created while in Washington DC over the past 20 years as well as his own big-government voting record, maybe Gene Taylor shouldn’t hold those positions in the first place.

I know – call me crazy! But, maybe Gene Taylor should start representing one of the most conservative districts in America when he gets back to Washington DC or step aside for a good Christian conservative who will.

It sure would serve the conservatives in Mississippi’s 4th District better if Gene Taylor would either admit the truth and stop calling others liars, or apologize to his constituents for taking the trust and support we loaned him and giving it to the far-left liberals like Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel, and others and promise to truly represent our conservative, limited government principles – consistently.

Barney Frank, huge supporter of single-payer health care through a “good” public option (video), is easily one of Congresses most out-spoken proponents of far left, socialist legislation. He has spent his 28 year career building influence among his colleagues and has become one of the most powerful members of Congress.

Barney Frank’s 4th district of  Massachusetts and the 4th district of Mississippi couldn’t be any further from one another on the political spectrum (which makes me wonder why the green circle and the orange circle almost completely overlap one another… hmmm.)

Naturally, a person from Mississippi’s 4th District, one of the most conservative districts in America, would think that their representative in Congress would voraciously oppose a Congress member such as Barney Frank.

In fact, according to OpenCongress.org, Gene Taylor votes with Barney Frank 82% of the time! He also votes with Nancy Pelosi 71% of the time! Remember, GovTrack.us labels Gene Taylor a “follower”. On the other hand, they label Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi a “leader”. And, he voted for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House as well as Barney Frank for Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

It’s crystal clear who Gene Taylor follows and the ideology he supports. How can we expect to be represented when our congressman supports far-left liberal Democrats like Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi?

How long will south Mississippians let this continue? 2010? 2012? 2014? Longer?

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi is one of the far-left liberal members of Congress and she represents San Francisco, California, the most far-left liberal districts in America.

According to OpenCongress.org, Gene Taylor votes with Nancy Pelosi 71% of the time. So, it shouldn’t be any surprise that he cast his vote for her to be Speaker of the House over all other members of Congress.

I often compare Gene Taylor’s voting record with that of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s, one of the most conservative members of Congress, because the 4th District of Mississippi is easily one of the most conservative districts in the country. Gene Taylor votes like Michele Bachmann only 24% of the time. Gene Taylor… a conservative? Really?

Not hardly. Maybe Gene Taylor should run for Congress in California’s 8th district in 2010.

So my question to you is, do you feel represented when your congressman sides with Nancy Pelosi 71% of the time and supports her ambitious effort to lead the most liberal Congress we’ve ever seen?

In other words, it’s the government incentivizing folks to spend money on something that loses the bulk of it’s value as soon as you drive it off the lot, This, during one of the worst economies we’ve seen in a while and at a time when unemployment is over 9%.

In my opinion, the very idea of using taxpayers’ dollars to take perfectly good vehicles off the road and turn them into scrap metal is awful. But there are some very legitimate concerns by people in the auto industry as well.

According to the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA) there’s a lees intrusive way to boost the economy. The AAIA says that simple vehicle maintenance “would save consumers $30 billion in gasoline a year vs. spending $3 billion in taxpayer dollars to buy new cars.”

(AAIA) opposes the “Cash for Clunkers” program for the following reasons:

• The program destroys many vehicles that are not even close to being defined as “clunkers” with years of remaining life and use.
• Destroyed vehicles are removed from the market forever, depriving consumers who seek to purchase a used vehicle or charities in need of donated vehicles.
• It hurts the aftermarket companies that manufacture, distribute, sell and install vehicle parts on used vehicles, and those who rebuild/remanufacture vehicle parts.
• Resources and energy use is multiplied when a vehicle is destroyed and a new one is built to replace it.
• The majority of vehicles being traded in are domestic, and the majority of new vehicles being sold are foreign.
• The program entices consumers to purchase a new car that they might not be able to afford and certainly to go further in debt, reminiscent to the sub-prime home mortgage debacle.
• The program is regressive since only those at higher income levels who can afford to purchase a new car will qualify for the $4,500 voucher, while destroying used cars that could be purchased by lower income families, most in need of assistance in obtaining transportation.

The folks at Kelly Blue Book have some concerns as well. Recently they released a statement predicting “a likely bubble in used-car values, which could deflate as the Cash for Clunkers program comes to a close.”  In other words, as basic economics suggests, if you take up to 750,000 used vehicles out of the market, the price of used cars necessarily goes up in a serious way.

KBB’s senior analyst of vehicle valuation Alec Gutierrez had this to say:

If this bubble comes to pass, dealerships will end up with excess inventory of both new and used vehicles and be forced to offer deep discounts to remove surplus inventory, driving values down. Ultimately, there will be the possibility of a severe contraction in auto sales as soon as the Cash for Clunkers program runs out of funding.

Cash for Clunkers is a good example of how Gene Taylor believes the more our government intrudes into the free market, the better. Unfortunately, government’s intrusion into the free market, more often than not, leads to unintended consequences that will lead to more government intrusion later in order to fix the mess they created.

Here’s how the NTU scoring works:

The Taxpayer Score measures the strength of support for reducing spending and opposing higher taxes. In general, a higher score is better because it means a member of Congress voted to spend less money.

On the other hand, I often compare Gene Taylor’s record with that of Congress woman Michele Bachmann. Why? Because she’s one of the most conservative members of Congress, she’s always on the House floor and on tv fighting furiously for conservative values, and Mississippi’s 4th District is easily one of the most conservative congressional districts in America. She’s the kind of conservative fighter we deserve.

Interestingly, the NTU scored Congresswoman Bachmann a 86% out of 100%, giving her an “A” grade.

Like I said, Gene Taylor a conservative spender? Not hardly.

Conservatives are disgusted by the recent string of tax evaders that are too smart to be held accountable for their illegal actions. Do you think you or I would have a snowball’s chance in hell to avoid jail time if we screwed over the IRS? Of course not.

You would think that Congressman Gene Taylor would feel the same way. But, apparently he’s willing to let his Democrat buddies in Congress slide. Obviously, you and I have to abide by a tighter set of laws than the career politicians “we work for” in Washington.

Congressman Charles (Charlie) Rangel, one of the most liberal Democrats in Congress, is leading the charge to increase taxes by 5.4%, as the Washington Post points out. So you’d think he’d be the first to pay his taxes, right?

Actually, as Politico points out, Charlie Rangel is facing a slew of tax evasion and ethics charges. So when HR 1460 gave Gene Taylor the opportunity to remove this far-left liberal from his powerful Chairman of the House Ways and Means position and investigate the tax evasion charges, why did Gene Taylor vote against it?

Does Gene Taylor believe that some politicians are too smart to be held accountable for their actions? His vote suggests so. I suppose if it were you or I, we wouldn’t have got off so easy.

Note: HR 1460 was a bill introduced in September 2008 that would’ve investigated Charlie Rangel and remove him as Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee. Before they voted on HR 1460 itself, in a  roll call vote (#609), Gene Taylor voted to “table” the bill, which ends the debate and kills the bill  permanently. So, when given the opportunity to take government corruption head on, Gene Taylor joined  every other Democrat Congress member to bypass the democratic process and let Charlie Rangel get off on obvious and blatant tax evasion.

From The Employment Policies Institute:

On Friday, July 24, the federal minimum wage is set to jump for the third time in three years to $7.25 per hour. Yet, decades of research have shown that minimum wage hikes take a sledgehammer to the entry-level job market. As employers are faced with higher labor costs, they hire workers who have the most experience or high skill levels. That leaves unskilled applicants, particularly teens, without that critical first job experience. Since Congress began implementing the 2007 wage hike, over 480,000 teen jobs have disappeared across the country.

Continued…

Today’s the day the minimum wage goes up to $7.25/hr. This Democrat piece of legislation sucks for everyone, and it’s not just me saying it.

From WLBT.com:

Diann Alford, owner of Two Sister’s Kitchen says the wage increase translates into more taxes and additional payroll costs.

“Small business owners can only absorb so much then there’s not gonna be a small business owner anymore. Right now it seems to me that the majority is falling to the small business owner,” Alford said.

…

She says she will do everything she can to keep her staff.

“The people that work here will just have hours cut as we need to in order for everybody who is here to still have a job,” Alford said.

Aside from the small business owners, the increase is great for minimum wage earners…  if they can find a job and keep it in this tough economic recession where the unemployment rate is close to 10% and expected to rise. If they’re looking for a job – it just got tougher, thanks to Gene Taylor. In 2007 he voted for the increased burdens and expenses that make it difficult for Mississippi’s employers to hire new Mississippi workers.

From WLBT.com:

Dr. Marianne Hill, Senior Economist for the Mississippi Institutions of Higher Learning, says the wage increase could mean higher prices, and even layoffs for small businesses. Hill says larger companies may actually benefit.

Low-skilled & entry-level workers are the bottom rung of the employment ladder and will find the new minimum wage increase especially difficult. Remember, employers have to consider demand and cost when evaluating prospective employees for a job opening. In other words, entry-level workers have to compete with low skilled workers, as well as skilled workers, for the payroll dollars of the employer. This will undoubtedly price many low-skilled & entry-level workers out of a job.

As Economist and President & Chief Global Strategist of Euro Pacific Capital, Peter Schiff wrote in a recent article titled, “Employment: Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity“:

First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.

So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become – had the minimum wage not denied him a job.

The excessive minimum wage that Gene Taylor voted for is yet another example of how meddling in the markets and forcing small businesses to shoulder a disproportionate share of the burden almost always has undesired consequences for the most vulnerable people in our society.

Both Democrats Gene Taylor and Bennie Thompson (Mississippi’s 2nd District) voted for the increase in minimum wage. For them, however, it’s an easy way to garner a few extra votes while proclaiming, “Look what I did for Mississippians.”