Has there ever been a time when the federal government been so blatant about their intentions to destroy the middle class, or for that matter to show their political favortisim for a special interest group, I mean as long as their has been lobbiests in washington there has been corruption, but at least it was done under the cover of darkness, but this administration just doesn`t give a damn who knows what they are doing! I know elections have consequences, but come on....
This admin is attacking marriage, middle class families, small businessess.....while protecting unions, lifetime welfare receipients, and the liberal elite, can anything be more sinister, and corrupt, and just plain morally unjust than this????
Please dont take my word for this....
READ ON AND MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND....
House and Senate negotiators are considering applying for the first time the Medicare payroll tax to investment income as part of a compromise to pay for a health overhaul.
The extra Medicare tax would apply only to the wealthy and could allow congressional Democrats to reduce the sting of a tax on high-cost insurance plans, said Democratic aides and others briefed on the negotiations.
The proposal is intended to mollify Big Labor’s anger over the Cadillac plan tax:
Labor leaders complained directly to President Barack Obama on Monday about the tax on high-value plans, which would hit some union members who have negotiated generous health benefits.
At least one union is threatening to oppose the underlying legislation if the tax remains, and the president of the AFL-CIO suggested in a speech that Democrats who took unions for granted risked losing support in congressional elections later this year.
“Politicians who think that working people have it too good … are inviting a repeat of 1994,” when Republicans took control of the House after decades in the minority, said AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka.
So, only the “wealthy” would pay the new tax?
Think again:
Under the proposal now being considered, people making more than those amounts would also pay the Medicare tax on dividends and other income from investments, the people familiar with the talks said. Income from pensions and retirement accounts, including 401(k) accounts, would be exempt.
People familiar with the talks cautioned that the idea was still in the study stage along with other ideas, and that it was too early to say whether it would find favor among Democrats.
A version of the broader Medicare tax, put forward by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), would raise $111 billion over 10 years, according to a December estimate from the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.
The proposal would also bring the Senate closer to the House version of the health bill, which contains a 5.4% income surtax on the wealthy. That surtax would apply to income above $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for couples.
The extra Medicare tax might bring in enough to scale back the tax on high-cost health plans and still have some left over to beef up subsidies to help the poor buy health insurance — a key goal of House negotiators in the talks.
“It’s an obvious compromise,” said Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “They need to find something between the House and Senate versions. The advantage of this proposal is that, like the House surtax, it is broad-based.”
Speaking of punitive Demcare measures, Phyllis Schlafly spotlights the government health care takeover’s marriage penalty:
Here is the cost in the House bill for an unmarried couple who each earn $25,000 a year (total: $50,000). When they both buy health insurance (which will be mandatory), the combined premiums they pay will be capped at $3,076 a year.
But if the couple gets married and has the same combined income of $50,000, they will pay annual premiums up to a cap of $5,160 a year. That means they have to fork over a marriage penalty of $2,084.
The marriage penalty is the result of the fact that government subsidies for buying health insurance are pegged to the federal poverty guidelines. Couples that remain unmarried are rewarded with a separate health care subsidy for each income.
When the Wall Street Journal reporter quizzed the Democratic authors of the health-care bill, they made it clear that this differential was deliberate. The staffer justified the discriminatory treatment because “you have to decide what your goals are.”
Indeed, the Democrats have decided what their goals are. They know that 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Obama in 2008, and the Democrats plan to reward this group with health insurance subsidies.
To restore and uphold the sovereignty and rights of the individual States as guaranteed by the tenth amendment of the United States Constitution, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
What the Fed really does (and it ain't pretty)
The Federal Reserve Paid the Federal Government $46 Billion in 2009. The FED Seeks Control, Not Profits
This report is from Fortune. It says that the Federal Reserve System made $51 billion in 2009, and it returned over $46 billion to the government.
The Federal Reserve System is not about making money at the expense of the government. It is about using a government-granted monopoly over money to regulate the economy to the benefit of a handful of large banks. This has always been its primary function.
The banking system is a cartel. The Federal Reserve System is the cartel's protector and enforcer.
The Fed, in a statement on Tuesday, said its members returned $46 billion of that sum to taxpayers. The central bank is an independent arm of the government and its member banks are required to return all profits to the Treasury, after certain deductions.
Those deductions account for the $6 billion difference between the two figures. Federal Reserve banks paid the private banks that control them $1.4 billion in dividends in 2009, while shoring up their own capital by $4.6 billion.
Who owns the FED? Member banks. How much money did the FED make in profit? About $1.4billion. That's not bad on $51 billion of income. It's about 2.7%. But it is a far cry from the standard criticism from anti-FED critics that the FED makes huge profits by creating money out of nothing.
For 2.7%, why does anyone care who owns the FED?
I have heard these anti-FED criticisms for years. The FED is deservedly criticized, but not on this issue: profits.
The concern over a peripheral issue deflects serious criticism, namely, its control over the monetary base. It creates the economy's boom-bust cycle. It never gets blamed for this by academic economists or the mainstream media.
The news release on what the FED paid to the Treasury is the first that I can remember. It got a lot of coverage.
My guess: the FED is trying to blunt criticism. It is getting hit from Congress because of Ron Paul's bill to audit the FED. Meanwhile, the House Oversight Committee has subpoenaed the New York Federal Reserve Bank to provide documents. The issue? The NY FED's oversight of the funding of AIG by the Treasury. This is more heat than the FED has ever experienced in its history. Wright Patman, the Texas populist Congressman, used to pillory the FED when he was chairman of the House Banking Committee a generation ago, but no one paid any attention. A lot of people are paying attention now.
A special shout out to Gary North who made this op-ed possible...
This report is from Fortune. It says that the Federal Reserve System made $51 billion in 2009, and it returned over $46 billion to the government.
The Federal Reserve System is not about making money at the expense of the government. It is about using a government-granted monopoly over money to regulate the economy to the benefit of a handful of large banks. This has always been its primary function.
The banking system is a cartel. The Federal Reserve System is the cartel's protector and enforcer.
The Fed, in a statement on Tuesday, said its members returned $46 billion of that sum to taxpayers. The central bank is an independent arm of the government and its member banks are required to return all profits to the Treasury, after certain deductions.
Those deductions account for the $6 billion difference between the two figures. Federal Reserve banks paid the private banks that control them $1.4 billion in dividends in 2009, while shoring up their own capital by $4.6 billion.
Who owns the FED? Member banks. How much money did the FED make in profit? About $1.4billion. That's not bad on $51 billion of income. It's about 2.7%. But it is a far cry from the standard criticism from anti-FED critics that the FED makes huge profits by creating money out of nothing.
For 2.7%, why does anyone care who owns the FED?
I have heard these anti-FED criticisms for years. The FED is deservedly criticized, but not on this issue: profits.
The concern over a peripheral issue deflects serious criticism, namely, its control over the monetary base. It creates the economy's boom-bust cycle. It never gets blamed for this by academic economists or the mainstream media.
The news release on what the FED paid to the Treasury is the first that I can remember. It got a lot of coverage.
My guess: the FED is trying to blunt criticism. It is getting hit from Congress because of Ron Paul's bill to audit the FED. Meanwhile, the House Oversight Committee has subpoenaed the New York Federal Reserve Bank to provide documents. The issue? The NY FED's oversight of the funding of AIG by the Treasury. This is more heat than the FED has ever experienced in its history. Wright Patman, the Texas populist Congressman, used to pillory the FED when he was chairman of the House Banking Committee a generation ago, but no one paid any attention. A lot of people are paying attention now.
A special shout out to Gary North who made this op-ed possible...
We Gave You Tarp Now We Own You
We had TARP. We had stimulus. We had bailouts. We had all this stuff, and it was all done for individual prosperity. It was not. It was done to destroy individual prosperity. The bailouts of the banks were specifically designed, we can now tell you, specifically designed to enslave the banks or ensnare the banks into a never-ending cycle where they can’t get out of it. Obama Dear Leader will own the banks. He will own the car companies. He will own them all unless all of them repay all of the money. I actually sat here today, ladies and gentlemen, and I heard Obama mouthpiece nut job Valerie Pinko Jarrett say that it doesn’t matter what conditions we loaned TARP money out of. The banks are all collectively responsible now for this. I sat here and listened to this, and I go, this isn’t happening, man. This is not happening.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, If you’re driving, pull over. If you’re standing, sit down. I’m giving you fair warning. You’re going to hear the woman that sits at the left hand of our Father – that’s Obama – the woman who sits at the left hand of our Father, who whispers sweet nothings of communism in his ear like she whispered to Van Jones, you’re going to hear her spill the beans. Spill the beans. Wall Street, the banks, everyone. We’re all in this together. Obama’s going to announce this today. All the bailout money. Why, if one bank does better than another, and another bank can’t pay the money back, well, then Bank B, regardless of what contract or what understanding they had of the bailout funds, must then basically tax their shareholders and give it to Bank A so that Bank A can pay its loan back. We’ll have some analogies of this. But I want you to hear it straight from the commie’s mouth.
[Clip] Valerie Jarrett: It’s not just as simple as Goldman Sachs paying back the money that was lent to Goldman.
Steve Doocy: Right.
Valerie Jarrett: The money that was lent to AIG benefited Goldman. So there’s a collective responsibility on behalf of all of the large financial institutions to pay the money back. The taxpayer should not have to suffer one penny of loss. and that’s what the President is committed to, and that’s what he’ll announce today. [End clip]
Oh it sounds so sweet and saccharine, right? oh, yeah, the taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for – no, no, we’re gonna – because she said “collective.” She said that this is a collective thing.
Now, listen.
Get ready, because here it comes.
Listen.
[Clip] Steve Doocy: I’m a little confused, though, by what you said. So if GM got $50 billion, but all the banks and the financial services companies wind up paying the fee and pay off the $50 billion, then would GM have to pay it off, pay it back?
Valerie Jarrett: GM is going to have to pay back whatever they’re able to pay back under the terms of their loan. We’re looking at this from the vantage point of the taxpayers. And what we’re saying is that every single penny of TARP money that was put out and lent out to the taxpayers is going to be paid back by the financial institutions. That’s what the law provides. If you go and look at the actual law that was passed, it says that the financial institutions will be responsible for paying back the TARP money, and they should honor that commitment. [End clip]
Now, folks, I will confess to you at this point in time, I’m as confused as you are...The only thing I got out of this is, A, collective; is, B, that somehow if General Motors can’t pay the money back that it borrowed, but Goldman Sachs made some fortunes this year, well, then, Goldman Sachs has to pay GM’s loan back? I’m sorry, I must have missed this. I must have missed this in all the bailout TARP discussion last year. I do not recall any discussion of America’s financial industry being a collective. I mean, what is this, the Borg? This the Wall Street Borg? You will be assimilated.
you cannot go after the fact and change the rules of contracts. That’s why they’re called contracts. This despite, and some of you will know this, despite the knowledge that many of us have that some of these institutions tried to not take the money. They were forced to take it by Henry Paulsen, Bush’s Treasury Secretary, and then by Tiny Tim Geithner. They were told, “No, no, you’re going to take it.” “I don’t – I don’t wanna.” “You’re going to take it. Shut up.” It’s like cod liver oil when you were a child.
So I’m going to listen to this with you one more time to try to get to the bottom of this. But from where I sit, the way I’m understanding this, and the way I understand what the President is going to say today, all financial institutions. Would this include, then, your community bank? Hmm? Would this be a way to reach out and get the rest of the banks that did not take bailouts, that may still be operating separately and privately? Maybe even, dare I say, profitably? Hmm? Would this be a way for the White House and for Barney Frank and the rest of these sinister people to stick their little tentacles into business that they don’t currently have it in, by claiming, oh no no, no no, no. When one institution accepted a loan, if I’m to understand this correctly, when one institution accepted a bailout loan, all of you collectively accepted responsibility for that loan. Does that sound like a moral hazard to you?
So, now the taxpayers are collectively on the hook for this??? So, now, this was sold as taxpayers benefiting collectively because this was going to save our economy. Right? Do I have that part of it right? I think I do. But now we’re going to go out, and we’re going to make pronouncements that, oh, no, no, well, what we meant to say was that you guys – so am I off the hook now? I mean, folks, you cannot have an economy, a free market economy that functions like this. Let me sum this up. Any financial company that does well is going to subsidize the failure of their competitors. Am I understanding this correctly??
Does the President of the United States have the authority to conscript every financial institution into some kind of involuntary servitude to assume the debts of their competitors simply because they’re in the same industrial class? I wonder if this applies to plumbers. Does this apply to all manufacturers, not just car companies? Well, if GMAC or GM took a bailout, doesn’t that mean that AC Delco got some benefit from it? Aren’t they on the hook, then, for GMAC or GM’s bailout? What about you people that work at the Dunlop Tire Company? You people that work at Firestone? Goodyear? Goodrich? General? Cooper? Michelin? Fatboy Tires? Aren’t you all getting benefit from General Motors and Chrysler being bailed out? Shouldn’t you, if you’re making a profit, then have some of it confiscated from you so that you can ostensibly pay back your big sugar daddy’s debt?
So here it is from today’s Washington Compost: Obama administration seeks tax hike on financial firms to recoup cost of bailout.
What an absolute charade.
This entire adminisration is a damn joke, and so are the people that agree with what they`re doing!
Now, ladies and gentlemen, If you’re driving, pull over. If you’re standing, sit down. I’m giving you fair warning. You’re going to hear the woman that sits at the left hand of our Father – that’s Obama – the woman who sits at the left hand of our Father, who whispers sweet nothings of communism in his ear like she whispered to Van Jones, you’re going to hear her spill the beans. Spill the beans. Wall Street, the banks, everyone. We’re all in this together. Obama’s going to announce this today. All the bailout money. Why, if one bank does better than another, and another bank can’t pay the money back, well, then Bank B, regardless of what contract or what understanding they had of the bailout funds, must then basically tax their shareholders and give it to Bank A so that Bank A can pay its loan back. We’ll have some analogies of this. But I want you to hear it straight from the commie’s mouth.
[Clip] Valerie Jarrett: It’s not just as simple as Goldman Sachs paying back the money that was lent to Goldman.
Steve Doocy: Right.
Valerie Jarrett: The money that was lent to AIG benefited Goldman. So there’s a collective responsibility on behalf of all of the large financial institutions to pay the money back. The taxpayer should not have to suffer one penny of loss. and that’s what the President is committed to, and that’s what he’ll announce today. [End clip]
Oh it sounds so sweet and saccharine, right? oh, yeah, the taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for – no, no, we’re gonna – because she said “collective.” She said that this is a collective thing.
Now, listen.
Get ready, because here it comes.
Listen.
[Clip] Steve Doocy: I’m a little confused, though, by what you said. So if GM got $50 billion, but all the banks and the financial services companies wind up paying the fee and pay off the $50 billion, then would GM have to pay it off, pay it back?
Valerie Jarrett: GM is going to have to pay back whatever they’re able to pay back under the terms of their loan. We’re looking at this from the vantage point of the taxpayers. And what we’re saying is that every single penny of TARP money that was put out and lent out to the taxpayers is going to be paid back by the financial institutions. That’s what the law provides. If you go and look at the actual law that was passed, it says that the financial institutions will be responsible for paying back the TARP money, and they should honor that commitment. [End clip]
Now, folks, I will confess to you at this point in time, I’m as confused as you are...The only thing I got out of this is, A, collective; is, B, that somehow if General Motors can’t pay the money back that it borrowed, but Goldman Sachs made some fortunes this year, well, then, Goldman Sachs has to pay GM’s loan back? I’m sorry, I must have missed this. I must have missed this in all the bailout TARP discussion last year. I do not recall any discussion of America’s financial industry being a collective. I mean, what is this, the Borg? This the Wall Street Borg? You will be assimilated.
you cannot go after the fact and change the rules of contracts. That’s why they’re called contracts. This despite, and some of you will know this, despite the knowledge that many of us have that some of these institutions tried to not take the money. They were forced to take it by Henry Paulsen, Bush’s Treasury Secretary, and then by Tiny Tim Geithner. They were told, “No, no, you’re going to take it.” “I don’t – I don’t wanna.” “You’re going to take it. Shut up.” It’s like cod liver oil when you were a child.
So I’m going to listen to this with you one more time to try to get to the bottom of this. But from where I sit, the way I’m understanding this, and the way I understand what the President is going to say today, all financial institutions. Would this include, then, your community bank? Hmm? Would this be a way to reach out and get the rest of the banks that did not take bailouts, that may still be operating separately and privately? Maybe even, dare I say, profitably? Hmm? Would this be a way for the White House and for Barney Frank and the rest of these sinister people to stick their little tentacles into business that they don’t currently have it in, by claiming, oh no no, no no, no. When one institution accepted a loan, if I’m to understand this correctly, when one institution accepted a bailout loan, all of you collectively accepted responsibility for that loan. Does that sound like a moral hazard to you?
So, now the taxpayers are collectively on the hook for this??? So, now, this was sold as taxpayers benefiting collectively because this was going to save our economy. Right? Do I have that part of it right? I think I do. But now we’re going to go out, and we’re going to make pronouncements that, oh, no, no, well, what we meant to say was that you guys – so am I off the hook now? I mean, folks, you cannot have an economy, a free market economy that functions like this. Let me sum this up. Any financial company that does well is going to subsidize the failure of their competitors. Am I understanding this correctly??
Does the President of the United States have the authority to conscript every financial institution into some kind of involuntary servitude to assume the debts of their competitors simply because they’re in the same industrial class? I wonder if this applies to plumbers. Does this apply to all manufacturers, not just car companies? Well, if GMAC or GM took a bailout, doesn’t that mean that AC Delco got some benefit from it? Aren’t they on the hook, then, for GMAC or GM’s bailout? What about you people that work at the Dunlop Tire Company? You people that work at Firestone? Goodyear? Goodrich? General? Cooper? Michelin? Fatboy Tires? Aren’t you all getting benefit from General Motors and Chrysler being bailed out? Shouldn’t you, if you’re making a profit, then have some of it confiscated from you so that you can ostensibly pay back your big sugar daddy’s debt?
So here it is from today’s Washington Compost: Obama administration seeks tax hike on financial firms to recoup cost of bailout.
What an absolute charade.
This entire adminisration is a damn joke, and so are the people that agree with what they`re doing!
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Is this finally the end of Leviathan otherwise known as the federal government?
Liberalism is dead. R.I.P. Has assumed room temperature.
Now don’t tell this to the Libs, they are partying like its 1969, totally aloof to the tsunami of reality and disaster that is about to hit them.
Are these my far right wing talking points, you just wait and see, Obama and the Democrats are gonna fix. Actually I think that all the fixes that American Socialists have forced on the republic are the reason they’re being fitted for 7 foot long pine boxes.
Stop and make a greatest hits list of the Libs “accomplishments” and you’ll see why I’m calling in the undertaker.
Public Schools - This idea is all theirs even though today it enjoys bi-partisan support. No single progressive program has done more damage to this republic and the children living in it than public education. Libtards themselves must endlessly campaign for ever increasing amounts of resources per pupil.
More and more parents are home-schooling, tutoring and turning to 3rd party educators like Founding Father Films to educate their children.
Labor Unions, another exclusive franchise of the Stalinist libtards has worn its welcome out with but 48% of Americans approving down from its 1950’s high of 75%. These numbers do not reflect the destructive impact these unions, which these days are made of mostly government employees, have on state and local budgets.
When Americans discover the full scale of what libtard pols have promised these labor union thugs in retirement benefits, there will be a revolt. This is coming to your state very soon, it’s already hit California, Arizona and Pennsylvania to name a few.
The biggest messes created by American Socialists: Schools and the labor work force. The nail in the Libs\dems coffin comes in the form of the most discussed topic on earth today. No, NOT global warming, we’re talking “health care”.
It’s interesting to watch the Libs\dems run such a passionate campaign to slay the monster that they themselves created. It was American Socialists that created MediCare and then MediCaid. They allegedly created these wealth transfer agencies to help the elderly and the poor. They helped them alright, helped them become de-facto slaves to Leviathan. Many of these people have been stripped of their liberties and the basic human instinct of survival. This was traded to the Libtard State in exchange for the security of “free” health care benefits whose funding is provided by those who have yet to surrender to Big Brother. We call these people entrepreneurs, small biz men and women.
I have argued from day one that this issue must be argued on the grounds that it is a personal liberty to choose your doctor and for doctors to choose their profession. We have all witnessed the corrupt zeal with which the Libtards have sought to compel all of us to become their slaves and they have lost this argument.
Regardless of whether Dear Leader Chairman MaObama signs a “health care bill” this month, the people that promoted, bribed and forced it on us will be forever more marked for it and this will be their undoing.
Good… freaking… riddance!
The final nail in the Libtard coffin is Industry. The United States began the last century as the world leader in manufacturing, as late as the 1950’s, the States manufactured nearly 70% of everything consumed in this republic.
70%…
That figure has now dropped to 30% and it is the result of 50 years of unionizing, minimum wages, rules and regulations, taxes and slavery subsidies. All of these things were the dreams of the American Socialist and they became the nightmare of the American worker. This too must and will end.
What then will the Libs\dems do when they have been stripped of power over:
Schools, Industry, Health Care and Services?
Well, here’s one possible scenario: They will do what ever we demand they do, if they want a job sweeping emptying bedpans in our hospitals, sweeping floors in our power plants our washing chalk from our private school chalkboards....
It is time for this demonizing experiment called "socialism" to end, it does not work, never has worked, and never will work!
Now don’t tell this to the Libs, they are partying like its 1969, totally aloof to the tsunami of reality and disaster that is about to hit them.
Are these my far right wing talking points, you just wait and see, Obama and the Democrats are gonna fix. Actually I think that all the fixes that American Socialists have forced on the republic are the reason they’re being fitted for 7 foot long pine boxes.
Stop and make a greatest hits list of the Libs “accomplishments” and you’ll see why I’m calling in the undertaker.
Public Schools - This idea is all theirs even though today it enjoys bi-partisan support. No single progressive program has done more damage to this republic and the children living in it than public education. Libtards themselves must endlessly campaign for ever increasing amounts of resources per pupil.
More and more parents are home-schooling, tutoring and turning to 3rd party educators like Founding Father Films to educate their children.
Labor Unions, another exclusive franchise of the Stalinist libtards has worn its welcome out with but 48% of Americans approving down from its 1950’s high of 75%. These numbers do not reflect the destructive impact these unions, which these days are made of mostly government employees, have on state and local budgets.
When Americans discover the full scale of what libtard pols have promised these labor union thugs in retirement benefits, there will be a revolt. This is coming to your state very soon, it’s already hit California, Arizona and Pennsylvania to name a few.
The biggest messes created by American Socialists: Schools and the labor work force. The nail in the Libs\dems coffin comes in the form of the most discussed topic on earth today. No, NOT global warming, we’re talking “health care”.
It’s interesting to watch the Libs\dems run such a passionate campaign to slay the monster that they themselves created. It was American Socialists that created MediCare and then MediCaid. They allegedly created these wealth transfer agencies to help the elderly and the poor. They helped them alright, helped them become de-facto slaves to Leviathan. Many of these people have been stripped of their liberties and the basic human instinct of survival. This was traded to the Libtard State in exchange for the security of “free” health care benefits whose funding is provided by those who have yet to surrender to Big Brother. We call these people entrepreneurs, small biz men and women.
I have argued from day one that this issue must be argued on the grounds that it is a personal liberty to choose your doctor and for doctors to choose their profession. We have all witnessed the corrupt zeal with which the Libtards have sought to compel all of us to become their slaves and they have lost this argument.
Regardless of whether Dear Leader Chairman MaObama signs a “health care bill” this month, the people that promoted, bribed and forced it on us will be forever more marked for it and this will be their undoing.
Good… freaking… riddance!
The final nail in the Libtard coffin is Industry. The United States began the last century as the world leader in manufacturing, as late as the 1950’s, the States manufactured nearly 70% of everything consumed in this republic.
70%…
That figure has now dropped to 30% and it is the result of 50 years of unionizing, minimum wages, rules and regulations, taxes and slavery subsidies. All of these things were the dreams of the American Socialist and they became the nightmare of the American worker. This too must and will end.
What then will the Libs\dems do when they have been stripped of power over:
Schools, Industry, Health Care and Services?
Well, here’s one possible scenario: They will do what ever we demand they do, if they want a job sweeping emptying bedpans in our hospitals, sweeping floors in our power plants our washing chalk from our private school chalkboards....
It is time for this demonizing experiment called "socialism" to end, it does not work, never has worked, and never will work!
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Bankrupt Congress 12/20/09
Now, just think about these headlines as I read them to you:
New jobless claims rise unexpectedly.
House approves $290 billion increase in debt limit.
Obama signs $1.1 trillion spending bill.
House approves $155 billion for jobs.
Hillary: $100 billion global warming giveaway.
And then the CBS News headline: The federal government is currently in default. We owe more than we have borrowed to cover it.
Now, usually the first rule in situations like this is, first thing you’ve got to do to right the ship is to stop digging. Stop borrowing, dumbass. These people act as if there’s a mystery to this. There’s some mysterious formula out there that only mystics can see.that bill that Obama signed included a 10 percent across-the-board increase to all federal agencies.
Now, you can choose to be a nonbeliever and say this happens all the time. They’re not doing this on purpose. Why, this is just the way sausage is made.” This is a plan. And it has been executed with near precision. Why aren’t these state governors convening an emergency Article V convention right now? That’s what I want to know. Bobby Jindal, where are you? Why aren’t the state governors getting together and saying, if the federal government is borrowing all this money, where are they going to get it from? Oh, that’s right, they’re going to start taxing. They’re going to start telling states and what have you to start selling things.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is an intentional, I think, intentional bankruptcy or impending bankruptcy of the federal government. Remember Obama has run around the country and has boasted and bragged about his desire to remake America. Well, it’s happening. He’s actually doing it. And he’s doing it all under the cover of an
economic crisis that he’s there to solve. He’s not solving it.
Every time he opens his mouth his poll numbers go down.
Every time he says something he is proven wrong.
Now, I just happen to know because I was watching the Senate debate last year. Senator Tom Coburn introduced an amendment on the floor of the Senate, and it shocked the bejeezus belt off of Chrissy Hissy-Fit Dodd. He was talking about the amount of property that the federal government owns that is unoccupied. And what Coburn was saying was that, at the current time – The federal government owns in excess of 80,000 properties. Only less than 10,000 of them are occupied. Meaning there is a glut of some 70,000 properties.
What would it be, if you were getting ready to go bankrupt or couldn’t pay your bills, and you had all kind of properties that you owned, and you were looking for a way to pay your bills, what is one of the things that you might consider doing? Oh, I don’t know, Selling some of the properties, maybe? What would be the second thing you were doing if you were running a company and you were the CEO of it? Would you be giving pay raises out and hiring more people? Or would you, if you were a responsible steward of the federal government, if you were a responsible steward of the people’s purse, would you issue an immediate hiring freeze???
Would you then issue an immediate congressional order, and they can do this, suspending all, any and all federal hiring till further notice? Yes, you would. Would you issue an immediate edict ordering that there will be a review of all current federal government contracts that have not begun work and a permanent freeze until that review can be completed will be put on all those projects? “Why,yes, you would.”
Would you then order the Medicare board of trustees to begin the process of dismantling their operation and returning all their authority to the state governments for the state legislatures to administer and then begin downsizing the federal workforce that must be kept employed to enforce that? “Why yes, I would.” In order to start job creation, would you order your Environmental Protection Agency to cease issuance of all rules and to cease review of all rules currently under review? No new regulations. “Why,yes, I would.” Would you immediately order your department of [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] to cease issuance of all rules and all regulations, and any of those that are under consideration are permanently – the debate over those, comment period, is permanently ended? We’ll revisit this when our economy and our government can pay its bills and right itself. “Why,yes, I would.” Would you immediately, immediately begin the process of laying federal workers off through attrition? “Why, yes, I would.”
You would do all these things, and it wouldn’t fix the problem, but it would go a long way towards not having to borrow more money. I’m not even talking about dismantling all of Leviathan. I’m just talking about stopping the bleeding. The patient is dying, ladies and gentlemen. We are being ordered about by demagogues. They’re doing this with impunity. They have no intention of stopping. There’s still an orgy going on in Mordor on the Potomac. Now, I realize that it’s Christmas, and you want to spend time with your family, and you want to do family things.
Let me tell you, if you want to do something for your family, when your member of Congress or the United States Senate leaves Mordor on the Potomac to return home, you will be paying visits to their offices. You will be demanding that town halls be convened. And you will let them know that, if they dare return to Mordor on the Potomac and spend one dime of borrowed money, and you don’t care who it’s owed to, that you are going to convene
grand juries and prosecute them for criminal mischief, for fraud, abuse, violating their oath of office to the Constitution. I think these people should be treated as domestic enemies!
New jobless claims rise unexpectedly.
House approves $290 billion increase in debt limit.
Obama signs $1.1 trillion spending bill.
House approves $155 billion for jobs.
Hillary: $100 billion global warming giveaway.
And then the CBS News headline: The federal government is currently in default. We owe more than we have borrowed to cover it.
Now, usually the first rule in situations like this is, first thing you’ve got to do to right the ship is to stop digging. Stop borrowing, dumbass. These people act as if there’s a mystery to this. There’s some mysterious formula out there that only mystics can see.that bill that Obama signed included a 10 percent across-the-board increase to all federal agencies.
Now, you can choose to be a nonbeliever and say this happens all the time. They’re not doing this on purpose. Why, this is just the way sausage is made.” This is a plan. And it has been executed with near precision. Why aren’t these state governors convening an emergency Article V convention right now? That’s what I want to know. Bobby Jindal, where are you? Why aren’t the state governors getting together and saying, if the federal government is borrowing all this money, where are they going to get it from? Oh, that’s right, they’re going to start taxing. They’re going to start telling states and what have you to start selling things.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is an intentional, I think, intentional bankruptcy or impending bankruptcy of the federal government. Remember Obama has run around the country and has boasted and bragged about his desire to remake America. Well, it’s happening. He’s actually doing it. And he’s doing it all under the cover of an
economic crisis that he’s there to solve. He’s not solving it.
Every time he opens his mouth his poll numbers go down.
Every time he says something he is proven wrong.
Now, I just happen to know because I was watching the Senate debate last year. Senator Tom Coburn introduced an amendment on the floor of the Senate, and it shocked the bejeezus belt off of Chrissy Hissy-Fit Dodd. He was talking about the amount of property that the federal government owns that is unoccupied. And what Coburn was saying was that, at the current time – The federal government owns in excess of 80,000 properties. Only less than 10,000 of them are occupied. Meaning there is a glut of some 70,000 properties.
What would it be, if you were getting ready to go bankrupt or couldn’t pay your bills, and you had all kind of properties that you owned, and you were looking for a way to pay your bills, what is one of the things that you might consider doing? Oh, I don’t know, Selling some of the properties, maybe? What would be the second thing you were doing if you were running a company and you were the CEO of it? Would you be giving pay raises out and hiring more people? Or would you, if you were a responsible steward of the federal government, if you were a responsible steward of the people’s purse, would you issue an immediate hiring freeze???
Would you then issue an immediate congressional order, and they can do this, suspending all, any and all federal hiring till further notice? Yes, you would. Would you issue an immediate edict ordering that there will be a review of all current federal government contracts that have not begun work and a permanent freeze until that review can be completed will be put on all those projects? “Why,yes, you would.”
Would you then order the Medicare board of trustees to begin the process of dismantling their operation and returning all their authority to the state governments for the state legislatures to administer and then begin downsizing the federal workforce that must be kept employed to enforce that? “Why yes, I would.” In order to start job creation, would you order your Environmental Protection Agency to cease issuance of all rules and to cease review of all rules currently under review? No new regulations. “Why,yes, I would.” Would you immediately order your department of [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] to cease issuance of all rules and all regulations, and any of those that are under consideration are permanently – the debate over those, comment period, is permanently ended? We’ll revisit this when our economy and our government can pay its bills and right itself. “Why,yes, I would.” Would you immediately, immediately begin the process of laying federal workers off through attrition? “Why, yes, I would.”
You would do all these things, and it wouldn’t fix the problem, but it would go a long way towards not having to borrow more money. I’m not even talking about dismantling all of Leviathan. I’m just talking about stopping the bleeding. The patient is dying, ladies and gentlemen. We are being ordered about by demagogues. They’re doing this with impunity. They have no intention of stopping. There’s still an orgy going on in Mordor on the Potomac. Now, I realize that it’s Christmas, and you want to spend time with your family, and you want to do family things.
Let me tell you, if you want to do something for your family, when your member of Congress or the United States Senate leaves Mordor on the Potomac to return home, you will be paying visits to their offices. You will be demanding that town halls be convened. And you will let them know that, if they dare return to Mordor on the Potomac and spend one dime of borrowed money, and you don’t care who it’s owed to, that you are going to convene
grand juries and prosecute them for criminal mischief, for fraud, abuse, violating their oath of office to the Constitution. I think these people should be treated as domestic enemies!
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
--- VERY QUIETLY OBAMA'S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES SUPREME COURT
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 12:16 PM
VERY QUIETLY OBAMA'S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT
AP- WASHINGTON D.C. - In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group "Americans for Freedom of Information" has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College . Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate at the The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the
Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as President. When reached for comment in London , where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue. Britain 's Daily Mail has also carried the story in a front-page article titled, "Obama Eligibility Questioned," leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups,
Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter.
.
LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON'T !
Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?
While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 2) He traveled with a
British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No.. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008..
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress,the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you Don't care that Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this and go into your cocoon.
VERY QUIETLY OBAMA'S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT
AP- WASHINGTON D.C. - In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group "Americans for Freedom of Information" has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College . Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate at the The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the
Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as President. When reached for comment in London , where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue. Britain 's Daily Mail has also carried the story in a front-page article titled, "Obama Eligibility Questioned," leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups,
Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter.
.
LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON'T !
Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?
While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 2) He traveled with a
British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No.. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008..
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress,the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you Don't care that Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this and go into your cocoon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)