Did you see Byron York’s column today? Obama Administration favors Al Jazeera to Congress for news on NASA plans
NASA’s Muslim outreach: Al Jazeera told first
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
July 9, 2010
Lawmakers across Capitol Hill, both Democrats and Republicans, were surprised to learn recently that the Obama administration has made reaching out to Muslim nations a top priority for the space agency NASA. They will probably be more surprised to learn that administration officials told the Middle East news organization Al Jazeera about it before they told Congress.
Rep. Pete Olson, the ranking Republican on the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, got a call from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden on June 28, the day the White House released its new long-term plan for the space program. “He ran down some of the things from the president’s new space policy, and mentioned outreach to Muslims,” Olson recalls. “That stunned me. I didn’t believe it.”
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the Democrat who chairs the subcommittee (and is also married to astronaut Mark Kelly), got a briefing from Bolden the same day, according to a spokesman.
As it happens, Bolden’s calls to Giffords and Olson came several days after Bolden discussed the Muslim initiative with Al Jazeera. According to a NASA spokesman, Bolden sat down with Al Jazeera’s Imran Garda on June 17, during a stop in Doha, Qatar. Bolden’s Mideast trip, which was timed to mark the first anniversary of President Obama’s June 2009 Muslim outreach speech, was devoted to pursuing “a new beginning of the relationship between the United States and the Muslim world.”
During the interview, Bolden told Al Jazeera that the “foremost” mission he had been given by Obama was “to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”
The Al Jazeera interview did not air until June 30, after the Obama space plan was released and Bolden briefed members of Congress. But there’s no question Al Jazeera got the word first.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/NASA_s-Muslim-outreach_-Al-Jazeera-told-first-98058674.html#ixzz0tBziAzakRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
The following article from the EUTimes was brought to my attention over the weekend:
A new report circulating in the Kremlin today authored by France’s Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE) and recently “obtained” by the FSB shockingly quotes French President Nicolas Sarkozy [photo top right with Obama] as stating that President Barack Obama is “a dangerous[ly] aliéné”, which translates into his, Obama, being a “mad lunatic”, or in the American vernacular, “insane”.
According to this report, Sarkozy was “appalled” at Obama’s “vision” of what the World should be under his “guidance” and “amazed” at the American Presidents unwillingness to listen to either “reason” or “logic”. Sarkozy’s meeting where these impressions of Obama were formed took place nearly a fortnight ago at the White House in Washington D.C., and upon his leaving he “scolded” Obama and the US for not listening closely enough to what the rest of the World has to say.
Apparently, as this report details, the animosity between Sarkozy and Obama arose out of how best the West can deal with the growing threat posed by rising Islamic fundamentalism. Both Sarkozy and his European neighbors had previously been supported in their efforts by the United States in forming an alliance to strengthen the integration of Muslim peoples into their societies, and has including France and Belgium moving to ban the wearing of burqa’s.
European fears over their growing Muslim populations appear to be valid as the growing immigration and birth rates of these Islamic peoples are warned is causing the “Eurabiazation” of the Continent and within a few generations will see them become the majority of nearly all of the EU Nations.
The greatest threat to these Western Nations posed by the Muslim peoples becoming the majority of their populations lies in their likelihood of destroying the Global Banking System which according to their faith is firmly rooted in “satanic” evil and “must” be replaced by an Islamic one.
[Note: Islamic banking refers to a system of banking or banking activity that is consistent with the principles of Islamic law (Sharia) and its practical application through the development of Islamic economics. Sharia prohibits the payment or acceptance of interest fees for the lending and accepting of money respectively, (Riba, usury) for specific terms, as well as investing in businesses that provide goods or services considered contrary to its principles (Haraam, forbidden).
Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t share the views of his European allies and has, instead, embarked upon a course of embracing the Muslim peoples of the World and to the shock of all has overturned the Bush era ban on the radical Swiss born Muslim Cleric Tariq Ramadan from entering the United States, last year ordered the US government bailed out General Electric Capital Corporation to became the first Western multinational to issue an Islamic bond, and this past week commanded that all of his governments security documents eliminate the words “Islamic extremism” and “jihad”.
Sarkozy in these reports further warns that by Obama’s “unrestrained” and “destabilizing” actions an already tense Global situation is growing ever more catastrophic as America’s once stalwart allies are being cast aside in favor of a New World Order where instead of the United States securing its vital energy future through conquest and war it will now do so by appeasement to some of the most violent and radical regimes on Earth, and as we can see exampled:
In Egypt…where the 30-year reign of the stalwart US ally President Hosni Mubarak is being allowed by Obama to fall so that this most vital of Middle Eastern countries can be ruled by the former head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, who allowed through his appeasement the Persian Nation of Iran to gain the knowledge, equipment and expertise needed to build an atomic bomb.
In Turkey…where Obama in failing to stop, like all American Presidents before him, his Congress from passing a law blaming that critical Eurasian Nation for the 1915 Armenian genocide left Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan no choice but to recall his ambassador to the US.
In Kyrgyzstan…where Obama failed to stop a revolution against the American installed President thus allowing Russian Prime Minister Putin to achieve his goal of revolutionary change for that critical Central Asian Nation and putting in jeopardy the United States war in Afghanistan as the new Kyrgyz government prepares to throw the Americans out of their country thus depriving them of their main air supply route to their already undersupplied troops battling the Afghan Taliban.
In India…where by Obama’s failing to support the Indians fight against Pakistani backed Muslim terrorists has caused the second most powerful Asian Nation to turn towards Iran rebuffing all Western attempts to isolate them and instead of their participating in Obama’s Global Nuclear Summit have, instead, agreed to attend the Iranians.
In Pakistan…where just this week Obama gave this vital American ally a “public slap on the wrist” by denying to them the same nuclear deal he had previously given to India thus insuring the Pakistani military will cease their support for American troops in Afghanistan battling the Taliban.
In Israel…where Obama has so demoralized and demonized their once most reliable ally that Prime Minister Netanyahu has just announced he will not attend Obama’s Global Nuclear Summit because of his fears that the American President will not keep Egypt and Turkey under control thus threatening the Israelis nuclear supremacy over their Middle Eastern enemies who have sworn to destroy them.
In Brazil…where Obama has ordered his Defense Secretary Robert Gates to sign an historic defense agreement with this South American nuclear power whose President, Lula da Silva, has praised Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, slammed Israel, and has announced his intentions to visit Iran next month.
To all of these actions (and too many more to mention in this short report) Russian Military Analysts warn that Obama has pushed our world towards total global war more than any single leader since Nazi Germany’s Adolph Hitler, to which Russia and China are, likewise, preparing to confront to stop the Americans.
Most unfortunately for those Americans living under the Obama regime is that their attempts to stop the radical socialism he has pushed upon them from destroying their once great Nation has failed as new reports from the United States are showing that in under two years Obama and his cohorts have succeeded in making nearly 50% of these people support the other 50% who aren’t working. (And which really should surprise none of them as during his campaign for the Presidency he openly vowed to “redistribute the wealth”, but which history has always shown makes everyone a pauper, except for the elites that is.)
…Now to if Sarkozy’s grim and dire assessment of Obama is true or not it is not in our knowing, nor do these reports say. But, it is important to note that nearly all of the longstanding allies of the United States Obama has turned his back on are, admittedly, some really bad (to say the least) leaders who no one in their right mind would want to live under.
There was a really informative editorial in the Washington Times Tuesday regarding job numbers:
Economists measure the number of jobs two different ways: the establishment survey that asks about 370,000 employers how many people they are employing and the household survey that asks about 110,000 people each month whether they are working. The establishment survey is often given more weight because about 40 million Americans work for the companies surveyed, a lot more than the 110,000 people interviewed in the other survey. But 110,000 people still make up a huge sample (a large survey for a presidential election might involve 2,000 to 3,000 people), and it is hard to ignore the results. The household survey is also what is used to calculate the unemployment rate.
The problem is that the two surveys have reached different estimates, with the household survey showing a significantly greater drop in the number of jobs than the establishment survey. It turns out that there might be a simple reason for that. For the survey of firms, the list of firms surveyed doesn’t change very often. Thus, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which puts these numbers together, can only guess at the number of jobs created by new firms because it doesn’t even know how many new firms have been created each month. To get around this gap in the data, the bureau makes an assumption that the jobs created at new companies are about equal to the jobs lost at companies that go out of business.
That assumption hasn’t come close to being right during the current recession. The error in estimating the number of jobs from April 2008 to March 2009 was 10 times greater than the average error over the preceding eight years. Typically, the government error would underestimate the number of new jobs by 80,000, but this time, it overestimated the number of jobs by more than 800,000.
No one will know what the error rate has been with the establishment survey from April to December 2009 until the numbers are revised again in February 2011, three months after the 2010 midterm elections. But a great deal of skepticism seems warranted. The establishment survey assumes that new firms generated almost a million new jobs over those nine months. At the same time, the household survey just happens to show that about a million more jobs were lost than the survey of firms indicates.
Remember also, in a column last week, I shared a heads up provided by my Congressman Dave Camp regarding the actual number of new jobs per state as evidenced by state rolls versus the number the Obama Administration claimed they had produced. The numbers were ASTONISHINGLY different, with only two areas producing jobs – a limited number of new jobs in North Dakota and, of course, a much,much larger number of new jobs in Washington DC.
Remember too, for every trillion dollars our government wastes that equates to over $3000 for every man, woman and child in America… for each and every trillion dollars they spend. They just raised the debt ceiling to over $14,000,000,000,000 or $42,000 for every man, woman and child in America. That does not account for health care, cap and trade, the next stimulus (aka jobs bill) or any other theft of our money going forward.
The so called jobs bill, which is actually just another worthless “stimulus” bill, contains much that won’t take effect for the next several years. Congress is not allowed to call it a stimulus bill, by the way. That is forbidden by the administration. If it’s not going to put America to work NOW in non-governmental jobs, then WHAT IN THE HECK ARE THEY DOING?
Glenn Beck had said late last year to NOT let anything pass, nothing, in Washington, DC. He could not have been more right.
Nothing is truthful. Nothing is sincere. Nothing is worthwhile. Nothing is worthy of the American people.
Until such time as we can get honesty out of our government (don’t hold your breathe), NOTHING CAN BE ALLOWED TO PASS.
Let’s have some common sense solutions of a non-political nature. Our government has shown it is NOT capable of doing that. Everything boils down to foolery, trickery, and pocket stuffing by our politicians in both parties.
CUT TAXES. STOP SPENDING. It’s not hard to figure out, but it’s seems it’s difficult for them to comprehend.
We need REAL JOBS, NON-GOVERNMENT JOBS, RIGHT NOW. We also need to increase the unemployment rate by a whole lot in our nations capital.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
I don’t mean to be disrespectful, and I hope the President and his family are enjoying their luxury vacation in Hawaii, but no matter what he says he comes off as disingenuous to me. His wife comes across the same way.
Unless of course, he is pushing his socialistic/communistic agenda – then he sounds sincere. Is it me? What do you think? Please leave comments here to let me know. I certainly would not want to be biased, and I know, even though I disagree with nearly all of his policies and actions, I am not a racist. I just find him mechanical and without heart. I find him lacking sincerity, real compassion, connectedness with the American people and dangerous to freedom loving American citizens.
I thought you would find it interesting, in a psychological, look-into-his-soul kind of way, to see the following statements made by the President around holiday wishes.
On behalf of the American people – including Muslim communities in all fifty states – I want to extend best wishes to Muslims in America and around the world. Ramadan Kareem.
Ramadan is the month in which Muslims believe the Koran was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad, beginning with a simple word – iqra. It is therefore a time when Muslims reflect upon the wisdom and guidance that comes with faith, and the responsibility that human beings have to one another, and to God.
Like many people of different faiths who have known Ramadan through our communities and families, I know this to be a festive time – a time when families gather, friends host iftars, and meals are shared. But I also know that Ramadan is a time of intense devotion and reflection – a time when Muslims fast during the day and perform tarawih prayers at night, reciting and listening to the entire Koran over the course of the month.
These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.
For instance, fasting is a concept shared by many faiths – including my own Christian faith – as a way to bring people closer to God, and to those among us who cannot take their next meal for granted. And the support that Muslims provide to others recalls our responsibility to advance opportunity and prosperity for people everywhere. For all of us must remember that the world we want to build – and the changes that we want to make – must begin in our own hearts, and our own communities.
This summer, people across America have served in their communities – educating children, caring for the sick, and extending a hand to those who have fallen on hard times. Faith-based organizations, including many Islamic organizations, have been at the forefront in participating in this summer of service. And in these challenging times, this is a spirit of responsibility that we must sustain in the months and years to come.
Beyond America’s borders, we are also committed to keeping our responsibility to build a world that is more peaceful and secure. That is why we are responsibly ending the war in Iraq. That is why we are isolating violent extremists while empowering the people in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we are unyielding in our support for a two-state solution that recognizes the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security. And that is why America will always stand for the universal rights of all people to speak their mind, practice their religion, contribute fully to society and have confidence in the rule of law.
All of these efforts are a part of America’s commitment to engage Muslims and Muslim-majority nations on the basis of mutual interest and mutual respect. And at this time of renewal, I want to reiterate my commitment to a new beginning between America and Muslims around the world.
As I said in Cairo, this new beginning must be borne out in a sustained effort to listen to each other, to learn from each other, to respect one another, and to seek common ground. I believe an important part of this is listening, and in the last two months, American embassies around the world have reached out not just to governments, but directly to people in Muslim-majority countries. From around the world, we have received an outpouring of feedback about how America can be a partner on behalf of peoples’ aspirations.
We have listened. We have heard you. And like you, we are focused on pursuing concrete actions that will make a difference over time – both in terms of the political and security issues that I have discussed, and in the areas that you have told us will make the most difference in peoples’ lives.
These consultations are helping us implement the partnerships that I called for in Cairo – to expand education exchange programs; to foster entrepreneurship and create jobs; and to increase collaboration on science and technology, while supporting literacy and vocational learning. We are also moving forward in partnering with the OIC and OIC member states to eradicate polio, while working closely with the international community to confront common health challenges like H1N1 – which I know is of particular to concern to many Muslims preparing for the upcoming hajj.
All of these efforts are aimed at advancing our common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. It will take time and patient effort. We cannot change things over night, but we can honestly resolve to do what must be done, while setting off in a new direction – toward the destination that we seek for ourselves, and for our children. That is the journey that we must travel together.
I look forward to continuing this critically important dialogue and turning it into action. And today, I want to join with the 1.5 billion Muslims around the world – and your families and friends – in welcoming the beginning of Ramadan, and wishing you a blessed month. May God’s peace be upon you.
PRESIDENT: Hello everyone, and Merry Christmas. As you and your families gather to celebrate the holidays, we wanted to take a moment to send greetings from our family—from me, from Michelle, from Malia and Sasha—and from Bo.
FIRST LADY: This is our first Christmas in the White House, and we are so grateful for this extraordinary experience. Not far from here, in the Blue Room, is the official White House Christmas Tree. It’s an 18-foot tall Douglas-fir from West Virginia and it’s decorated with hundreds of ornaments designed by people and children from all over the country. Each one is a reminder of the traditions we cherish as Americans and the blessings we’re thankful for this holiday season.
PRESIDENT: That’s right, especially as we continue to recover from an extraordinary recession that still has so many Americans hurting: parents without a job who struggled to put presents under the Christmas tree; families and neighbors who’ve seen their home foreclosed; folks wondering what the new year will bring.
But even in these tough times, there’s still so much to celebrate this Christmas. A message of peace and brotherhood that continues to inspire more than 2,000 after Jesus’ birth. The love of family and friends. The bonds of community and country. And the character and courage of our men and women in uniform who are far from home for the holidays, away from their families, risking their lives to protect ours.
To all our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen—I have no greater honor than serving as your Commander in Chief. I’ve been awed by your selfless spirit, your eagerness to serve—at the Naval Academy and West Point. I’ve been energized by your dedication to duty—from Baghdad to the Korean Peninsula. Michelle and I have been moved by your determination—wounded warriors at Walter Reed and Bethesda, fighting to recover, to get back to your units.
And I’ve been humbled, profoundly, by patriots who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom. In flag-draped caskets coming home at Dover. In the quiet solitude of Arlington. And after years of multiple tours of duty, as you carry on with our missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, your service, your readiness to make that same sacrifice, is an inspiration to us and to every American.
FIRST LADY: And so are your families. As First Lady, one of my greatest privileges is to visit with military families across the country. I’ve met military spouses doing the parenting of two—keeping the household together, juggling play dates and soccer games, helping with homework, doing everything they can to make the kids feel OK even as they try to hide their own fears and worries.
I’ve met kids who wonder when mom or dad is coming home; grandparents and relatives who step in to care for our wounded warriors; and folks trying to carry on after losing the person they loved most in the world.
And through it all, these families somehow still find the time and energy to serve their communities as well—coaching Little League, running the PTA, raising money to help those less fortunate than they are, and more.
But even these strong military families can use a hand, especially during the holidays. If you live near a military base, you can reach out through your workplaces, your schools, your churches. There are so many ways to help—with child care, with errands, or by just bringing over a home-cooked meal. Even if you don’t know a military family nearby, your family can still help by donating or volunteering at organizations that support military families.
PRESIDENT: You can also reach out directly to our forces around the world. Kids can make a card that will bring a smile to an American far from home. Adults can send a care package or a pre-paid phone card that makes the tour at little easier. Every American can do something to support our troops, even if it’s as simple as just saying thank you. For more ways to let our troops know you care, go to www.whitehouse.gov
So to all our men and women in uniform spending the holidays far from home—whether it’s at a base here in the states, a mess hall in Iraq or a remote outpost in Afghanistan, know that you are in our thoughts and our prayers. And this holiday season—and every Holiday season—know that we are doing everything in our power to make sure you can succeed in your missions and come home safe to your families.
FIRST LADY: And to all Americans, from our family to yours, Merry Christmas.
PRESIDENT: Merry Christmas, everybody.
Michelle and I send warm wishes to all those celebrating Kwanzaa this holiday season.
This is a joyous time of year when African Americans and all Americans come together to celebrate our blessings and the richness of our cultural traditions. This is also a time of reflection and renewal as we come to the end of one year and the beginning of another.
The Kwanzaa message tells us that we should recall the lessons of the past even as we seize the promise of tomorrow.
The seven principles of Kwanzaa — Unity, Self Determination, Collective Work and Responsibility, Cooperative Economics, Purpose, Creativity, and Faith — express the values that have inspired us as individuals and families; communities and country.
These same principles have sustained us as a nation during our darkest hours and provided hope for better days to come. Michelle and I know the challenges facing many African American families and families in all communities at this time, but we also know the spirit of perseverance and hope that is ever present in the community.
It is in this spirit that our family extends our prayers and best wishes during this season and for the New Year to come.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
City Year unites young people of all backgrounds for a year of full-time service, giving them the skills and opportunities to change the world.
As tutors, mentors and role models, these diverse young leaders make a difference in the lives of children, and transform schools and neighborhoods in 19 U.S. locations and one in Johannesburg, South Africa. Just as important, during their year of service corps members develop civic leadership skills they can use throughout a lifetime of community service.
Major corporations and businesses participate in our mission by serving as strategic partners, team sponsors, and national leadership sponsors.
Together we’re building a citizen service movement that is larger than our organization, our lifetime, and ourselves.
“You have to have folks with our students every single day, making a difference in their lives. That’s what City Year does, with its diversity, with its long term commitment, with its passionate young people. There’s no one else I know of in the country who is having that kind of impact.” – US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan -Former CEO of Chicago Public Schools
As a partner of City Year, you will not only invest in City Year and our dedicated corps members, but also the communities and neighborhoods we serve. City Year has been fortunate to develop strong strategic partnerships across many sectors.
City Year is a proud member of the AmeriCorps national service network. AmeriCorps offers Americans of all ages the opportunity to devote a year to community-based service in areas of education, health and human needs, public safety, disaster preparedness, and the environment.
National Leadership Sponsors are the companies—and the people—increasing the service and scope of City Year as its closest strategic and premiere partners. In addition to their time, expertise and ideas, National Leadership Sponsors invest at least $1 million in City Year over two years.
City Year is proud to call these companies our National Leadership Sponsors:
Aramark, Bank of America, Cisco Foundation, Comcast, CSX, Pepsi, Timberland, TMobile and Deloitte.
City Year corps members serve full-time at one of 19 locations across the United States as tutors and mentors, running after-school programs and leading youth leadership programs.
At each City Year location, you will participate in physical service projects as part of a team. All city year sites have a corps member team dedicated to engaging citizens in physical service projects in the communities you serve.
Through transformational physical service projects, you will engage community members of all ages and show them the difference they can make by giving back.
City Year corps and staff start each morning by gathering at a central location for “Unity Rally” – an opportunity to wake up and prepare for the hard day’s work that lies ahead. PT is the highlight of Unity Rally, but it is more than just doing jumping jacks or lunges. It is a demonstration of corps members’ commitment to each other and to their communities.
When you come together to start your day, you are reminded that you are not in this alone, that you can rely on your team members, and that making a difference is a group effort.
City year now serves twenty communities.
Earlier this year, Congress voted to expand Americore. Under the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, Americore upped the number of available “slots” from 75,000 to 250,000. While Democrats voted wholely in favor of the bill, 26 Republicans joined in with their support. This is the bill that also named 09/11 as a National Day of Service instead of a National Day of Mourning. Michele Bachmann, in April, expressed on a local radio talk show that the AmericaCorps program.. will morph into a mandatory service program, with young people sent to indoctrination centers for “re-education.”
“It’s under the guise of ”volunteerism,” Bachmann told host Sue Jeffers on KTLK-AM in Minneapolis during an April of this year. “But it’s not volunteers at all. It’s paying people to do work on behalf of government. We had about 75,000 people involved in AmeriCorps before, this adds another 250,000 people, so more government employees – but what’s even more concerning about it is the focus is on young people.”
“The original language of the bill was mandatory service for government,” she continued. “Right now the language is voluntary, but just this last week a Democrat colleague introduced a bill to make this mandatory.
“I believe when is all said and done … there’s a very strong chance that we will see that young people will be put into mandatory service. And the real concern is that there are provisions for what I would call re-education camps for young people, where young people have to go and get trained in a philosophy that the government puts forward and then they have to go and work in some of these politically correct forums.
“So it’s very concerning. It appears that there’s a philosophical agenda behind all of this. And especially if young people are mandated to go into this, as a parent I would have a very, very difficult time seeing my children do this. Again – a huge power grab and it’s at a cost of billions of dollars.”
According to their website, workers get room and board and about $100/week during the term of their service. That’s seems like payment, confirming what Ms. Bachmann said.
“Nobody likes paying taxes, particularly in times of economic stress,” Obama said. “But most Americans meet their responsibilities because they understand that it’s an obligation of citizenship, necessary to pay the costs of our common defense and our mutual well-being.”
- Lael Brainard, nominee for Treasury Undersecretary of International Affairs
- Capricia Marshall, Chief of protocol for the State Department
- Kathleen Sebelius, secretary, Health and Human Services
- Ron Kirk, Trade Representative: The former mayor of Dallas, Tex
- Caroline Atkinson, Treasury Undersecretary of International Affairs
- Tom Daschle, nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services
- Nancy Killefer, nominee, Administration’s Chief Performance Officer
- Hilda Solis, Secretary of Labor’s husband
- Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, the man who oversees the IRS
1) On people making more than $250,000.
- $338 billion – Bush tax cuts expire
$179 billion – eliminate itemized deduction
$118 billion – capital gains tax hike
- Total: $636,000,000,000 /10 years
2) On Businesses:
- $17 billion – Reinstate Superfund taxes
$24 billion – tax carried-interest as income
$5 billion – codify “economic substance doctrine”
$61 billion – repeal LIFO
$210 billion – international enforcement, reform deferral, other tax reform
$4 billion – information reporting for rental payments
$5.3 billion – excise tax on Gulf of Mexico oil and gas
$3.4 billion – repeal expensing of tangible drilling costs
$62 million – repeal deduction for tertiary injectants
$49 million – repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and natural gas properties
$13 billion – repeal manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies
$1 billion – increase to 7 years geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers
$882 million – eliminate advanced earned income tax credit
- Total: $353,000,000,000 /10 years
Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges.
The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.
Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.
Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.
Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.
Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.
Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.
This on the heels of the Administration’s announcement to hold civilian trials for enemy combatants who confessed to killing over three thousand people at the World Trade Center on September 11,2001.
The announcement came just days after failing to label the massacre at Fort Hood a terrorist attack, despite the shooter’s al Qaeda ties and shouting Allahu Akbar while killing innocent people.
The current Administration has hired a special prosecutor to investigate our CIA for any infractions during interrogation of enemy combatants.
The abuse by our government has it’s tentacles into other groups acting in defense of their country as well.
There was the illegal firing of competent Inspector General Walpin who found improprieties involving friend of Obama, former pro-basketball star, now Mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson, regarding use of Ameri-core funds.
The elitist demonization of Tea Party Patriots by many members of the Administration, Senate and Congress. Homeland security now classifies these citizens as low-level terrorists.
The problem goes back beyond the Obama Administration however.
There are many other examples, but I believe I have made my point. Our corrupt and misguided government officials are going off the deep end.
In my mind, those soldiers are heroes, putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. Too bad I can not say the same for my government. God help us all.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )
I can’t even hold in my rage for this administration at this point. I came across an article in the Washington Times Friday:
Declaring success in border security and immigration enforcement, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday that the federal government has done its work and now it’s time for Congress to pass a broad bill to legalize illegal immigrants.
Her speech signals President Obama will make good on his promise to push Congress to pass an immigration bill next year – adding yet another hot-button issue to an already long and contentious list.
Ms. Napolitano said members of Congress and voters who balked at an immigration bill two years ago, fearing a repeat of the 1986 amnesty that only made the problem worse, can be assured this time is different. She said in those two years, the flow of illegal immigrants across the border has dropped dramatically and the government is doing more to catch fugitive aliens inside the U.S.
“The security of the southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” she said in a speech to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. “The federal government has dedicated unprecedented resources to the Mexican border in terms of manpower, technology and infrastructure – and it’s made a real difference.”
Who are they trying to kid? Once again, they are living in some alternative reality. If, in fact, illegal aliens are coming across the border fewer in number, it is because there are no jobs here – hello??? The U.S. looks more and more like Mexico every day. Why bother?
Who’s to say there are fewer, though? If they know exactly how many illegal aliens are coming over than why can’t they stop them? Obviously, they don’t want to. It doesn’t meet with their agenda. Neither did it meet with the agenda of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc…. I am sick of it!
This administration has done nothing to foster border security. The only ”work” it’s done is to push for more free benefits for illegals on the backs of hard working LEGAL citizens who don’t qualify for the same free handouts. Redistribution of our so-called “wealth” to those of foreign lands is becoming the norm for this administration and according to their agenda will continue as long as progressives are allowed control.
According to Federation for American Immigration Reform (F.A.I.R), if the administration was serious about advancing national security, it would:
* Reverse course and welcome the assistance of local jurisdictions that aggressively identify illegal aliens for deportation.
Instead they are going after Sheriff Joe Arpaio
* Push for the E-Verify system to be adopted as a national requirement for all employers and all workers. In the meantime, implementation of the “no-match” letter screening system would represent a significant deterrent to the mass illegal immigration that compromises border security.
E-Verify was to go into effect in January, then the Obama administration delayed implementation until June, then again until September. They wanted more time to review the program. Yeah, right. They didn’t want to alienate millions of potential future voters. And, of course with groups like ACORN around, they won’t even need to prove citizenship in order to vote.
* Withdraw support for an amnesty for illegal aliens and, thereby, convey the message abroad that the United States is serious about enforcing its immigration laws.
An article in the Washington Times clearly recalls the President’s words recently during the health care debate:
- President Obama said this week that his health care plan won’t cover illegal immigrants, but argued that’s all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.
- He also staked out a position that anyone in the country legally should be covered – a major break with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which limited most federal public assistance programs only to citizens and longtime immigrants.
* Rapidly pursue implementation of a comprehensive electronic database that matches entry and departure of foreign visitors, and expand the special tracking database for students to include all long-term visitors.
*Reverse the recent expansion of the Visa Waiver Program that allows the entry of nationals of 35 countries to enter without consular screening and gradually eliminate it.
*Tighten the criteria for admission of nationals of countries with active terrorist organizations in the refugee and asylum programs.
Not to mention a porous border allows anyone to walk right in. Although the massacre at Fort Hood was done by a natural born citizen, it does remind us there are segments of the population, legal or otherwise who are out to get us.
Today, Saturday, November 14, 2009, at least 53 cities are holding teaparty protests:
Tea Parties Against Amnesty and Illegal Immigration held in over 53 cities and towns tomorrow, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009.
These events are designed to unify Americans of all races, faiths, and political parties who represent the 78% found in a recent Pulse Opinion poll who oppose any path to citizenship or any form of Amnesty for illegal immigrants currently in the United States.
New details are being added to our listing of these events online each hour.
Event times, locations, details, and organizer contact information can be found on our EVENT LOCATIONS page at www.AgainstAmnesty.com
F.A.I.R. presents the following facts for your consideration:
The general public overwhelmingly favors immigration reform. Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws.
- 68% oppose the creation of sanctuary cities (jurisdictions that have a policy of not enforcing immigration law) with only 13% in favor (Rasmussen, October 2009).
- 73% of Americans want to see a decrease in illegal immigration, while only 3% believe there should be an increase (CNN, October 2009).
- 56% of Mexicans believe that granting amnesty to illegal aliens in the United States would make it more likely that people they know would attempt to illegally migrate to United States. Only 17% think it would make people less likely to migrate illegally to the United States (Zogby, October 2009).
- 65% of Mexicans who have a member of their immediate household in the United States said that amnesty would make people they know more likely to attempt to illegally migrate to America (Zogby, October 2009).
- 55% of Mexicans who expressed a desire to migrate to the U.S. said they would attempt to enter the U.S. illegally (Pew Hispanic Center, September 2009).
- 56% of U.S. voters believe that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration (Rasmussen, October 2009).
- 83% of U.S. voters say that citizenship verification should be part of any health care reform legislation (Rasmussen, September 2009).
- 78% of likely U.S. voters believe that mass immigration has adversely impacted the quality and cost of the U.S. health care system (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
- 78% of likely U.S. voters oppose amnesty, with 19% in favor. 88% of African-Americans oppose amnesty. (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
- 70% of American voters feel that increased border control should be the most important priority in immigration reform. Only 22% prioritized legalization of illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2009).
- 50% of American think immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, while only 14% want to see an increase in immigration to the U.S. (Gallup, August 2009).
- 68% of adults think limiting care to illegal aliens is a good to excellent way to reduce overall health care costs (Zogby, July 2009).
- 80% of likely voters oppose healthcare coverage for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, June 2009).
- 67% of liberals and progressives believe that the level of immigration into the U.S. is too high (Pulse Opinion, April 2009).
- 68% believe that employers who hire illegal aliens should be punished (Rasmussen, March 2009).
- 79% of voters say the military should be used along the border with Mexico (Rasmussen, March 2009).
- 73% believe law enforcement officers should check immigration status during traffic stops (Rasmussen, March 2009).
- Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him (Zogby, November 2008).
|Summary Demographic National Data (and Source)|
Population (2008 CB est.):
|Population (2000 Census):||281,421,906|
|Foreign-Born Population (2008 FAIR est.):||38,110,000|
|Foreign-Born Population (2000 Census):||31,107,573|
|Share Foreign Born (2008 FAIR est.)||12.5%|
|Share Foreign-Born (2000 Census)||11.1%|
|Immigrant Stock (2000 CB est.):||55,890,000|
|Share Immigrant Stock (2000 est.):||20.4%|
|Naturalized U.S. Citizens (2000 Census):||12,542,626|
|Share Naturalized (2000):||40.3%|
|Immigrant Admissions (DHS 1997-2006):||9,105,162|
|Illegal Alien Population (2008 FAIR est.):||13,010,000|
|Projected Population – 2025 (2006 FAIR):||364,237,000|
Much of the cost for immigration is paid by the states and municipalities, but a lot is paid for by the federal government too. Illegal immigrants receive taxpayer support for their U.S.-born children, immunizations, subsidized public health and other programs. Legal immigrants are eligible for almost all federal programs with the exception of welfare, which generally is not available for the first five years in the country. In many areas, such as education, the federal government gives matching grants for state expenditures, which means paying twice for those costs of immigration. When states hand a bill to the federal government for the costs of immigration (as is provided for by law in the case of incarceration of illegal immigrants, emergency medical expenditures, or welfare programs for the illegal aliens who were given amnesty in 1986), it is you who will pay regardless of where you live. The United States is a vast country; it is easy to be deceived into thinking that what goes on in other states does not affect us. But, directly or indirectly, the impact of mass immigration on our country hits us all and hits us hard. For that reason, all Americans should demand that their elected representatives reduce the price they are paying for immigration. The best way to cut those costs is deter illegal immigration and to reduce immigration itself back towards a more moderate level. The Tyranny of Change: America in the Progressive Era, John Whiteclay Chambers, 1992. Supporters of today’s mass immigration like to claim that we should not be concerned about it, because it is no worse than the Great Wave of immigration at the turn of the last century. But in fact, because times have changed greatly in the last one hundred years, immigration now is much more out of sync with our country’s needs than it was at the turn of the last century. In the economy of the Gilded Age (rapid industrial expansion), low-skilled workers were highly employable. New mechanical devices and processes were being introduced that did away with the need for workers with special industrial skills and know-how. As the U.S. Industrial Commission pointed out: “The fact that machinery and the division of labor opens a place for the unskilled immigrants makes it possible not only to get the advantages of machinery, but also to get the advantages of cheap labor.” However, modern technology requires skilled workers, not unskilled ones. Yet, in 2001, only 16 percent of legal immigrants were admitted as skilled workers. Before 1900, there may have been some marginal fiscal gain from immigration. Today, the estimated annual net cost of each immigrant, on average, is $2700. Then, immigrants’ stay in the U.S. was often temporary; today’s immigrants are here to stay. The Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that the rate of return from 1900 to 1904 was over 37 percent; in the 1990s, the rate of immigrants’ return to their homelands was a much lower 15 percent. Ethnic ghettoization and its retardation of assimilation is more serious now than a hundred years ago. At that time, only rarely did a single ethnic group dominate an area of several city blocks, and even then many immigrants moved out of such areas. Now, ethnic enclaves are huge and growing; in the city of Miami, for example, nearly half of the population speaks English poorly or not at all, and 73 percent speak a language other than English at home. Even at the turn of last century, it was known that the era of needed expansion in the U.S. was at an end. At the 1893 meeting of the American Historical Society, Frederick Jackson Turner began his paper on “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” by noting that the Bureau of the Census had just announced that there was no longer a continuous lie of free unsettled land visible on the U.S. map. The American “frontier” had closed… Alien Nation, Peter Brimelow, 1995. During those frontier days, we had a vast empty country and states actively recruited immigrants. Now, our country is increasingly congested and communities pass ordinances to limit the growth of their populations. In 1900, the number of people per square mile in the United States was 25.6; in 2002, it was 82 people per square mile—a more than three times greater population density. At the turn of the last century, having relatives in the United States made it logistically easier to immigrate here; it did not, however, guarantee that you would be admitted. At the turn of this century, having near relatives in the United States makes you legally eligible to immigrate and guarantees you eventual admission. In 2001, 64 percent of legal immigrants were admitted simply because they had a relative here. Due to the eligibility of the foreign relatives of immigrants, there is a line of several million aliens waiting and eligible for admission as immigrants to the United States. A bill to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to permit States to determine State residency for higher education purposes and to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for other purposes.
We pay for immigration through federal taxes
Why Today’s Immigration is a Worse Problem than the Great Wave
Today We Need Skilled Workers
Today’s Immigrants are Permanent and Create Net Costs
Today Assimilation is Held Back
Today Our Country is No Longer Empty
Today We Have Chain Migration
Much of the cost for immigration is paid by the states and municipalities, but a lot is paid for by the federal government too. Illegal immigrants receive taxpayer support for their U.S.-born children, immunizations, subsidized public health and other programs. Legal immigrants are eligible for almost all federal programs with the exception of welfare, which generally is not available for the first five years in the country. In many areas, such as education, the federal government gives matching grants for state expenditures, which means paying twice for those costs of immigration. When states hand a bill to the federal government for the costs of immigration (as is provided for by law in the case of incarceration of illegal immigrants, emergency medical expenditures, or welfare programs for the illegal aliens who were given amnesty in 1986), it is you who will pay regardless of where you live.
The United States is a vast country; it is easy to be deceived into thinking that what goes on in other states does not affect us. But, directly or indirectly, the impact of mass immigration on our country hits us all and hits us hard. For that reason, all Americans should demand that their elected representatives reduce the price they are paying for immigration. The best way to cut those costs is deter illegal immigration and to reduce immigration itself back towards a more moderate level.
The Tyranny of Change: America in the Progressive Era, John Whiteclay Chambers, 1992.
Supporters of today’s mass immigration like to claim that we should not be concerned about it, because it is no worse than the Great Wave of immigration at the turn of the last century. But in fact, because times have changed greatly in the last one hundred years, immigration now is much more out of sync with our country’s needs than it was at the turn of the last century.
In the economy of the Gilded Age (rapid industrial expansion), low-skilled workers were highly employable. New mechanical devices and processes were being introduced that did away with the need for workers with special industrial skills and know-how. As the U.S. Industrial Commission pointed out: “The fact that machinery and the division of labor opens a place for the unskilled immigrants makes it possible not only to get the advantages of machinery, but also to get the advantages of cheap labor.” However, modern technology requires skilled workers, not unskilled ones. Yet, in 2001, only 16 percent of legal immigrants were admitted as skilled workers.
Before 1900, there may have been some marginal fiscal gain from immigration. Today, the estimated annual net cost of each immigrant, on average, is $2700. Then, immigrants’ stay in the U.S. was often temporary; today’s immigrants are here to stay. The Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that the rate of return from 1900 to 1904 was over 37 percent; in the 1990s, the rate of immigrants’ return to their homelands was a much lower 15 percent.
Ethnic ghettoization and its retardation of assimilation is more serious now than a hundred years ago. At that time, only rarely did a single ethnic group dominate an area of several city blocks, and even then many immigrants moved out of such areas. Now, ethnic enclaves are huge and growing; in the city of Miami, for example, nearly half of the population speaks English poorly or not at all, and 73 percent speak a language other than English at home.
Even at the turn of last century, it was known that the era of needed expansion in the U.S. was at an end. At the 1893 meeting of the American Historical Society, Frederick Jackson Turner began his paper on “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” by noting that the Bureau of the Census had just announced that there was no longer a continuous lie of free unsettled land visible on the U.S. map. The American “frontier” had closed…
Alien Nation, Peter Brimelow, 1995.
During those frontier days, we had a vast empty country and states actively recruited immigrants. Now, our country is increasingly congested and communities pass ordinances to limit the growth of their populations. In 1900, the number of people per square mile in the United States was 25.6; in 2002, it was 82 people per square mile—a more than three times greater population density.
At the turn of the last century, having relatives in the United States made it logistically easier to immigrate here; it did not, however, guarantee that you would be admitted. At the turn of this century, having near relatives in the United States makes you legally eligible to immigrate and guarantees you eventual admission. In 2001, 64 percent of legal immigrants were admitted simply because they had a relative here. Due to the eligibility of the foreign relatives of immigrants, there is a line of several million aliens waiting and eligible for admission as immigrants to the United States.
A bill to amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to permit States to determine State residency for higher education purposes and to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for other purposes.This bill would give states the authority to repeal the denial of an unlawful alien’s eligibility for higher education benefits, which have been previously tied state-residency. Additionally, it allows for the adjustment from status of alien to conditional permanent resident and outlines the criteria for such an adjustment by the Secretary of Homeland Security. The bill and its equivalent in the House, H.R.1751, is just as controversial as most other immigration related bills, such as, H.R.1868, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009.
At my last count, 10 states allowed for in-state tuition for illegal aliens and three even allowed for them to receive financial help with that tuition. Does this seem fair to you? To me it seems as if this is another benefit not given to legal citizens of this country.
In any other country, including Mexico, there are strict penalties for illegal entry, but yet, those of us in favor of halting illegal immigration are called unreasonable. More suicidal progressive initiatives dressed up as political correctness.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )
CMF does not say what qualifies as offensive, but if this summer is any indication that definition would include anything that the Congressman did not want to talk about. In other words, this report urges Congressmen not to actually interact with their constituents, but to avoid them altogether by holding safe townhalls they can completely control. And what did CMF find where the results of these Potemkin townhalls?
The online town halls increased constituents’ approval of the Member. Every Member involved experienced an increase in approval by the constituents who participated. The average net approval rating (approve minus disapprove) jumped from +29 before the session to +47 after. There were also similar increases in trust and perceptions of personal qualities – such as whether they were compassionate, hardworking, accessible, etc. – of the Member.
The lesson: avoid your constituents’ inconvenient questions and your approval ratings will rise. And this is a taxpayer funded study.
Congress is actually using your tax dollars to pay social scientists to find ways they can avoid actually talking to their constituents while improving their chances of reelection.
Anyone in Congress who uses this method in lieu of face to face contact should be automatically voted out. They don’t seem to mind meeting us in person when asking to represent us during the campaign, but apparently once they are in the least actual contact and real communication the better.
This doesn’t seem to apply, however, to when they are groveling for our forgiveness. Such was the case yesterday when various members of the Republican party horned in on the People’s Housecall in Washington, D.C. Rep Michele Bachmann, (R)-MN, who is one of the few heroes in Washington D.C., and who does her job effectively, had put out a call for citizens who could to meet her at the Capital steps Thursday at noon. From trustworthy accounts of the rally, 25,000-30,000 taxpayers came out. Hooray for those who sacrificed their time, hard earned money, and effort to do so.
The rally was supposed to last an hour, it lasted two. This thanks to many opportunistic Congressmen and Congresswomen who wanted to feign kinship with the protesters. Pardon my attitude, it’s just that if they were really doing their jobs, we wouldn’t be in the predicament we are in. Many of them have been there for years, and, without apology, have taken part in the fleecing of America. Perhaps not all, I understand that, but why wait until a campaign to oust all office holders to “stand up” for our principles? Too little, too late? That’s a personal decision every voter will have to decide for themselves. They urged everyone to bombard the three Congressional office buildings, and even provided a map and guidance. I had to wonder if they would have been so bold if it were Republicans were the target of the frustration? My feeling is they would have been hiding under their desks or running for their nose plugs like Harry Reid.
It was encouraging to see all of them standing on the Capital steps, heralding the praises of our forefathers and Constitution. I can only pray they mean it. I am fairly sure, Michele Bachmann excluded, it was the fear that still grips them after learning of the size of the crowd, an estimated 1.7 million marchers, on 09/12/2009. That, I feel, was their “come to Jesus” moment.
Time will tell and I am grateful, newcomer or not, for every Constitutionalist in the halls of the Capital. There are many battles before us and we can use all the help we can get.
They can start by doing all in their power to thwart any plans to clamp down on free speech.
A World Net Daily article recently pointed out that a group of major religious denominations and organizations, launched a petition to the FCC requesting it investigate “hate speech in the media” citing their feeling that hate speech may play a role in “hate crimes”. This came immediately on the heels of “hate crimes” legislation, offering special protections to crimes committed against those enjoying “alternative” lifestyles, being inappropriately inserted into a military appropriations bill. WND states:
- The petition is promoted by members of the “So We Might See” coalition that includes the United Church of Christ, the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops, the Islamic Society of North America, United Methodist Communications, Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
- “The possible correlation between hate speech and violent crime gives us great pause. Immigrant, minority, and religious populations are often targets of hate speech before they are subsequently the target of physical hate crimes,” the petition says.
“Hate speech in the media is a growing problem that must be examined before it can be solved. So We Might See supports efforts to increase the resources available to the public to understand hate speech. As members of the faith community, we will do our part to ask our members to raise their own voices condemning hate speech when they see it and to ask for all citizens to conduct themselves with civility,” it says.
The move, however, was so controversial that the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops, while a part of the coalition, refused to sign on to the petition.
“USCCB supports the establishment of a broad public forum to debate the difficult constitutional and regulatory issues, including the potential danger to religious speech, raised by the petitioners,” it said in a separate statement. “We are asking the FCC to make available a proceeding where the public can attempt to describe speech anyone deems harmful, and where the public (including Catholics and the bishops) can raise important constitutional constraints on government action regarding speech, including religious speech.
“We are not participating in any campaign to censor any organization, program or commentator,” the organization said.
That’s how I read Lloyd’s videotaped statement, first aired by Glenn Beck of Fox News, in which he said: “The property owners and the folks who then were controlling the media rebelled [against Chavez], worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government, worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country.”
Then there was the June 5 high school commencement speech in which White House Communications Director Anita Dunn called Mao Zedong — one of history’s greatest mass murderers and an implacable enemy of free speech — one of “my favorite political philosophers.” Dunn has, coincidentally, been the point person in President Obama’s attacks on Fox News.
But the real problem is a provision, which the U.S. championed jointly with Egypt, exuding hostility to free expression.
That provision “expresses its concern that incidents of racial and religious intolerance, discrimination and related violence, as well as of negative racial and religious stereotyping continue to rise around the world, and condemns, in this context, any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence, and urges States to take effective measures, consistent with their obligations under international human-rights law, to address and combat such incidents” (emphasis added).
Then there’s this by Drew Zahn at WND:
- Michelle Obama (on video) stated “For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country.” Who would have believed that such a brazenly anti-American, chip-on-her-shoulder woman would end up as first “lady?”
- Jeremiah Wright, pastor of the Chicago church the Obamas attended for twenty years, (on video) spewed out hatred of America with comments such as “G*d damn America.” How many of us would sit back and listen to that kind of preaching for 20 years and not change churches (unless we agreed with it)? Has anyone heard Obama speak out against Wright’s sermons? His silence speaks volumes.
- The Obamas’ close friendship with terrorist William Ayres is very disturbing to me. My parents taught us as children that we are known by the company we keep and that birds of a feather flock together. Obama has appointed 44+ czars, some of whom are admitted Marxists/communists and have published books promoting these radical beliefs. I heard Van Jones, a self-described communist, now the eco czar, speaking (on radio) about suicidal gray capitalism. In a speech at Berkeley, he referred to all Republicans with a vulgar expletive. It appears to me that Obama has surrounded himself with revolutionaries who have evil intentions. I fear for my country and for my children and grandchildren. Too many detrimental things are happening too quickly and against the best interests of America.
- How dare this president apologize for my country either here or when visiting foreign countries! America is the greatest nation in the world. Our troops have fought and died all around the world for freedom, NOT for socialism. We are the most generous people in the world, always there first to help in any disaster and constantly giving food and money to less prosperous nations. If he doesn’t believe we are the greatest country in the world, he has no business being president. Other than having the power to implement radical changes, why would he even want to be the president of a country for which he holds such contempt?
- I watched the video of Obama bowing to a Saudi king. The administration tried to explain it away. Have you heard the expression, “Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?” America’s president should bow to no worldly king!
- This president stated (on video) that we are not a Christian nation. I disagree, as do millions of other Christians across this country. Our nation was founded upon Christian principles. George Washington was administered the Oath of Affirmation of office as prescribed by Article II Section 1, on April 29th, 1789, to which he added: “So help me God.” “In God We Trust” is on our money and inscribed on our national monuments. Clearly Christians exclusively are under siege by this administration and not a word of reprisal from the mainstream media, all of whom are in bed with Obama. Never for a moment would the media tolerate vile remarks against Muslims, but it’s fine against Christianity. Thank God for FOX News and conservative talk radio, the only places where the truth is exposed. And now, the Obama administration, under the guise of the Fairness Doctrine, is attempting to shut down our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech.
- Another video clip showed Hugo Chavez receiving a big hug and glowing praise from Obama. This thug dictator got just what he wanted from an American president, legitimacy and photo ops. Obama played right into his hands.
- The recent happenings of attempted curtailment of free speech, control of the Internet, and now indoctrination of our children in their classrooms are all reminiscent of similar happenings in Germany in the mid and late 1930’s. We all know what happened to personal freedoms after that.
- The list goes on: all the bailouts, out of control government spending, takeovers of private corporations, nightmare healthcare reform legislation that will ration healthcare for seniors and people with special needs. (This infuriates me because I have an autistic grandchild). It will lead to long wait times for diagnostic testing and surgeries, resulting in many preventable deaths, substandard healthcare, bankrupting our nation, and placing so much debt on our children and grandchildren that they will never realize the American Dream.
- The administration is going after the CIA agents who have kept our country safe from another attack by terrorists for the past eight years. This is exactly the kind of policy that gutted the CIA in Clinton’s administration and led up to the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Could it be that a weakened CIA where agents are intimidated by fear of prosecution and therefore don’t pursue investigations, would be beneficial to this administration?
- What about the insanely restricted interrogation methods our troops in Afghanistan now have to follow? They require that captured terrorists be flown out of the area within 48 hours, making it virtually impossible to get useful information from these prisoners due to the time constraint. Does anyone else wonder why this is happening?
In summary, I’m out there protesting on the street corner because I am scared to death for the future of our country. I am angry and totally fed up with this administration and all of the politicians as a whole, and I am not going to take it any more! Too much is at stake to sit on the sidelines. I sense deep inside that something is terribly wrong inside our government and that these anti-American, anti-capitalism czars are intentionally pushing our country quickly down the road to bankruptcy and socialism/Marxism. I believe that this administration is looking for any excuse, including accusations of civil disorder by those of us daring to peacefully protest, to declare martial law so they can take control and shut down media opposition. I hope and pray that I am wrong. And I hope and pray that God allows us more time to unite against and stop what I perceive to be treason against America.
We are stewards of the America that we pass on our children and grandchildren. Are you willing to stand with me and fight for freedom as our patriot forefathers did for us?
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
The recently released White House Guest List holds valuable clues to who holds real power in America. Let’s take a CLOSE look at who’s had multiple opportunities for President Obama’s attention:
# Visits Name Description
2 William Ayers
Former Weather Underground Founder, Leftist Radical, Ghost Writer Obama: Dreams of My Father, Criminal
2 Angela Davis
Former FBI Most Wanted, Former People’s Temple (Jim Jones/ mass murderer cult) Supporter, 1980 and 1984 Communist Party Vice President candidate
15 Kim Gandy
6 Jesse Jackson
8 Jeffrey Jones
8 Nancy Keenan
NARAL President (pro abortion group)
1 Scott Levinson
8 Michael Moore
25 Anthony, John, Heather Podesta
Center for American Politics (Soros Funded Organization), Lobbyists for H1N1 Vaccine Novartis and leftist radicals. Van Jones and other subversives were given position at CAP after leaving government. John Podesta was former Chief of Staff under Bill Clinton.
5 Cecile Lynn Richards
Planned Parenthood President
2 Al Sharpton
National Action Network
9 Cass Sunstein
Constitutional Law scholar and proponent of the Nudge philosophy , Obama Regulation Czar who will translate Bills into Law
Leftist Philanthropic Organizations:
8 Steve Gunderson
Former Representative, President Council on Foudations (2000+ grant making foundations)
9 Phillip Gara Lamarche
Friend of Valerie Jarrett, Leftist Philantrapist of Atlantic Philantrophies (Soros wannabe)
2 Nancy Roob
Edna McConnell Clark Foundation President
7 Ralph Smith
Sr VP Annie E Casey Foundation
4 George Soros
Evil Incarnate, Leftist organizer and funder of America’s demise. Bilderberg & CFR member
2 Luis Ubinas
Ford Foundation President
4 Darren Walker
Union Bosses :
22 Andy Stern
6 John Sullivan
Labor Leader, Labor Attorney, Obama nominee Commissioner- Federal Election Commission , Assistant General Counsel SEIU, former General Counsel International Brotherhood of Teamsters
7 Richard Trumka
Green Agenda Proponents:
4 Al Gore
Former VP, presumed First Carbon Billionaire, Hypocrite, leading proponent of anti-human agenda
5 Jeffrey Immelt
Controversial GE CEO , Obama Advisor
3 Nancy Sutley
White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair
14 William White
Former Deputy Sec of Energy under Clinton, proponent of green technologies
5 Steven Williams
Former Dept of Fish and Wildlife Director
Financial / Bankers:
3 Lloyd Blankfein
Goldman Sachs CEO
2 Fred Becker
National Association of Federal Credit Unions
6 James Dimon
J P Morgan Chase CEO , Council on Foreign Relations member
4 Camden R Fine
Independent Bankers of American CEO
3 Maurice Greenberg
Council on Foreign Relations Member and former AIG CEO
6 Alan Greenspan
Former Fed Chair, member Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, husband to Andrea Mitchell (Bilderberg and Council on Foreign Relations member)
2 Kenneth Doyle Lewis
Bank of America CEO
2 John Mack
Morgan Stanley CEO
5 Daniel Mica
Credit Union National Association President, former Congressman
2 Heidi Miller
JP Morgan Chase
3 Vikram Pandit
3 Scott Talbot
Sr VP Government Affairs Financial Services Roundtable
5 Edward Yingling
American Bankers Association President and CEO
11 Tom Daschle
Health Care Lobbyist, former Senate Majority Leader and unsuccessful Obama nominee for HHS head, tax cheat
5 Steve Elmendorf
United Health Care Lobbyist, Veteran Dem strategist, Lobbyist for Nat Assoc Broadcast Communications
James Wood Johnson Foundation President – Foundation touts they are “Leader in transforming America’s Health Care System”
5 Linda Lipson
Health Services Reasearch and Development Services, Veterans Administration
2 Glen Tullman
Allscripts-Misys HC Solution CEO and Obama Advisor
3 Robert McDonald
Proctor and Gamble CEO
7 David OReilly
3 Rex Tillerson
Exxon Mobil CEO
Leftist Politicos :
3 Howard Dean
Former DNC Chair, founder Democracy For America
3 Michael Dolan
Campaign Coordinator Democrat Party
3 Ellen Malcom
Polical fundraiser, President Emily’s List (supports pro abortion women candidates)
5 Dr. William Graham
Marshall Institute, national security expert
5 Jon Huntsman
Former Idaho Governor and Obama’s Ambassador to China
5 Michael Jordan
Former NBA pro
2 Mark Mallory
Cincinnatti, OH Mayor
4 Chris McNeil
Smithsonian Institute board member
7 Timothy Ryan
7 Paul Smith
Oyez Project – documenting Supreme Court
27 William Smith
Unknown, possibly William Kennedy Smith, but can not confirm
7 David Strauss
University of Chicago Law School, associate of President Obama
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
Even if the annual flow of carbon emissions were to immediately stabilize at today’s rate (40 gigatons), the stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would be double the pre-industrial level by 2050, resulting in a high probability of dangerous temperature rises, serious economic damage and potentially destabilizing political consequences… It is the cumulative stock of emissions produced by the currently developed industrialized countries that are the root cause of dangerous rise in greenhouse gas concentrations. Since 1840, three quarters of the cumulative total has been generated by Annex I countries with the United States alone accounting for close to 30 per cent. Th e picture is even starker if per capita emissions are used.
Equity is an essential ingredient of an eff ective global climate change policy, as refl ected in the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”, set forth in the UNFCCC. Not only have today’s high-income economies generated about 80 per cent of past fossil fuel-based emissions, but those same emissions have helped carry them to high levels of social and economic well-being. Th ese countries carry the responsibility for the bulk of climate damage but they also have the capacity to repair it. Th is will require additional multilateral fi nancing, on an adequate and predictable scale, comprising grants, concessional loans and compensatory payments. In the context of the ongoing UNFCCC negotiations, developing countries have insisted on the fact that Annex II countries have a clear-cut responsibility for providing new and additional fi nancial resources to meet the agreed full costs incurred by developing-country parties in complying with their obligations. Translating such responsibilities into tangible resources is still a major stumbling block. Th e Greenhouse Development Rights (GDR) methodology provides one possible way of sharing the burden of emissions reductions among countries according to their capacity to pay for reductions and their responsibility for past and current emissions. Each of these criteria is defi ned with respect to a development threshold so as to explicitly safeguard the right of lowincome countries to economic growth (such as a PPP per-capita income level of $9,000, beyond which human and economic development approaches “advanced” levels); only individuals with incomes above this threshold have a responsibility to pay for emissions abatement. Each country is assigned an emissions allocation based on per capita rights. In addition, each country is assigned an obligation to pay for abatement—whether at home or abroad— based on its share of cumulative emissions starting from a base year (such as 1990) and the cumulative income of its population with incomes above the development threshold.1 Following these criteria, at this point, the EU, for example, would need to contribute $32.9 billion for every $100 billion of climate fi nancing, while the contribution of the United States would be $47.7 billion and that of Japan $11.2 billion.
Placing this challenge in the context of an evolving investment programme is to recognize that developing countries will themselves be responsible for mobilizing resources on an increasing scale over time, as well as for insisting on the responsibility of developed countries for meeting the additional costs of undertaking such investments in the initial stages of the transition. Developed countries need to live up to the responsibility they took on themselves under UNFCCC regarding climate change related assistance to developing countries.
Policy Brief #13 The Trillion Dollar Plan
The rapidly unfolding global fi nancial and economic crisis will severely disrupt economic growth worldwide, affect the livelihoods of billions around the world and endanger progress toward the poverty reduction and other millennium development goals (MDGs). Major industrialized countries and some developing countries have put together massive fi nancial sector rescue packages and large fi scal stimulus packages. Since the outbreak of the crisis up to March 2009, the total support is estimated at a staggering $20.8 trillion or 33.5 per cent of the estimated World Gross Product (WGP) for 2008. Th e vast majority of these resources comprise government guarantees of toxic assets held by the banking sectors in the United States, Europe and elsewhere.
The fiscal stimulus plans total about $2.6 trillion or 4 per cent of WGP to be spent, roughly, over the three-year period between 2009 and 2011. Many observers, including analysts at the IMF and the United Nations, consider this amount of fi scal stimulusto be insufficient.
Developing countries are particularly exposed to this crisis. They have less resilient economies and with fewer resources they are more typically forced to pursue pro-cyclical monetary and fiscal policies, imposing greater variability in their economic performance to the detriment of long-term growth. Global responses should urgently redress this asymmetry.
In the first place, this would require providing sufficient financial resources to developing countries to engage in counter-cyclical measures. If spent eff ectively, this could not only put the global economy on a more sustainable growth path but also help to meet poverty targets and development goals set by the international community.
For this, the United Nations has estimated that developing countries would need around $1 trillion for 2009 and 2010, half of which would be used for covering short-term fi nancing needs, with the other half required for long-term development lendingand assistance. While this seems like large sum of money, it can be feasibly delivered through existing mechanisms and within existing commitments. Moreover, it would send a strong signal of solidarity to developing countries that they will be supported through the crisis.
Meeting short-term liquidity needs ($500 billion)
According to the World Bank and the Institute for International Finance, private capital fl ows to developing countries declined by about $500 billion in 2008 from 2007 levels and a further decline by about $630 billion is forecast for 2009. The decline has been the result of, inter alia, a severe squeeze of trade credits, which is aff ecting trade and growth of developing countries directly.
Well over $1 trillion in corporate, external debt in emerging markets and other developing countries will mature in 2009 and will need to be rolled over. As commodity prices and exports decline and income from worker remittances subsides, most developing countries will experience severe balance of payment problems. Th e World Bank estimates that 98 of 104 developing countries are expected to fall short of covering external fi nancing needs, with an estimated gap which could be as high as $700 billion. For low-income countries alone, the IMF estimates that the balance-of-payments shock could amount to $140 billion in 2009.
The G20 already seems to have neared an agreement on doubling (as proposed by the EU) or tripling proposed by the United States) the IMF’s existing lending capacity of $250 billion. New SDR issuance could amount to $250 billion as has been proposed in the past, but failed to gain the backing of the United States government. Now this seems more acceptable. The Japanese government has already lent $100 billion of its reserves to increase the IMF’s lending capacity. Countries with vast amounts of reserves, such as China or some of the major oil exporters, could contribute similarly, though this likely will require making suffi cient progress towards governance reform of the IMF to make this politically more acceptable for these countries. Mobilizing resources through regional reserve funds should also be considered. For instance, Asian countries have already agreed to increase resources for liquidity provisioning through the Chiang Mai Initiative, their main mechanism of regional fi nancial cooperation. Both international (IMF) and regional channels should be used, requiring closer collaboration between the IMF and regional institutions of financial cooperation.
What about conditionality?
Adequate oversight of the usage of resources will also need to be established, ensuring in particular that the compensatory financing is not subject to the kind of pro-cyclical policy conditionality which is typically attached to existing mechanisms. Financing needs for fiscal stimulus ($500 billion) In addition, another $500 billion in enhanced long-term official fi nancing will be needed to cover fiscal revenue gaps in 2009 and 2010 (due to falling export revenues and slower growth) and provide developing countries with the necessary resources to protect social spending and finance fiscal stimulus packages. Spread over two years, these resources would provide the means for a stimulus of about 3 per cent per year of the combined GDP of developing countries (excluding China and major oil-exporting countries), which—assuming a multiplier eff ect of about 1.7 from well-designed and internationally coordinated fi scal packages— would support adequate growth recovery. Half of the required resources could be mobilized by enhancing the lending capacity of multilateral development banks and the remainder through increased offi cial development assistance through accelerated delivery on existing donor commitments.
How to finance $250 billion for increased development lending?
The increase in development lending could be mobilized through the multilateral development banks. This could be achieved as follows:
• By optimizing use of available capital, the World Bank could make new development financing commitments for about $100 billion.
• With a $60 billion replenishment of their capital and maintaining solid leverage ratios, regional development banks could expand development lending by about $150 billion. This should be feasible. The World Bank would be using existing lending space and has already announced increased lending capacity in this way. The Asian Development Bank has already requested a replenishment of its capital. Surplus countries with vast amounts of reserves and sovereign wealth funds could similarly allocate some of its resources to regional development banks in order to expand their lending capacity.
How to mobilize and additional $250 billion in offi cial development assistance for the poorest countries?
The increase in ODA could be mobilized as follows:
• $50 billion
• $200 billion would need to be mobilized through an acceleration of the delivery on existing ODA commitments.
The required resources can be provided on the basis of available resources and existing commitments. The World Bank’s concessional window (IDA) was already replenished by $30 billion in 2008 to cover three years of credits and grants. This could be frontloaded to make these resources available during 2009 and 2010. Equally concessional lending windows of regional development banks (ADB, AfDB, IDB and others) could be frontloaded to provide the additional $20 billion.
Donors have repeatedly pledged to deliver on existing aid commitments, including at the Doha Follow-up Conference on Financing for Development of November-December 2008. At the 2005 Gleneagles Summit, the G8 committed to raise ODA to at least $160 billion per year (at 2008 prices) by 20101 (up from $103.7 billion in 2007). Meeting this commitment should increase existing aid fl ows by a total of about $115 billion over 2009-2010. Further delivery towards the agreed UN target of 0.7 per cent of their annual GNI could provide the remaining $85 billion needed over 2009-2010, which would bring ODA to about 0.4 per cent of GNI of OECD/DAC members.
The World Bank’s proposal for a “Vulnerability Fund” of the size of 0.7 per cent of the developed countries’ stimulus packages (amounting to about $15 billion) might form a part of this broader proposal.
UN-DESA Policy Brief #17 Reaching a Climate Deal in Copenhagen
There is a growing awareness that action is urgently needed to seriously address the climate change problem. Th e multilateral process that began with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992 resulted in the Bali Action Plan (BAP) in 2007. Th e BAP calls for enhanced action on adaptation, mitigation, technology development and transfer, and fi nance, which should be specifi ed in an international agreement by the end of 2009 in Copenhagen. This brief addresses some key development and burden sharing aspects related to mitigation and adaptation which need due consideration to ensure a successful and sustainable outcome of the negotiations.
Crisis as opportunity
The current financial crisis provides an opportunity to make a fundamental change in the patterns of international cooperation, investment and production. New sustainable development trajectories are to be sought, based on low-carbon, clean technologies, with a large component of renewable energy sources. In fact, there are important synergies to be expected from integrating climate and energy related investments into strategies addressing the economic downturn, for example the employment gains of shifting towards renewable energy. A ‘shared vision’ based on the essential premise of the UNFCCC convention—common but diff erentiated responsibilities and capabilities will be the basis of any new international agreement agreed in Copenhagen. Negotiating parties must ensure that this shared vision show a clearand strong commitment to the overall objective of sustainable development and catch-up growth in developing countries. It should also include equity considerations such as poverty reduction and convergence in terms of income distribution and emissions per capita.
..Towards a new climate finance architecture
In order to enhance predictability, funding must not be voluntary but tied to agreed long-term commitments, based e.g. on pro rata mechanisms (such as levied percentages of financial flows, mandatory contributions in relation to GDP). Wider ranging options which include taxes on capital flows or on international transport, energy use or emissions, or volumes of transactions in carbon markets, permit-auctioning, and others can generate considerable additional annual fl ows on the order of tens of billions of dollars. Revenue sources, like auctioning of emissions permits and carbon or energy taxation imply carbon-pricing, which in itself may stimulate the shift towards sustainable, low-carbon development. Yet, carbon pricing may generate adverse (regressive) income eff ects which will need to be addressed. Th e future fi nancial ‘architecture’ should enable the mobilization of adequate, additional and predictable funding. It would need to be built on, and handle, fl ows of fi nance mobilized according to objective criteria refl ecting responsibilities and capabilities to contribute to climate related policies. Disbursements to eligible recipient countries should also be based on agreed criteria which should indicate priorities of resource allocation towards the most vulnerable countries. The overall governance in a new architecture should ensure policy coherence and a focus on sustainable development.
Effective mitigation will require lead and aggressive action in the North as well as mitigation actions in developing countries in the future, supported by full and eff ective assistance by the North, as articulated in the convention and reaffirmed in BAP. Development has to be central to the climate change agreement —both mitigation and adaptation have to be an integrated part of development agendas and the global process must strengthen the appropriate links with global and national efforts in this connection. Th is requires an urgent scaling up of funding and technology available to developing countries for mitigation as well as adaptation and support for an investment “push” and catch-up growth in developing countries. Th is remains the only sustainable option to deal with future developing country emissions and climate change challenges.
could be mobilized by front-loading resources in the already replenished International Development Assistance (IDA) window of the World Bank and those in the concessional windows of the regional development banks.
Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests were adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992.
The Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was created in December 1992 to ensure effective follow-up of UNCED, to monitor and report on implementation of the agreements at the local, national, regional and international levels. It was agreed that a five year review of Earth Summit progress would be made in 1997 by the United Nations General Assembly meeting in special session.
The full implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Commitments to the Rio principles, were strongly reaffirmed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg, South Africa from 26 August to 4 September 2002.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 12 so far )
- The best way to understand what Sustainable Development actually is can be found by discovering what is NOT sustainable.
- According to the UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report, items for our everyday lives that are NOT sustainable include: Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment (capitalism, free markets).
- Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Rio Earth Summit in 1992 said, “. .. Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.”
- Are you starting to see the pattern behind Cap and Trade, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and all of those commercials you’re forced to watch about the righteousness of Going Green? They are all part of the enforcement if Sustainable Development.
- And one of the most destructive tools they use to force it on us is something called the “precautionary principle.” That means that any activities that might threaten human health or the environment should be stopped — even if no clear cause and effect relationship has been established — and even if the potential threat is largely theoretical.
- That makes it easy for any activist group to issue warnings by news release or questionable report and have those warnings quickly turned into public policy — just in case.
- In short, it’s all about wealth redistribution. Your wealth into a green rat hole.
- Now they have taken this and wrapped it all in a nice green blanket, scaring us with horror stories about the human destruction of the environment — and so we are now throwing our liberties on the bon fire like a good old fashioned book burning — all in the name of protecting the planet.
- Free trade, social justice, consensus, global truth, partnerships, preservation, stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity, visioning, open space, heritage, comprehensive planning, critical thinking, and community service are all part of our new language.
- Rather than good management of resources, Sustainable Development has come to mean denied use and resources locked away from human hands. In short, it has become a code word for an entire economic and social agenda…
- The Sustainablists insist that society be transformed into feudal-like governance by making Nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society. As such, every societal decision would first be questioned as to how it might effect the environment. To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; land use, education, and population control and reduction...
- Sustainable Development’s Social Equity plank is based on a demand for “social justice.” …
- Under the Sustainablist system, private property is an evil that is used simply to create wealth for a few. So too, is business ownership….
- Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based on one overriding premise: that the wealth of the world was made at the expense of the poor. It dictates that, if the conditions of the poor are to be improved, wealth must first be taken from the rich. Consequently, Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based not on private enterprise but on public/private partnerships…
- Sustainable Development policy is redefining free trade to mean centralized global trade “freely” crossing (or eliminating) national borders. It definitely does not mean people and companies trading freely with each other…
- “Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right way and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms.” from the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty presented at the 1992 UN Earth Summit. (hello, can anyone say Cass Sunstein??…are we ‘getting it’ yet?)…
- Under Sustainable Development there can be no concern over individual rights — as we must all sacrifice for the sake of the environment. Individual human wants, needs, and desires are to be conformed to the views and dictates of social planners. The UN’s Commission on Global Governance said in its 1995 report: “Human activity… combined with unprecedented increases in human numbers… are impinging on the planet’s basic life support system. Action must be taken now to control the human activities that produce these risks”Under Sustainable Development there can be no limited government, as advocated by our Founding Fathers, because, we are told, the real or perceived environmental crisis is too great. Maurice Strong, Chairman of the 1992 UN Earth Summit said: “A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally-damaging consumption patterns. The shift will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.”…
- The politically based environmental movement provides Sustainablists camouflage as they work to transform the American systems of government, justice, and economics. It is a masterful mixture of socialism (with its top down control of the tools of the economy) and fascism (where property is owned in name only — with no control). Sustainable Development is the worst of both the left and the right. It is not liberal, nor is it conservative. It is a new kind of tyranny that, if not stopped, will surely lead us to a new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.
In walks Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cqN4NIEtOY
While Americans clearly voted for change in the last election, I am not sure this is the change they meant. No matter, they are hoisting it up on us like a speeding bullet ! Change is almost here. All it will take is “Cap and Trade”, “Health Care Reform” and “Card Check” to pass. Please do a search on my site if you would like to know any more about these PENDING bills.
This started many years ago- and yes, it takes about 20 years for fundamental change to take place. While it started with the GATT agreement of 1947, it moved on from there. Slowly at first, but then under George Bush, Sr., then President Clinton, things started moving more quickly. NAFTA, WTO, First they made it possible for our manufacturing to move away. While we were all screaming ” Why isn’t our government securing our jobs? … Why are they making trade regulations so unfair to American workers?.. Why do corporations moving jobs overseas still get tax breaks”.. Well, all these years later, our worst fears are being realized. Now the only large scale manufacturing left is owned by the Government. The rest will soon follow or die.
Then, the started ebbing away at our 401K plans. Black Monday, October, 1987. Then over-valuation that caused the “Internet bubble”, and on from there to where we are now with much of the citizen’s wealth deteriorated to the point where many have to work years later than anticipated. But, that was not enough. We still had our homes. About twenty years ago, even after the Savings and Loan Crisis, they started making it easier for money to be lent. It was like giving candy to a baby. No longer did we all attempt to pay off our homes in 30 years. They made it easy for us to roll consumer debt into our mortgages. This went on for several years until it became more prevalent that most did not own their homes outright nor even hold the majority equity. Even though Appraisers were screaming about the abuses that were going on in the marketplace - no one would listen. I believe that is because it was part of the plan all along. Let’s not forget the “Progressive Agenda” started to rear it’s ugly head against our Constitution under Teddy Roosevelt. Eventually, in 1921, the Council for Foreign Relations was formed (see previous articles on my site) and real ”progress” began. It was slow enough so we would not put the pieces together. Until Obama. They are so close now, they feel comfortable wearing their arrogance on their sleeve. To get a very good feel for how we got here, allow me to recommend another article by Henry Lamb. http://www.pushhamburger.com/morenews12.htm
Make NO mistake. This is a GLOBAL INITIATIVE. Much of the wealth lies here and so does the legacy of the Founding Fathers. We are a tough nut to crack, so they must use code, back door allegiances, and a bit of magic. There’s so much going on now it is hard for anyone that must work to pay attention. It is my personal belief that the whole “women’s rights” movement of the 1970′s was also a part of the plan. Why would they want mothers in schools watching them indoctrinate our children? Why would they want mothers home all day so they could pay attention to what is going on in the neighborhood or Washington DC. So, what better way than to say to women.. you are not equal, let’s make you equal. We were equal all along, it was they that treated us unequally. But instead of changing themselves (which is not what it was about), they FUNDAMENTALLY changed this country… with our help. They made us feel bad if we CHOSE to stay home with our kids, then they made it all but impossible. Another reason to allow debt to be built up. We would have to occupy ourselves with work outside the home, in addition to the work inside the home and the children. No time to go over every little spec of instructional material they were cramming down our children’s throat. No time to find out they were not teaching our children about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers any longer. No time to realize the UN and the Teachers Union were implementing a whole new agenda. (Give your kids and Grandkids a copy of The 5000 Year Leap by W. Cleon Skousen and ask them to read it )
Our Government now owns our banks, too, right? Well, actually the banks own the government. That is a whole set of novels unto itself. However, this all started with the implementation of the FED. A very good book on this subject is “The Creature from Jekyll Island” by G.Edward Griffin. This has been going on since the progressives took over the country in 1913, under Wilson, with the institution of the Fed giving the banks the ability to manipulate the money supply. Catapulted further under FDR, who gave up tying our money supply to the gold standard in 1933. Then paper money no longer became backed by silver under Johnson, meaning it was purely a fictional piece of paper we could pretend was actual money. This gave the FED power to print away with nothing to stop them from manipulating the money supply at their whim. Now today we see, they can print money hand over fist without answering to anyone. The only one paying any attention today is China. Why, because they see where first Bush and now Obama are leading us. By printing money without limit, by running up the deficit to levels which can never be paid back, by devaluing our currency and instituting hyper-inflation (coming soon to a neighborhood near you), they thereby initiate another CRISIS, causing us to have no other choice but to leave our dollar for a world wide currency. This is already being discussed by Europe and the UN. That will spell the end of our sovereignty. We are already funding the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Your tax dollars hard at work, just not for you.
The United Nations is heavily involved and is leading the crunch against America. Most of their current agenda surrounds Global Governance, or put another way – death to American Sovereignty. I would like to direct your attention to a small piece of that - The Marrakech Process- by reading The Marrakech Memorandum. This was discussed in the article I mentioned earlier at RecycleWashington.com . You can find out more about it’s TEN YEAR PLAN to global governance at their website: http://esa.un.org/marrakechprocess/
So, what could possibly get in their way? Well, citizens, of course. That’s why they had to poke fun of the Townhallers and the Tea Party participants. Why they GROSSLY underestimated attendance at the March on Washington DC a few weeks ago. Why the media can not report it. Why no real journalist can talk about it (even OReilly). Most of the media belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations, by the way. It’s all part of the gig and the media is in on it. That’s why they have worked for years on fine tuning the Martial Law regulations, and, not to sound crazy, but why they are currently hiring internment specialists (really- I saw the ad). Not all the politicians are in on it, but many are. Long term Senators especially. That is why they have to go! The sooner the better! We MUST have term limits, too! NOW!
What else stands in their way? Oh, yeah, THE INTERNET! TALK RADIO! That is why the FCC is attempting an agenda currently to control both. An agenda already in progress. Do NOT let it happen. Pay attention. If they get us there, we’re done. Do not let anything pass in Congress. NOTHING. They are leaving everything open to interpretation, and the interpreter is Cass Sunstein. You may wish to make his acquaintance as well (search prior articles on my site).
While space will not allow every detail, perhaps I have connected enough of the dots for your to see the big picture. All of the stuff that does not make sense, all the trashing of our Constitution, all of the freaks being appointed to high positions… it’s all for the end game. The end game is doing away with any meaningful sovereignty for the US. We are now at a crossroads. If you condone the New World Order/ One World Order thing that puts the crackpots at the UN in charge of you and all you’ll ever be – do nothing. If this seems like a nightmare to you, then you need to get involved NOW! Right NOW! They almost have it. I beg you. Do NOT let them win.
I have recently posted lists of tools you can use to root out the bad guys (located in the Citizen Tools category on right). The trick is to follow the money and watch the regulations. Please give up a few nicities, like watching television a few hours a week or reading that fiction novel. We need all hands on deck. We have been asleep so long they almost have it in the bag. We need to make up for lost time. We need to mobilize and fight back NOW. They are way ahead of us. They have armies and systems in place. Our only saving grace is there are, I believe, more of us than them. This reminds me of a time in our country’s history. How ironic.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 8 so far )
Dems push expanded Community Reinvestment Act; deny Act’s role in mortgage meltdown; GOP cites ACORN connection by Byron York at Washington Examiner
A number of experts believe that aggressive enforcement of the 1970s-era Community Reinvestment Act contributed to the mortgage meltdown, and thus to the greater financial crisis, by requiring financial institutions to lend to unqualified borrowers. Now, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives is responding to that situation by proposing to expand the scope and power of the Community Reinvestment Act.
This morning House Financial Services Committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank held a hearing on H.R. 1479, the “Community Reinvestment Modernization Act of 2009.” The bill’s purpose is “to close the wealth gap in the United States” by increasing “home ownership and small business ownership for low- and moderate-income borrowers and persons of color.” It would extend CRA’s strict lending requirements to non-bank institutions like credit unions, insurance companies, and mortgage lenders. It would also make CRA more explicitly race-based by requiring CRA standards to be applied to minorities, regardless of income, going beyond earlier requirements that applied solely to low- and moderate-income areas.
Republicans on the committee strongly oppose the plan. “Instead of looking to expand the number of institutions that must abide by Community Investment Act regulations,” California Rep. Ed Royce said in prepared opening remarks at today’s hearing, “I think we should reassess the role this and other government mandates played in the financial collapse and consider scaling it back.”
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongre…
Reinvestment Act Is Tied to ACORN
…So-called “community groups” like ACORN benefit themselves from the CRA through a process that sounds like legalized extortion. The CRA is enforced by four federal government bureaucracies: the Fed, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The law is set up so that any bank merger, branch expansion, or new branch creation can be postponed or prohibited by any of these four bureaucracies if a CRA “protest” is issued by a “community group.” This can cost banks great sums of money, and the “community groups” understand this perfectly well. It is their leverage. They use this leverage to get the banks to give them millions of dollars as well as promising to make a certain amount of bad loans in their communities. …
…Consequently, banks in every community in America have been forced to hold a portfolio of bad loans, euphemistically referred to as “subprime” loans. In order to compensate themselves for the added risk of extending these loans, many lenders have increased the lending fees associated with mortgage loans. This is simply an indirect way of doing what banks always do – and what they must do to remain solvent: charging effectively higher rates of interest on riskier loans.
But this is discriminatory!, complained the “community organizations.” Thus, if one browses the ACORN web site, one can read of their boasts of having “predatory lending laws” passed in numerous states which outlaw such fees, prohibiting banks from protecting themselves from the added risk involved in making forced loans to “subprime” borrowers. …
Interesting to Me This Comes On The Heels of the Senate Vote to Defund ACORN.. Well, perhaps it is not defunding, but rather a shell game- no doubt learned at the knee of ACORN itself
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongre…
Learn About ACORN/ CCI
Citizens Consulting Inc. (CCI), the shadowy financial nerve center of the embattled radical activist group ACORN, has filed false lobbying disclosure reports with Congress, according to Ron Sykes, a former ACORN employee. This revelation is important because, as former ACORN national board member Charles Turner said earlier this year on “The Glenn Beck Program,” CCI “is where the shell game begins.”
“ACORN has over 200 different entities that the money gets moved around to – for this purpose to that purpose, this organization to that organization,” said Turner. “We believe the way the money has been moved around, they’ve been laundering money.” When former ACORN activist Ron Sykes was informed by this reporter that ACORN affiliate CCI registered him as a lobbyist, he was angry. “It’s like identity theft,” said Sykes in an interview. “I have no idea why they registered me. I didn’t register myself and was not aware that they were doing it.”
Whether this reflects ACORN’s institutional carelessness or a calculated effort to deceive, the discovery throws some light on how ACORN treats its employees, moves money around the ACORN network, and deals with the federal government. Federal lawmakers have known for years about ACORN’s unorthodox and possibly illegal practices, including its use of government resources to promote legislation and its extensive commingling of funds within its network of affiliates.
CCI Tied Directly To Obama Campaign: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/22/acorn-watch-pt-ii-obama-hid-800000-payment-to-acorn-through-citizen-services-inc/ (from Michelle Malkin on 08/22/2008)
..U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. — a subsidiary of ACORN — worked in “get-out-the-vote” projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary. ..
Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As a Criminal Enterprise?http://republicans.ov…
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has repeatedly and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud. Both structurally and operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate. Emerging accounts of widespread deceit and corruption raise the need for a criminal investigation of ACORN. By intentionally blurring the legal distinctions between 361 tax-exempt and non-exempt entities, ACORN diverts taxpayer and tax-exempt monies into partisan political activities. Since 1994, more than $53 million in federal funds have been pumped into ACORN, and under the Obama administration, ACORN stands to receive a whopping $8.5 billion in available stimulus funds.
Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract investigators. Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act. The report that follows presents evidence obtained from former ACORN insiders that completes the picture of a criminal enterprise.
Read the report, which is linked above.
RECENT RELATED COLUMNS:
How many patriots does it take to affect change in Washington? I guess about 2 million:
HR 3226 Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009
To provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, or similar office which is established by or at the direction of the President and headed by an individual who has been inappropriately appointed to such position (on other than an interim basis), without the advice and consent of the Senate.
ACTION ALERT: CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW AND DEMAND THEY CO-SPONSOR THIS BILL
I will here begin to lay out what is happening in aggregate. This is only the first part of a two part series of how our government (both parties) are taking our liberties and defying the constitution over and over and over again. They are giving away our soveriegnty as a nation as well.
The Obama Adminstration, following on the heels of the unconstitutional acts of the Bush Administration, is carrying the ball so much further. Under first Bush and now Obama we have nationalized the banks and manufacturing and are well on our way to nationalizing health care, energy, and the air waves. Now they want the power to control the internet. This is not the America I know. This is literally becoming a socialist government, which defies the Constitution of the United States of America. Please join us for the March on Washington DC on 09/12/2009. The Declaration of the United States of America states:
“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are institituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying it’s foundation on such principles and organizing it’s powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”
The US Constitution and You
The United States Constitution begins with the words, “We the People”. Very simply put that means the we the people hold the only sovereign power to rule ourselves and not the government. We the People have established a set of laws by which the government must abide by and we the people have by these laws authorized the government certain powers as dictated by the Constitution. This set of absolute laws tells the government exactly what it can and what it cannot do. It says government you may go this far and no further. Whenever the government violates any of these absolute laws We the People have the right No the responsibility to totally ignore them. Under a decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1828 any laws passed by the Congress that is in direct violation to or which is contrary to the United States Constitution is not a law. This decision is also known as the Marshal decision and is the standing rule of constitutional law. We have got to wake up to the fact that the government no matter what form it might take is not our friend but is in fact our worst enemy. It is the inherent nature of government to seek absolute power over the governed. By its very nature government must have supreme power to rule and to govern. It is for this very reason why our Constitution was written in the way it was. We as individual citizens have the absolute power to decide for ourselves what is constitutional and what isn’t constitutional. We as individual citizens have the absolute power to force the government to prove in a court of law that its actions against us are within the strict limitations of the constitution. Finally we can cast our vote for individuals who will support and defend the Constitution and who will insure that our individual rights are fully protected.
S. 773 -Bill Allows for Government to Shut Down Internet In Time of Crisis
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet. They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773, which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency. The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license. “I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. “It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.” Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller’s aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s773/show
H.R.675 – To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.
In January, without any recognizable corporate media coverage, Rep. Bob Filner, a California Democrat, introduced H.R. 675. The bill would amend title 10 of the United States Code and extend to civilian employees of the Department of Defense the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. The bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee on January 26, 2009. Filner’s bill would amend the United States code with the following: “Sec. 1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms… for any offense against the United States.” (Emphasis added.) The Posse Comitatus Act, passed on June 18, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, limits the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits members of the federal uniformed services from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property within the United States. H.R. 675 sidesteps Posse Comitatus by defining “law enforcement officer of the Department of Defense” as “a civilian employee of the Department of Defense,” including federal police officers, detectives, criminal investigators, special agents, and game law enforcement officers classified by the Office of Personnel Management Occupational Series 0083 (the United States Office of Personnel Management is described as an “independent agency” of the U.S. government that manages the civil service of the federal government).
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h675/show
US FEMA CAMPS: a little background
FEMA was created on April 1, 1979 pursuant to President Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order 12127. It amalgamated the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities formerly carried out by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It also took over Civil Defense from the Department of Defense, which was in charge of preparing citizens for military attack. In 1993 Bill Clinton turned the directorship of FEMA into a Cabinet position. In 2003 FEMA became part of the Department of Homeland Security’s Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate. The stated purpose of FEMA is to “reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.”
Readiness Exercise 1984 (REX-84) is an emergency response program involving the implementation of martial law, the movement of civilian populations and the arrest and detainment of segments of the population. …
Operation Garden Plot is a United States Army and National Guard program under control of the US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) to provide Federal military support during domestic civil disturbances. ..Executive Order was made to permit the use of the Federal army to uphold domestic laws pursuant to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which places restrictions on the domestic use of the military for law enforcement purposes.
Recently, however, Section 1076 Public Law 109-364, or the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007″ (H.R.5122) has amended Posse Comitatus and The Insurrection Act (which also places limits on domestic military deployment) to allow the Federal government to unilaterally take control of state National Guards and position Federal troops anywhere in the country during a ‘public emergency’.Throughout the 1960s numerous Presidential Executive Orders were issued authorizing Federal agencies to take over essential functions in the case of a declared emergency. The powers include, among many others, the authority of the Federal government to take over transportation infrastructure including highways and seaports (10990), food resources and farms (10998) and mobilize citizens into government supervised work brigades (11000).
On May 9, 2007 President George Bush reasserted the role of the Federal government during a declared emergency by issuing Executive Order NSPD 51/ HSPD-20. The Order states that in the event of a ‘catastrophic emergency’ all ‘national essential functions’ may be taken over by the Executive branch of government and the Department of Homeland Security (including FEMA).The United States Federal Emergency Management Agency has numerous detainment camps throughout the United States. Some camps have been recently constructed and / or renovated and are fully staffed. The existence of the camps coupled with Presidential Executive Orders giving the President and Department of Homeland Security (of which FEMA is now part) control over ‘national essential functions’ in the event of ‘catastrophic emergency’ have resulted in concerns that the camps will be used to forcefully detain American citizens for unconstitutional purposes.
ENTER H.R. 645 – National Emergency Centers Establishment Act
HR 645- Congress Acts To Authorize and Legalize FEMA Camps
A new bill has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives called the National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645. This bill, if passed into law, will direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers otherwise known as FEMA camp facilities on military installations. This is an incredibly disturbing piece of legislation considering that the powers that be have already set in motion an agenda to setup a nationwide marital law apparatus through U.S. Northern Command and the Department of Homeland Security. Apparently, the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough. Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next. With this in mind, it appears as if these so called national emergency centers will be used in a national emergency but only if the national emergency requires large groups of people to be rounded up and detained. If that isn’t the case, than why have these national emergency facilities built in military installations?
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h645/show
HR:1388 – The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act - passed into law 04/21/2009
[ H.R. 1388 ] is one of the most disturbing pieces of legislation I have seen in a long time. The “Serve America Act” is cloaked in feel-good rhetoric and supposedly noble goals, but it is nothing more than another Washington power-grab – this time targeted at non-profits and education – and ultimately at indoctrinating a whole new generation of Obamanistas into forsaking individual liberty and free will for the Statist worldview.
The bill is far too onerous to detail here – and given Republican support for it, it would seem somewhat futile. But, the legislation is far too destructive not to spend some time on, and one of the few remaining patriots in Washington – Jim DeMint (R-SC) – gave an excellent speech yesterday explaining the bill’s misguided approach and his opposition.
And here are just a few of the lowlights in the legislation:
1. The bill will substantially increase the size and reach of an existing federal government program;
2. The bill will burden taxpayers with more than 5 billion tax dollars at a time when we should be cutting back, not spending more;
3. The bill will steer funding and volunteers for public service away from churches, individuals, neighbors, and others who would like to lend a helping hand and toward organizations selected by bureaucrats;
4. The bill is full of vague language and has insufficient safeguards to prevent left-wing special interest groups from using tax dollars to advance their agenda in the name of “community service;”
5. The bill risks politicizing charity and community service by funneling funds and volunteers toward the preferred organizations picked by ideologues;
6. The first 25% of this bill is really education legislation, and should be in an education bill at the state level; and
7. The bill will compound the disincentives created by new limits on federal tax deductions for charitable giving, thereby decreasing the role of families, churches and other local organizations in their communities.
When you look at the details – one realizes that it’s far worse than even that… more along the lines of full-scale indoctrination camps toward Statism. The legislation will, in many circumstances, force our children to participate in charitable activity as part of school – and that activity may well be chosen by or approved by a bureaucrat. The bill causes a federally chartered, Washington-based institution to, essentially, pick priorities and winners and losers in the charitable universe – undoubtedly putting many charities at a significant disadvantage…
None of this even considers the lack of Constitutional basis for such a massive federal intervention into local charities and volunteerism… but when does that ever stop anyone in Washington? And when coupled with the soon-to-be-reduced lower tax deductions for charities, the Obama-Democrat machine is massively shifting the focus of charity from the individual to the State.
H.R. 45 – Blair Holt Firearms Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009
Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm – any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:
.It is registered
.You are fingerprinted
.You supply a current Driver’s License
.You supply your Social Security #
.You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing
.Each update – change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25
- Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.
.There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18.
The Government would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.
If you think this is a joke – go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this..
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show
HR 3200 America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F6iP9_s9qc (audio) HR3200 deprives you of your civil liberties 7 ways
Bill includes DIRECT access, without notification, to YOUR PERSONAL BANK ACCOUNT by the federal government. The bill is full of items of concern and should be read by every citizen.
READ THE BILL: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/showRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
« Previous Entries