Saturday, April 30, 2011

Black Chamber of Commerse Head "I only voted for 'Obama' because he is Black"

Harry Alford is the president and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. He is  not a fan of the business positions Democrats have taken either. He said in a recent interview “Obama wanted the National Black Chamber to dance to his music and have blind allegiance to his crazy programs and agenda, which are totally anti-business. We are a pro-business organization. So we have to stand on the side of business, and the benefit of our members, which are black entrepreneurs.” He also called Obama Marxist and fanatical. He said “They might as well put on the brown shirts and swastikas.”  Mr. Alford also said he only voted for Obama because he is black. “That is a lesson I will take to my grave,” he said solemnly, later saying Obama is “wrecking” the country and is “dangerous.” That is a lesson I think alot of Americans are learning, or I at least hope they are learning. Because this is change that I don't believe in. President Obama's change is to remake our country into a socialistic has been of a country. He is the first President who seems to actually be trying to make our country worse off. I can not logically make any other sense out of his actions. Looks like the National Black Chamber of Commerce will be endorsing the republican candidate next time around.

Related Posts:

President Obama Dictator
Obama's Accomplishments - NOT!
Obama to Implement Portions of Disclosure Act

Romney Clobbers Obama in Recent Poll

According to the new survey conducted by Dartmouth College, Romney beats the president in a head-to-head match up by 8 points, 47 percent to 39 percent. But hold on: though losing big to Romney, Obama soundly defeats every other potential GOP candidate the poll tested, including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (by 8 points), former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (by 16 points), Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (by 19 points), businessman Donald Trump (by 22 points) and former GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin (by 27 points). The president does not get passed the 50 percent threshold when pitted against every potential GOP candidate except Palin and Trump. This is an indication that the President is highly beatable if the GOP choose the right candidate. Romney seems to have the best chance of winning right now. I think at this point we need to support the one with the best chance of winning. The less infighting in the primaries the better. 

Quote of the Day

"No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States."  -  President George Washington

Gadhafi's Youngest Son -- Saif al-Arab Gadhafi --Was killed by a NATO Airstrike

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's youngest son -- Saif al-Arab Gadhafi --was killed by a NATO air strike, a spokesman for Libya's government said Sunday.  Moammar Gadhafi and his wife were in their son's house when it was targeted but they are ok. Several of Gadhafi's grandchildren were reported to have been killed in the attack as well. The house in Tripoli was destroyed by the strike, a massive crater is now where the house was. At least one unexploded bomb could be seen at the scene. "We don't believe this is true," said Abdul Hafiz Ghoga, deputy chairman of the Transitional National Council in Benghazi. "It is all fabrications by the regime in a desperate attempt to get sympathy ... This regime constantly lies and keeps lying." The last part of that quote "lies and keeps lying" sounds like the regime currently in power in America as well. Ibrahim, a spokesman for Gadhafi's government, accused NATO of ordering the attack specifically to kill Gadhafi. Which they probably did, but will deny of course. In April 1986, U.S. forces launched an air strike on Moammar Gadhafi's residential compound. As a result, the Libyan leader's adopted daughter, Hanna Gadhafi, was killed. President Ronald Reagan ordered the attack following the bombing of a West Berlin night club that killed two U.S. servicemen. Now that was a President. What we need is this county is the resurrection of President Ronald Reagan to get our country on the right track again.

Related Posts:

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
Libyan No Fly Zone

Friday, April 29, 2011

Gov. Daniels of Indiana to Abort Planned Parenthood Funding

Gov. Mitch Daniels R-IN said he would sign a bill that will strip all taxpayer funding from Planned Parenthood in Indiana. This will make Indiana the first state to cut off all funding of Planned Parenthood.  Gov. Daniels, a possible presidential candidate, will get a boost among social conservatives for signing this bill.  Gov. Daniels said he supported the abortion restrictions from the outset and that the provision added to defund abortion providers did not change his mind. He said women's health, family planning and other services will remain available. "The principle involved commands the support of an overwhelming majority of Hoosiers," Daniels said in a statement announcing his intentions to sign the bill into law once it reaches his desk. Predictably, resorting to possible judicial activism and legislation from the bench, Planned Parenthood of Indiana said in a statement it would file an injunction to "try to halt this alarming erosion of public health policy in our state." How is protecting the lives of the unborn an erosion of public health exactly? Indiana may lose $4 million in federal family planning funds because of the legislation. A small price to pay for doing the right thing in my opinion. Bill sponsor state Rep. Eric Turner, R-Cicero, said "People in the conservative community care about action, and he's clearly the most pro-life governor in America with a signature on that bill." Daniels said "We will take any actions necessary to ensure that vital medical care is, if anything, more widely available than before," Daniels added "Any organization affected by this provision can resume receiving taxpayer dollars immediately by ceasing or separating its operations that perform abortions." Many believe that signing this bill is an indication that Gov. Daniels intends on running for president, lets hope so if this is how he plans on leading America.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

President Obama's Long Form Birth Certificate

President Obama's Long Form Birth Certificate

Age Of America Ending/The Rise of China

A bombshell and nobody noticed it. For the first time, the International Monetary Fund has set a date for the moment when the “Age of America” will end and the U.S. economy will be overtaken by that of China.

IMF sees China topping U.S. in 2016

According to the latest IMF official forecasts, China's economy will surpass America's in real terms in 2016 — just five years from now. That is alot closer than you thought, if you thought about that at all. It provides an urgent and sad context for the budget fight taking place right now. It raises enormous questions about what the international markets are going to look like in just a few of years. And it casts an ominous cloud over both the U.S. dollar and the Treasury market, which have been propped up for decades by their privileged status as the liabilities of the worlds leading super power and economy. According to the IMF forecast, which was quietly posted on the Fund’s website just two weeks ago, whoever is elected U.S. president next year — Obama? Mitt Romney? Donald Trump? — will be the last to preside over the world’s largest economy. Most people are not prepared for this. The government is not prepared for this and the last thing we need when this happens is to have the incompetent American apologist as the President.
China’s economy will be the world’s largest within five years or so.









The comparison that really matters

In addition to comparing the two countries based on exchange rates, the IMF analysis also looked to the true, real-terms picture of the economies using “purchasing power parities.” That compares what people earn and spend in real terms. Just 10 years ago, the U.S. economy was three times the size of China’s. This is the end of the Age of America. As a bond strategist in Europe said two weeks ago, “We are witnessing the end of America’s economic hegemony.”

We have lived in a world dominated by the U.S. for so long that there is no longer anyone who remembers anything else. America overtook Great Britain as the world’s leading economic power in the 1890s and has never looked back.  And both these countries have similar rules of constitutional government, respect for civil liberties and property rights. China has none of these, The Age of China will feel very different. The Age of China will be very different.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Quote of the Day

"The question of our time is not whether all men are brothers. That question has been answered by God who placed us on this earth together. The question is whether we have the strength and the will to make the brotherhood of man the guiding principle of our daily lives."  -  President John F. Kennedy

Obama Easter Sunday with another Racist Pastor?

President Obama and his family went to Shiloh Baptist Church in D.C. for Easter services on Sunday. The mainstream media reported on his attendance and what his family wore, but they neglected to report on the strange racist views of the pastor of this church. Here we go again. First Jeremiah Wright now it is Rev. Wallace Smith. While he is not as fiery as Rev. Wright he still holds some bizarre views of the world and it was reported that President Obama could be seen nodding his head in approval through out the service.  In 2010 Rev. Wallace Smith said the country is still racist, that racist get their own shows on FOX and that Rush Limbaugh is the new KKK. Smith frequently preaches on race. He even included race remarks in the Easter message. I don't know how the constitutional clause which counted blacks in the south as 3/5's of a person fits into a Easter message but Smith wove it in. Last year at a speech at Eastern University Smith said "racism is alive and rampant in America, especially on the conservative airways".  I would agree with the first part of that statement Rev. Smith, but would ask you to look in the mirror to see who I consider as the one that is propagating it. At the same speech he also said Rush Limbaugh is a new breed KKK member. He went on to say "Now Jim Crow wears blue pin stripes … and he doesn’t have to wear white robes anymore, because now he can wear the protective cover of talk radio, or can get a regular news program on Fox. He doesn’t have to wear his white garments anymore.” People like Rev. Smith seem like extremely paranoid reverse racists. Mean while the President sat through this mans message on Sunday nodding in agreement to many points. When will people wake up? The old saying goes 'birds of a feather flock together'. If President Obama continually ends up listening and nodding in agreement to paranoid racist pastors doesn't this say something about his own views on race?

2011 Index of Economic Freedom

The index of economic freedom is put together every year by the Wall Street Journal and the Heritage Foundation. It measures a countries economic freedom based on the following categories: business freedom. trade freedom, fiscal freedom, government size, monetary freedom, investment freedom, financial freedom, property rights, freedom from corruption and labor freedom. The freedom score range is 100 to 80 considered free, 79-70 mostly free, 69-60 moderately free, 59-50 mostly unfree, and 49-0 as repressed. Guess where the United States under President Barack Obama places: barely in the top ten. We are number nine on the scale. We are barley freer than Bahrain! The top ten is as follows:

1. Hong Kong -89.7
2. Singapore -87.2
3. Australia -82.5         
4. New Zealand -82.3
5. Switzerland -81.9
6. Canada -80.8
7. Ireland -78.7
8. Denmark -78.6
9. United States -77.8
10. Bahrain -77.7

Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control their own labor and property. In an economic free society governments allow the free movement of labor,capital and goods. Economic freedom promotes a higher standard of living, higher wages, cleaner environments, better health care, democracy and elimination of poverty. The Obama administrations tightening of government controls on our economy threatens all of these advances. We need new leadership in Washington D.C. Leadership that will once again cause the United States to be the freest nation on  earth. The bastion of liberty to the world. The hope of the repressed peoples of the earth and not the declining nation she has become under this inept, incompetent, and socialistic President we now have.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Obama's Grand Accomplishments - NOT!

$5 a gallon gas, an envisioned cap and trade plan that would bankrupt our coal companies and an Energy Secretary that says America needs European level gas prices. Well guess what Secretary Chu we are almost their. The President and Secretary Chu envision a sort of Euro-USA. Where socialism is the norm. Where we have $5-$6 dollar a gallon gas, where the dollar is rapidly being devalued and where a 10% unemployment rate is common place. We have arrived then. Mr. Obama has Europified us. We are no longer exceptional. We are no longer looked up to around the world. We are know just one the gang an average country. The $5 Trillion in additional debt he has saddled us with is like an anchor around the countries neck as it is struggling to stay ahead of the rest of the world. No thanks to the American apologist Mr. B. Hussein Obama. Just think now that we have $5 a gallon gas they can subsidize mass transit and make it sound like a good idea. They can push electric cars like the Volt. They can do all their 'green' wish list ideas and make it sound good because of the high energy prices. Just one catch to that, we would not have the high energy prices if it were not for their policies. The ban on off shore drilling, the hoped for cap and trade bill, the massive devaluing of the dollar (caused by their terrible fiscal policies), and Obama's massive non stop spending binge. When Obama was elected gas was $1.85 a gallon now it is hovering around $4.25 a gallon and over $5 and approaching $6 in some locations. Our unemployment rate was under 8% now in has been around 10% for the last 2 years. We were the most powerful and respected nation on earth, we have now lost that edge. The President used to be the leader of the free world, but now under Obama it appears he has abdicated that responsibility to President Sarkozy of France. The Dollar used to be the strongest most stable currency on earth now that too is faltering. Mr. Obama's policies have led to a devalued dollar. Our foreign policy approach was strong and respected now it is muddled and weak. Our country can not handle any more of President Obama's "accomplishments". The madness of his socialism experiments have got to stop. Lets hope it is not too late. America is very resilient when it has the right leadership in place. So don't count us out yet world. If we get rid of Obama we can get back on top. I hope.

Related Posts:

America's Financial Demise
7 Ways to save at Gas Pump
Rising Gas Prices/Declining Dollar
$14.2 Trillion National Debt and Counting

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Excerpts from Federalist #10 contrasting democracies & republican forms of government - James Madison

A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or extensive republics are more favorable to the election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:
In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.
In the next place, as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of the people being more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess the most attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.
It must be confessed that in this, as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of which inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number of electors, you render the representatives too little acquainted with all their local circumstances and lesser interests; as by reducing it too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and too little fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.
The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.

Obama administration to implement — by executive fiat — portions of the DISCLOSE Act.

This is a post of an article by  Hans A. von Spakovsky a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation :

An impeccable source has provided e with a copy of a draft Executive Order that the White House is apparently circulating for comments from several government agencies. Titled “Disclosure of Political Spending By Government Contractors,” it appears to be an attempt by the Obama administration to implement — by executive fiat — portions of the DISCLOSE Act.

This was the bill introduced last year by Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. The bill had onerous requirements that were duplicative of existing law and burdensome to political speech. It never passed Congress because of principled opposition to its unfair, one-side requirements that benefited labor unions at the expense of corporations. Democratic commissioners at the Federal Election Commission then tried to implement portions of the bill in new regulations. Fortunately, those regulations were not adopted because of the united opposition of the Republican commissioners.

As my source says:

It really is amazing — they lost in the Supreme Court, they lost in Congress, they lost at the FEC, so now the president is just going to do it by edict.

The draft Executive Order says it is intended to “increase transparency and accountability,” an interesting claim given the fact that federal contractors are already completely barred by 2 U.S.C. § 441c from making:

Any contribution of money or other things of value, or to promise expressly or impliedly to make any such contribution to any political party, committee, or candidate for public office or to any person for any political purpose or use.

Yet this proposed Executive Order would require government contractors to disclose:

(a) All contributions or expenditures to or on behalf of federal candidates, parties or party committees made by the bidding entity, its directors or officers, or any affiliates or subsidiaries within its control.

(b) Any contributions made to third party entities with the intention or reasonable expectation that parties would use those contributions to make independent expenditures or electioneering communications.

The problem is that this will require companies to delve into the personal political activities of their officers and directors — and require them to report political contributions those employees have made, not out of corporate funds (which is illegal), but out of their personal funds.

And note that these disclosure requirements will only apply to companies that make bids on government contracts. Federal employee unions that negotiate contracts for their members worth many times the value of some government contracts are not affected by this order. Neither are the recipients of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants.

Clearly, this administration is not interested in increasing “transparency and accountability” when it comes to forcing union leaders or the heads of liberal advocacy organizations such as Planned Parenthood from disclosing the personal political contributions they make to candidates running for federal office.

The draft order also tries to interfere with the First Amendment rights of contractors. It requires them to disclose independent expenditures that can be made legally on everything from politics to grassroots lobbying on issues. This is clearly intended to deter charitable and other contributions to third-party organizations, since the contractors will have to report any such contributions made with the “reasonable expectation” that the money will be used for First Amendment-protected activities.

“Reasonable expectation” is the kind of broad, nebulous legal term that can cover almost any situation that the government — and government prosecutors — want it to cover. This makes it almost impossible for contractors to know what the acceptable legal standard is for engaging in First Amendment activity.

This administration completely mischaracterized the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, especially when President Obama attacked the Court in his State of the Union speech. It misrepresented the intended effects and requirements of the DISCLOSE Act, which former FEC Chairman Brad Smith correctly observed should really have been called the “Democratic Incumbents Seeking to Contain Losses by Outlawing Speech in Elections Now” Act.

With this proposed Executive Order, the administration is engaging in a back-door maneuver that promotes transparency only in the form of transparent political gamesmanship. It’s an alarming proposal that should raise great concern among members of Congress and the American public.

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation ( and a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission.

Quote of the Day

"He is not here: for He is risen, as he said. Come see the place where the Lord lay."  Mathew 28:6

Saturday, April 23, 2011

President Obama A 'Dictator' & "Low level Socialist Agitator"

Rep. Alan West of Florida recently said about President Obama that he has a "third world dictator-like arrogance" and he also said "I am sick and tired of this class warfare, this Marxist, demagogic rhetoric that is coming from the President of the United States of America. It is not helpful for this country and it’s not going to move the ball forward as far as rectifying the economic situation in our country. And I’m not going to back away from telling what the truth is. There’s a great depth to my conviction, and part of my conviction is telling the truth. I don‘t think it’s very presidential when Barack Hussein Obama refers to my colleague, Paul Ryan, as a simple little accountant, either. So I think that when you look at what a community organizer is turning out to be, it does seem to be like a low-level socialist agitator." Rep. West at least can not be charged with racism with these statements because he too is African American. Finally a republican with a back bone who is not afraid to tell it like it is. President Obama is acting rude and very immature with alot of his remarks. The one about Repub's sitting in the back of the bus last year was very distasteful and unfortunate as well. Looks like the country elected the wrong first black President, Rep. West of Florida would have made a much better choice. Lets hope he decides to run this year after all.

Quote of the Day

"The Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion or the like."  -  United States Supreme Court 1980

"Religious worship and discussion are forms of speech and association protected by the First Amendment." United States Supreme Court 1981

"The Constitution does not require a complete separation of Church and State. It affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions and forbids hostility towards any."  -  United States Supreme Court 1985

Related Posts:

Separation of Church and State
Separation of Church and State Part 2

Friday, April 22, 2011

The Ryan Budget Plan Basics

1-Privatize Medicare (voucher system) leaving those over 55 years-of-age to stay on the current system. This allows those UNDER 55 years-of-age the CHOICE of what health care they want. Most Doctors and medical facilities do not like taking medicare or medicaid because the government either does not pay, does not pay what it is suppose to or does not pay within a reasonable amount of time.

2. Revamps medicaid so that it is gradually phased out. With Obamacare, if Obamacare, their is no need for medicaid and therefore no need to DUMP over $680 BILLION into that one system alone every year.

3-CLOSE Corporate Tax Holes so that companies, like GE, that support Obama do NOT get away with  paying no taxes.

4-Extend the Bush tax cuts: If the Bush tax cuts were repealed a significant number of the poorest workers would owe more in taxes. Also if they were repealed it would amount to the biggest tax increase in the history of planet Earth.

Democrats join Republicans in Threat to hold up vote on Debt Ceiling

President Obama is even starting to feel pressure from within his own party on holding up the vote on the debt ceiling Sen. Pryor of Arkansas said ""What I've told anyone who will listen to me in Washington, including my leadership is that I'm not going to vote for that unless there is a real and meaningful commitment to debt reduction." Republicans are demanding the vote be connected to budget and deficit reduction and a commitment to overhaul the tax code. Some democrats are beginning to see things that way too. Along with Senator Pryor other Dem's like Senator Manchin of West Virginia, Rep. Ross D-Ark. and Rep. Boren have all said they will not vote for raising the debt ceiling without significant cuts from budget. "So let me also continue to be clear about my position on the debt ceiling, I strongly believe we must adopt a long-term, responsible and realistic fiscal plan that reflects our values and defines priorities, or I will vote against raising the debt ceiling." Sen. Manchin D-WV said. Sen. Pryor said every federal program will have to face some cuts. It seems as though some Democrats are starting to sound like they are finally getting the fiscal picture. Some Dem's are waking up and smelling the federal budget disaster looming on the horizon. Lets hope enough of them wake up to the reality of our financial condition in time. The government needs to make structural spending cuts and soon if we are going to survive this budget and deficit disaster. To put perspective on the budget cuts the Republicans got out of the Dem's for the rest of this year, the cuts are only 10% of Obama's spending increase since he took office. We still need to cut the other 90% of that plus the Bush deficit we had when he left office. Still alot of work to do and a short time to get it done.

Related Post:

America's Financial Demise

Quote of the Day

"The spirit of man is more important than mere physical strength, and the spiritual fiber of a nation than its wealth." -  President Dwight D. Eisenhower

Land (home) Ownership Creates more Responsible Citizens

The right to own property is fundamental to a free society. Freedom is promoted by ownership of private property only when ownership rights are enforced by law. Eminent Domain needs to be looked at again. It is being used to widely and for frivolous reasons. A society that does not treat ownership rights as sacred is a society starting to loose some of its freedoms. History shows us that land ownership requirements for voting tends to lead to more stable societies. I am not saying we should go back to this requirement, I am just pointing out the obvious observation. Land ownership leads to more interest in how the big picture of the country is. Whereas no land ownership (no stake in societies responsibilities of paying property taxes and maintaining the land and desiring to see it increase in value) leads to voters who are easily swayed by the promises or the whims of the moment i.e. "Yes we can". Both political parties should be trying to promote responsible land (home) ownership. Promote responsible uses of ones monetary resources. Promote and emphasize the necessity for all to have tangible assets of some kind, so all can have a stake in society.  With some hard work and a little wisdom the average American can achieve home ownership and in so doing will become a more responsible member of the electorate. A course in personal finance and macroeconomics should be requirements for all students before completion of High School. This would lead to more financially knowledgeable citizens and a more stable republic.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Excerpts from Federalist #39 regarding republican form or government - James Madison

What, then, are the distinctive characters of the republican form? We may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is SUFFICIENT for such a government that the persons administering it be appointed, either directly or indirectly, by the people. The House of Representatives is elected immediately by the great body of the people. The Senate derives its appointment indirectly from the people. The President is indirectly derived from the choice of the people. The President is to continue in office for the period of four years. The President of the United States is impeachable at any time during his continuance in office. The tenure by which the judges are to hold their places, is, as it unquestionably ought to be, that of good behavior. Could any further proof be required of the republican complexion of this system, the most decisive one might be found in its absolute prohibition of titles of nobility, both under the federal and the State governments; and in its express guaranty of the republican form to each of the latter.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

7 Suggestions to Reform Tax Code, Balance Federal Budget & Fund Medicare and Social Security

I am offering 7 suggestions on how to Reform our broken tax code, help balance our federal budget and help fund Medicare and Social Security. Everyone needs to pay some taxes each year. We need to make all citizens stakeholders in what is going on in Washington D.C. No one should get benefits that our country provides them and in return pay no taxes.

1.) Limit the Earned Income Credit to no more that 90% of total tax pay-out per person. What I mean by tax-pay out is how much total taxes a person pays out. For example a person pays out lets say $500 in federal withholding, $1296 in Social Security tax and $576 in Medicare tax. The total E.I.C. credit that they could receive would be 90% of the total of these three combined or $2135. Under current law this person could receive a refund upwards of $6000. This person would receive the benefit of this huge refund plus all other benefits that they might be receiving through the year and have no net taxes of any kind paid. My suggested reform of E.I.C. would make them at least a partial stakeholder and not just a taker. (This would save approximately $30 billion)

2.) Increase Medicare and Social Security pay roll tax.  I suggest a small and modest increase in the withholding of these two taxes. I also suggest to not limit the income taxed for Social Security but to tax all of earned income for Social Security. I suggest increasing the Medicare tax rate from 1.45% to 1.9% and Social Security from 6.2% to 6.5%. This would increase over a years time the withheld tax for a person making $100,000 a year by $750. (This would bring in about $6 billion more a year)

3.) Means Test Social Security and Medicare.  I suggest adding a means test to qualify to receive Social Security Payments and Medicare coverage. Did you know someone like Donald Trump gets Social Security Checks every month. There needs to be established a fair upper income limit on receiving these benefits so the country can continue to provide the benefits to those who truly need them. (This would save about $70 billion a year)

4.) Add a 1% no tax liability surcharge to all returns.  If a person ends up with no tax liability after completing his return. There should be added a 1% no tax liability surcharge. This would mean at least everyone pays at least 1% of their income in taxes. This would make all adult citizens in the nation at least partial stakeholders in the national budget debate. ( This would bring in about $50 billion more each year)

5.) Eliminate some credits and deductions.  For example eliminate the Educator expense deduction, the Student loan interest deduction, The Hope and American Opportunity credit, the Energy credit, and the Daycare credit. (This would save approximately $15 billion a year)

6.) Increase the tax rates of those with incomes of $200,000 or more by just 1%.  ( This would bring in about $15 billion)

7.) Institute a national sales tax of .5%. No one would even miss the .5%, but it would sure make a difference in the federal budget. ( This would provide about $75 billion in additional revenue)

All these suggestion have a combined savings/increase in revenue of approximately $245 Billion. Combine these with budget cuts elsewhere in federal budget to arrive at balance. These are just suggestions I am offering. In no way am I saying I know it all, just offering some suggestions to the debate.

Related Posts:

Top 5 End of Year Tax Tips
Top 5 Things Wrong with the Tax Code

Quote of the Day

"Freedom is the natural condition of the human race, in which the Almighty intended men to live. Those who fight the purpose of the Almighty will not succeed. They always have been, they always will be beaten."  -  President Abraham Lincoln

Standard and Poor's Negative Outlook for U.S. Debt Obligations

Standard and Poor's downgraded the future outlook of U.S. debt from stable to negative. THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN AS A GIANT WARNING MESSAGE! Lawmakers get the picture, you need to fix this debt problem and the sooner the better. The downgrade is unheard of for the U.S. This is a signal they have some doubts on whether the U.S. can pay its future debt obligations. The national debt is now at 95% of GDP. For comparison it was hovering around 70% when Bush left office. As long as it is under 90% you can still control it, but over 90% it starts controlling you. Were we your average country that would be checkmate, game over, don't pass go, your done. Having the debt at 95% of GDP means basically we are like Greece. The only thing saving us right now is low interest rates and the fact the Dollar is the world's reserve currency. If either of those two were to change there would be dire consequences. "Serious reforms are needed to ensure America’s fiscal health ," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said in a written statement, calling S&P's announcement " a wake-up call to those in Washington asking Congress to blindly increase the debt limit." "It’s time for both sides to drop their partisan talking points and decide what we can do together while we still control our own destiny, If we refuse to negotiate within our own government, we will soon find ourselves negotiating with foreign governments and the international financial community on terms far less favorable than we enjoy today." Senator Tom Coburn said Monday. It's time to bring the budget back to balance. Reform entitlements, and start paying down our debt. The financial dooms day clock is fast approaching midnight. We need to get fiscal mess fixed and fast.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Sen. Demint Threatens Filibuster

Sen. Jim Demint R-SC. threatens a filibuster on the vote to raise the debt ceiling unless congress votes for a balanced budget amendment. He said he would filibuster the increase in the federal debt ceiling unless that vote takes place. Most Republicans say they will demand significant spending cuts and reforms as a condition to raising the debt ceiling, but none have gone as far as Sen. Demint. "I will oppose any attempt to vote to raise the limit on our $14 trillion debt until congress passes the balanced-budget amendment," Sen. Demint said. The balanced budget amendment would prohibit congress from running a deficit and it would take a two thirds vote by congress and ratification by the states. White House spokesman Jay Carney said "The issue here is the debt ceiling has to be raised, and it cannot be held hostage to a process that is very complicated and difficult,". Sec. Geitner said repeatedly on Sunday that lawmakers who flirt with taking us to the brink of the debt ceiling will bare the responsibility for the fall out of hitting it. He said just getting real close to it could be problematic. Well we finally have a Senator with some guts to do what is right, but we cannot hit the debt ceiling that would be devastating to our country.

Related Link:

Sunday, April 17, 2011

As reported at The Presidents numbers continue to slip downward. This is not good news for a man who wants to get re-elected. His polling has for the most part been in a downward direction since the passage of ObamaCare. Nothing he has done so far seems to be able to stop this. I think America is just finally seeing him for what he really is. An extremely left of center President. One who does not listen to the voters opinions and does what he wants regardless of what the country wants. The President is just too much of an ideologue. Unlike President Clinton who was able to pivot to the middle by this point in his Presidency and become an effective leader, President Obama seems to not be able to.

Quote of the Day

"Religion is the basis and Foundation of Government"  -  President Madison

"All men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrate"  -  President Madison


Over the last 60 years or so, there has been more or less a constant majority on the Supreme Court that has remained committed to removing religion from the public culture. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment may be used in a principled way to regulate government distinctions on the basis of religion, just as it is used to regulate government distinctions based on race or ethnicity. For example no one would take seriously a charge that St. Patricks day is a white supremacist holiday or that the Black History Month designation is unconstitutional. Why then is any religious references by government entities seemingly always challenged as unconstitutional? Madison did not think legal or even constitutional rights could limit natural rights. Madison evoked a broader 'natural right' to religious freedom. He did not think we should rely solely on what was in the constitution. The decisions of the supreme court to try to stop so-called state sponsorship of religion have infringed on our constitutional right to the free exercise of religion. We for example can no longer publicly pray freely in a public school. I would argue that this infringes on my right to freely exercise my religion. The lefts view of this sometimes sites Madison's "Detached Memorandum" so as to assert a strict view of this part of the first amendment, but the same left wants a broad and loose interpretation of the constitution to allow for a right to abort a child. You cant have it both ways guys. Religion and religious expressions of any faiths is not some destructive virus seeking to destroy America. On the contrary seeking to squelch such public and governmental references to religion is the virus that is undermining our core values as a culture. So does the Constitution call for separation of church and state? No it does not. Does it create a wall of separation as written by Jefferson? No it does not. Is the term 'seperatin of church and state' merely a metaphor for the practical application of the first amendment? Again no it is not. The first amendment guarantees our right to exercise our religion as we choose. It also says congress can not establish a state church, that is all. No separation of the two included there.

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Quote of the Day

In a 1935 radio broadcast, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared: "We cannot read the history of our rise and development as a nation, without reckoning with the place the Bible has occupied in shaping the advances of the Republic ... Where we have been the truest and most consistent in obeying its precepts, we have attained the greatest measure of contentment and prosperity."

In his Second Inaugural Address in 1937 he said "I shall do my utmost...seeking divine guidance."

In his Third Inaugural Address in 1941 he said "We go forward in the service of our country by the will of God."

Friday, April 15, 2011


The concept of separation of church and state refers to the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the government. The term comes from the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state," written by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. The original text reads: "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." This is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, authored by Jefferson and championed by Madison, it guaranteed that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination. Amendment 1  of the Constitution states - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. No where in the Constitution do the words separation of church and state appear. Under the United States Constitution, the treatment of religion by the government is broken into two clauses: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. Both are in regard to whether certain types of state actions would be an impermissible government establishment of religion. Scholars have distinguished between what can be called "friendly" and "hostile" separations of church and state The friendly type limits the interference of the church in state matters and also limits the interference of the state in church matters. The hostile variety, in contrast, tries to confine religion strictly to the home or church and limits religious education, rites of passage and public displays of faith. The following are some Supreme Court decisions about separation of church and state: McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) Court finds religious instruction in public schools a violation of the establishment clause and therefore unconstitutional, Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962) Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion Lemon v. Kurtzman, 91 S. Ct. 2105 (1971) Established the three part test for determining if an action of government violates First Amendment's separation of church and state:
1) the government action must have a secular purpose;
2) its primary purpose must not be to inhibit or to advance religion;
3) there must be no excessive entanglement between government and religion.
We don't deal with discrimination by pretending we are all male. We don't deal with racism by pretending we are all white. We don't deal with sickness by pretending we are all healthy. Why then do the courts try to deal with the concept of religion like we are all agnostic? Madison wrote "Religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it can only be directed by reason and conviction, not by force or violence, and therefore, all men are equally entitled to the FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION, according to the dictates of conscience." No where in the Constitution do the words separation of church and state appear. Why then is that the apparent goal of so many? Why then are religious references in government so shunned?

Quote of the Day

"can we really be surprised that the Almighty who created us in His image also bequeathed to us a world where we are most prosperous when we are most free?"  -  William McGurn  Vice President for News Corporation

Quote of the Day

"Let us unite, therefore, in imploring the Supreme Ruler of nations, to spread His holy protection over these United States."  -  President George Washington

What if the U.S. Hits the Debt Ceiling?

Secretary Geitner warned congress last week that the U.S. will smash into the debt ceiling sometime around May 16th. Once the government hits the current debt limit of $14.3 trillion it will be legally constrained from incurring anymore debt. This is a problem since the U.S. takes in only about 60 cents for every dollar it spends. Congress has raised the debt ceiling 74 times since 1962. Ten of those times in the last decade. It has almost become a yearly routine vote. It appears that congressional Republicans will not vote to raise the debt ceiling without considerable concessions from the Democrats. So what would happen if the U.S. did hit the debt ceiling and it was not raised? Immediately after this happens the Treasury Department can impose 'extraordinary actions' to pay the bills. This include the suspension of investing in government workers savings plan, and pulling Treasury securities out of a trust fund.  If the debt ceiling was not increased the government would have to cut $738 billion in government spending in the span of six months. In the worst case scenario the markets would crash world wide. The dollar would decline dramatically and foreign investor's would flee the country. The country's credit rating would be severely damaged. This would make it even harder to sell more debt later. The political ramifications for the party perceived to be in the blame would be Armageddon like.

Related post:

America's Financial Demise

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Quote of the Day

" The State may not establish a 'religion of secularism' in the sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion, thus preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe."  -    United States Supreme Court 1963  School District of Abington Township v. Schempp

America's Financial Demise?

America's debt recently hit $14.2 trillion. According to the Obama administration our Public debts will soon exceed 100 percent of GDP. History shows us countries that hit this level of indebtedness are rarely able to control it. This level of debt usually leads to the debasement of currency. Senator Jeff Sessions recently said "We've got to talk about the systematic problem we have here." Americas debt is the result of over four decades of structural deficits.There is plenty of blame to go around for this. This is a Republican and Democratic problem. During the last 42 years America has been running deficits the Republicans have controlled the White House for 28 of those years and the Dem's for just over 14 years. The only President to actually pay down some of that debt was President Clinton. President Obama for his part up till now instead of trying to do something about our spending problem, has slammed down the spending accelerator. It would be wrong to blame President Obama for our debt problem he is not the root cause, but he is a very big symptom. Both parties are responsible. Do your remember who started all the bail outs? Today we are starting to reap the consequences of our spending problems. Our National debt is almost out of control. We need both parties to work together to save our country from the abyss. All options need to be on the table. Including cuts to entitlements and some tax increases. We need to make sure this is not the beginning of the road to Americas financial demise.

Related Post:

$14.2 Trillion Debt & Counting!

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Quote of the Day

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."  -  President Thomas Jefferson

Your Share of National Debt $46,000 and climbing!

Every man, women and child in the United States from newborn to 110 share of the National Debt is $46,000 and going up by the minute. This means an average family of fours share of the National Debt is $184,000! The median income in the U.S. in 2009 was $49,777. This means the average income a person will make working an entire year is approximately their personal share of the National Debt. So if by some way everyone living in America could work for an entire year and give every penny they make to the federal government we could come close to paying off the debt. We would be about 5 Trillion short because of current year budget spending. It took the federal government 42 years to accumulate $14.2 trillion debt. It could be paid down in just thirty years.

14.2 Trillion National Debt & Counting

 Suppose you spend more money than you brought in. You might use your credit card to cover the difference. The next month it happens again and you use your credit card again.This is called a deficit. Eventually you would cut back your expenses so you would not have to keep borrowing. Well the Federal Government has been spending more than it brought in for over 500 months straight. That's right since 1969 we have been running deficits. The national debt in September of 2000 was 5.7 trillion dollars. The current national debt is a staggering 14.2 Trillion dollars! The national debt has almost tripled in the last decade. President Obama has added over 4 Trillion of debt to that amount in his little over two years in office. He has spent more than any President in history and in a shorter amount of time. His debt increase is unprecedented in the history of the world. It took President Bush for example almost his entire two terms in office to add that much to the national debt. One Trillion of that debt was added in the last few months of his time in office to try to offset the pending global economic depression. If left unchecked the Federal Government will not even be able to pay the interest on the national debt. Some say tax the rich more to bring down the deficit. The total worth of all billionaires in America in 2010 was $1.3 Trillion. If the government confiscated all their net worth and used it to bring down the deficit it would not be enough, and then what would you do the following year? The treasury department has the third largest expense in the Federal Government (that expense consits mostly of paying the interest payments on the National debt), only the  Defense Department and entitlements are more.  The government can not provide anything to anyone without first taking money from someone. We need to drastically cut federal spending and now. "There is no such thing as government money - only taxpayer money" William Weld.  One more quote " A politician cannot spend one dime on any spending project without first taking that dime from the person who earned it. So, when a politician votes for a spending bill he is saying that he believes the government should spend that particular dollar rather than the individual who worked for it " Neal Boortz.

Related Links:
CBO Economic Implosion 2037 
CBO Predictions Motivation for Lawmakers? 
CBO Model Predicts Crash of US Economy in 2037 
Common Sense Budget Proposal

Monday, April 11, 2011

Seven Ways to Save Money at the Gas Pump

No. 1: Fill up on off-days. The day of the week you fill up on will impact the price you pay. Although it is hard to know the exact day prices are lower, due to regional changes in pricing, usually filling up on Wednesdays helps reduce pricing. Prices usually are raised right before the weekend.
No. 2: Change how you drive.  Driving in rush hour burns up to 15% more gas. I know this is easier said then done.

No. 3: Don’t fill up in affluent or highly congested areas. Usually these areas offer gas at higher prices than those of just a couple miles away.

No. 4: Avoid high speeds. This is an obvious one. You tend to lose fuel efficiency as you get past 60 mph.

No. 5: Try a wholesale club. Stores like Sams Club or Costco usually offer a discount on gas.

No. 6: Get extra weight out of your vehicle. Removing excess weight out of your vehicle will improve your gas mileage.

No. 7: Use your smallest vehicle. Use your smallest most fuel efficient vehicle for most of your travel.

We need to develop a better energy policy in America. We need to get rid of the red tape hindering oil companies from being able to drill. We need to open up the north shore of Alaska to drilling. The oil companies have  environmentally friendly ways to drill and extract the oil. The polar bears will never know they are their. America is the Saudi Arabia of the world in coal. We need to push for development of clean coal technologies and take advantage of this abundant natural resource. We need to build more nuclear plants. I know this is controversial now considering what is going on in Japan, but we need to use all our available options to end our dependence on middle east oil. We need to tap into the oil sands of Canada and exploit that as much as possible. Finally we need new leaders in Washington. Ones who care more about the average citizen than they do about appeasing environmental groups.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Quote of the Day

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that 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 instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ---- The Declaration of Independence ---- God Bless America!

Principles Of Americanism / Sovereignty of the People

The principle of the Sovereignty of the People is one of the key principles of what I call Americanism. You have distinctive forms of government around the world. You have Communism, Marxism, Socialism, Dictatorships, you have so called Theocracies in the Middle East. I propose Americas form and attitude of governance is peculiar to her. I suggest no other country on earth has ever had such a form or governance and spirit of independence as has America. I am going to put forth what I perceive as the core principles of what I call Americanism. The first principle is the principle of the Sovereignty of the people. In America this principle is recognized by customs and proclaimed by our laws. It arrives unimpeded to the remotest parts of our land. This principle can be studied and seen in the affairs of the country. Example, the sovereign will of the people can be seen and expressed in the elections of our representatives. If we feel our sovereign rights are not being protected we will exercises our right to vote and vote the members of government we perceive to be in error out. In America all power comes from the hands of the people and we submit and trust that power to the hands of the elected government. If they break that trust they are not usually long in office. The people participate in the making of our laws by the choosing of our legislatures. We participate in the execution of our laws by the choosing of our executives. The people are the sovereigns of the political world in America. The power of all elected officials ultimately originates of the people, by the people and for the people. Let us guard earnestly this principle of Americanism and when it is threatened let us defend it!

Liberal Hate Speech

Examples of Liberal Hate Speech:

Howard Dean  "I hate Republicans and everything they stand for."
President Obama   "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
Jesse Jackson   "Hate and hurt are on a roll in America. If what was happening here was happening in South Africa, it’d be called racist apartheid. If it was happening in Germany, we’d call it Nazism. And in Italy, we’d call it fascism. Here we call it conservatism."
Al Gore  "He betrayed this country! He played on our fears! He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure pre-ordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place!"  Speaking about former President Bush.
Alec Baldwin  " We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families."
Rev. Jeremiah Wright   "God d#@* America for treating our citizens as less than human. God d#@* America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
Wanda Sykes   "I think Rush Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker but he was just so strung out on Oxycontin he missed his flight."
Louis Farrakhan  "White people are potential humans – they haven’t evolved yet."
Montel Williams  “Michele, slit your wrist. Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing [sic]… start at the collarbone.” Speaking about Rep. Michelle Bachman.

Hate speech is hate speech. It does not matter who is doing the hating. The liberals are guilty of this often, but they cry freedom of speech when they get caught. The vitriol of the left has got to stop. They need to stop saying conservatives are trying to steel food from grandma or enslave women. Just get real liberals, get respectful,  get patriotic, and get concerned about our future and not about your special interests!


Saturday, April 9, 2011

Abort Planned Parenthood Funding

Planned Parenthood performed 332,278 abortions in the United States in 2009, according to a fact sheet the group published last month. That is about as many as the 333,012 people who lived in the city of Cincinnati, Ohio, in 2009, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Planned Parenthood aborted an entire city of Americans! THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! De-fund Planned Parenthood! Planned Parenthood kills over 100 times as many Americans each year than al Qaeda did on the 9/11 attacks! The 332,278 abortions Planned Parenthood performed equals to an average of  one every 95 seconds.
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius moronically reasoned that cutting funding  to the organization would actually increase abortions. Talking about the proposed cuts to Planned Parenthood’s funding, Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, said that, ”This is an opportunity for the right wing in the House to really sock it to women.” How is decreasing funding to this organization and therefore increasing the number of live births of American women socking it to them. The logic for this funding is extremely illogical. Senator Chuck Schumer said “never, never, never going to pass the Senate.” That is unfortunate Senator, unborn children are Americans too.

Quote of the Day

"America was born a christian nation. America was born to exemplify that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelation of Holy Scriptures."    President Woodrow Wilson
President Obama did you catch that first part "a christian nation"!!!!!!

"we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation"     President Obama --- my how things have changed.

Government Shutdown, Not Yet.

Speaker Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have struck a deal that is being voted on in the house as I write this. The deal will fund the government through the end of next week to avoid a government shutdown. Next week negotiators will hammer out the details of the final budget agreement that will fund the budget till the end of the fiscal year. The controversial provision of taking funding away from planned parenthood was removed with the proviso that the Senate would hold a separate vote on it at a later date. The amount cut from this years budget is microscopic compared with what needs to be cut. The Republicans had this much trouble getting the Dem's to go along with cutting 30 some billion this year. What is going to happen when they start trying to cut Trillions? I think the Republicans blinked at the Democrats threats. I think the Dem's won this showdown, but the Republicans live to fight another day, and I have hope that they will keep fighting the good fight to free our country from the chains of this colossal debt. "This has been a lot of discussion and a long fight," said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Republicans fought to "create a better environment for job creators in our country." "difficult but important for the country." said Senator Harry Reid. The President said the cuts are "painful" but necessary for the economic future of our country.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Quote of the Day

" On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted. recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."  President Thomas Jefferson   ---  This should be required to be memorized by all federal judges and read in open court before all decisions are made!

Is Gov. Walker of Wisconsin a Republican Obama?

I am going to lay out some striking parallels between Governor Walker of Wisconsin and President Obama. First if you are going to pass landmark legislation, the kind of legislation that is a complete game changer, you need to build at least a partial bipartisan coalition. In example,Obama-Care, the President and the Dem's in congress passed this legislation on a strict party line vote. Governor Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin passed the collective bargaining legislation on a strict party line vote. Did not we all complain that Obama shoved Health care reform down our throats? That is what Governor Walker did with his controversial bill. I am not saying I am against the good intentions behind that bill. It just was crafted wrong, too broad of a bill, too partisan of a bill. All long lasting and ultimately good pieces of legislation have some bipartisan support or they are considered illegitimate. As a result of Obama passing health care the way he did extreme bitter feelings erupted on the republican side. As a result of Gov. Walker passing his bill the way he did extreme bitter feelings erupted on the Democratic side. Obama-Care is getting repeatedly challenged in court and even being deemed unconstitutional. Gov. Walkers bill is getting repeatedly challenged in court and even being deemed unconstitutional. You can not pass legislation no matter how good or how right you feel you are without at least some input from the opposing point of view. Compromise is the heart and soul of politics. Sure you have certain principles you absolutely will not compromise on, but after that you need to negotiate. People took to the streets and our capital building in protest of Obama-care. People took to the streets and the Capitol in Madison in protest of Gov. Walkers bill. Obama received voter backlash to his tactics and Dem's got voted out of office. Will Gov. Walker receive the same backlash?

Government Shutdown/Budget Battle

 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the odds on a government shutdown are "no better than 50-50". After four White House meetings in 48 hours between President Barack Obama and congressional leaders no agreement on a spending plan for the rest of the current fiscal year had been reached, increasing the chances for a partial government shutdown to begin Friday at midnight. Speaker Boehner and Senator Harry Reid issued a joint statement “We have narrowed the issues, however, we have not yet reached an agreement. We will continue to work through the night to attempt to resolve our remaining differences.” The House Republicans passed another week long budget spending bill to keep the government going. It would  fund the Pentagon and pay our soldiers for the rest of the fiscal year. Senator Harry Reid said it was a "non-starter". Let me get this straight, Senator Reid would rather score political points instead of pay our soldiers what they are due! President Obama said he would veto the plan if it reached his desk. Veto paying the soldiers who are fighting and dying this very minute to keep us free, are you kidding me? Speaking about this plan Senate Minority Leader MConnell said "This is the only proposal out there that keeps the government open, If a shutdown does occur, our Democratic friends have no one to blame but themselves." "If we are serious about getting something done we should be able to complete a deal, get it passed and avert a shutdown," Obama said. Apparently The President, Senator Reid, Minority Leader Pelosi and the rest of the Dem's are not serious then!

Related Posts:

2037 CBO Economic Implosion could happen sooner!
Rising Gas Prices/Declining Dollar

Wednesday, April 6, 2011


Excerpts from an interview with Donald Trump:

Do you think given all the issues that this country is facing that this is something that resonates with the public? That they care about this?
The Constitution of the United States…great document. And you agree with it?
Yeah, sure.
It says you have to be born in this country. Essential. Have to be born in this country, okay? If he wasn’t born in this country, he has conned the whole world.
But you’re saying it’s a con. That’s what you’re saying.
DONALD TRUMP:I’m not saying anything. I’m saying--
Sure you are.
I am saying I want to see the birth certificate. It’s very simple. I want to see the birth certificate. How come his own family doesn’t know which hospital he was born in? How come-- forget about birth certificates. Let’s say there’s no birth certificate. How come in the hospital itself, okay? This is one of the…in the hospital itself, there’s no records of his birth. In other words, it doesn’t say how much they paid, where is the doctor, here’s your room bill. You know, all the
MEREDITH VIEIRA:You’ve been privy to all of this to know this?
Well, I have people that actually have been studying it and they cannot believe what they’re talking.
You have people now out there searching-- I mean, in Hawaii?
Absolutely. And they cannot believe what they’re finding. And I’m serious

This could be big.

Quote of the Day

Thomas Jefferson said, "In questions of power let us hear no more of trust in men, but bind them down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution."

2037 CBO Economic Implosion - It Could Happen Alot Sooner!!

The interest payment on the National Debt in 2010 was over 400 Billion dollars. That was with an average interest rate for the year at about .025%. This interest rate controls how much the Federal Government has to pay on the debt, kinda like a credit card, a low rate makes the payments lower and a high rate makes the payments higher. The Federal Tax Revenue for fiscal year 2010 was 2.345 Trillion dollars. So roughly about 17% of the total tax revenue of 2010 was used to pay just the interest on the National Debt. Compared with total expenditures of other programs: NASA 6 Billion, The Department of Education 31 Billion, and The Department of Transportation 26 Billion dollars. The bad news is the historical average interest rate is 6.45% with an all time high of 20% in March of 1980. Can you imagine the dire consequences if the interest rate was to just go up to the historical average? If the interest rate climbed back to just the historical average the interest payment on the National Debt would be more than the total tax revenue for the entire year! This would leave the Federal Government with just two options: to default on the National Debt or to resort to devaluing the dollar. Brazil when faced with a similar crisis several years ago devalued their currency. When you devalue currency this lead to hyperinflationism. This would lead to the quality of life in the U.S. dropping by at least 25% if not a whole lot more. The western European nations would have a higher quality of life than the U.S. America as we know it would cease to exist, but this is a worst case scenario. Lets hope and pray that our politicians wont let it get this bad. What we need is honest leadership in Washington on this, and we need it NOW!


2037 Predictions-Motivation for Law Makers
CBO Budget Model Predicts Crash Of US Economy in 2037

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Quote of the Day

"The Only thing we have to fear is fear itself....we humbly ask the blessing of God. May he protect each and everyone of us! May he guide me in the days to come!"  Franklin Delano Roosevelt

CBO 2037 Predictions-Motivation for lawmakers?

The Congressional Budget Office budget model predicts the U.S. budget will be unsustainable and crash by the year 2037. Reducing and eliminating the deficit and starting to pay down the public debt should be at the top of every one's to-do list in D.C. We are talking about the end of our country as we know it. The CBO budget model literally predicts that America as we know her will cease to exist! Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi made some statements about Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's proposed budget today. She seemed to be suggesting that he wanted to steal money and take food away from seniors. Why don't the Democrats get it. We need to get real serious about fixing our budget problems real fast. Quit trying to score cheap political points. Show some leadership and get to work on the impeding implosion of our budget and economy. What the Ryan plan really does is reform the tax code and closes alot of corporate loop holes. Big corporations are not getting special treatment. Under the Ryan plan they will pay alot more taxes than they do now. The Ryan plan has deliberate and specific protections written into it for seniors. Seniors will be financially better off under the Ryan plan than any alternative offered by the Democrats, oh shoot wait a minute they have not offered any alternatives yet!  Also more bad news this week for the Dem's, a recent poll states that 77% of Americans think that 100 billion in cuts is not enough, let along the 61 billion the Republicans are trying to get past. That meas only 23% of Americans think cutting less that 100 billion is the path to choose. Come on Democrats get real and get on the Budget Reform train before it leaves the station!

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Lybian Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) on the front lines of Lybian rebels!

There are various factions that make up the Libyan opposition: Royalists, defectors from the Qadhafi regime, members of the Libyan Armed Forces, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), the National Conference for the Libyan Opposition (NCLO) which acts as an umbrella organization.Rarely acknowledged by the mainstream media, Al-Jamaa al-Islamiyyah al-Muqatilah bi Libya, the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is an integral part of the Libyan Opposition. The LIFG, which is part of  al Qaeda, according to reports,  is in the front lines of the armed insurrection. The LIFG is categorized by the UN Security Council as terrorists. In a cruel twist of irony The United States and the Allies are in violation of their own anti-terrorism laws and policies, while being simultaneously aligned with al Qaeda in the form of the LIFG in Libya and fighting a war against them elsewhere across the globe. There are even indications that the CIA and MI6 may have provided support to the LIFG in years past. The anti-terrorism policy of the US seriously needs to get a second and even a third look. We needed to do something to keep the innocent civilians from being slaughtered, but we are now in the middle of a very complicated mess. It is ridiculous to be helping the LIFG out after knowing they are part of al Qaeda.

The Party of NO Leadership

Sen. Harry Reid and the Democrats, seem to be pinning their reelection hopes on blaming the Republicans for a government shutdown. Is this the extent of what they have to offer our country? Is this the extent of their intellectual capacity? Is this all they have to say about our budget crisis? Do they have any alternatives of their own? Do we have a President that has any idea on what to do about our budget problems? Do the Democrats care about our budget problems? I hope they do care. I hope they do have some alternatives. I hope they start honestly engaging the Republicans and the American people about our tremendous budget train wreck that is fast approaching. America needs leadership on both sides of the political spectrum. We are facing the possible implosion of our nation in just a couple of decades. Sen. Reid, Mr President lead!

Senator Harry Reid "radical, unrealistic, unreasonable..."

"So let me reiterate my hope that the Republican leadership recognizes they can't continue to be pulled to the right by the radical, unrealistic, unreasonable…faction: the Tea Party." said Senator Harry Reid D-NV about the Republicans wanting to just cut 61 billion dollars from this years budget which has a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit. That is only a 4.3%  proposed cut of the deficit for this year, and Sen. Reid labels a 4.3% cut of a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit as "radical, unrealistic, unreasonable..." are you serious Senator? At the rate you are proposing to cut the deficit it would take us nearly a 100 years to reach balance. Have you not seen the CBO report that predicts an economic melt down by the year 2037? While mentioning the House passed spending cut proposal of 61 billion dollars for this year, House Speaker John Boehner said on Wednesday, "It's time for Senate Democrats to pass a bill. The House has passed our bill and it's been nearly 40 days."
"Now the Senate says, 'We have a plan,'" Boehner added. "Well great. Pass the damn thing! Alright? And send it over here and let's have real negotiations." Sen. Harry Reid has had over forty days in a Senate the Dem's control and he so-called "leads" and he can not pass a simple spending reduction proposal, but he can sure criticize others who have. Democrats are blasting the proposed republican spending cuts as to deep and too extreme, yet I sill fail to see how a 4.3% reduction in current year spending which will still leave us with over a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit is extreme. What is "radical, unrealistic, unreasonable..." is Senator Harry Reid and the Democrats who care more about their party and scoring political points than they do about their country's future!

Extremely Irresponsible Sen. Chuck Schumer stands by his Extreme Coments!

The extremely, ignorant of the Constitution, Senator Chuck Shumer D-NY stands by his comments where he characterized the Tea Party as extreme. "You know, we have three branches of government. We have a House. We have a Senate. We have a President." One of the Senator's extremely ignorant quotes about the three branches of government, which are actually legislative, judicial, and executive.  "The American people are seeing the Tea Party for what it is -- extreme," Schumer said. No in fact the American people are seeing you as extreme because of your extreme disregard for the future of the country. The Tea Party knows we need to make drastic cuts in the Federal budget or our economy and government will crash and dissolve by the year 2037 according to the independent non party affiliated CBO. Part of our budget mess you Senator Schumer our extremely responsible for thanks to your extreme comment on the matter "Let me say this, to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little tiny, yes, porky amendments - the American people really don't care. " Senator Chuck Schumer I think the American people care about your extreme spending habits and your extremely uncaring attitude about our budget crisis. Senator Schumer seems to care more about scoring temporary political points than he cares about the future prosperity of our country.