Thursday, March 25, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
How We Could Fix Congress
I know many of you will say "this is impossible." Let me remind you, Congress has the lowest approval rating of any entity in Government. Now is the time when Americans will join together to reform Congress - the entity that represents us.
We need to get a Senator to introduce this bill in the US Senate and a Representative to introduce a similar bill in the US House. These people will become American heroes.
**********************************
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
1. Term Limits.
12 years only, one of the possible options below..
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms
2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.
We need to get a Senator to introduce this bill in the US Senate and a Representative to introduce a similar bill in the US House. These people will become American heroes.
**********************************
Congressional Reform Act of 2010
1. Term Limits.
12 years only, one of the possible options below..
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms
2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Obamacare Bill Turns the IRS Into the Secret Police
No three letters strike fear in the hearts of Americans that I-R-S. According to a new report by the GOP members of the House Ways and Means committee, If the Senate Obamacare bill gets passed by the house, the IRS is going to gets a lot more intimidating because it is going to get a slew of new responsibilities. They be acting as Barack Obama's not so secret health insurance police.
“If the Democrats’ health care bill becomes law, the IRS could have to hire more than 16,000 additional agents, auditors and other workers just to enforce all the new taxes and penalties,” said Ways and Means Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI). “It is a dangerous expansion of the IRS’s power and reach into the lives of virtually every American.”
Under the Individual Mandate Tax (IMT) provision in the bill, the part that forces you to purchase Obamacare whether you want it or not, the progressive Democrats make the IRS the chief enforcer for a new government-run health insurance system.
The IRS would be in charge of verifying that every American taxpayer has obtained acceptable health coverage for every month of the year. If the IRS determines that a taxpayer lacks acceptable insurance for even a single month, then the IRS would impose a
new tax on that taxpayer, even auditing the taxpayer and could assess interest and penalties on top of the tax. This is an unprecedented new role for the IRS – one that will inject the federal government even further into the lives of American families. The bill also gives the IRS some new "teeth" to strike fear in the hears of the people with, including:
* IRS agents verify if you have “acceptable” health care coverage
* IRS has the authority to fine you up to $2,250 or 2 percent of your income (whichever is greater) for failure to prove that you have purchased “minimum essential coverage”
* IRS can confiscate your tax refund
* IRS audits are likely to increase
* IRS will need up to $10 billion to administer the new health care program this decade
* IRS may need to hire as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents and other employees to investigate and collect billions in new taxes from Americans Nearly half of all these new individual mandate taxes will be paid by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty ($66,150 for a family of four). There goes that less than $250,000 thing the POTUS promised.
And then the Pièce de résistance:
* The IRS is barred from imposing these taxes and penalties on illegal immigrants
Lets put it a different way, if you are here legally you are screwed, but if you are here illegally, hey don't worry, be happy.
The report warns of the danger of giving the IRS double duty:
The 2009 National Taxpayer Advocate’s report to Congress includes an extensive and ominous discussion on the risks and challenges involved in running social programs through the tax system. The report expresses concern that the IRS has neither the mission nor the expertise to perform such tasks.
“When social program delivery is grafted to traditional IRS activities,
there arises a potential conflict with the IRS’s traditional mission [of revenue collection],” the report states.
The Taxpayer Advocate discusses these concerns in the context of refundable credits such as the earned income tax credit, but the analysis is especially timely considering that the IRS could soon be responsible for administering large portions of the nation’s health care system – a social program that dwarfs any of the existing refundable credits.
The IRS' new powers will simply be another loss of freedom from the folks who brought you "hope and change."
“If the Democrats’ health care bill becomes law, the IRS could have to hire more than 16,000 additional agents, auditors and other workers just to enforce all the new taxes and penalties,” said Ways and Means Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI). “It is a dangerous expansion of the IRS’s power and reach into the lives of virtually every American.”
Under the Individual Mandate Tax (IMT) provision in the bill, the part that forces you to purchase Obamacare whether you want it or not, the progressive Democrats make the IRS the chief enforcer for a new government-run health insurance system.
The IRS would be in charge of verifying that every American taxpayer has obtained acceptable health coverage for every month of the year. If the IRS determines that a taxpayer lacks acceptable insurance for even a single month, then the IRS would impose a
new tax on that taxpayer, even auditing the taxpayer and could assess interest and penalties on top of the tax. This is an unprecedented new role for the IRS – one that will inject the federal government even further into the lives of American families. The bill also gives the IRS some new "teeth" to strike fear in the hears of the people with, including:
* IRS agents verify if you have “acceptable” health care coverage
* IRS has the authority to fine you up to $2,250 or 2 percent of your income (whichever is greater) for failure to prove that you have purchased “minimum essential coverage”
* IRS can confiscate your tax refund
* IRS audits are likely to increase
* IRS will need up to $10 billion to administer the new health care program this decade
* IRS may need to hire as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents and other employees to investigate and collect billions in new taxes from Americans Nearly half of all these new individual mandate taxes will be paid by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty ($66,150 for a family of four). There goes that less than $250,000 thing the POTUS promised.
And then the Pièce de résistance:
* The IRS is barred from imposing these taxes and penalties on illegal immigrants
Lets put it a different way, if you are here legally you are screwed, but if you are here illegally, hey don't worry, be happy.
The report warns of the danger of giving the IRS double duty:
The 2009 National Taxpayer Advocate’s report to Congress includes an extensive and ominous discussion on the risks and challenges involved in running social programs through the tax system. The report expresses concern that the IRS has neither the mission nor the expertise to perform such tasks.
“When social program delivery is grafted to traditional IRS activities,
there arises a potential conflict with the IRS’s traditional mission [of revenue collection],” the report states.
The Taxpayer Advocate discusses these concerns in the context of refundable credits such as the earned income tax credit, but the analysis is especially timely considering that the IRS could soon be responsible for administering large portions of the nation’s health care system – a social program that dwarfs any of the existing refundable credits.
The IRS' new powers will simply be another loss of freedom from the folks who brought you "hope and change."
Why You Should Oppose Obamacare: 32 Quotes From Democrats
The (Healthcare) bill that’s coming through the House, with or without the public option, isn’t good for America. -- Rep. John Adler (D-NJ)
There's a lot of discomfort with the reconciliation process, the self-implementing rule, where you wouldn't have a formal vote on maybe the most important policy of the past 40 years. I have a big issue with the way they're doing the process. I think it's wrong and my constituents don't like it. -- Jason Altmire
Reconciliation would hurt healthcare reform, it would make it partisan, it would hurt, it would stymie it, it would make it very partisan. -- Max Baucus (D-MT)
There’s going to be a tendency on the part of our people to be in denial about all this, but if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up. -- Evan Bayh
You know we’re going to control the insurance companies. -- Joe Biden
I was one of the authors of the legislation that created the budget reconciliation process in 1974, and I am certain that putting health care reform and climate change legislation on a freight train through Congress is an outrage that must be resisted. -- Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Bluntly put, this is the political reality: First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes. -- Patrick H. Caddell & Douglas E. Schoen
Pelosi says she might use a procedural tactic where the House will vote on the package of fixes to the Senate bill, and then that vote would signify that lawmakers- quote, 'deem' the health care bill to be passed.
Politically speaking, this is beyond sleazy. It's meant to protect House Democrats, who are all running for reelection in November, from having to make a tough vote up or down on health care reform. Pelosi says of this process- quote, 'I like it, because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill,' unquote. In Nancy Pelosi's world, accountability is a dirty word. -- Jack Cafferty
As I said publicly, I can't vote for a bill that will publicly fund abortion. -- Chris Carney (D-Pa.)
I don't believe reconciliation was ever intended for (health care reform). It doesn't work well for writing major, substantive legislation. -- Kent Conrad (D-ND)
What good is reading the (health care) bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill? -- John Conyers (D-MI)
The reason tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on. And that's the plain and simple truth. -- Howard Dean
The last time I had to confront something like (these town halls) was when I voted for the civil rights bill and my opponent voted against it. At that time, we had a lot of Ku Klux Klan folks and white supremacists and folks in white sheets and other things running around causing trouble.” -- John Dingell (D-MI)
While I certainly support this initiative...I will not bend on the principle of federal funding on abortion. They are going to have to do it without me and without the other pro-life Democrats. -- Steve Dreihaus (OH-1)
Anyone who would stand before you and say ‘well, if you pass health care reform next year’s health care premiums are going down,’ I don’t think is telling the truth. I think it is likely they would go up. -- Dick Durbin
Insurance companies win. Time to kill this monstrosity coming out of the Senate. -- Kos
This bill represents a giveaway to the insurance industry. $70 billion dollars a year, and no guarantees of any control over premiums, forcing people to buy private insurance, five consecutive years of double-digit premium increases. -- Dennis Kucinich
The problem is this we are spending almost a trillion dollars and folks are telling me I should vote yes and we will fix it later. You wouldn't buy a car for a trillion dollars and say yeah, it doesn't run but we will fix it later. -- Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.)
(The Slaughter Rule is) disingenuous. It would really call into question the credibility of the House. -- Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.)
And what I believe that means is we’ve got to break out of what I call, sort of, the 50-plus-one pattern of presidential politics. Which is, you have nasty primaries where everybody’s disheartened. Then you divide the country 45 percent on one side, 45 percent on the other, 10 percent in the middle — all of them apparently live in Florida and Ohio — and battle it out. And maybe you eke out a victory of 50-plus-one, but you can’t govern. I mean, you get Air Force One, there are a lot of nice perks to being president, but you can’t deliver on health care. We’re not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-one strategy. -- Barack Obama
You know I respect what the Clinton's tried to do in 1993 in moving health reform forward. But they made one really big mistake, and that is they took all their people and all their experts into a room and then they closed the door. We will work on this process publicly. It'll be on C-SPAN. It will be streaming over the net. -- Barack Obama
How many people are getting insurance through their jobs right now? Raise your hands. All right. Well, a lot of those folks, your employer it’s estimated would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent, which means they could give you a raise. -- Barack Obama
I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate. -- Barack Obama
We said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. -- Barack Obama
Bipartisanship is a two-way street. A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes. Republicans have left their imprint. -- Nancy Pelosi
(The Slaughter Rule is) more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know. But I like it because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill. -- Nancy Pelosi
These disruptions (at Town Halls) are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views -- but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) (D-MI)
While deeming, like reconciliation, has been used by Republicans and Democrats in the past, the context in which it would be used in this case leads me to conclude that it would poison an already terribly partisan atmosphere and leave the Congress even less able to find bipartisan solutions to fiscal problems that are on the verge of becoming overwhelming. -- Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.)
No one has talked about reconciliation, but that's what you folks have talked about ever since that came out. -- Harry Reid
I do not like the slaughter rule, it lacks honesty and transparency. -- Joe Sestak
Without a public option, it’s just a giveaway to the insurance companies, and it does nothing to control costs. -- Patrick Robinson, spokesman for MoveOn
If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing. Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about. -- Bart Stupak
Republicans and their allied groups -- desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill -- are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right-wing extremists funded by K Street lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of healthcare in America taking place in congressional districts across the country. -- Democratic National Committee communications director Brad Woodhouse
There's a lot of discomfort with the reconciliation process, the self-implementing rule, where you wouldn't have a formal vote on maybe the most important policy of the past 40 years. I have a big issue with the way they're doing the process. I think it's wrong and my constituents don't like it. -- Jason Altmire
Reconciliation would hurt healthcare reform, it would make it partisan, it would hurt, it would stymie it, it would make it very partisan. -- Max Baucus (D-MT)
There’s going to be a tendency on the part of our people to be in denial about all this, but if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up. -- Evan Bayh
You know we’re going to control the insurance companies. -- Joe Biden
I was one of the authors of the legislation that created the budget reconciliation process in 1974, and I am certain that putting health care reform and climate change legislation on a freight train through Congress is an outrage that must be resisted. -- Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Bluntly put, this is the political reality: First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes. -- Patrick H. Caddell & Douglas E. Schoen
Pelosi says she might use a procedural tactic where the House will vote on the package of fixes to the Senate bill, and then that vote would signify that lawmakers- quote, 'deem' the health care bill to be passed.
Politically speaking, this is beyond sleazy. It's meant to protect House Democrats, who are all running for reelection in November, from having to make a tough vote up or down on health care reform. Pelosi says of this process- quote, 'I like it, because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill,' unquote. In Nancy Pelosi's world, accountability is a dirty word. -- Jack Cafferty
As I said publicly, I can't vote for a bill that will publicly fund abortion. -- Chris Carney (D-Pa.)
I don't believe reconciliation was ever intended for (health care reform). It doesn't work well for writing major, substantive legislation. -- Kent Conrad (D-ND)
What good is reading the (health care) bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill? -- John Conyers (D-MI)
The reason tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on. And that's the plain and simple truth. -- Howard Dean
The last time I had to confront something like (these town halls) was when I voted for the civil rights bill and my opponent voted against it. At that time, we had a lot of Ku Klux Klan folks and white supremacists and folks in white sheets and other things running around causing trouble.” -- John Dingell (D-MI)
While I certainly support this initiative...I will not bend on the principle of federal funding on abortion. They are going to have to do it without me and without the other pro-life Democrats. -- Steve Dreihaus (OH-1)
Anyone who would stand before you and say ‘well, if you pass health care reform next year’s health care premiums are going down,’ I don’t think is telling the truth. I think it is likely they would go up. -- Dick Durbin
Insurance companies win. Time to kill this monstrosity coming out of the Senate. -- Kos
This bill represents a giveaway to the insurance industry. $70 billion dollars a year, and no guarantees of any control over premiums, forcing people to buy private insurance, five consecutive years of double-digit premium increases. -- Dennis Kucinich
The problem is this we are spending almost a trillion dollars and folks are telling me I should vote yes and we will fix it later. You wouldn't buy a car for a trillion dollars and say yeah, it doesn't run but we will fix it later. -- Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.)
(The Slaughter Rule is) disingenuous. It would really call into question the credibility of the House. -- Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.)
And what I believe that means is we’ve got to break out of what I call, sort of, the 50-plus-one pattern of presidential politics. Which is, you have nasty primaries where everybody’s disheartened. Then you divide the country 45 percent on one side, 45 percent on the other, 10 percent in the middle — all of them apparently live in Florida and Ohio — and battle it out. And maybe you eke out a victory of 50-plus-one, but you can’t govern. I mean, you get Air Force One, there are a lot of nice perks to being president, but you can’t deliver on health care. We’re not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-one strategy. -- Barack Obama
You know I respect what the Clinton's tried to do in 1993 in moving health reform forward. But they made one really big mistake, and that is they took all their people and all their experts into a room and then they closed the door. We will work on this process publicly. It'll be on C-SPAN. It will be streaming over the net. -- Barack Obama
How many people are getting insurance through their jobs right now? Raise your hands. All right. Well, a lot of those folks, your employer it’s estimated would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent, which means they could give you a raise. -- Barack Obama
I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate. -- Barack Obama
We said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. -- Barack Obama
Bipartisanship is a two-way street. A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes. Republicans have left their imprint. -- Nancy Pelosi
(The Slaughter Rule is) more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know. But I like it because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill. -- Nancy Pelosi
These disruptions (at Town Halls) are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views -- but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) (D-MI)
While deeming, like reconciliation, has been used by Republicans and Democrats in the past, the context in which it would be used in this case leads me to conclude that it would poison an already terribly partisan atmosphere and leave the Congress even less able to find bipartisan solutions to fiscal problems that are on the verge of becoming overwhelming. -- Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.)
No one has talked about reconciliation, but that's what you folks have talked about ever since that came out. -- Harry Reid
I do not like the slaughter rule, it lacks honesty and transparency. -- Joe Sestak
Without a public option, it’s just a giveaway to the insurance companies, and it does nothing to control costs. -- Patrick Robinson, spokesman for MoveOn
If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing. Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about. -- Bart Stupak
Republicans and their allied groups -- desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill -- are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right-wing extremists funded by K Street lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of healthcare in America taking place in congressional districts across the country. -- Democratic National Committee communications director Brad Woodhouse
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Africa Aid goes for Weapons
The BBC tells us aid recipients in Ethiopia during the famine of 1984-85 were rebels who perpetrated a gigantic fraud to buy weapons 1.
So if private charities can easily be duped, then perhaps it would be safer and more efficient to execute payment schemes government-to-government such as those mediated by the World Bank? Well, that is even worse: Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo has been warning us for years that such bilateral programs are counter-productive; as Moyo puts it:
"Foreign aid props up corrupt governments — providing them with freely usable cash. These corrupt governments interfere with the rule of law, the establishment of transparent civil institutions, and the protection of civil liberties, making both domestic and foreign investment in poor countries unattractive. Greater opacity and fewer investments reduce economic growth, which leads to fewer job opportunities and increasing poverty levels. In response to growing poverty, donors give more aid, which continues the downward spiral of poverty. This is the vicious cycle of aid.2"
Please, for God's sake, Bono, Bob Geldof, Boy George, David Bowie, Dennis Thomas, George Michael and all you other celebrities who think you are helping, please stop. All you are doing is adding more hunger, disease, and death to Africa. If you have any mercy in your heart, please investigate what your actions have already done and promise to stop doing anymore in the future.
So if private charities can easily be duped, then perhaps it would be safer and more efficient to execute payment schemes government-to-government such as those mediated by the World Bank? Well, that is even worse: Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo has been warning us for years that such bilateral programs are counter-productive; as Moyo puts it:
"Foreign aid props up corrupt governments — providing them with freely usable cash. These corrupt governments interfere with the rule of law, the establishment of transparent civil institutions, and the protection of civil liberties, making both domestic and foreign investment in poor countries unattractive. Greater opacity and fewer investments reduce economic growth, which leads to fewer job opportunities and increasing poverty levels. In response to growing poverty, donors give more aid, which continues the downward spiral of poverty. This is the vicious cycle of aid.2"
Please, for God's sake, Bono, Bob Geldof, Boy George, David Bowie, Dennis Thomas, George Michael and all you other celebrities who think you are helping, please stop. All you are doing is adding more hunger, disease, and death to Africa. If you have any mercy in your heart, please investigate what your actions have already done and promise to stop doing anymore in the future.
Pelosi and healthcare
"(Since Pelosi) does not have enough Democratic, much less Republican, votes to pass it, the door she will be kicking through is the back door. Pelosi told the bloggers she favors using the self-executing rule strategy in which the House would pass the Senate health care bill without going on the record as specifically voting for it. 'I like it,' Pelosi said of the scheme, 'because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill.' The strategy of passing the Senate bill while avoiding a direct vote, writes (reform advocate Ezra Klein), 'is all about plausible deniability for House members who don't want to vote for the Senate bill.'"
Lovely. Members can tell their constituents "I voted to pass it, but I didn't vote for 'it', if you know what I'm saying..."
"In a particularly Alice-in-Wonderland moment, Pelosi argued that the debate over health care reform can begin after the bill is passed. 'Pelosi said passing the bill would allow Dems to undertake a 'debate' with Republicans over 'what is the balanced role that government should have,' writes another pro-reform blogger at the Post, Greg Sargent. According to Sargent, Pelosi explained, 'We have to take it to the American people, to say, this is the choice that you have. This is the vision that they have for your health and well being, and this is the vision that we have.' Again, in Pelosi's scenario, that debate would occur after the bill is passed."
The anti-Democratic arrogance of the Democrats, and their contempt for Americans, is stunning.
Lovely. Members can tell their constituents "I voted to pass it, but I didn't vote for 'it', if you know what I'm saying..."
"In a particularly Alice-in-Wonderland moment, Pelosi argued that the debate over health care reform can begin after the bill is passed. 'Pelosi said passing the bill would allow Dems to undertake a 'debate' with Republicans over 'what is the balanced role that government should have,' writes another pro-reform blogger at the Post, Greg Sargent. According to Sargent, Pelosi explained, 'We have to take it to the American people, to say, this is the choice that you have. This is the vision that they have for your health and well being, and this is the vision that we have.' Again, in Pelosi's scenario, that debate would occur after the bill is passed."
The anti-Democratic arrogance of the Democrats, and their contempt for Americans, is stunning.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Judge Andrew P Napolitano Congress & healthcare
Andrew P. Napolitano is a former New Jersey Superior Court Judge and now a political and legal analyst for Fox News Channel. Napolitano started on the channel in 1998, and currently serves as the network's senior judicial analyst, commenting on legal news and trials. He is a graduate of Princeton University (where he was a founding member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton) and Notre Dame Law School [Wiki].
Judge Napolitano, the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey, explains that Congress does not have the Constitutional power to regulate healthcare.
Judge Napolitano, the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey, explains that Congress does not have the Constitutional power to regulate healthcare.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Pelosi explains why they have to pass the healthcare bill
Reassuring to know she is #2 in line for the presidency
Sunday, March 7, 2010
U.S. Is Not Enforcing Iran Sanctions
U.S. Is Not Enforcing Iran Sanctions-Has Awarded Over $107 Billion in Contracts to Firms Ignoring Embargo
from YID With LID by Sammy Benoit
As the United States is negotiating with China and Russia to reach a compromise list of sanctions to place on the tyrannical regime running Iran one has wonder the US will even enforce any additional sanctions. Presently the United States is paying over $107 Billion to vendors companies that are breaking the Iranian sanctions.
In October Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Ron Klein (D-Fla.) sponsored a letter, signed by fifty other congressmen on both sides of the aisle, asking President Obama to enforce the sanctions already in place.
“As Iran attempts to draw the United States and our allies into endless negotiations while continuing its illegal uranium enrichment, the time has come for the Obama Administration to enforce U.S. law,” said Kirk, co-chair of the bipartisan Iran Working Group and Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer. “Failure to enforce current legal sanctions could embolden Iran and undermine diplomacy.”
“Laws are on the books to crack down on the current regime in Iran, and it is long past time they were enforced,” Klein said. “We cannot allow foreign companies to flagrantly violate U.S. law by investing millions in Iran’s energy sector with no penalties. Our comprehensive strategy to address the threat posed by a nuclear Iran must include giving real teeth to sanctions that are already the law of the land.”
The Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 requires the President to sanction entities that invest more than $20 million in Iran’s energy sector. Not one of the past three Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama have done the necessary job in enforcing this act or the other sanctions which were passed by the UN Security Council.
These pages have gone into depth about how the US is ignoring the fact that the Nokia/Siemans alliance is selling Iran high tech monitoring device to help the regime crack down on dissidents.
The New York Times identified 74 companies that have done business both in Iran and with the United States government over the last decade. Out of the 74:
* 14 no longer do buisness in Iran
* 11 are in Iran but promise to pull out right after they finish this one last progect
* 49 are still getting money from the US and Iran
During that period these companies have been awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments by the Federal Govt. The past three administrations have sent mixed messages to the corporate world when it comes to doing business in Iran, rewarding companies whose commercial interests conflict with American security goals.
It is interesting to note that not included in the dollar figures is the funds used to bail out Chrysler, but both its old owner, Daimler and its "new" Fiat are still active buisness partners of both the US and Iran. Also included in the currently active list is Toyota, Tyson Foods and Samsung which as a company based in South Korea should be well aware of the dangers of a crazy regime expanding its nuclear weapons capability.
Many of those companies are enmeshed in the most vital elements of Iran’s economy. More than two-thirds of the government money went to companies doing business in Iran’s energy industry — a huge source of revenue for the Iranian government and a stronghold of the increasingly powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, a primary focus of the Obama administration’s proposed sanctions because it oversees Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.
Beyond $102 billion in United States government contract payments since 2000 — to do everything from building military housing to providing platinum to the United States Mint — the companies and their subsidiaries have reaped a variety of benefits. They include nearly $4.5 billion in loans and loan guarantees from the Export-Import Bank, a federal agency that underwrites the export of American goods and services, and more than $500 million in grants for work that includes cancer research and the turning of agricultural byproducts into fuel.
In addition, oil and gas companies that have done business in Iran have over the years won lucrative drilling leases for close to 14 million acres of offshore and onshore federal land.
In recent months, a number of companies have decided to pull out of Iran, because of a combination of pressure by the United States and other Western governments, “terrorism free” divestment campaigns by shareholders and the difficulty of doing business with Iran’s government. And several oil and gas companies are holding off on new investment, waiting to see what shape new sanctions may assume.
The Obama administration points to that record, saying that it has successfully pressed allied governments and even reached out directly to corporate officials to dissuade investment in Iran, particularly in the energy industry. In addition, an American effort over many years to persuade banks to leave the country has isolated Iran from much of the international financial system, making it more difficult to do deals there.
“We are very aggressive, using a range of tools,” said Denis McDonough, chief of staff to the National Security Council.
How about no more US government contracts, that is a very aggressive tool that is easy and shows that America means what it says?
The government can, and does, bar American companies from most types of trade with Iran, under a broad embargo that has been in place since the 1990s. But as The Times’s analysis illustrates, multiple administrations have struggled diplomatically, politically and practically to exert American authority over companies outside the embargo’s reach — foreign companies and the foreign subsidiaries of American ones.
There is a great deal of politics behind the non enfocement of the Sanctions act.
....in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies
Such as South Korean engineering giant Daelim Industrial, which in 2007 won a $700 million contract to upgrade an Iranian oil refinery.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the deal appeared to violate the Iran Sanctions Act, meaning Daelim could have faced a range of punishments, including denial of federal contracts. That is because the law covers not only direct investments, such as the purchase of shares and deals that yield royalties, but also contracts similar to Daelim’s to manage oil and gas development projects.
But in 2009 the United States Army awarded the company a $111 million contract to build housing in a military base in South Korea. Just months later, Daelim, which disputes that its contracts violated the letter of the law, announced a new $600 million deal to help develop the South Pars gas field in Iran.
John Bolton, former United Nations ambassador in the Bush administration, said failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action.
Mr. Bolton recalled what happened in 2004 when he suggested to the Japanese ambassador that Japan’s state-controlled oil exploration company, Inpex, might be penalized for a $2 billion investment in the Azadegan field in Iran. “The Japanese ambassador said, ‘Well, that’s interesting. How come you’ve never sanctioned a European Union company?’ ” Mr. Bolton recounted.
Inpex was never penalized, though several years later it decided to reduce its stake in the Iranian project. And to Mr. Bolton’s chagrin, the Bush administration did not act on reports about other such investments, neither waiving the law nor penalizing violators.
Now, though, frustration over Iran’s intransigence has spawned a growing, if still piecemeal, movement to more effectively use the power of the government purse to turn companies away from investing there.
Nineteen states — including New York, California and Florida — have rules that bar or discourage their pension funds from investing in companies that do certain types of business in Iran. Congress is considering legislation that would have the federal government follow suit, by mandating that companies that invest in Iran’s energy industry be denied federal contracts. The provision is modeled on an existing law dealing with war-torn Sudan.
Obama administration officials, while indicating that they were open to the idea, called it only one variable in a complex equation. Right now, the president’s priority is on breaking down Chinese resistance to the new United Nations sanctions, which apply across borders and are aimed squarely at entities that support Iran’s nuclear program.
But just today China's Foreign Minister said new sanctions on Iran will not solve the standoff over its nuclear program, and Russia continues to resist an embargo on weapons shipments to Iran
So as the world community gets all tied up in its underwear trying to find the best powder-puff-type sanctions that can get by both Russia and China in the Security Council, why not enforce existing sanctions?
William A. Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.... argues that their futility can be seen in the intransigence of the Iranian government and the way American oil companies have simply been replaced by foreign competitors. Moreover, many foreign companies with business interests in Iran are also large American employers; deny them federal contracts and other benefits, Mr. Reinsch said, “and it’s those workers who will pay the price.”
But Hans Sandberg, senior vice president of Atlas Copco, which is based in Sweden, offered a different perspective. Atlas Copco’s sales of mining and construction equipment to Iran are dwarfed by its American business, including military contracts. If forced to choose, he said: “It would be no problem. We wouldn’t trade with Iran.”
Time for the US Government to get serious about the Nuclear threat.
from YID With LID by Sammy Benoit
As the United States is negotiating with China and Russia to reach a compromise list of sanctions to place on the tyrannical regime running Iran one has wonder the US will even enforce any additional sanctions. Presently the United States is paying over $107 Billion to vendors companies that are breaking the Iranian sanctions.
In October Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Ron Klein (D-Fla.) sponsored a letter, signed by fifty other congressmen on both sides of the aisle, asking President Obama to enforce the sanctions already in place.
“As Iran attempts to draw the United States and our allies into endless negotiations while continuing its illegal uranium enrichment, the time has come for the Obama Administration to enforce U.S. law,” said Kirk, co-chair of the bipartisan Iran Working Group and Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer. “Failure to enforce current legal sanctions could embolden Iran and undermine diplomacy.”
“Laws are on the books to crack down on the current regime in Iran, and it is long past time they were enforced,” Klein said. “We cannot allow foreign companies to flagrantly violate U.S. law by investing millions in Iran’s energy sector with no penalties. Our comprehensive strategy to address the threat posed by a nuclear Iran must include giving real teeth to sanctions that are already the law of the land.”
The Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 requires the President to sanction entities that invest more than $20 million in Iran’s energy sector. Not one of the past three Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama have done the necessary job in enforcing this act or the other sanctions which were passed by the UN Security Council.
These pages have gone into depth about how the US is ignoring the fact that the Nokia/Siemans alliance is selling Iran high tech monitoring device to help the regime crack down on dissidents.
The New York Times identified 74 companies that have done business both in Iran and with the United States government over the last decade. Out of the 74:
* 14 no longer do buisness in Iran
* 11 are in Iran but promise to pull out right after they finish this one last progect
* 49 are still getting money from the US and Iran
During that period these companies have been awarded more than $107 billion in contract payments by the Federal Govt. The past three administrations have sent mixed messages to the corporate world when it comes to doing business in Iran, rewarding companies whose commercial interests conflict with American security goals.
It is interesting to note that not included in the dollar figures is the funds used to bail out Chrysler, but both its old owner, Daimler and its "new" Fiat are still active buisness partners of both the US and Iran. Also included in the currently active list is Toyota, Tyson Foods and Samsung which as a company based in South Korea should be well aware of the dangers of a crazy regime expanding its nuclear weapons capability.
Many of those companies are enmeshed in the most vital elements of Iran’s economy. More than two-thirds of the government money went to companies doing business in Iran’s energy industry — a huge source of revenue for the Iranian government and a stronghold of the increasingly powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, a primary focus of the Obama administration’s proposed sanctions because it oversees Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.
Beyond $102 billion in United States government contract payments since 2000 — to do everything from building military housing to providing platinum to the United States Mint — the companies and their subsidiaries have reaped a variety of benefits. They include nearly $4.5 billion in loans and loan guarantees from the Export-Import Bank, a federal agency that underwrites the export of American goods and services, and more than $500 million in grants for work that includes cancer research and the turning of agricultural byproducts into fuel.
In addition, oil and gas companies that have done business in Iran have over the years won lucrative drilling leases for close to 14 million acres of offshore and onshore federal land.
In recent months, a number of companies have decided to pull out of Iran, because of a combination of pressure by the United States and other Western governments, “terrorism free” divestment campaigns by shareholders and the difficulty of doing business with Iran’s government. And several oil and gas companies are holding off on new investment, waiting to see what shape new sanctions may assume.
The Obama administration points to that record, saying that it has successfully pressed allied governments and even reached out directly to corporate officials to dissuade investment in Iran, particularly in the energy industry. In addition, an American effort over many years to persuade banks to leave the country has isolated Iran from much of the international financial system, making it more difficult to do deals there.
“We are very aggressive, using a range of tools,” said Denis McDonough, chief of staff to the National Security Council.
How about no more US government contracts, that is a very aggressive tool that is easy and shows that America means what it says?
The government can, and does, bar American companies from most types of trade with Iran, under a broad embargo that has been in place since the 1990s. But as The Times’s analysis illustrates, multiple administrations have struggled diplomatically, politically and practically to exert American authority over companies outside the embargo’s reach — foreign companies and the foreign subsidiaries of American ones.
There is a great deal of politics behind the non enfocement of the Sanctions act.
....in the 14 years since the law was passed, the government has never enforced it, in part for fear of angering America’s allies
Such as South Korean engineering giant Daelim Industrial, which in 2007 won a $700 million contract to upgrade an Iranian oil refinery.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the deal appeared to violate the Iran Sanctions Act, meaning Daelim could have faced a range of punishments, including denial of federal contracts. That is because the law covers not only direct investments, such as the purchase of shares and deals that yield royalties, but also contracts similar to Daelim’s to manage oil and gas development projects.
But in 2009 the United States Army awarded the company a $111 million contract to build housing in a military base in South Korea. Just months later, Daelim, which disputes that its contracts violated the letter of the law, announced a new $600 million deal to help develop the South Pars gas field in Iran.
John Bolton, former United Nations ambassador in the Bush administration, said failing to enforce the law by punishing such companies both sent “a signal to the Iranians that we’re not serious” and undercut Washington’s credibility when it did threaten action.
Mr. Bolton recalled what happened in 2004 when he suggested to the Japanese ambassador that Japan’s state-controlled oil exploration company, Inpex, might be penalized for a $2 billion investment in the Azadegan field in Iran. “The Japanese ambassador said, ‘Well, that’s interesting. How come you’ve never sanctioned a European Union company?’ ” Mr. Bolton recounted.
Inpex was never penalized, though several years later it decided to reduce its stake in the Iranian project. And to Mr. Bolton’s chagrin, the Bush administration did not act on reports about other such investments, neither waiving the law nor penalizing violators.
Now, though, frustration over Iran’s intransigence has spawned a growing, if still piecemeal, movement to more effectively use the power of the government purse to turn companies away from investing there.
Nineteen states — including New York, California and Florida — have rules that bar or discourage their pension funds from investing in companies that do certain types of business in Iran. Congress is considering legislation that would have the federal government follow suit, by mandating that companies that invest in Iran’s energy industry be denied federal contracts. The provision is modeled on an existing law dealing with war-torn Sudan.
Obama administration officials, while indicating that they were open to the idea, called it only one variable in a complex equation. Right now, the president’s priority is on breaking down Chinese resistance to the new United Nations sanctions, which apply across borders and are aimed squarely at entities that support Iran’s nuclear program.
But just today China's Foreign Minister said new sanctions on Iran will not solve the standoff over its nuclear program, and Russia continues to resist an embargo on weapons shipments to Iran
So as the world community gets all tied up in its underwear trying to find the best powder-puff-type sanctions that can get by both Russia and China in the Security Council, why not enforce existing sanctions?
William A. Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.... argues that their futility can be seen in the intransigence of the Iranian government and the way American oil companies have simply been replaced by foreign competitors. Moreover, many foreign companies with business interests in Iran are also large American employers; deny them federal contracts and other benefits, Mr. Reinsch said, “and it’s those workers who will pay the price.”
But Hans Sandberg, senior vice president of Atlas Copco, which is based in Sweden, offered a different perspective. Atlas Copco’s sales of mining and construction equipment to Iran are dwarfed by its American business, including military contracts. If forced to choose, he said: “It would be no problem. We wouldn’t trade with Iran.”
Time for the US Government to get serious about the Nuclear threat.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
IACOCCA SPEAKS OUT ON OBAMA
Just as true today as it was when his book first came out.
He was, and still is, a brilliant businessman!
Often we need to be reminded of Iococca's words.
Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from its death throes? He's now 82 years old and has a new book, 'Where Have All The Leaders Gone?'.
Lee Iacocca Says:
'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage with this so called president? We should be screaming bloody murder! We've got a gang of tax cheating clueless leftists trying to steer our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even run a ridiculous cash-for-clunkers program without losing $26 billion of the taxpayers' money, much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'trust me the economy is getting better..'
Better? You've got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned, 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the Democrats out along with Obama!'
You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore..
The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs.. While we're fiddling in Afghanistan , Iran is completing their nuclear bombs and missiles and nobody seems to know what to do. And the liberal press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the ' America ' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?
I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the first.)
Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with thumb up your butt and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.
On September 11, 2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A hell of a mess, so here's where we stand.
We're immersed in a bloody war now with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. But our soldiers are dying daily.
We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the world, and it's getting worse every day!
We've lost the manufacturing edge to Asia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs.
Gas prices are going to skyrock again, and nobody in power has a lucid plan to open drilling to solve the problem. This country has the largest oil reserves in the WORLD, and we cannot drill for it because the politicians have been bought by the flea-hugging environmentalists.
Our schools are in a complete disaster because of the teachers union.
Our borders are like sieves and they want to give all illegals amnesty and free healthcare.
The middle class is being squeezed to death every day.
These are times that cry out for leadership..
But when you look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders gone?' Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.
Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo?
We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.
Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping the government will make it better for them. Now, that's just crazy... Deal with life.
Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, look what Obama did about it!
Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debit, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.
I have news for the Chicago gangsters in Congress. We didn't elect you to turn this country into a losing European Socialist state. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on NBC or CNN news will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?
Had Enough? Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope - I believe in America . In my lifetime, I've had the privilege of living through some of America 's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: The 'Great Depression,' 'World War II,' the 'Korean War,' the 'Kennedy Assassination,' the 'Vietnam War,' the 1970's oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years since 9/11.
Make your own contribution by sending this to everyone you know and care about. It's our country, folks, and it's our future. Our future is at stake!!
***********************************
LET'S GET THE ROOKIE OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
He was, and still is, a brilliant businessman!
Often we need to be reminded of Iococca's words.
Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from its death throes? He's now 82 years old and has a new book, 'Where Have All The Leaders Gone?'.
Lee Iacocca Says:
'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage with this so called president? We should be screaming bloody murder! We've got a gang of tax cheating clueless leftists trying to steer our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even run a ridiculous cash-for-clunkers program without losing $26 billion of the taxpayers' money, much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'trust me the economy is getting better..'
Better? You've got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned, 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the Democrats out along with Obama!'
You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore..
The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs.. While we're fiddling in Afghanistan , Iran is completing their nuclear bombs and missiles and nobody seems to know what to do. And the liberal press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the ' America ' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?
I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the first.)
Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with thumb up your butt and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.
On September 11, 2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A hell of a mess, so here's where we stand.
We're immersed in a bloody war now with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. But our soldiers are dying daily.
We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the world, and it's getting worse every day!
We've lost the manufacturing edge to Asia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs.
Gas prices are going to skyrock again, and nobody in power has a lucid plan to open drilling to solve the problem. This country has the largest oil reserves in the WORLD, and we cannot drill for it because the politicians have been bought by the flea-hugging environmentalists.
Our schools are in a complete disaster because of the teachers union.
Our borders are like sieves and they want to give all illegals amnesty and free healthcare.
The middle class is being squeezed to death every day.
These are times that cry out for leadership..
But when you look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders gone?' Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.
Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo?
We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.
Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping the government will make it better for them. Now, that's just crazy... Deal with life.
Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, look what Obama did about it!
Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debit, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.
I have news for the Chicago gangsters in Congress. We didn't elect you to turn this country into a losing European Socialist state. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on NBC or CNN news will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?
Had Enough? Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope - I believe in America . In my lifetime, I've had the privilege of living through some of America 's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: The 'Great Depression,' 'World War II,' the 'Korean War,' the 'Kennedy Assassination,' the 'Vietnam War,' the 1970's oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years since 9/11.
Make your own contribution by sending this to everyone you know and care about. It's our country, folks, and it's our future. Our future is at stake!!
***********************************
LET'S GET THE ROOKIE OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)