tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-57120417586227709762024-03-13T22:18:51.829-07:00Thomas Jefferson LivesWarning! - This blog contains ideas and writing that is highly objectionable to anyone that is opposed to individual freedom, personal liberty, the authority of the Constitution, the Sovereignty of the States or "We the People." It will also offend anyone who is a Liberal, Socialist, Communist or other enemy of Free Speech, Free Enterprise, Limited Government and the Right of the People to Self-Determination (and rightly so).TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.comBlogger70125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-37784643487738131002010-02-09T06:27:00.000-08:002010-02-09T06:34:17.076-08:00WH says Critic Helping Al-Quedahttp://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/wh-some-critics-serving-the-goals-of-al-qaeda.html<br /><br />The White House says Obama's critics are helping Al-Queda. I would like to point out that Obama is helping Al-Queda with his refusal to let the military deal with terrorists and instead try them with civil authorities. Granting them the rights reserved only for US citizens and others legally in this country is a slap in the face to its law abiding citizens and military who have died fighting for these rights, many against these same terrorists, only to have these rights given to the terrorists in return.<br /><br />John Brennan -- Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, wrote in an op-ed to USA today that, "Terrorists such as Jose Padilla and Saleh al-Mari did not cooperate when transferred to military custody, which can harden one's determination to resist cooperation."<br /><br />No, the fact that they are bombing things in order to kill Americans and non-muslims hardens their determination to resist co-operation. Typically one does not co-operate with people one is trying to bomb. Just my observation of the way things tend to be. Apparently this administration does not see it that way, and thinks that if you sit dwn with someone over a cup of tea (or a couple of beers), you can have a "teachable moment" and all will be well. Everyone will see eye to eye and the world will sing in perfect harmony. Unfortunately, they forget one thing: There are those that hate music - outlaw it even. Who? Well I'm speaking of course, of Al-Queda and the Taliban.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-3680713596693092952010-02-04T05:58:00.001-08:002010-02-04T06:20:05.724-08:00Police Want Backdoor Access to Your Private Web Info<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10446503-38.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10446503-38.html</a><br /><br />Be angry. Be very angry. The police are trying to violate your 4th Amendment rights protecting you from illegal search and seizure.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"The 289-page report detailed how the FBI obtained Americans' telephone records by citing nonexistent emergencies and simply asking for the data or writing phone numbers on a sticky note rather than following procedures required by law."</span><br /><br />(See the report here: <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10446503-38.html">http://www.justice.gov/oig/special/s1001r.pdf</a>)<br /><br />Couple this intrusion with the tendency towards (nay, the Law of) Mission Creep (anything the government proposes as a mission statement will grow to include anything else that can possibly be brought under the scope of that mission statement), and the teaming up of Google and the National Security Agency, and you have a big problem.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020304057_pf.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020304057_pf.html</a><br /><br />Why is this a big problem? Well, I'll let you connect the dots on that, but suffice it to say that when Big Sister (Janet Napolitano) over at the Department of Homeland Security can declare people with "Don't Tread On Me" bumper stickers to be possible domestic terrorists (<a href="http://newsmax.com/Newsfront/homeland-security/2009/04/14/id/329451">http://newsmax.com/Newsfront/homeland-security/2009/04/14/id/329451</a>) while the federal government gives civilian rights to the real terrorists, let's just say nothing is out of the question.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-40388040055497568872010-01-25T04:51:00.000-08:002010-01-25T11:51:23.836-08:00Hmm... is the Obama pot calling the Bush kettle black?<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/25/obama-administration-steers-lucrative-bid-contract-afghan-work-dem-donor/">http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/25/obama-administration-steers-lucrative-bid-contract-afghan-work-dem-donor/</a><br /><br />hmm... so much for blaming Bush for sweetheart contracts... Obama donor gets a $25M no-bid contract for training "legal professionals" in Afghanistan (competitive bids need not apply). I wonder if that includes a course on ethics?TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-20183870699352033542010-01-23T14:03:00.000-08:002010-01-23T14:04:25.506-08:00UK calls legal protests "domestic extremism." US next...<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/25/police-surveillance-protest-domestic-extremism">http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/25/police-surveillance-protest-domestic-extremism</a><br /><br />UK police call lawful protests "domestic extremism." Worried? You should be. The Homeland Security Department headed by "Big Sister" Janet Napolitano essentially did the same thing last year. Oppressive tyrannical government is here.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson </span>TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-32488943989453509072010-01-23T06:56:00.001-08:002010-01-23T07:16:05.223-08:005th District Tea Party Debates in my HometownThe 5th District Tea Party Debates were held last night in my hometown - just outside the ground of my University. That's right, beautiful Charlottesville.<br /><br />Each of the 7 candidates had agreed beforehand to be there - although one refused to be there unless there was a change in the moderator. So, accommodations were made for State Senator Robert Hurt.<br /><br />There was a packed house as each of the candidates showed up - well, sort of - to promote themselves as the best choice for the Republican nominee and to tout their knowledge of the Constitution. Senator Hurt reneged on his promise to be there, but was represented instead by a cardboard cutout with his face on it, dressed in a suit. Politicians are said to be empty suits from time to time, but Sen. Hurt literally was.<br /><br />After going around the will of the people and the other 6 candidates (who all supported a convention for - among other reasons - the ability to save the state $250,000 at a time of fiscal difficulty) to secure a primary via the good old boy network, he now snubbed the people who showed up to hear what he thought on the issues presented.<br /><br />There were several references made to him (or his suit) specifically on the question of whether or not they would vote for a tax increase if a government shut down were at stake. Lawrence Verga said he would absolutely shut the government down, then said "how about you Robbie?" Mike McPadden said that there was just that situation in Richmond in 2004 and the Republicans held the line and went toe to toe with the Democrats, until the line buckled and somebody gave in. At this he turned his head and cast a sideways glance to Hurt's empty suit. Ron Ferrin perhaps gave the most memorable response when he said, "Personally, I think the Congress does it's best work in August when they aren't in session." At this the crowd gave a loud round of applause and agreeable laughter.<br /><br />Any way you want to slice it, not only is Tom Perriello clearly in the crosshairs of the Tea Party and the public, but if Robert Hurt keeps up his smug dismissal of the people, he will be too. After last night, every political opponent he faces in the future will be using photos of his empty suit and he may have just ended his political career.<br /><br />The 400+ people in attendance last night bore witness to the fact that there are 6 good candidates in the race, 1 that doesn't care about them, and of the 6, 2 that are better than the rest at thinking on their feet and public speaking: Ferrin and McPadden.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-17412090654334864852010-01-20T13:44:00.000-08:002010-01-20T14:00:38.056-08:00Tea Partiers take over national politicsThis article talks about the "angry Independents" making the difference in the races over the past few months.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31717_Page2.html">http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31717_Page2.html</a><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"This voting bloc has swung decisively against Democrats, starting this past summer. A review of polling in Massachusetts, in other states and nationally shows the same thing: By about a 2-to-1 margin, independents have turned on Democrats. </span><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> </p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that two-thirds of independents would prefer Republicans controlled Congress. The same polls show the voters don’t even like Republicans. A CBS News poll showed only one-third of independents approve of Obama’s handling of the economy — a nearly 20-point drop in less than one year. </p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> </p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> In all three big Democratic losses this past year — in New Jersey, Virginia and now Massachusetts — better than 60 percent of independents said they backed Republicans."<br /></p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Make no mistake, these are Tea Partiers. Pelosi's Politburo didn't want to acknowledge them when they marched on DC over 1 Million strong. She's hearing them loud and clear now.</span></p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">This is no GOP backed movement. They don't like the GOP either. These are former GOP and Democrat supporters who have banded together over the ideas of limited government and the freedom to determine their own lives.</span></p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The rallying cry is starting to become "Ballots or bullets" as the mounting frustration with the clear tyrannical bent of the government is starting to boil over. The government is clearly not listening to the wishes of the people or they never would've tried the stunts they pulled over Christmas, nor the mere idea of trying to ram a bill through before the new senator was seated, or of trying to circumvent a filibuster by using cloture or of changing the rules of the Senate as the despicable Barney Frank insinuated.</span></p><p style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The people are becoming educated as to what is going on, they are organizing and they are volunteering all over the country to make sure the candidates that they agree with (even in other states) are winning elections by making phone calls, donating time, money, resources, anything that is needed. Some even take off from work and drop everything to go door to door in other states.</p><p style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The Tea Party is now the dominant force in American politics. These are not "redneck teabaggers" as Janeane Garofoalo contemptuously referred to them. These are neighbors, citizens, middle class, upper class, lower class - Americans, coming together to save their freedom, their country and their way of life. They are taking heed of Mr. Jefferson's directive:</p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [i.e., securing inherent and inalienable rights, with powers derived from the consent of the governed], it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." --Thomas Jefferson: Declaration of Independence, 1776.</p><p style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The current administration would be wise to listen to the people before they deem it necessary to obey another of his directives:</p><p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"><span class="text">"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson</span><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></span></span></p>TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-79525959120650591682010-01-20T10:22:00.000-08:002010-01-20T10:48:30.936-08:00Obama wants to control something elseObama now wants to nationalize the student loan industry<br /><br /><a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/60074">http://cnsnews.com/news/article/60074</a><br /><br />That ought to work out about as well as the Post Office, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, the VA, Fannie & Freddie, and bailouts of the auto and banking sectors. (In case you've been living under a rock for the past 6 decades, those have all been miserable failures)TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-20867473505362239442010-01-19T06:41:00.000-08:002010-01-19T07:49:15.825-08:00Dems want it both ways... Americans be damned<a href="http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2010/01/18/pelosi/index.html?source=rss&aim=/politics/war_room">http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2010/01/18/pelosi/index.html?source=rss&aim=/politics/war_room</a><br /><br />Pelosi says we will have healthcare "one way or the other." On the one hand, Obama headed to MA yesterday to plead his case that the "health are bill is in jeopardy"! They realize that a loss there would be a stinging defeat in what has quickly become a referendum on the current healthcare bills. One candidate has pledged to pass it - she had a 30 point lead a few months ago. Her opponent has pledged to vote against it - he has a 9 point lead in a poll released on the morning of the election. (<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/ma/massachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html">http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/ma/massachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html</a>)<br /><br />So, on the one hand, the gun to the head of the voters is "you won't get healthcare if you vote for Brown."<br /><a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/01/19/rep_weiner_health_care_dead_if_scott_brown_wins.html">http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/01/19/rep_weiner_health_care_dead_if_scott_brown_wins.html</a><br /><br />The gun to the head of the rest of the voters is, even if you pull off an astounding victory by electing a Republican to the Senate in traditionally Democratic Massachusetts and say "NO" to healthcare, we'll pass it ANYWAYS!<br /><br />If Brown does win, the Democrats controlling the state are threatening not to certify the election results and let him be seated in the Senate in time to vote on the bill. Contrast this with the Democrats saying Coakley will be sworn in IMMEDIATELY if she wins and you have a tyrannical government on your hands that gives no account to the will of the people.<br /><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/19/new-mass-senator-sworn/">http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/19/new-mass-senator-sworn/</a><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Historical Significance</span><br /><br />The Senate seat up for grabs is the one previously occupied by Ted Kennedy. If Brown, a Republican, were to win the seat previously held by the Democratic leader who's life goal was to push national healthcare and thus stop the bill in its tracks, the irony and embarrassment would be a very bitter pill for Obama and his ilk to swallow. They will have been given the political equivalent of the finger by the people (who, as we know from the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, are the ones that are REALLY in charge - in theory anyways).<br /><br />Lets go back a bit further, to say... 1775.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7nEoW-P81-0&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7nEoW-P81-0&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />Now, those Mass residents would say that the current residents are pansies, although they may applaud them for standing up to tyrannical gov't in the short term. The real truth is that they would've never let it get this far.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Sons of Liberty</span><br /><br />They started protesting tyrannical actions by the British government beginning in 1765. Their most famous act was ultimately the Boston Tea Party on Dec. 16, 1773. They had members in many states, including Patrick Henry, John Hancock, James Otis Paul Revere and Dr. Joseph Warren. (Patrick Henry, obviously, was a Virginian)<br /><br />They forced British loyalists into hiding beginning in 1766. An event they are quite famous for is the incident involving Andrew Oliver. He was to be commissioned as the Distributor of Stamps for Massachusetts. On August 14, 1765 an effigy of him was found hanging in a tree on Newbury Street. Next to it, was a devil climbing out of a large boot. (A play on words regarding the Earl of Bute)<br /><br />A large crowd gathered and the sheriff's were commanded to remove the display but refused to in fear for their lives. Before the day was over Oliver's property on Kilby street was burned, his effigy was paraded to his frount yard where it was beheaded with the occupants of his house looking on, followed by his house being stoned. The effigy was then taken to nearby Fort Hill where it was burned in a large fire. Later that night the Sons of Liberty ransacked Oliver's (now abandoned) home. It was very clear who was in charge in Massachusetts - the people, not the tyrannical government.<br /><br />From the South Carolina chapter of the Sons of Liberty, we get the origins of the yellow Gadsden Flag, with it's rattlesnake and the now famous words, "Don't Tread on Me." It doesn't take much to see how the origins of that flag now resonate with the revived movement to dispel tyrannical government. In fact, that's what they are doing in Massachusetts today.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Tying It Together</span><br /><br />On April 19, 1775 Massachusetts Minutemen fired the shot heard 'round the world against the oppression of the world's largest super-power. Today, January 19, 2010, they will have another chance to do the same. The current government has made it clear that the will of the people is of no account to them. The Massachusetts patriots will fire their shot heard 'round the world one ballot at a time. Whether the government chooses to listen to that is a different matter altogether. One thing is for sure, the people of Massachusetts in 1775 wouldn't stand for the dictation of their lives by an oppressive government that was unresponsive to their wishes. We will see if the people of Massachusetts in 2010 will do the same.<br /><br />The British Boston Commissioner of Customs, John Malcom, was tarred and feathered twice.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-30892635626468644752010-01-17T15:43:00.001-08:002010-01-17T16:08:58.435-08:00Criminal Sympathizer's Protest Sheriff Joe<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100117/ap_on_re_us/us_arizona_sheriff_protest">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100117/ap_on_re_us/us_arizona_sheriff_protest</a><br /><br />Ah yes... more criminal sympathizers that think anyone should just be able to waltz into our country, grab their share of bounty off the backs of tax payers and get something for nothing. "We're Human" they say. Ah, I can tell. It's human nature to want what others have without doing the hard work they did to get it. That's called jealousy.<br /><br />I believe there was a commandment about that... oh yes, the 10th one... Thou shalt not covet! Thou shalt not covet your neighbors house, your neighbors wife... or his schooling that he pays TAXES for, or his healthcare that he pays for, or his voting rights that he earned via his legally obtained citizenship, or his high standard of living that he obtained through legal means and hard work.<br /><br />One family wore t-shirts saying, "Who Would Jesus deport?" Well, he might sit down and braid a whip and tell them to get out of his Father's house (he did that once), or he might tell them to "Give unto Caeser, that which was Caeser's" and obey the laws of the land (he did that once too).<br /><br />They accuse Sheriff Joe of racially profiling them. Well, when 99.9% of the illegals in one area all have the same characteristics, it certainly wouldn't behoove them to search a 90 year-old granny not bearing those characteristics, in an attempt to find out if she was legally in the country. (No, that would be too much like the TSA which now relies on passengers in their planes to do the job they aren't - does that come with hazard pay? Maybe a 1st class upgrade? You never know when it might be a one way trip.)<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">“The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.” - Alexander Hamilton</span><br /><br />These people have no national sentiment. If they did, they would've come here legally. That is, they would think so highly of this country as to want to adhere to its laws and truly be a part of the fabric of american life. As it is now, these illegals thumb their noses at the very fabric of America - our laws, our ethics and our general sense of fair play. These are not Americans. No, these are not even decent people. Decent people do not eny their neighbors, nor do they conspire to take from their neighbor what he has worked hard for and has rightfully earned!<br /><br /><span style=";font-family:verdana,arial;font-size:85%;" ><span style=";font-family:VERDANA,ARIAL;font-size:85%;" ><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);font-size:100%;" >"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." - Teddy Roosevelt</span><br /><br /></span></span> And so it is. These people are not here in good faith, nor do they wish to be Americans. They wish to leach off the backs of hard-working Americans, taking for themselves what is not theirs to take. They clog our streets, fill our prisons, meddle in our elections, demand rights that are neither theirs (nor do they have the right to demand), force our people to bear all sorts of injustices at the mere bullying insistance that because they want what we have, they have the right to take it.<br /><br />They are in no way Americans, nor do they intend to be Americans, nor follow our laws, nor assimilate or be beneficial to us in any way. Their flag is not the American flag, nor is their loyalty to America and the American people. They must be driven out, removed, radiated, chemo'd and by all means necessary removed from this country lest in their greed to take what is not theirs from those that have earned it, they remove from us our own country and our very way of life.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-91964251975401055882010-01-17T14:27:00.000-08:002010-01-17T14:37:37.751-08:00Americans for Limited Government to attempt to stop voter fraud in Mass on Tues.<a href="http://netrightnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1252294:citizen-watchdogs-in-massachusetts-to-observe-tuesday-special-senate-election&catid=1:nrn-blog&Itemid=7">http://netrightnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1252294:citizen-watchdogs-in-massachusetts-to-observe-tuesday-special-senate-election&catid=1:nrn-blog&Itemid=7</a><br /><br />Looks like citizens are taking matters into their own hands when it comes to making sure their elections are clean and fair. Given the enormity of the election and how much is at stake, they'd better be. Granted, this is nothing more than, A. people getting fed up with elections being stolen from them by corrupt parties, and B. people taking to heart the words of <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Thomas Paine, "Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Ours is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It ceases to be our government when we allow those wolves among us who would pervert it to their own uses. (In this case, political parties who seek to control the government - according to the very nature of government itself.)</span> <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Ben Franklin</span><br /><br />Here's to you, well armed lambs of Massachusetts - may the Kennedys and their ilk never serve mutton again!TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-36523222384375662562010-01-17T11:59:00.000-08:002010-01-17T12:09:06.518-08:00CNBC's Cramer calls out "Pelosi Politburo"<a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/17/jim-cramer-brown-win-causes-huge-stock-rally-investors-nervous-about-">http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/17/jim-cramer-brown-win-causes-huge-stock-rally-investors-nervous-about-</a><br /><br />Jim Cramer said a Brown win will signal the end of the Pelosi Politburo and cause a huge rally on wallstreet. (as well it would!) Cramer (and the rest of the business world) are quite aware of what Pelosi, Reid, et. al. mean for business - and the end of the economy in this country as we know it!<br /><br />The business world knows exactly what final passage of this healthcare bill would mean for freedom and the future of the economy.<br /><object id="cnbcplayer" height="380" width="400" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0"><br /><param name="type" value="application/x-shockwave-flash"><br /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"><br /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><br /><param name="quality" value="best"><br /><param name="scale" value="noscale"><br /><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><br /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000"><br /><param name="salign" value="lt"><br /><param name="movie" value="http://plus.cnbc.com/rssvideosearch/action/player/id/1387021968/code/cnbcplayershare"><br /><embed name="cnbcplayer" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#000000" height="380" width="400" quality="best" wmode="transparent" scale="noscale" salign="lt" src="http://plus.cnbc.com/rssvideosearch/action/player/id/1387021968/code/cnbcplayershare" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed><br /></object><br /><br />The mere possibility of Brown's election in a traditionally VERY left wing state signals the beginning of the end of Obama's unfettered power. Certainly not a good sign for him that he has to go campaign for Coakley in this election after November elections that saw the trouncing of Creigh Deed's in VA and then the very unexpected loss of the NJ Governorship to a Republican. Here's to another embarrassing blow to the "anointed one" and wanna-be President of the World.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-73081458116012906502010-01-17T11:19:00.000-08:002010-01-17T11:37:23.828-08:00Mass. Senate hopeful Coakley shows typical snobbery of left-wing elitests<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/15/race_is_in_a_spinout/">http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/15/race_is_in_a_spinout/</a><br /><br />How do you lose an election in Massachusetts as a Democratic Senatorial candidate? Simple, don't go out, don't talk to people, don't consider yourself as above the voting masses and don't consider yourself as an anointed candidate. (That only worked once and the voters aren't buying it anymore!)<br /><br />Further, you shouldn't tie yourself to a VERY unpopular program like nationalized healthcare (although truth in advertising is always nice and the President should consider it sometime). Lastly, there's this little thing called the Constitution and you should at least PRETEND to know and care about it. Even in semi-socialist states like Massachusetts (which I spelled correctly and she didn't in one of her early campaign commercials)<br /><br /><a href="http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/01/12/martha-coakley-spelled-massachusetts-wrong-seriously/">http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/01/12/martha-coakley-spelled-massachusetts-wrong-seriously/</a><br /><br />Oh, and with that note, let's note the final thing you shouldn't do in a campaign... incorrectly spell the name of the state you wish to represent. Oops. It's hard to claim conservatives/republicans/anyone you are running against is ignorant and stupid when you can't even spell the name of your own state correctly.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-74047518727386912582010-01-16T06:19:00.000-08:002010-01-16T06:29:39.433-08:00US Blames Ineffective Gov't on Slow ComputersSo apparently it's the slow computer's fault that government is being ineffective here in the U.S.<br /><br /><a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/75965-white-house-blames-inefficient-government-on-outdated-technologies">http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/75965-white-house-blames-inefficient-government-on-outdated-technologies</a><br /><br />That's funny because for the vast majority of U.S. history, there were no computers (they hadn't been invented yet) and the government was just fine - quite effective and efficient.<br /><br />I'd have to say that to the contrary, the government is inefficient because it's trying to do too much.<br /><br />That government is best which governs least." - Thomas Paine<br /><br />In fact, we are quickly approaching the point of another of his memorable quotes... <span class="text"><br /><br />"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."</span> - Thomas Paine<br /><br />Why is the government inefficient? Simple, it has no incentive to be either effective or efficient. The private sector depends on profit to stay alive. If there is profit, the business stays around, if not, it folds. How do you get profit? Simple, by being more efficient or more effective than a competitor. This leads to innovation.<br /><br />The government has no need for either effectiveness or efficiency because it does not depend on profit to stay alive. Rather, anything it needs but doesn't have, or want's but doesn't have, or thinks someone else needs or wants but doesn't have, it simply takes from the taxpayer. Since it has no need for profit, it has no need for effectiveness or efficiency. And this is the REAL reason the government is inefficient - it has nothing to do with computers. After all, the Constitution was written roughly 200 years before the personal computer was a possibility, and those guys did just fine with paper, pen and ink. (no calculators needed)TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-12206081604630842952010-01-16T05:08:00.000-08:002010-01-16T06:02:00.782-08:00Mass Immigration from Haiti to the US?<span style="font-size:100%;">It appears that FL officials are bracing for mass immigration by Haitian refugees following the earthquake.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583156,00.html">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583156,00.html</a><br /><br />However, U.S. officials would be wise to turn them back. Up until fairly recently, immigration was restricted to those who were highly skilled in their particular trades. This created a highly skilled workforce and as a result the U.S. economy flourished as businesses had more than enough talent to grow effectively.<br /><br />That changes with the passage of the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, which allowed specifically easier entry for: "unmarried adult sons and daughters of citizens, and spouses and unmarried sons and daughters of permanent residents." Beginning with this, (especially in the South-West) immigration stopped being a merit-based reward, and started being viewed as a right by non-citizens.<br /><br />Note the language in the wording above: "permanent residents." These aren't even citizens. They have simply been granted permanent resident status, and use that to bring their entire family over. "What is wrong with that?" you may ask. Quite simply this: If they are not willing to become U.S. citizens, and contribute to our society in a positive manner, then they should not be here. </span><span style="font-family: times new roman;font-size:100%;" >Period!</span><br /><br /> <p style="font-family: courier new;"><span style="font-size:85%;">"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."<br /></span></p><p style="font-family: courier new;"><span style="font-size:85%;">- Theodore Roosevelt, Jan. 3, 1919</span></p><p style="font-family: times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Roosevelt's fear was of the nation being "brought to ruins" by a "tangle of squabbling nationalities."</span></p><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family: courier new;">"It is our boast that we admit the immigrant to full fellowship and equality with the native-born. In return we demand that he shall share our undivided allegiance to the one flag which floats over all of us."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: courier new;">- Theodore Roosevelt, 1917</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;font-size:100%;" >With this came the assumption that they would naturally learn English. After all, would you move to France without learning French? Or Spain without learning Spanish? Or Germany without learning German? Let alone if you were to become a citizen!</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family: courier new;">"Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or to leave the country," he said in a statement to the </span><i style="font-family: courier new;">Kansas City Star</i><span style="font-family: courier new;"> in 1918. "English should be the only language taught or used in the public schools."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: courier new;">- Theodore Roosevelt, Kansas City Star, 1918</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-family: times new roman;">To get the facts on Illegal Immigration and the burden that it poses to the country and you the citizen, I would suggest going here: </span><a style="font-family: times new roman;" href="http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_crime.html">http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_crime.html</a><span style="font-family: times new roman;">. Further, I would suggest reading Mark Levin's book Liberty and Tyranny. It will make you very angry. The bottom line: Illegal Aliens commit A LOT of crime. Those Illegals in prison have been arrested an average of 8 times, for 13 crimes and been convicted 5 previous times EACH! </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">And here's the kicker: Those that have been arrested for re-entry make up 90% were previously arrested and OF THOSE, 50% were arrested for violent or drug related felonies. (Then there's the sex crime numbers...oh yes. Those will make you very angry.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">The last bit here, arrested for "re-entry"... These people should not have been allowed BACK in the country. The government wasn't doing its job in protecting the borders as it was, it's citizens were victimized by these people and are now forced to PAY for their incarceration. That is the ultimate slap in the face. when they are finally released, they will be deported and what do you think they will do? Come right back across the border. Why? Because they've already done it a couple of times. (Yes, this would be that part where you pick up the phone and tell your Congressman that you want leathal force used to protect the border because it's a matter of national security - just like military base security - For you lefties out there, go ahead... try and sneak onto a US military base... see what happens)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Ultimately, the character of a person that would sneak into a country rather than to enter it legally, is not the type of character we want in our country. They are not of upright moral character, nor do they appreciate and respect something enough to go about it the correct way. That is a person we can do without.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Now, to bring this back to Haiti... Not only do we have enough trouble here domestically, but we do not need to add to it by taking in refugees that are not willing to fix their own country. We already provide Billions in aid each year around the world.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Haiti has had up to $1.4Billion in outstanding international debt. Further, Venezuela and Cuba are spending $1Billion to develop energy and infrastructure in Haiti. The debt per capita is only $169 US (whereas in the US it is $40,000 US - yes, you read that correctly, each person has a per capita national debt of $40,000. That should make you angry)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">What we DON'T need at this point in time is more Haitian's coming here. Yes things are very difficult over there, but you don't run away from problems. You stay and face them head on. There is a massive relief effort going on to help them. (Let's be real, if they aren't willing to stay and help fix their OWN country, do we really want them here?! How will that be any different than the millions of non-contributors already here that leach off of the system and provide nothing in return - except for law enforvement job-security of course!)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times new roman;">Here's the bottom line: These people have nothing to offer the U.S. We are already helping them both through $100M (at a time when we are in a severe economic crunch) and through millions more in private donations - which I encourage you to make to a reputable aid organization. If they do not have the work ethic to fix a country that they should be fiercely loyal to, since it's their homeland, what reason do we have to believe that they would be of benefit to the U.S. (especially since there is massive historical precedent that immigrants are only allowed in if they would BENEFIT the rest of the country - and rightfully so!)</span></span>TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-46613224341029380022009-06-01T14:24:00.000-07:002009-06-01T14:28:15.303-07:00The First-Pug...er...Lady says everyone should have a personal assistant!http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/05/07/work-life_balance_a_challenge.html<br />-----------------<br /><p><em>By DeNeen L. Brown</em><br />First lady Michelle Obama called her "current life" in the White House "a very blessed situation, because I have what most families don't have -- tons of support all around, not just my mother, but staff and administration. I have a chief of staff and a personal assistant, and everyone needs that."</p> <p>"Everyone should have a chief of staff and a set of personal assistants," Obama said with a laugh as she spoke before a crowd of business executives meeting today during a "Corporate Voices for Working Families" conference at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington. </p> <p>Along with the issues of community service and military families, Obama has said as first lady she wants to focus on the struggles of working families.</p> <p>During her 10-minute speech, Obama advocated for sick leave for parents, flexible work hours for employees and on-site child care, which she said "is something that keeps many of us up at night....You're just wondering where are we going to put our children where we feel like that they're being safe, that they're safe and being loved. That will relieve many of the stresses that parents feel on the job throughout the day."</p> <p><</p><div class="imgright"><div class="play-btn-box145x100"><br /><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2009/05/07/VI2009050703754.html" title="Play Video"><br /><img src="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/mmedia/player/images/050709-15v_145.jpg" border="0" height="100" width="145" /><br /><span class="play-btn"><b>Play Video</b></span></a><br /></div><br /><div style="font-family: arial; font-size: 11px; margin-bottom: 10px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51);"><br /><strong style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">VIDEO</strong> | Michelle Obama Talks About Her Life Change</div></div> <p>Obama said she personally knows the challenges of balancing work and family "trying to do a good job at both -- and always feeling like you're not quite living up to either -- and trying not to pit one against the other, really trying to balance."</p> <p>She called herself someone who strives to do more than 100 percent at work. "If people here are like me -- I call myself a 120-percenter. If I'm not doing any job at 120 percent, I think I'm failing. So if you're trying to do that at home and at work, you find it very difficult and stressful and frustrating."</p> <p>Obama told the story of her own childhood, growing up in Chicago with a father who worked as a city employee at a time when he could make enough money to allow her mother to stay home with the children.</p> <p>"When I look back on my childhood and the life that my parents provided, working-class folks with not a lot of money, my father was a blue-collar city worker who worked a shift job," she said. "But because he earned enough as a shift worker without a college degree, he could still support a family of four on that salary. And because he could, with that salary, support us -- we rented a home, we didn't live lavishly -- my mother was able to stay at home. She could afford to make the choice not to go to work while we were growing up. That was how families balanced back then." </p> <p>She said the economic situation has changed today. "One income really doesn't always cut it anymore. And that's in my lifetime," Obama said. "In most families, both parents have to work, and even if people want to make the choice to stay home. And again, there is no subjective analysis or -- of what is better. But people can't make the choice. It's even harder for single parents, and there are millions of them all across this country who are trying to build a life for themselves and their children, and they find in an economy that's tough that they're not just holding down one but they need a couple of jobs just to make ends meet."</p> <p>Obama said when she was an executive, she learned that giving her employees more flexibility helped their productivity.</p> <p>"I found that as I've managed staff, the more flexibility and opportunities that I gave them to be good parents, the more commitment that they made to working with me, the less likely they were to leave because they wouldn't find the same sort of situation somewhere else," Obama said. "So this isn't just about family balance. This is about making work places stronger and more effective, and keeping and attracting the most qualified people. This research is critical to empowering employers and is politically -- particularly important during our current economic climate."</p>-----------------<br /><br />I find it funny she talks about her experience managing people in the workplace. Does she mean those jobs her husband got her in exchange for him getting those companies some serious money in government earmarks? Oh wait, she must all those jobs she earned based on her personal merits and skills, NOT on who she was married to and what position he held. (and as soon as we find one of those in her employment record, we'll believe THAT too.)TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-27751056365202079232009-06-01T14:22:00.001-07:002009-06-01T14:24:02.176-07:00More on the Dis-honorable Sen. Arlen Specter...Most smart people would try and stay out of trouble upon switching sides. Not Arlen Specter. Then again, there's no reason to accuse Arlen Specter of being smart. (Intelligent people everywhere would be offended)<br /><br />What's he done this time? Read away...<br /><br />http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/cheat-sheet/050709white-house-cheat-sheet.html<br />--------------------<br /><p>A series of odd incidents that have proceeded from Pennsylvania Sen. <strong>Arlen Specter</strong>'s party switch last week have raised questions about whether the newest Democrat has permanently damaged himself in the eyes of the state's voters.</p> <p>The White House is concerned enough about the developments that deputy chief of staff Jim Messina and Ron Klain, a senior adviser to <strong>Vice President Biden</strong>, traveled to Capitol Hill on Wednesday and huddled with Specter to try to iron out the problems, according to informed Democratic officials.</p> <p>Those problems -- in brief:</p> <p>• Specter pronounced that he would be keeping his seniority when he announced his party switch last week -- maintaining that his ability to deliver for the state would not be diminished in any way shape or form by his move across the aisle. Except, that wasn't exactly right. The Senate's approval of Specter's junior status on a series of committees led to a "he said, he said" between Senate Majority Leader <strong>Harry Reid</strong> (Nev.) and the newest member of his caucus. Asked about the back and forth by CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday, Reid stood his ground saying simply: "He is a person who's been in the Senate since 1980. I think he should be able to handle himself."</p> <p>• In a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/10/magazine/10wwln-q4-t.htm%20l?_r=1">sitdown with the New York Times' Deborah Solomon</a>, Specter said he was hoping that the Minnesota courts would do "justice" and declare former Republican Sen. Norm Coleman the winner in the contested 2008 election. Whoops! Specter tried to walk the comment back told Reid that he briefly "forgot what team I was on."</p> <p>• Specter has done little to back off his initial assertion that his decision to switch parties was based almost entirely on political calculations and had little to do with ideology. While most party switchers are almost certainly guided by personal political concerns (what politician isn't?), most don't come right out and say it because it is a turnoff for voters who want to believe that their politicians believe in, well, something.</p> <p>For Pennsylvania voters -- especially Democratic primary voters -- this triptych of recent events is likely to be deeply troubling. </p> <p>"His actions over this past week have done nothing to curry favors with either party," said Penny Lee, a former senior adviser to Pennsylvania Gov. <strong>Ed Rendell</strong> (D) and now a Democratic consultant. "He needs to show some willingness to be a Democrat."</p> <p>Another Democratic strategist who follows Senate races closely was more blunt about the damage Specter has done to himself over the last week. "Do you think that any right-minded local Democratic elected official is going to stick his neck out for Arlen?" the source asked rhetorically. "Or any member of the Democratic Senate caucus?"</p> <p>Even those Democrats who believe that Specter has done himself no real long-term electoral harm with his actions over the past week don't exactly give him rave reviews. "The pride swallowing can't be easy but he had no choice if he wants to get reelected, and he was honest about that," said one senior Democratic strategist.</p> <p>Despite all of that criticism, Specter still has a number of things going for him heading into next year -- most importantly the support of an exceedingly popular president who commands massive loyalty particularly among the Democratic base and a campaign war chest bulging with nearly $7 million.</p> <p>And, average voters are not likely to be following every jot and tittle of the Specter saga -- especially so far from an election. Still, insiders are paying very close attention and, if Specter's stumbles over the past week encourage Rep. <strong>Joe Sestak</strong> to run in the primary, then the damage will have been done.</p> <p>What once looked like a huge coup for the White House -- and from a governing standpoint remains one assuming<strong> Al Franken</strong> eventually wins in Minnesota -- has quickly morphed into a gigantic political headache that almost no one saw coming.</p> <p>Politics is great, ain't it?</p>--------------------TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-89125013753901792972009-06-01T14:10:00.000-07:002009-06-01T14:20:33.083-07:0016 year-old US CITIZEN being held without charge under Patriot ActOk, so the police claim a 16 year old made a bomb threat from his room one night. Only problem, he wasn't there - and there is proof that he wasn't there. So here he sits, still in jail, with proof that he's innocent, and nothing is being done.<br /><br />http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867<br /><br />Now, don't get me wrong - I'm all for holding suspected terrorists... HOWEVER... this should not apply to people apprehended on U.S. soil or U.S. citizens. There's a reason for the Bill of Rights. You know, those 10 original amendments designed to limit the federal government's power that it so often like to ignore... yes, those.<br /><br />-----------------<br /><h1 class="headline">Mom says Patriot Act stripped son of due process</h1> <div style="display: none;"> <img src="http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/2009/04/29/5046747/1241042076-PatriotActTeen-220x165.jpg" alt="Ashton Lundeby" height="165" width="220" /> </div> <p class="story-timestamp">Posted: Apr. 29, 2009 </p> <div class="story-body"><p><span class="dateline">Oxford, N.C. — </span>Sixteen-year-old Ashton Lundeby's bedroom in his mother's Granville County home is nothing, if not patriotic. Images of American flags are everywhere – on the bed, on the floor, on the wall.<br /><br />But according to the United States government, the tenth-grade home-schooler is being held on a criminal complaint that he made a bomb threat from his home on the night of Feb. 15.The family was at a church function that night, his mother, Annette Lundeby, said.<br /></p>"Undoubtedly, they were given false information, or they would not have had 12 agents in my house with a widow and two children and three cats," Lundeby said.<br /><br />Around 10 p.m. on March 5, Lundeby said, armed FBI agents along with three local law enforcement officers stormed her home looking for her son. They handcuffed him and presented her with a search warrant.<br /><br />"I was terrified," Lundeby's mother said. "There were guns, and I don't allow guns around my children. I don't believe in guns."<br /><br />Lundeby told the officers that someone had hacked into her son's IP address and was using it to make crank calls connected through the Internet, making it look like the calls had originated from her home when they did not.<br /><br />Her argument was ignored, she said. Agents seized a computer, a cell phone, gaming console, routers, bank statements and school records, according to federal search warrants.<br /><br />"There were no bomb-making materials, not even a blasting cap, not even a wire," Lundeby said.<br /><br />Ashton now sits in a juvenile facility in South Bend, Ind. His mother has had little access to him since his arrest. She has gone to her state representatives as well as attorneys, seeking assistance, but, she said, there is nothing she can do.<br /><br />Lundeby said the <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/archive/ll/highlights.htm" target="_blank">USA Patriot Act</a> stripped her son of his due process rights.<br /><br />"We have no rights under the Patriot Act to even defend them, because the Patriot Act basically supersedes the Constitution," she said. "It wasn't intended to drag your barely 16-year-old, 120-pound son out in the middle of the night on a charge that we can't even defend."<br /><br />Passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S., the Patriot Act allows federal agents to investigate suspected cases of terrorism swiftly to better protect the country. In part, it gives the federal government more latitude to search telephone records, e-mails and other records.<br /><br />"They're saying that 'We feel this individual is a terrorist or an enemy combatant against the United States, and we're going to suspend all of those due process rights because this person is an enemy of the United States," said Dan Boyce, a defense attorney and former U.S. attorney not connected to the Lundeby case.<br /><br />Critics of the statute say it threatens the most basic of liberties.<br /><br />"There's nothing a matter of public record," Boyce said "All those normal rights are just suspended in the air."<br /><br />In a bi-partisan effort, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., last month introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives a <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1800" target="_blank">bill</a> that would narrow subpoena power in a provision of the Patriot Act, called the National Security Letters, to curb what some consider to be abuse of power by federal law enforcement officers.<br /><br />Boyce said the Patriot Act was written with good intentions, but he said he believes it has gone too far in some cases. Lundeby's might be one of them, he said.<br /><br />"It very well could be a case of overreaction, where an agent leaped to certain conclusions or has made certain assumptions about this individual and about how serious the threat really is," Boyce said.<br /><br />Because a federal judge issued a gag order in the case, the U.S. attorney in Indiana cannot comment on the case, nor can the FBI. The North Carolina Highway Patrol did confirm that officers assisted with the FBI operation at the Lundeby home on March 5.<br /><br />"Never in my worst nightmare did I ever think that it would be my own government that I would have to protect my children from," Lundeby said. "This is the United States, and I feel like I live in a third world country now."<br /><br />Lundeby said she does not think this type of case is what the Patriot Act was intended for. Boyce agrees.<br /><br />"It was to protect the public, but what we need to do is to make sure there are checks and balances to make sure those new laws are not abused," he said.</div> <ul class="contributors"><li>Reporter: <a href="http://www.wral.com/rs/bio/1014364/">Amanda Lamb</a></li><li>Photographer: <a href="http://www.wral.com/apps/feedback/feedback/?d_id_person=12">Chad Flowers</a></li><li>Web Editor: <a href="http://www.wral.com/apps/feedback/feedback/?d_id_person=125">Kelly Gardner</a></li></ul> <div class="copyright">Copyright 2009 by Capitol Broadcasting Company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.<br />-----------------------<br /><br />Now, interestingly enough... it appears there have been some changes in the case.<br /><br />http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w93.html<br /><br />"<span style="font-family:Times New Roman, Times, serif;font-size:100%;">First, the federal prosecutor in charge of the Ashton Lundeby case issued a press release <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/026683.html">denying that the USA PATRIOT act played any role</a> in the investigation, arrest, and detention of Ashton Lundeby. </span> <p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman, Times, serif;font-size:100%;"> Secondly, <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/teenage-bomb-threat-suspect-was-an-internet-prank-phone-call-star/">Ashton’s mother Annette admitted</a> that her son, under the screen name "Tyrone," had been involved in internet-facilitated pranks. "Tyrone" allegedly called in phony bomb threats to schools at the request of other teenagers who wanted an excuse to miss school – and then charging them for this illicit service. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman, Times, serif;font-size:100%;"> While Annette Lundeby admits that Ashton made crank calls, she maintains that he was <i>not</i> involved in calling in phony bomb threats. She likewise <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-2698-Charlotte-Gun-Rights-Examiner%7Ey2009m5d7-Reports-indicate-Ashton-Lundeby-case-is-a-hoax">continues to insist</a> that someone in the group of on-line Gamers with whom Ashton carried out "pranks" stole his IP address and used his on-line identity while calling in the bogus bomb threats. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman, Times, serif;font-size:100%;">According to Annette Lundeby, her son’s court-appointed attorney and other officials refused to offer a straightforward answer when she asked if the PATRIOT act was involved. She also claims to have exculpatory evidence confirming that her son was set up by the same former on-line friend who turned him in to the authorities."</span></p><p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman, Times, serif;font-size:100%;">-------------------</span></p><p>At any rate, the bottom line is that the Bill of Rights is there for a reason and that ALL U.S. Citizens should have theirs respected by the government. Mr. Jefferson had many ideas about the government, including what should be done with it when it no longer works for the people. It's one thing to punish criminals... quite another to usurp the rights of citizens without cause. Stay tuned to see what happens in this case in the future.<br /></p></div>TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-26329628942845588182009-06-01T14:04:00.000-07:002009-06-01T14:08:40.495-07:00Massachusetts: So screwed up the welfarites get free cars!You think I'm kidding? No, no. If you're going to be a non-contributing member of society - i.e. a leech - Mass. is the place for YOU!<br /><br />You can get welfare checks, free healthcare AND a car!!! All at the tax payer's expense!<br /><br />http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2009_05_07_Free_cars_for_poor_fuel_road_rage/srvc=home&position=also<br /><br />----------------<br /><span class="bold">By Hillary Chabot</span><br /> Thursday, May 7, 2009 - <span class="bylineUpdated"> Updated 22d 7h ago</span><br /> <!--//tool box end//--> <!--//article and page numbers//--> <div id="articleFull" class="articleFull"><p><span class="articleBegin">G</span>ov. <a href="http://news.bostonherald.com/search/?topic=Deval+Patrick&searchSite=pubdate"><b>Deval Patrick</b></a>’s free wheels for welfare recipients program is revving up despite the stalled economy, as the keys to donated cars loaded with state-funded insurance, repairs and even AAA membership are handed out to get them to work.</p> <p>But the program - fueled by a funding boost despite the state’s fiscal crash - allows those who end up back on welfare to keep the cars anyway.</p> <p>“It’s mind-boggling. You’ve got people out there saying, ‘I just lost my job. Hey, can I get a free car, too?’ ” said House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading).</p> <p>The Patrick administration decided last month to funnel an additional $30,000 to the nearly $400,000 annual car ownership program.</p> <p>The program, which is provided by the State Department of Transitional Assistance, gives out about 65 cars a year, said DTA Commissioner Julia Kehoe.</p> <p>The state pays for the car’s insurance, inspection, excise tax, title, registration, repairs and a AAA membership for one year at a total cost of roughly $6,000 per car.</p> <p>The program, which started in 2006, distributes cars donated by non-profit charities such as Good News Garage, a Lutheran charity, which also does the repair work on the car and bills the state.</p> <p>Kehoe defended the program, saying the state breaks even by cutting welfare payments to the family - about $6,000 a year.</p> <p>“If you look at the overall picture, this helps make sure people aren’t staying on cash assistance. It’s a relatively short payment for a long-term benefit,” Kehoe said.</p> <p>But Kehoe admitted about 20 percent of those who received a car ended up back on welfare, and while they lose the insurance and other benefits, they don’t have to return the car.</p> <p>“Given the state’s fiscal condition, paying for AAA and auto inspection costs is outrageous,” said Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei (R-Wakefield). “There are so many families out there trying to deal with layoffs and pay cuts. You have to wonder what the state’s priorities are at this point.”</p> <p>Applicants for cars must have a job or prove they could get one if they had the car in order to qualify. Once they have the wheels, they must send DTA their pay stubs to prove they are employed.</p> <p>To get the cars, they must be unable to reach work by public transportation and have a clean driving record. The program is only available to families on welfare with children.</p> <p>Kehoe said the bulk of cars go to places with less public transportation, such as Fitchburg, New Bedford and Lowell.</p> <p>“I can’t believe there are no restrictions on how they use the car,” Jones said. “I just don’t see this as a core function of government.</p> </div>----------------<br /><br />Man, America... what a great place. The lazy get everything they ever wanted, and the hard working people trying to actually MAKE SOMETHING OF THEMSELVES, get to pay for it and watch the poor pass them by in standard of living.<br /><br />Is it any wonder people from Mass. are leaving the state? Now let's just hope they don't come here and vote for higher taxes and more welfare benefits and wonder why it didn't work here either...TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-9278401863873474592009-06-01T13:59:00.000-07:002009-06-01T14:03:36.989-07:00Saudi "Miss Beautiful Morals" PageantI find it hilariously ironic that the Saudi's are having a beauty pageant. Yes, even in the land of the Burkha, beauty pageants exist - just don't show your ankles, lest you die.<br /><br />http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519193,00.html<br /><br />Yes, Saudi Arabia is having a Miss Beautiful Morals pageant. I imagine this is to celebrate which female embraces her non-existent rights the best. Think of it as the Islamic counter to the phrase, "...but she has a great personality!" That's right - "We have no idea WHAT she looks like ladies and gentlemen (and if we did see her face we'd stone her for being a whore just like Mohammed commanded), but she has beautiful morals!"TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-38776453068623589562009-06-01T13:50:00.000-07:002009-06-01T13:58:52.055-07:00Dems patronizing Specter with sub-comittee chair...Oh wait... not so fast. Specter's reward for playing Benedict Arnold... absolutely NOTHING!<br /><br />http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/07/source-durbin-gives-specter-judiciary-subcommittee-chair/<br /><br />That's right, Specter switches sides, leaving the Republican's in the lurch, jumps to the Dem's thinking it will be better for his career, and gets NOTHING! ZIP! ZILCH!<br /><br />And to that, this Virginia boy says... Sic Semper Proditor (traitors)TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-43968847340844837052009-05-18T12:17:00.000-07:002009-05-18T13:15:23.853-07:00Obama want's to cut pennies out of spending bills...Amazing isn't it? The man can define his way into and out of anything. The man wants to cut spending, so he proposes cutting $17B out of his new spending bill which will rack up a $1.17T deficit in 2010 alone.<br /><br />http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUKTRE54647Y20090507<br />------------------------------<br /><p>By <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=Richard.Cowan">Richard Cowan</a> and <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=Jeff.Mason">Jeff Mason</a> - Analysis<span id="midArticle_byline"></span></p><span id="midArticle_0"></span> <p>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President <a href="http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/barackobama" title="Full coverage of President Barack Obama">Barack Obama</a>'s budget suggests $17 billion in spending cuts for fiscal year 2010, but Congress already has rejected some of those proposals and the savings do little to dent a projected $1.17 trillion deficit.</p><span id="midArticle_1"></span> <p>Obama on Thursday released details of the spending cuts, most of which were announced during or after the initial roll-out of his $3.5 trillion budget in February. Fiscal year 2010 begins on October 1.</p><span id="midArticle_2"></span> <p>Here is a look at what some of the cuts mean for deficit reduction and the chances they have of getting approval from lawmakers:</p><span id="midArticle_3"></span> <p>* Obama's budget calls for controversial healthcare reforms and legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming, but a huge fight is already underway in Congress over both initiatives.</p><span id="midArticle_4"></span> <p>Republicans largely oppose a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, calling it a disguised energy tax, and some Democrats are wary of the system's effect on the economy. Obama wants to help fight climate change by capping emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, from big industries and allowing them to trade rights to pollute. Such systems are known as "cap and trade."</p><span id="midArticle_5"></span> <p>* Congress already has rejected Obama's proposed subsidy cuts for wealthy farmers.</p><span id="midArticle_6"></span> <p>* The $17 billion in proposed savings are easily lost in just the interest payments on a federal government debt that is now more than $11.2 trillion. Those interest payments are totaling hundreds of billions of dollars a year.</p><span id="midArticle_7"></span> <p>* Obama's cuts would be far eclipsed by the more than $94 billion in new "emergency" spending to continue paying for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars this year and to increase foreign aid and battle a possible pandemic flu.</p><span id="midArticle_8"></span> <p>* The U.S. budget deficit picture is worsened by the economic recession that has resulted in lower government tax receipts and huge increases in spending to try to stimulate the economy. Until a turnaround occurs, deficits are expected to continue at historically high levels.</p><span id="midArticle_9"></span> <p>* Budget experts believe that the only way to get deficits under control long-term is by making significant reforms to federal retirement and healthcare programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.</p><span id="midArticle_10"></span> <p>* The details of Obama's requests come about a week after lawmakers wrapped up work on the very budget the president is now proposing. The Democratic-controlled Congress has passed a nonbinding $3.4 trillion budget plan for next year that embraces many of Obama's priorities.</p><span id="midArticle_11"></span> <p>(Editing by Will Dunham)</p>------------------------------<br /><br />The bottom line is, the guy will call bigger welfare checks a tax cut, call doubling the deficit cutting it in half because it will only end up being half as big as when he quadrupled it in the first place. Lies, lies and more lies. And some poeple are dumb enough to actually believe them.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-63498442364074510622009-05-18T12:08:00.000-07:002009-05-18T12:16:44.400-07:00Congress sends it's kids to private school while ending D.C. vouchers... (SHOCKER!)Well, Congress is at it again telling people that what's good for the goose isn't good enough for the gander. How? Simple. 40% of them have sent their kids to private schools because they didn't want them going to public schools. So what did they do about it? They killed the school voucher system that lets parents choose to send their kids to private schools if they want. If public schools in D.C. are so good, how come none of the Congressmen and Senators send their own kids there? Obama is sending his kids to a private school in D.C. also. Wait a second. I thought he was all for the public schools.<br /><br />http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/06/protesters-blast-congress-axing-dc-vouchers-sending-kids-private-school/<br />---------------------------<br /><p>Supporters of a celebrated school voucher program in Washington rallied near the mayor's office Wednesday to save the scholarships from being slashed by Congress -- nearly 40 percent of whose members send their own children to private schools.</p><p>An estimated 1,000 parents, children and community leaders attended the afternoon protest in Washington's Freedom Plaza, where they called on D.C. politicians to help preserve a federal school choice program that currently assists more than 1,700 students with scholarships worth up to $7,500.</p><p>"Several years ago many of us in this good city worked very hard to get a program going with the federal government so that children could go to the schools of their choice. This program has worked," said Kevin Chavous, a former D.C. councilman, but "right now some folks in Congress want to end this program."</p><p>The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program is slated to end next year because of a provision slipped into Congress' $410 billion omnibus spending bill by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., whose children attend private school.</p><p>The amendment has angered parents who say the vouchers have raised performance and rescued students from one of the country's worst public school systems.</p><p>"I saw dramatic change. The change is not even comparable to what a parent could do alone," said Ingrid Campbell, a single mother of three who has two daughters in the opportunity program.</p><p>"I'm going to have to get a part-time job" when the funds are cut off, she told FOX News Wednesday morning before the rally. "I'll do anything, anything in my power and my will to keep my two little girls in their schools."</p><p>Rally organizers blasted members of Congress for opposing vouchers but choosing private school for their own families, a choice they say is denied the poorest residents of Washington.</p><p>"Your tax dollars also go to pay the salaries of Congress, 40 percent of whom send their kids to private schools," said Joe Robert, a board member of D.C. Children First, a pro-voucher organization.</p><p>"Right now we have choices around America but we only have it for people who have some money. We don't have it for people who are struggling."</p><p>Thirty-six percent of U.S. representatives and 44 percent of the senators with school-age children have sent their kids to private schools, according to a study by the Heritage Foundation.</p><p>Just 11 percent of American schoolchildren attend private schools, according to the study.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://www.heritage.org/Press/FactSheet/images/fs0015_chart.jpg">Click here to see a breakdown of that study.</a></p><p>The rally, which was held just blocks from the White House, ratcheted up pressure on the Obama administration to address the axing of the program, which would remove two black scholarship students from Sidwell Friends, the private academy that President Obama's daughters attend.</p><p>Some parents wondered how Obama would explain the absence of Sarah and James Parker from Sidwell Friends next year.</p><p>"I wonder how he feels when his daughter says, 'Hey daddy, my best friend is not coming back next year.' How would that feel?" said Campbell, whose young daughter has pledged to work after school to help pay her own tuition at Georgetown Visitation Preparatory School. "Maybe he can feel what we parents are feeling right now."</p><p>Parents with children in the program have been enthusiastic supporters of the vouchers, but a government review released in March offered a less sanguine view of the scholarships.</p><p>The program improved reading but not math scores, and while parents were pleased with the increased safety at private schools, students did not report much of a change. The study included both students who used the scholarship and some who were only offered the funds.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20094050/">Click here to read the report.</a></p><p>The rally was attended and addressed by prominent D.C. politicians, including former mayor Anthony Williams, who credited his success to an excellent education, and former mayor Marion Barry, who said he was a strong supporter of choice.</p><p>"We've got to tell Congress to fund this program and not let local people down," said Barry, who currently sits on the city council.</p><p>Barry and others pledged to push to rescue the program before it ends this year.</p><p>"We're here today to express our full support for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. We want the city council, the mayor, we want members of Congress, we want all of the decision makers to know that our kids come first," said Benjamin Chavis, co-chairman of the Hip Hop Summit Action Network.</p>---------------------------<br />The bottom line is that Congress likes to tell us one thing while doing another. Just like the National Health Care initiative. They want all of us to pay for everyone else's healthcare. They don't particularly care that it won't work or that the elderly and critically ill will be denied healthcare benefits. Why? Simple. They are on Congressional Health Care. That's right. When they are old and retired, they will have access to the best health care your tax payer dollars can buy. Proving once again that they are quite happy to cook, as long as someone else is eating the food.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-63925934392730338932009-05-18T11:53:00.000-07:002009-05-18T12:08:03.294-07:00New Montana Gun Law draws line in the sand...Montana's Governor has just signed into law a provision that would make all gun sales in Montana, to Montanans by Montana companies (i.e. no interstate commerce) impervious to Federal firearms laws. In other words, no background checks, no waiting periods, no silencer bans, no restrictions on amount or type of ammunition or type of weapon or even rates of fire.<br /><br />http://www.fishingbuddy.com/new_montana_gun_law_signed<br />http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520466,00.html<br />http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/10/MN4V17BCF2.DTL<br />------------------------<br /><div id="bodytext_top" class="bodytext bodytext_top"><div id="fontprefs_top" class="georgia md"><p><strong>(05-10) 04:00 PDT Helena, Mont.</strong> -- Montana is trying to trigger a battle over gun control - and perhaps make a larger point about what many folks in this ruggedly independent state regard as a meddlesome federal government.</p> </div></div> <div id="articlebox"> <!-- /templates/types/article/objects_lib.tmpl --> <!-- end /templates/types/article/object_lib.tmpl --> <!-- multiobjects --> <!-- /multiobjects --> <!-- chartlink --> <!-- /chartlink --> <!-- dropins --> <!-- /dropins --> <!-- defaultbox --> <!-- /defaultbox --> <!-- related links --> <!-- begin: /templates/types/widgets/pages/related_links/rss.tmpl --> <!-- related_links/news/index.html generated by news_rl on Mon May 18 12:00:51 2009 --> <div class="sfg_art004 clearfix">In a bill passed by the Legislature earlier this month, the state is asserting that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background check and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.<ul><li style="display: none;" id="rl_news_rl_last_row"><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/17/state/n205906D02.DTL">Quake gives Southern California a 'serious jolt'</a> <span>05.18.09</span></li></ul> <script type="text/javascript"> //<![CDATA[ sfg_hideoneorlast('rl_news_rl'); //]]> </script> </div> <!-- end related_links/news/index.html --> <!-- end: /templates/types/widgets/pages/related_links/rss.tmpl --></div><!--/articlebox --> <div id="bodytext_bottom" class="bodytext bodytext_bottom"><div id="fontprefs_bottom" class="georgia md"> <p> That notion is all but certain to be tested in court.</p> <p> The immediate effect of the law could be limited, since Montana is home to just a few specialty gun makers, known for high-end hunting rifles and replicas of Old West weapons, and because their out-of-state sales would automatically trigger federal control.</p> <p> Still, much bigger prey lies in Montana's sights: a legal showdown over how far the federal government's regulatory authority extends.</p> <p> "It's a gun bill, but it's another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana," said Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who signed the bill.</p> <p> Carrie DiPirro, a spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, had no comment on the legislation. But the federal government has argued that it has authority under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution to regulate guns because they can so easily be transported across state lines.</p> <p> Guns and states' rights both play well in Montana, the birthplace of the right-wing Freemen militia and a participant in the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 1970s and '80s, during which Western states clashed with Washington over grazing and mineral extraction on federal land.</p> <p> Montana's leading gun rights organization, more hard-core than the National Rifle Association, boasts it has moved 50 bills through the Legislature over the past 25 years. And lawmakers in the Big Sky State have rebelled against federal control of everything from wetland protection to the national Real ID system.</p> <p> Under the new law, guns intended only for Montana would be stamped "Made in Montana." The drafters of the law hope to set off a legal battle with a simple Montana-made youth-model single-shot, bolt-action .22 rifle. They plan to find a "squeaky clean" Montanan who wants to send a note to the ATF threatening to build and sell about 20 such rifles without federal dealership licensing.</p> <p> If the ATF tells them it's illegal, they will sue and take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if they can.</p> <p> Similar measures have also been introduced in Texas and Alaska.</p> <p> "I think states have got to stand up or else most of their rights are going to be buffaloed by the administration and by Congress," said Texas state Rep. Leo Berman.</p> <p> Critics say exempting guns from federal laws anywhere would undermine efforts to stem gun violence everywhere.</p> <p> "Guns cross state lines and they do so constantly, and this is a Sagebrush Rebellion-type effort to light some sort of fire and get something going that's pleasing to the gun nuts and that has very little actual sense," said Peter Hamm, communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.</p> <p> In a 2005 case, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the enforcement of federal laws against marijuana in California, even if the drug is for medical purposes and is grown and used within the state. The court found that since marijuana produced in California is indistinguishable from pot grown outside the state, the federal government must have the authority to regulate both to enforce national drug laws.</p> <p> Randy Barnett, the lawyer and constitutional scholar who represented the plaintiff in the California case, said that Montana could argue that its "Made in Montana"-stamped guns are unique and sufficiently segregated as to lie outside federal regulation.</p> <p> Supporters of the measure say the main purpose is not extending gun freedoms, but curbing what they regard as an oppressive interpretation of the interstate commerce clause and federal overreach into such things as livestock management and education.</p> <p> "Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I'd like to support that," said Montana state Rep. Joel Boniek, the bill's sponsor. "But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It's about state rights."</p> <p> </p> <p id="pageno">This article appeared on page <strong>A - 32</strong> of the San Francisco Chronicle<br /></p><p id="pageno">------------------------<br /></p> </div></div><br />To put it simply, Montana just created the opening for the 2nd Amendment to be used the way the Founding Fathers intended for it to work. Further, the state will arrest and prosecute any Federal officials who try to arrest Montanans who buy guns made in the state that are in accordance to the law. To put it bluntly, Montana just put it's foot down on the State's Sovereignty issue and thumbed it's nose at Washington and said, "What are you going to do about it?"<br /><br />The question is to see is which state is next in line to challenge Congress. My money is on Texas. Why? Because the only thing they hate worse than being second at anything, is being third.TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-73043365673144102382009-05-15T08:13:00.001-07:002009-05-15T08:30:43.568-07:00Obama says, "Long Term Debt unsustainable"... (Really Sherlock?!?!?)*NEWSFLASH* Obama: Long Term Debt Unsustainable.<br /><br />No kidding moron! Is that why you just passed a $3.1 TRILLION Spending Plan? How about the fact that you quadrupled spending from what it was before? (The very spending you said was too much while you were campaigning.) How about that fact that you've spent more than all the rest of the Presidents in history... COMBINED!<br /><br />http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJsSb4qtILhg&refer=worldwide<br />-----------------------------<br /><p>By Roger Runningen and Hans Nichols</p> <p> May 14 (Bloomberg) -- President <a href="http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Barack+Obama&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1" onmouseover="return escape( popwSearchNews( this ))">Barack Obama</a>, calling current <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=FDEBTY%3AIND" onmouseover="return escape( popwQuoteShort( this, 'FDEBTY:IND' ))">deficit</a> spending “unsustainable,” warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries. </p> <p>“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.” </p> <p>Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.” </p> <p>Earlier this week, the Obama administration revised its own budget estimates and raised the projected deficit for this year to a record $1.84 trillion, up 5 percent from the February estimate. The revision for the 2010 fiscal year estimated the deficit at $1.26 trillion, up 7.4 percent from the February figure. The White House Office of Management and Budget also projected next year’s budget will end up at $3.59 trillion, compared with the $3.55 trillion it estimated previously. </p> <p>Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion increase in other spending. </p> <p>Entitlement Programs </p> <p>In his New Mexico appearance, the president pledged to work with Congress to shore up entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. He also said he was confident that the House and Senate would pass health-care overhaul bills by August. </p> <p>“Most of what is driving us into debt is health care, so we have to drive down costs,” he said. </p> <p>Obama prodded Congress to pass restrictions on credit-card issuers, saying consumers need “strong and reliable” protection from unfair practices and hidden fees. </p> <p>“It’s time for reform that’s built on transparency, accountability, and mutual responsibility, values fundamental to the new foundation we seek to build for our economy,” the president said. </p> <p>Obama called on Congress to send to him by May 25 a bill that would clamp down on what he says are sudden rate increases, unfair penalties and hidden fees. He also wants the measure to strengthen monitoring of credit-card companies. </p> <p>House Bill </p> <p>The U.S. House of Representatives passed the credit-card bill last month after adding a provision requiring banks to apply consumers’ payments to balances with the highest interest rates first. The bill also imposes limits on card interest rates and fees. </p> <p>The Senate continued debating its version of the bill today. It would require credit-card companies to give 45 days’ notice before increasing an interest rate. It would prohibit retroactive rate increases on existing balances unless a consumer was 60 days late with a payment. </p> <p>The president said Americans have been hooked on their credit cards and share some blame for the current system. “We have been complicit in these problems,” he said. “We have to change how we operate. These practices have only grown worse in the midst of this recession.” </p> <p>The American Bankers Association, which represents card issuers, has warned lawmakers and the Obama administration against taking punitive action or setting requirements that are too stringent. Doing so, the lobby group says, would limit consumer credit and worsen a credit crunch. </p> <p>Obama said that restrictions “shouldn’t diminish consumers’ access to credit.” </p> <p>Uncollectible Debt </p> <p>Uncollectible credit-card debt rose to 8.82 percent in February, the most in the 20 years that Moody’s Investors Service Inc. has kept records. Lawmakers have said they’re under increasing pressure from constituents to respond to rising interest rates and abrupt changes to consumers’ accounts. </p> <p>Obama held a White House meeting last month with executives from the credit-card industry, including representatives from Bank of America Corp. and American Express Co. Afterward, he told reporters that credit-card issuers should be prohibited from imposing “unfair” rate increases on consumers and should offer the public credit terms that are easier to understand. </p> <p>“The days of any time, any increase, anything goes -- rate hike, late fees -- that must end,” Obama said today at Rio Rancho High School. We’re going to require clarity and transparency from now on.” </p> <p>He also said the steps he has taken to stimulate the economy and start the debate on overhauling the health-care system are beginning to take effect. </p> <p>‘Beginning to Turn’ </p> <p>“We’ve got a long way to go before we put this recession behind us,” Obama said. “But we do know that the gears of our economy, our economic engine, are slowly beginning to turn.” </p> <p>Taking questions from the audience, Obama repeated his stance that he wants legislation to overhaul the health-care system finished before the end of the year, saying it is vital to the economy. </p> <p>Health-care costs are driving up the nation’s debt and burdening entitlement programs such as Medicare, the government- run insurance program for those 65 and older and the disabled. </p> <p>The programs’ trustees reported May 13 that the Social Security trust fund will run out of assets in 2037, four years sooner than forecast, and Medicare’s hospital fund will run dry by 2017, two years earlier than predicted a year ago. </p> <p>To contact the reporters on this story: <a href="http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Roger+Runningen&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1" onmouseover="return escape( popwSearchNews( this ))">Roger Runningen</a> in Albuquerque at <a href="mailto:rrunningen@bloomberg.net" onmouseover="return escape( popwSendEmail( this ))">rrunningen@bloomberg.net</a>; <a href="http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Hans+Nichols&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1" onmouseover="return escape( popwSearchNews( this ))">Hans Nichols</a> in Washington at =1871 or <a href="mailto:hnichols2@bloomberg.net" onmouseover="return escape( popwSendEmail( this ))">hnichols2@bloomberg.net</a> </p> <i>Last Updated: May 14, 2009 19:40 EDT</i><br />-----------------------------<br /><br />I think what he really meant to say was that he is unsustainable as President of the United States. The country will not survive him being in White House for more than 4 years. (And it may not survive his 4 years in the first place)<br /><br />You know what's really interesting is that he spent all this money to avoid a "problem" that would've worked itself out in 5 years anyways according to the General Accounting office - the same amount of time that it will take to work itself out under his spending plan that cost us $3.1T!<br /><br />If he has such a problem with spending levels, then why doesn't he spend less? The lying egotistical bastard has no problem blaming other people for the problems he sees with this country but of course none of it is EVER his doing - even when it's his doing. Pricks like this make me sick. Obama needs to go ASAP!TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712041758622770976.post-52276081008049431222009-05-15T06:15:00.000-07:002009-05-15T06:18:47.108-07:00Thousands of Dead people mailed stimulus checks...Thousands of dead people were mailed stimulus checks recently... Why? The government didn't know they were dead. Hmm... that's interesting now isn't it? They haven't paid their taxes for years, but nobody thought to check?<br /><br />http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/your_money/consumer/090514_Dead_People_Get_Stimulus_Checks<br />----------------------------<br /><div class="story last"><p>MYFOXNY.COM - This week, thousands of people are getting stimulus checks in the mail. The problem is that a lot of them are dead. A Long Island woman was shocked when she checked the mail and received a letter from the U.S. Treasury -- but it wasn't for her.</p> <p> <strong> <em>WATCH DICK BRENNAN'S REPORT (VIDEO, LEFT)</em></strong></p> <p>Antoniette Santopadre of Valley Stream was expecting a $250 stimulus check. But when her son finally opened it, they saw that the check was made out to her father, Romolo Romonini, who died in Italy 34 years ago. He'd been a U.S. citizen when he left for Italy in 1933, but only returned to the United Stated for a seven-month visit in 1969.</p> <p>The Santopadres are not alone. The Social Security Administration, which sent out 52 million checks, says that some of those checks mistakenly went to dead people because the agency had no record of their death. That amounts to between 8,000 and 10,000 checks for millions of dollars.</p> <p>The feds blame a rushed schedule, because all the checks have to be cut by June. The strange this is, some of the checks were made out to people -- like Romonini -- who were never even part of the Social Security system.</p>-----------------------------------<br /><br />I think there's an easy explanation for all of this though. They were simply registered by ACORN to vote for Obama and these were their thank-you notes. You know how it is... In Chicago, the dead vote early and often!<br /></div>TJLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15171477835312179218noreply@blogger.com0