All Posts (27806)

Sort by

The Obama administration is using U.S. foreign aid to promote rights for gays and lesbians living abroad.
President Barack Obama issued a memorandum Tuesday directing government agencies, including the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, to use foreign aid to assist homosexuals who are facing human rights violations.
"I am deeply concerned by the violence and discrimination targeting LGBT persons around the world," Obama said in the memo.
"Our deep commitment to advancing the human rights of all people is strengthened when we as the United States bring our tools to bear to vigorously advance this goal," he added.
The president also ordered U.S. agencies to "protect vulnerable gay and lesbian refugees and asylum seekers."

Read more…

We must win the independant vote.
Newt will not attract the "must win" Independant vote
Working women will look at Obama and Gingrich and vote for Obama. Not even close.
People are all rushing to back Newt Gingrich, almost in panic mode, in mass.

Am just asking people to slow down. Is we screw this up early, we can't change it and do not want to make Obama's path easier.
Give Newt consideration, but don't cast your mental vote yet.

Please let Newt play out.

Yes, we all would love to see Newt "Debate" Obama. In recent past some Democratic candidates have limited debates in in Presidential Campaign to one debate. So can we afford to put Newt up there for maybe one debate? And what if he has one descent debate, what then? Or what if Obama does better than expected? have we put all our marbles in one bag with hopes that will catapult us to election win?
We are having financial problem a country. We need a financial wiz to help pull us out of thie depression.

 

Read more…

EVERY AMERICAN HAS TO READ IT, THERE IS NOT MUCH TIME LEFT FOR AMERICA, THIS IS THE TRUTH,  WE SCERWED UP IN EGYPT, WE REALLY SCREWED UP IN IRAQ, WHERE IS OUR PAYMENT IN THEIR OIL//////IRAN IS NOW GOING TO COME IN AND TAKE IT..   FOUR MORE YEARS OF DEMOCRATS AND THERE IS NO MORE AMERICA, AS WE KNOW IT TODAY< WE WILL BE A SOCIALIST NATION. I PRAY TO JESUS EVERY NIGHT FOR THIS COUNTY.

Read more…

Tis the Season For Christmas Phobia!

Posted on Townhall-By Robert Knigh-On December 1, 2011:

Atheists must be the most fragile peaches in the basket.

They’re always getting bruised by the slightest exposure to public displays that remind them of Christmas, God, the Ten Commandments, or worst of all, Jesus.

Just as pathetic are the atheist enablers who are complicit in doing away with any reminders of America’s Christian heritage, even secular symbols. For example, the Hollings Cancer Center in Charleston, South Carolina recently decided that a visit by Santa Claus might upset nonbelievers. Perhaps they feared that it could lead to heart attacks, an Inquisition or perhaps even inspire local militant imams to issue a fatwa (death threat). You can never be sure what kind of chaos a visit by Santa could unleash.

After the public rebelled, the center said that Santa can squeeze down the center’s chimney, but we’ll have none of that overtly religious stuff such as creches, angels, Christmas greetings – anything that brings joy to the world.

On Nov. 18, the Christian legal group Liberty Counsel sent a letter reminding Center Director Andrew S. Kraft, M.D., about how freedom of religion works in America under the Constitution and how his actions constitute viewpoint discrimination. Let’s hope Dr. Kraft will grow a big heart like the Grinch did in Whoville.

The secular virus has been spreading for years in public and private zones. Shopping malls, which would go broke without Christmas, try their best to attract Christmas shoppers without mentioning Christmas. Hence, we get generic “happy holidays” and color schemes with blue and silver snowflakes cold enough to freeze the socks off Grandfather Frost. He’s the former Soviet Union’s made-up patron saint who took over giving gifts to children after the commisars bumped off St. Nicholas. It’s rumored (just starting it now) that the Christmas-phobic ACLU tacks up portraits of Grandfather Frost in back offices to inspire them during that darned holiday season that Dare Not Tell Its Name.

Driving the whole mess is the growing fear Not to Offend. The war on Christmas, part of the ongoing trend to eradicate anything Christian in the public square, is also driven by a profound misreading of the First Amendment, which says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

To the ACLU and other pro-atheist groups, that means the government must be hostile to any public expressions of belief that offend atheists. That makes atheism the de facto official religion, something the Founders went out of their way to prevent.

Genuine conflicts do arise, and the courts have found ways to keep religiously themed items legal on public property – as long as they fulfill a secular purpose. In 1984, the Supreme Court in Lynch v. Donnelly ruled that the presence of a crèche amid other seasonal displays – a Santa Claus house, a Christmas tree, and a “Seasons Greetings” banner – erected by the city of Pawtuckett, R.I., was not an unconstitutional establishment of religion.

The secular purpose? Government was acknowledging the cultural significance of a traditional holiday celebrated by the vast majority of Americans. In what became the “reindeer test,” the Court said that religious elements are okay if secular elements are present. So if you dust off a Bambi, put a red nose on it and place it next to the baby Jesus, all is right with the world. Previous generations didn’t need this kind of “cover,” but we’re in a different place now.

The court also noted that, “The Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any.”

In early November, the Supreme Court declined to hear a case involving roadside cross memorials to fallen Utah state troopers. The American Civil Rights Union filed an amicus brief arguing for a new constitutional standard. The “Coercion Test” would evaluate whether a policy, practice, or action involves coercion in regard to religion. The framers meant to prohibit coercion, but they did not intend to prohibit voluntary, public, religious speech, or religious expression or symbolism, which do not involve coercion. This test might have helped the state-supported cancer center folks see that barring Santa was a silly idea.

In Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU (1989), the Court clarified the holiday standard by forbidding stand-alone nativities but not Christmas trees or menorahs. So the National Christmas Tree is safe—for now. Wonder if the Ban Christmas crowd knows that a decorated fir is not really a Christmas tree unless crowned with a star or an angel? Hillary Clinton’s National Tree had a purple, sparkling planet atop it one year. Make of that what you will.

Please don’t tell the ACLU about the stars and angels, though. Grim-faced volunteers will be fanning out with ladders to grab them and fling them into the nearest dumpster to save us from the Reason for the Season.

Last year, atheists in Loudoun County, Virginia, upped the price of having a crèche at the county courthouse by erecting signs with diatribes against Christianity and belief in God. When you see this stuff, keep in mind that the devil can’t create anything. He can only pervert what is good. And he’s especially adept at enlisting atheists for his schemes, because, as Psalms 14 and 53 say, “the fool has said in his heart that there is no God.”

Fortunately, since we’re all prone to foolishness of one kind or another, that same God loves us anyway and gave us the ultimate gift, which is why we celebrate Christmas.

Source:

http://townhall.com/columnists/robertknight/2011/12/01/tis_the_season_for_christmas_phobia/page/full/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and video relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. DOJ Ignores Christians and Defends Muslims!-Posted on Godfather Politics-By GIACOMO-On November 25, 2011:

http://godfatherpolitics.com/2221/doj-ignores-christians-and-defends-muslims/

II. Obama Doesn‘t Mention ’God’ in Thanksgiving Message – Problem?-Posted on The Blaze-By Scott Baker-On November 24, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-doesnt-mention-god-in-thanksgiving-message-problem/

III. Video: Obama Doesn‘t Mention ’God’ in Thanksgiving Message – Problem?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STsr9_VvzNA&feature=player_embedded

IV. Herman Cain: Obama’s scrubbing Christian heritage ‘intentional’ ‘The majority of people do not want God to be taken out of our culture!’-Posted on WND.com-By Drew Zahn-On March 18, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=276825

V. Why Does Religious Freedom Matter?-Posted on The Heritage Foundation-On December 20, 2010:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/Why-Does-Religious-Freedom-Matter?utm_source=strategicmktg&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=understandingamerica

VI. The ACLU’s Communist, Atheist Roots!-Posted on Floyd Reports-By Guest Writer-On December 16, 2010:

http://floydreports.com/the-aclus-communist-atheist-roots/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=4f039851aa-EO_12_16_201012_16_2010&utm_medium=email

VII. Faith is the Source of America’s Greatness-Posted on Patriot Update-By Floyd Brown-On December 11, 2010:

http://www.patriotupdate.com/exclusives/read/292/Faith-is-the-Source-of-Americas-Greatness

VIII. Pope in the UK: Atheists Like Nazis-Posted on NewsMax.com-On September 17, 2010:

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/PopebenedictnazisUnitedKingdom/2010/09/17/id/370610?s=al&promo_code=AC5C-1

IX. Pastors taken to task for political apathy: ‘What we have in America is a preacher problem!’-Posted on WND.com-On September 16, 2010:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=204473

Note:  The following articles and/or blog posts and reports reveal that George Soros has a pastor close to President Obama on his payroll, along with exposing the President, Soros and the Religious Left-You Decide:

Soros Has a Pastor Close to Obama On His Payroll!-Posted on American Thinker-By Ed Lasky-On August 25, 2010:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/soros_has_a_pastor_close_to_ob.html

Barack Obama, George Soros and the Religious Left!-Posted on American Thinker-By Jason Lee-On June 12, 2011:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/barack_obama_george_soros_and_the_religious_left.html

Note:  What follows are two articles and/or blog posts that reveal the connection between NBC and New York Atheists that were written by Chuck Norris-You Decide: 

Our Founders vs. NBC and New York Atheists! (Part 1 of 2)-Posted on Town Hall-By Chuck Norris-On June 28, 2011:

http://townhall.com/columnists/chucknorris/2011/06/28/our_founders_vs_nbc_and_new_york_atheists_part_1_of_2/page/full/

Our Founders vs. NBC and New York Atheists! (Part 2 of 2)-Posted on WND.com-By Chuck Norris-On July 4, 2011: 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=318489

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Faith of Our Forefathers!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/faith-of-our-forefathers/

Have the “power elite” and pseudo-experts covertly sold us corruption disguised as freedom?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/have-the-“power-elite”-and-pseudo-experts-covertly-sold-us-corruption-disguised-as-freedom/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Does Europe have a future?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/does-europe-have-a-future/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

I hope people slow down on this Newt Gingridge poll surge.
Newt is just telling people the
(Red Meat) they wish to hear.

I do not think he can even compete wth Obama.

How can he draw independants?
Do you think the youth of America will even consider him?
People who look at image will look at him and Obama and run to Obama?
Will he just be another old fogey, to youth?
Newt is smart, but those who are just average intelligence may not understand him?
He is serious gamble.
Is Newt playing us?

Read more…

Agenda 21 and the Threat in Your Backyard!

What’s disgusting about this?

Posted on The Heritage Foundation-By Mike Brownfield-On December 5, 2011:

“Ready to trade in your car for a bike, or maybe a subway instead? Interested in fewer choices for your home, paying more for housing, and being crammed into a denser neighborhood? You can have all this and more if radical environmentalists and “smart growth” advocates have their way and local, state, and the federal government impose the policies set forth in the United Nations’ Agenda 21.

You might have heard of this nefarious-sounding policy in a recent Republican presidential debate, but even if you haven’t, here’s some background information: Agenda 21 is a voluntary plan adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. It calls on governments to intervene and regulate nearly every potential impact that human activity could have on the environment. The end goal? Getting governments to “rethink economic development and find ways to halt the destruction of irreplaceable natural resources and pollution of the planet.”

As adopted, Agenda 21 was described as “a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.” That includes hundreds of specific goals and strategies that national and local governments are encouraged to adopt. And that translates into restrictive zoning policies that are aimed at deterring suburban growth. Ultimately, they suppress housing supply and drive up home prices, in turn imposing unnecessary costs, especially on middle- and lower-income households. These policies contributed to and aggravate the real estate bubble by putting inflationary pressures on housing prices.

But here’s the catch: Nothing about Agenda 21 is binding, and it’s not a threat in and of itself. Instead, the threat Americans need to be concerned about is the one that lies in their own backyard. In a new paper, “Focus on Agenda 21 Should Not Divert Attention from Homegrown Anti-Growth Policies,” Wendell Cox, Ronald Utt, Brett Schaefer explain:

“Opponents of Agenda 21 should not be distracted from the more tangible manifestation of the smart-growth principles outlined in that document. If they focus excessively on Agenda 21, it is much more likely that homegrown smart-growth policies that date to the early 1970s and undermine the quality of life, personal choice, and property rights in American communities will be implemented by local, state, and federal authorities at the behest of environmental groups and other vested interests.”

In the United States, smart-growth policies started in California and Oregon but then spread around the country to “deter suburban growth for all but the well-to-do,” as Cox, Utt, and Schaefer explain. They also write that those policies were not without detrimental impact:

“As they became more prevalent and restrictive, their impact on housing prices and construction likewise expanded. An explosion of exclusionary zoning throughout the U.S. encouraged many communities to adopt zoning policies to ensure that they maintained a certain demographic ‘profile.’ Such zoning limited real estate development to higher-cost homes in order to ‘price out’ moderate-income households, which included a disproportionate share of minorities.”

Where do these home-grown smart-growth policies stand today? The Obama Administration has embraced them while also increasing environmental regulations and restrictions on the use of natural resources. But the White House isn’t the only one behind the smart-growth movement. Local and state officials, along with interest groups, are promoting the policies at all levels of government.

And that’s where smart growth must also be thwarted. It’s not just a matter of standing against the implementation of Agenda 21 at the national level; it’s also about protecting our own backyards against the home-grown threat.”

Source:

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/12/05/morning-bell-agenda-21-and-the-threat-in-your-backyard/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

Note:  What follows are other articles and/or blog posts and videos that reveal a disturbing global land grab movement by George Soros, President Obama, elitists (both Democrat and Republican), and other hedge fund managers as part of the New World Order, which will require Americans to give up their individual freedoms, personal property and redistribute their wealth. Also included are articles and blog posts that reveal that Sheriffs around the country are rising up against the move-You Decide:

Agenda 21:

Video: Obama’s Executive Order 13575 Rural Council – Agenda 21!-Posted on Cowboy Byte-On November 29, 2011:

http://cowboybyte.com/2150/obamas-executive-order-13575-rural-council-–-agenda-21/

The U.N.’s “Agenda 21 must be stopped now!-Posted on Vickie Goes to Washington-By Victoria Jackson-On September 15, 2011:

http://vickigoestowashington.com/2011/09/the-u-n-s-agenda-21-must-be-stopped-now/

Global Land Grab: Nervous Rulers and Hedge Fund Managers Alike Scramble for Land!-Posted on The Truth is Treason-By KEVIN HAYDEN-On August 22, 2011:

http://www.truthistreason.net/global-land-grab-nervous-rulers-and-hedge-fund-managers-alike-scramble-for-land

UN’s Agenda 21 Update: Family Farms Are Under Attack!-Posted on The Blaze-By Mike Opelka-On July 31, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/agenda-21-update-family-farms-are-under-attack/

The CLEAR Act of a Federal Land Grab (HR 3534)-Posted on The Truth is Treason-By Cassandra Anderson, MorphCity-On July 22, 2011:

http://www.truthistreason.net/the-clear-act-of-a-federal-land-grab-hr-3534

Is The Soros-Sponsored ‘Agenda 21’ A Hidden Plan For World Government?-Posted on The Blaze-By Mike Opelka-On June 14, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-the-soros-sponsored-agenda-21-a-hidden-plan-for-world-government-yes-only-it-is-not-hidden/

Video: Texans for Accountable Government Exposes Agenda 21!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h-lTRxKu3A&feature=player_embedded

Video: John Bush Speaks On The Austin Regional Intelligence Center!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMZBV5abpLk&feature=related

Video: How your community is implementing AGENDA 21!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEHWsdimVO4&feature=player_embedded

Cedar Falls, Iowa City Council defies citizens; says YES to the United Nations and NO to the 4th Amendment!-Posted on The Gaspee Gazette-On June 11, 2011:

http://gaspeegazette.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/cedar-falls-iowa-city-council-defies-citizens-says-yes-to-the-united-nations-and-no-to-the-4th-amendment/

Video: Wildlands Project!-Posted on You Tube.com-By skiebus-On June 28, 2008:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo&feature=player_embedded#

For more analyses on Agenda 21, visit Cassandra Anderson’s website at www.MorphCity.com.

1.     http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNHR3534LandTrust.html

2.    http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNEPAlanduse5percnt.html

3.    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0

4.    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/02/white-house-land-grab/

5.     http://www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html 

Sheriffs Up-Rising Against Agenda 21:

Sheriffs Rise Up Against Feds!-Posted on American Free Press-By Pat Shannan-On November 2011:

http://www.americanfreepress.net/Issue_fronts/Issue_47_AFP_2011_1.pdf

New Mexico Law and Local Sheriff Trump the Feds in Agenda 21 Land Grab!-Posted on The Truth is Treason-By KEVIN HAYDEN-On November  8, 2011:

http://www.truthistreason.net/new-mexico-law-and-local-sheriff-trump-the-feds-in-agenda-21-land-grab

Note:  The following video reveals the impact of the Senate declaring war on Americans via the recent passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, and its utterly destructive attitude towards the Constitution and Bill of Rights, along with a video that contains a powerful message from a former C.I.A. Agent to all Americans-You Decide:

Video: NDAA's World Wide Declaration of War on The People!-Posted on YouTube.com-By TheAlexJonesChannel-On December 4, 2011:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbu4SCaMEDA&feature=uploademail

Video: YOU ARE THE RESISTANCE!-Posted on YouTube.com-By in5d-On May 6, 2010:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI0cd_aIxVg&feature=related

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

New World Order By Executive Order!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/new-world-order-by-executive-order/

It’s Getting Very Serious Now!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/it’s-getting-very-serious-now/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

Note: What follows is an article and/or blog post and a video (film) that exposes the real Newt Gingrich, to include who he serves by examining his actions and voting record-You Decide:

Globalist Candidate Gingrich Gets Influential Establishment Endorsement!-Posted on InfoWars-By Kurt Nimmo,
Infowars.com-On November 27, 2011:

http://www.infowars.com/globalist-candidate-gingrich-gets-influential-establishment-endorsement/

Video: The Real Newt Gingrich!-Posted on YouTube.com-By Lentenlands-On November 28, 2011:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXVc1oxm_VQ&feature=related

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

Campaign Finance Reform for Individuals

Should voters in New York be allowed to contribute to local elections in New Hampshire?
Should voters in Concord, NH be allowed to contribute to elections in Manchester, NH?
If you can not vote in an election, why should you be allowed to contribute to that election?
Whom do you want politicians to raise money from, their constituents or people that can NOT vote for them?
Campaign Finance Reform should be about Insiders versus Outsiders not hard money versus soft money.
US Citizens
An Example for US Citizens Who Live, Vote and Pay Taxes in the Government District:
Three people contribute to a campaign.  One contributes $10,000 worth of time, one contributes $10,000 worth of resources and one contributes $10,000 in cash.  
Which has violated campaign finance laws?  
The person that contributes $10,000 cash. The persons that contributed $10,000 worth of time and resources are making legal contributions.  But all three people live under regulations, pay taxes, and earn income in the government district that the candidate represents.
Question:
If you are not going to limit the time and resources a voter may contribute to a candidate, why is it fair to limit the cash a voter can contribute?
Answer:
Time, resources and money are all acceptable and equivalent contributions.  There should be no limits on contributions by people who can vote in an election.  They pay taxes and live under that government's regulations so they should be allowed to help select their representative any way they can, with time, money or resources.
Conversely, if a person can NOT vote in an election then they should not be allowed to contribute anything to a candidate, not time, money or resources.
Voting in an election is the key determiner of Insider versus Outsider.  If it were not so, we could vote in all 50 states, for 50 governors, 100 senators, etc.  Because we are limited to whom we can vote for, we should also be limited to whom we can contribute to.  This limit applies to time, money and resources.

An Example for Unlimited Campaign Contributions by Voters in an Election District:
Let’s use New York City as an example.  Two billionaires live in New York city and one billionaire we’ll call Michael, wants to be mayor of New York city.  Michael contributes $10 million to his own campaign, which is perfectly legal under the current campaign finance laws.  The other billionaire, we’ll call Donald, does not want to be mayor, but he also does not want Michael to be mayor.  He would like to contribute $10 million to another candidate.  This is not legal.  Why?  They both live, work, pay taxes and vote in New York city.  
If you are having problems with allowing voters to give unlimited campaign contributions please ask yourself these questions:
If you had a million dollars investment in the stock market, would you pay a stock broker to manage that investment.
If you paid one million dollars in taxes, would you not contribute to a politician to manage your "investment" in government?
If you received one million dollars in government contracts or tax deductions or subsidies, would you not contribute to a politician to manage your "revenue" from government?
If you paid one million dollars to comply with government regulations would you not contribute to a politician to manage your "investment" with the government?
Remember that billionaires can only make unlimited contributions in one election district, the one they can vote in.
Non-voting US Residents
The Supreme Court has ruled that people that can not vote in the US, but pay taxes to the US can participate in a limited way in elections.  This ruling applied to permanent residents who are not yet citizens.  The Supreme Court did allow restrictions on the amount of money non-citizens could contribute to an election.  They limited their contributions to only the amount of money the person earned in the US.
Question:
Two people make the same amount of money in a government district and pay the same taxes to that government, but only one of them can vote in that district.  Should the contributions by the nonresident be limited to the same amount of contributions as the voters in that district?  Should nonresidents be banned from making contributions of time and resources because placing a value on it and accounting for it is difficult to impossible?

An Example for People that Can Not Vote in a Government District:
Two people work in a election district, but only one can vote in that district.  Think of people who live in one district/state but work in another such as traveling sales people.
Person A represent the average constituent in the election district.  He makes $100K, pays $10K in taxes in that election district.  He contributes $100 to the election he can vote in.
If Person B who is not a constituent, represents Outsiders who are affected by the government in the election district.  He makes $100K and pays $10K in taxes in that election district.  He should be allowed to contribute $100 to that district.  If person B makes the 10 times the money or pays 10 times the taxes, he should be allowed to contribute 10 times the campaign contribution as person A.
Notice that if voters (Insiders) do NOT makes cash campaign contributions and only contribute time and resources, then person B can NOT make any cash contributions.  This means that people who vote in an election determine how much money will be spent on a campaign.  It is not the Outsiders, because their contributions are limited.  The limitation is calculated by dividing the total Insider donations by the number of constituents in the district.
Conclusion
People that can vote in an election have unlimited contributions to the candidates running in that district.  
Voters determine how much money is spent in an election.
People that can NOT vote in an election but who are affected by that government's by taxes, laws and regulations have some limited contribution to the candidates running in that district based on what Insiders contribute.
People that can NOT vote in an election are NOT allowed to contribute time or resources to that election.
People that are NOT affected by that government may NOT contribute to the candidates running in that district.  Not time, not money and not resources.
Final Question
So which campaign finance laws do you want to live under?  The existing hard money and soft money laws with unlimited spending by Political Action Committees? Or would you rather have the campaign finance laws regulate contributions based on Insiders versus Outsiders?

This and other papers can be found at www.cashinthehand.org
Read more…

A Vision for America

There are two possible visions for America.  Imagine two major league baseball stadiums.  
In one stadium there are billionaire owners in sky boxes, millionaire players on the field and in the stands there are people at work selling soda, popcorn and peanuts and working for peanuts.  The workers in the stands live in public housing, send their kids to public schools, have public health care, take public transportation, live on food stamps with government subsidized utilities and retire onto public pension plans.  The billionaire owners and millionaire players pay taxes to support all those government programs.
In another stadium there are billionaire owners in sky boxes, millionaire players on the field and in the stands there are people at work selling soda, popcorn and peanuts, but they are not working for peanuts.  The billionaire owners and millionaire players pay the workers in the stands enough money to live in private housing, send their kids to private schools, have private health care, use private transportation, buy their own food and pay for their own utilities and retire onto private pension plans.
Which one is your vision for America?
How You Get to the Second Baseball Stadium:
If you received a $1000 tax deduction for giving a person $1000 for food, would you do it?
If you received a $5000 tax deduction for giving a child $5000 for education, would you do it?
If you received a $10,000 tax deduction for hiring a person and paying them $10,000 for health care, would you do it?
This tax deduction is called “Cash in the Hand” and this is how the tax deduction works.
For Individuals:
  • If you could deposit your income tax payment in a Health Savings Account, would you do it?
  • If you could deposit your property tax payment in a Education Savings Account, would you do it?
Waiters and Waitresses:
  • Would you like all the sales taxes collected each day by your employer to be divided equally between all the workers in the restaurant and deposited into a Housing Savings Account for you?
Workers in a big box store:
  • Would you like your employers property tax bill divided equally between all the workers and deposited in your Education Savings Account for you?
  • Would you like your employers corporate income tax bill divided equally between all the workers and deposited in your Retirement Savings Account?
The education, retirement, health, housing, and transportation savings accounts can be one account that each individual controls.
Benefits of the Tax Deduction “Cash in the Hand”:
Gives every American Worker a Profit Sharing Plan with their Employer
Improves Public Education
Destroys Socialism
Eliminates Unemployment Benefits
Provides Health Care to People with Pre-Existing Conditions
Eliminates Farm Subsidies
Reduces Corruption in Politics
Enables the Public Option of the Health Care Law
Eliminates Corporate Subsidies
Solves the Immigration Problem, Both Legal and Illegal
Reduces the Trade Deficit
Eliminates the Movement of Jobs Overseas
This is a partial list of some of the problems that are reduced or eliminated by the tax deduction “Cash in the Hand”.   I will explain how this is done in a separate paper for each topic.

This and other papers can be found at www.cashinthehand.org

Read more…

A Vision for Health Care in America

Here is a vision for health care in America that all people can agree upon:
Imagine a doctor and patient sitting in a doctor's office.  The patient has all the money they need to pay for their medical needs.  There are no insurance companies in the room.  There are no government bureaucrats in the room.  Just the doctor, the patient and the money.

How Do You Get There?  
With the tax deduction “Cash in the Hand”: 
For Individuals:
  • If you could deposit your income tax payment in a Health Savings Account, would you do it?
  • If you could deposit your property tax payment in a Health Savings Account, would you do it?
Waiters and Waitresses:
  • Would you like all the sales taxes collected each day by your employer to be divided equally between all the workers in the restaurant and deposited into a Health Savings Account for you?
Workers in a big box store:
  • Would you like your employers property tax bill divided equally between all the workers and deposited in your Health Savings Account for you?
  • Would you like your employers corporate income tax bill divided equally between all the workers and deposited in your Health Savings Account?
What can you do with the money in an Health Savings Account?
Buy Health Insurance
Pay for any health related expense
Conclusion
Do you want to live under the ObamaCare health care laws or would you rather have a Health Savings Account made possible by the tax deduction “Cash in the Hand”?

This and other papers can be found at www.cashinthehand.org

Read more…

THE FALACY ABOUT THE 2% PAYROLL TAX CUT

ALL THIS FUSS ABOUT A 2% PAYROLL TAX CUT IS PREYING ON THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD ANY PERSONAL OR EXPERIENCE IN PAYROLL TAXES WHICH IS A COMPLEX TOPIC AND HAS BEEN CONVOLUTED WITH A LOT OF POLITICAL B S.  THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PAYROLL TAX DEDUCTIONS IN THE PAYROLL SYSTEM, I HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH PAYROLLS  FOR OVER 50 YEARS AND I RESENT THE MISREPRESENTATION THAT PREVAILS IN OUR MEDIA AND POLITICAL RHETERIC. A PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME FOR THE NATION IS THE INCOME TAX WITHOLDING TAX WHICH IS THE AMOUNT OF TAX EACH INDIVIDUAL PAYS INTO THE GENERAL TAX FUND WHICH IS THE FUND INTENDED TO FINANCE THE COST OF GOVERNMENT. IT WAS ORIGINALY INTENDED FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF GOVERNMENT FIRST AND OTHER THING LAST.  THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAX DEDUCTION WAS EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE ORIGINAL LAW TO BE A CONTRIBUTION INTO A GOVERNMENT MANDATED RETIREMENT FUND FOR  ALL WORKING AMERICANS ON A 50% CONTRIBUTION BASIS SHARED EQUALLY BY THE WORKER AND THE EMPLOYER. THIS IS THE PAYROLL TAX REFERRED TO IN THE CURRENT MISNOMORED PAYROLL TAX.  THE REDUCTION IN THIS TAX ONLY MEANS THAT LESS MONEY IS PUT INTO THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND WHICH IN THE END MEANS LESS FUNDS FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE TO ILLEGALLY TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL INCOME TAX FUND.  IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO FUND THE GENERAL MAINTINANCE OF GOVERNMENT.  SO WHAT DOES THIS 2% PAYROLL TAX DEDUCTION DO? IT IS A DELIBERATE THEFT OF THE FUTURE RETIREMENT BENEFITS OF THOSE WORKING PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY CONTRIBUTING.  PRESIDENT OBOMA'S THREAT EARLIER THIS YEAR TO NOT SEND OUT THE SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS WAS A STATEMENT THAT THE TRUST FUND HAD BEEN RAIDED TO A CRITICAL LEVEL AND HE COULD NOT CONTINUE TO PAY HIS INFLATED BEAUROCRATIC CRONIES AS WELL AS MEET THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS. SO NOW HE WANTS TO CONTINUE TO FUND HIS OVERLY INFLATED BEAUROCRATIC COLONY AT THE COST OF THE FUTURE BENEIFITS TO THOSE DESERVING WORKERS.    

Read more…

Liberty and the TSA

 

 Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.  Patrick Henry (1736-1739)

As a frequent traveler, I want to see a better balance between personal safety and public safety.  The TSA screening uses three types of technologies, low frequency electromagnetic fields, “back scatter” X-ray, and millimeter-wave scanners.  My basic issue with the TSA screening is over personal safety being compromised by technologies that do not significantly increase public safety but increase personal risk factors.  It is my opinion that Americans should not have to be irradiated in a similar way our luggage is screened.  Across, the globe, public safety relies on safer screening technologies of electromagnetic magnetometer (metal) scanners.  More recently, new technology called “millimeter-wave” screening is also a safer alternative to backscatter X-ray scanners.

Our personal liberty is being compromised by technological developments involving X-ray screening which exposes us to potentially harmful conditions that are known to damage DNA.   Although the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) claims the potential for dangerous radiation exposure from the backscatter machine is low and that it doesn't pose a significant risk to passengers, they should not have the right to force airline travelers to be exposed to any potential cancer causing X-rays.

According to TSA website, each scan emits less than 1/1,000 of the radiation given off in a chest X-ray.  To put in context to flying experience, this is equivalent of two minutes of high-altitude flight.  However there is a fundamental difference in the X-ray screening equipment and background environmental radiation.  The background radiation is not concentrated and is considered to be a uniformly distributed conditions   Unlike environmental radiation, the TSA X-ray screening equipment subjects the individual to a concentrated burst of energy that exposes the skin to higher levels that is possible from in flight conditions. 

We do have the right to opt of these X-ray screening devices as a personal decision.  Despite the TSA claims about howsafe and low level the X-rays are, we have to be able to address our safety concerns.  Recently, the European Union announced that it has banned the use of X-ray body scanners in all European airports "in order not to risk jeopardizing citizens' health and safety." Research shows that the X-ray scanners, which use low-level radiation to screen airline passengers for hidden explosives, slightly increase their risk of getting cancer.  The same scanners will continue to be used in the United States, according to the Transportation Security Administration. The TSA's stance is that the scanners meet its safety standards.

Approximately 250 X-ray scanners are currently being used in American airports, according to ProPublica, along with 264 millimeter-wave scanners. According the TSA, they believe they should be using both technologies in order to create competition, which keeps prices down and will ultimately lead to even better imaging technology.   Has anyone asked the American citizens if they are willing to save money using a technology that knowingly exposes people to DNA damaging X-rays?

The TSA does provide airline travelers the option to opt out and receive a physical “pat down” screening.  However, a recent New York Daily News about an 85-year-old woman who may sue TSA after being strip searched at JFK Airport raises questions about the actual implementation of TSA “pat down” policy.   According to the story reported by Nicholas Hirshon, Lenore Zimmerman, who lives in Long Beach, says she was on her way to a 1 p.m. flight to Fort Lauderdale when security whisked her to a private room and took off her clothes. 

What is infuriating is an 85 year old woman was forced to remove her clothes and TSA spokeswoman later said a review of closed circuit TV footage from the airport shows “proper procedures were followed.”   This is outrageous!

“I walk with a walker — I really look like a terrorist,” Zimmerman said sarcastically. “I’m tiny. I weigh 110 pounds, 107 without clothes, and I was strip-searched.”

When Zimmerman reached a security checkpoint, she asked if she could forgo the advanced image technology screening equipment, fearing it might interfere with her defibrillator. She said she normally gets patted down. But this time, she says that two female agents escorted her to a private room and began to remove her clothes.  What follows this next is the proverbially saying “add insult to injury”.  Zimmerman received a cut on her leg during the handling she received from the two female TSA agents.   The delays due to a medical agent administering a tetanus shot and applying a bandage on her wound resulted in Zimmerman missing her flight and spending the most of day in the airport.

Read more…