JUST BEFORE I WAS READY TO POST THIS ARTICLE, I CHECKED MY HOTMAIL ACCOUNT. THERE WAS AN EMAIL FROM FRANK STELLA, AN AFT REPRESENTATIVE. HE FORWARDED TO AFT MEMBERS DAVID AXELROD'S EMAIL . WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. THINK ABOUT IT.
***************************************************************************
The flap between Major Garrett and Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs extends right into my home. Coincidentally I happened to be listening to the news conference live when Garrett asked his question. I received that day the same unsolicited email that Garrett alluded to and that Gibbs ingenuously questioned—publicly impugning Garrett’s honesty. Gibbs doubted that such a thing could happen. IT DID.
I’ve got a lot of questions, but here are a basic few:
1. How did the White House get my email address?
2. Why is the White House sending me emails? I didn’t sign up for them.
3. Since the White House cannot purge emails because of federal regulations, into what kind of “file” have I been relegated?
4. Since this email is no more than SPAM, why didn’t my hotmail filter send it immediately to Junk Mail?
5. What right has the White House using these email addresses as an advertising tool to spread propaganda? I specifically use the word propaganda because of the content of the email which I will copy and paste on this post so you can see what David Axelrod, Obama’s political advisor and sometime spokesman is up to.
6. And maybe in the bigger scheme of things, this is the most important question: Since the White House, Congress, and much of the media is complaining that the Town Hall meetings are attended by people who are organizing against healthcare (just as they said about the Tea Parties), what would they call this behavior????
If this isn’t organizing on a big scale, what is it? And unlike the websites that suggest people show up at meetings to voice their opinions an TO WHICH INDIVIDUALS GO OF THEIR OWN VOLITION, this organizational effort is unsolicited, unwanted, and at least in my case, against my will and A BASIC INVASION OF MY PRIVACY.
This tactic is being perpetrated on us by the same people who objected, as an invasion of privacy, to finding out who was checking out library books that describe, among other things, how to construct bombs. You’ve got a right to learn how to build bombs, apparently, but no right to voice your opinion if it’s not in line with the Obama administration. Gives one pause to think.
*******************************************************************************
PS LOOK AT THE SALUTATION. I AM NOT DAVID AXELROD’S FRIEND!
*******************************************************************************
Dear Friend,
This is probably one of the longest emails I’ve ever sent, but it could be the most important.
Across the country we are seeing vigorous debate about health insurance reform. Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so well are back — even the viral emails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions.
As President Obama said at the town hall in New Hampshire, “where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed.”
So let’s start a chain email of our own. At the end of my email, you’ll find a lot of information about health insurance reform, distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage, 8 common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need health insurance reform now.
Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered by what’s below. So what are you waiting for? Forward this email.
Thanks,
David
David Axelrod
Senior Adviser to the President
P.S. We launched www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck this week to knock down the rumors and lies that are floating around the internet. You can find the information below, and much more, there. For example, we've just added a video of Nancy-Ann DeParle from our Health Reform Office tackling a viral email head on. Check it out:
8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage
1. Ends Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage because of your medical history.
2. Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses.
3. Ends Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms or eye and foot exams for diabetics.
4. Ends Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be prohibited from dropping or watering down insurance coverage for those who become seriously ill.
5. Ends Gender Discrimination: Insurance companies will be prohibited from charging you more because of your gender.
6. Ends Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.
7. Extends Coverage for Young Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for family coverage through the age of 26.
8. Guarantees Insurance Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays their premium in full. Insurance companies won't be allowed to refuse renewal because someone became sick.
Learn more and get details: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/health-insurance-consumer-protections/
8 common myths about health insurance reform
1. Reform will stop "rationing" - not increase it: It’s a myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies.
2. We can’t afford reform: It's the status quo we can't afford. It’s a myth that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, the President has identified ways to pay for the vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance companies; and increasing efficiency with such steps as coordinating care and streamlining paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal crisis.
3. Reform would encourage "euthanasia": It does not. It’s a malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to consult with their family and physicians about end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover these voluntary, private consultations for those who want help with these personal and difficult family decisions.
4. Vets' health care is safe and sound: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget significantly expands coverage under the VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system will continue to be available for all eligible veterans.
5. Reform will benefit small business - not burden it: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses, provide tax credits to help them pay for employee coverage and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average.
6. Your Medicare is safe, and stronger with reform: It’s myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will improve the long-term financial health of Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies, and help to close the Medicare "doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors.
7. You can keep your own insurance: It’s myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them.
8. No, government will not do anything with your bank account: It is an absurd myth that government will be in charge of your bank accounts. Health insurance reform will simplify administration, making it easier and more convenient for you to pay bills in a method that you choose. Just like paying a phone bill or a utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be standardized so they will be easier to understand. The choice is up to you – and the same rules of privacy will apply as they do for all other electronic payments that people make.
Learn more and get details:
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq
8 Reasons We Need Health Insurance Reform Now
1. Coverage Denied to Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 12.6 million non-elderly adults – 36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market – were in fact discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years or dropped from coverage when they became seriously ill. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html
2. Less Care for More Costs: With each passing year, Americans are paying more for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. In 2008, the average premium for a family plan purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage job. Americans pay more than ever for health insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html
3. Roadblocks to Care for Women: Women’s reproductive health requires more regular contact with health care providers, including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and obstetric care. Women are also more likely to report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to men, women are twice as likely to suffer from headaches and are more likely to experience joint, back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often require regular and frequent treatment and follow-up care. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html
4. Hard Times in the Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are nearly 50 million people who face challenges in accessing health care. The past several decades have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a primary health care provider in rural areas. With the recent economic downturn, there is potential for an increase in many of the health disparities and access concerns that are already elevated in rural communities. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes
5. Small Businesses Struggle to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of the uninsured – 13 million people – are employees of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from small business. The percentage of small businesses offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline
6. The Tragedies are Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at least partly the result of medical expenses. The typical elderly couple may have to save nearly $300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by Medicare alone. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction
7. Diminishing Access to Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An estimated 87 million people - one in every three Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the uninsured are in working families. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html
8. The Trends are Troubling: Without reform, health care costs will continue to skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on families, businesses, and state and federal government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign of the need for health care reform is the 46 million Americans currently without health insurance - projections suggest that this number will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the absence of reform. Learn more: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf
Unsubscribe Privacy Policy
Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House
The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111
Technorati Tags:
politics, politicians, Obama, Congress, White House, commentary, opinion, political blogs, blogs, Not With a Whimper, White House, David Axelrod, AFT, Frank Stella, retiress, healthcare, emails, Major Garrett, Robert Gibbs, freedom, privacy, Constitution, amendments, spam, Congress, propoganda, lists, Tea Parties, unions, education,
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Sunday, July 26, 2009
BARAK OBAMA--THE HALF-TRUTH PRESIDENT
As Barak Obama continues his assault on the American People regarding health care, he is beginning to show his true side, and it is desperately pathetic. So used to the unending adulation of his public, he has regressed to a whining and complaining little boy who sputters half truths in order to get his way.
In the last few days he has emphatically stated that Republicans will not go along with him because this will be his "Waterloo." He accuses them of trying to "torpedo" his plan in order to gain politically. Obama claims the Republicans want no change to health care in the country. I've heard Republicans and others suggest for years that tort reform would work on the problem of malpractice lawsuits and all the accompanying costs involved in doctors and hospitals protecting themselves. That was a big part of President George W. Bush's plan to work on health care--a plan firmly trounced by the Democats in Congress.
This issue does not appear to be addressed in the new bill. To see who stands to gain, look at people like John Edwards for whom medical malpractice was his road to millionairedom.
Additionally, Obama has totally disregarded the 57 blue dog Democrats who realize this health care plan is, at the very least, fiscally irresponsible. He never mentions dissension within his own party. The truth is there are doubters on both sides of the aisle; he tells us half the story.
Obviously, President Obama, the man who was going to bring transparency to the presidency, doesn't even want to tell us the truth.
Let's deal with the bill itself--a bill presented in such a hazy way that one would expect it will fix every problem in health care without taking away our choices, freedoms, or money (except for the rich who won't miss it anyway). Here perhaps we should be grateful for half truths because most of what we are hearing are out and out lies!
Rahm Emmanuel is still pushing for a vote before the recess, but members of Congress have not read read the bill. That's exactly what happened with the stimulus package. How can one vote intelligently without having read and digested the information? How do I know they haven't read the bill--aside from the obvious that the President wants the vote before the recess but the bill is not yet completed?
On page 389 of the proposed legislation, there are references to the "mentally retarded." Agree or not, this is now considered a politically incorrect term bringing all kinds of criticism when used in movies, etc. Yet Congress allows this wording in its bill and NO ONE has objected to the term. I guess no one read as far as page 389.
The age where there must be a determination about using aggressive procedures to fight illness is 65. You read that right. Yet the claim is that AARP supports the legislation. Why would they want to hurt their membership? Do the older supporters of Obama and his plan realize that their lives may be sacrificed in order to save younger people? Shall we call Obama the Soylent Green President?
Who makes the determination concerning aggressive care? The person suggested is the Surgeon General. Who is the Surgeon General? The President has nominated a doctor whose practice has done wonderful things for poor people. She runs clinics. She is well respected and is obviously a good woman and hopefully an excellent physician. BUT she is not associated with teaching or research hospitals. Her experience is not with the cutting edge techniques consistently being developed, and there is no way that she can be up to speed in these areas. Yet she and her staff (who selects them?) will make health care decisions for the entire country--health care decisions that should be made by the patient and his/her physician. When President Obama says CHOICE, he obviously is not talking about choice of the individual; he is talking about choice of the government. ANOTHER TWISTING OF THE TRUTH.
Speaking about sacrifice, let's look at how this kind of health care works in other areas.
Massachusetts with Mitt Romney's health care design is going broke due to the exhorbitant costs. The projected cost and the real cost had nothing in common. Waits to see doctors are long, and tests are scheduled weeks down the road.
The cancer death rates in Canada are 17% higher than in the U.S. despite a smaller population. Long wait times for tests mean long wait times for treatment. The same cancer death rate difference exists in England. Canadians who are able come to the U.S. for improved treatment.
Canadians also come here for certain appliances such as hearing aids. At a dinner in Montreal, I was discussing my digital hearing aids which are more sensitive and versatile. Canadians are offered old fashioned analog hearing aids. The ability to pay for the more expensive and more sensitive digital aids does not factor into any decision. Analog is cheaper and the government needs to take away choice in order to supply everyone equally.
When we were in Ireland in the fall of '07, we read of two health scandals in government-run health care United Kingdom. A hospital in England, in order to cut laundry costs, simply flipped the sheets when one patient left and before the next arrived. The result was a staph infection epidemic! The second scandal concerned Ireland's return to do-it-yourself dentistry by people with toothache pain so severe they couldn't suffer through the long waits to see the dentist. They resorted to many ways of removing their teeth including the old string on the doorknob game. If you find this hard to believe, don't. It is the whole truth.
The President talks about taxing only the rich to pay for this plan. He neglected to add that he is considering an excise tax on plans that go above and beyond the government sponsored plan. Here he will tax the insurance companies that offer "gold-plated" plans. That means if you or I are paying more for better coverage, our audacity will be punished. If we feel insurance is the way we wish to spend our money, we will be punished in order to pay for people who choose to spend their money in other ways--a large percentage of the uninsured are young people who do not see health insurance as a personal necessity. They will lose their right to choose as well. Do you see your liberty being threatened little by little? You should. Bye Bye "gold-plated" plans. If you were an insurance company paying extra taxes, would you continue to offer them?
In the last few days he has emphatically stated that Republicans will not go along with him because this will be his "Waterloo." He accuses them of trying to "torpedo" his plan in order to gain politically. Obama claims the Republicans want no change to health care in the country. I've heard Republicans and others suggest for years that tort reform would work on the problem of malpractice lawsuits and all the accompanying costs involved in doctors and hospitals protecting themselves. That was a big part of President George W. Bush's plan to work on health care--a plan firmly trounced by the Democats in Congress.
This issue does not appear to be addressed in the new bill. To see who stands to gain, look at people like John Edwards for whom medical malpractice was his road to millionairedom.
Additionally, Obama has totally disregarded the 57 blue dog Democrats who realize this health care plan is, at the very least, fiscally irresponsible. He never mentions dissension within his own party. The truth is there are doubters on both sides of the aisle; he tells us half the story.
Obviously, President Obama, the man who was going to bring transparency to the presidency, doesn't even want to tell us the truth.
Let's deal with the bill itself--a bill presented in such a hazy way that one would expect it will fix every problem in health care without taking away our choices, freedoms, or money (except for the rich who won't miss it anyway). Here perhaps we should be grateful for half truths because most of what we are hearing are out and out lies!
Rahm Emmanuel is still pushing for a vote before the recess, but members of Congress have not read read the bill. That's exactly what happened with the stimulus package. How can one vote intelligently without having read and digested the information? How do I know they haven't read the bill--aside from the obvious that the President wants the vote before the recess but the bill is not yet completed?
On page 389 of the proposed legislation, there are references to the "mentally retarded." Agree or not, this is now considered a politically incorrect term bringing all kinds of criticism when used in movies, etc. Yet Congress allows this wording in its bill and NO ONE has objected to the term. I guess no one read as far as page 389.
The age where there must be a determination about using aggressive procedures to fight illness is 65. You read that right. Yet the claim is that AARP supports the legislation. Why would they want to hurt their membership? Do the older supporters of Obama and his plan realize that their lives may be sacrificed in order to save younger people? Shall we call Obama the Soylent Green President?
Who makes the determination concerning aggressive care? The person suggested is the Surgeon General. Who is the Surgeon General? The President has nominated a doctor whose practice has done wonderful things for poor people. She runs clinics. She is well respected and is obviously a good woman and hopefully an excellent physician. BUT she is not associated with teaching or research hospitals. Her experience is not with the cutting edge techniques consistently being developed, and there is no way that she can be up to speed in these areas. Yet she and her staff (who selects them?) will make health care decisions for the entire country--health care decisions that should be made by the patient and his/her physician. When President Obama says CHOICE, he obviously is not talking about choice of the individual; he is talking about choice of the government. ANOTHER TWISTING OF THE TRUTH.
Speaking about sacrifice, let's look at how this kind of health care works in other areas.
Massachusetts with Mitt Romney's health care design is going broke due to the exhorbitant costs. The projected cost and the real cost had nothing in common. Waits to see doctors are long, and tests are scheduled weeks down the road.
The cancer death rates in Canada are 17% higher than in the U.S. despite a smaller population. Long wait times for tests mean long wait times for treatment. The same cancer death rate difference exists in England. Canadians who are able come to the U.S. for improved treatment.
Canadians also come here for certain appliances such as hearing aids. At a dinner in Montreal, I was discussing my digital hearing aids which are more sensitive and versatile. Canadians are offered old fashioned analog hearing aids. The ability to pay for the more expensive and more sensitive digital aids does not factor into any decision. Analog is cheaper and the government needs to take away choice in order to supply everyone equally.
When we were in Ireland in the fall of '07, we read of two health scandals in government-run health care United Kingdom. A hospital in England, in order to cut laundry costs, simply flipped the sheets when one patient left and before the next arrived. The result was a staph infection epidemic! The second scandal concerned Ireland's return to do-it-yourself dentistry by people with toothache pain so severe they couldn't suffer through the long waits to see the dentist. They resorted to many ways of removing their teeth including the old string on the doorknob game. If you find this hard to believe, don't. It is the whole truth.
The President talks about taxing only the rich to pay for this plan. He neglected to add that he is considering an excise tax on plans that go above and beyond the government sponsored plan. Here he will tax the insurance companies that offer "gold-plated" plans. That means if you or I are paying more for better coverage, our audacity will be punished. If we feel insurance is the way we wish to spend our money, we will be punished in order to pay for people who choose to spend their money in other ways--a large percentage of the uninsured are young people who do not see health insurance as a personal necessity. They will lose their right to choose as well. Do you see your liberty being threatened little by little? You should. Bye Bye "gold-plated" plans. If you were an insurance company paying extra taxes, would you continue to offer them?
As a matter of fact, bye bye insurance companies. Not today, but down the road. They will be unable to compete with government sponsored plans.
Let's deal with another problem with truth. The Franking Commission which decides when Congress-sponsored mail to constituents travels postage free, has decided that the term "government-sponsored health care" is a partisan term and disqualifies for free postage any Congressman or Senator who employs that term. The appropriate term, "public option," is to be used instead. How's that for Freedom of Speech?! How's that for issuing half truths or lies (you make the call) to the public. Keep 'em ignorant and you'll keep 'em under your thumb.
Here's an interesting lack of truthfulness. This health plan is supposedly designed to give all Americans the best of care. When an amendment was offered to insist that the President and members of Congress sign on to this plan, the amendment was not even included in the bill. The people crafting this wonderous plan all know the truth, and they are not going for it any more than we should go for it.
One last point (although I can go on) before this post gets any longer (and it could). Obama's people keep talking about 47 million uninsured. There is a saying, "Figures never lie but liers figure."
That statistic includes people who can afford insurance but choose not to have it (primarily younger people). They will be forced by law to buy insurance.
That number includes illegal immigrants in this country. Do you want your tax money to make sure the people who are here by breaking the law are supported by law to have health care while yours may very well be compromised in order to do that?
That statistic, a yearly statistic, includes anyone who does not have insurance for even one day--a person who changes jobs, for instance, or a person who opts for different coverage and there is a lag between the time when one ends and another begins.
The whole truth is that we are not getting the whole truth. But if these proposals become law, we will be giving up choices about our health, end-of-life issues, and our money. To me this means giving up freedom to which our Federal Government has no right. Technorati Tags:
politics, commentary, health care, Obama, President, taxes, Rahm Emmanuel, Congress, legislation, AARP, Canada, socialized medicine, public option, Franking Commission, England, Ireland, UK, cancer, death rates, MA, health plans, Not With a Whimper, political blogs
Saturday, June 13, 2009
OBAMA, CHRYSLER, & THE UAW--A MARRIAGE MADE IN A BACK ROOM
The United Auto Workers Union sent an interesting letter to its members explaining the results of the Chrysler bankruptcy.
The letter should also be interesting to those of us who foot the bill. Remember, too, that the GUARANTEED BONDHOLDERS (in Delaware where Chrysler is headquartered, bankruptcy law dictates that bondholders receive their money first) investers representing pension funds, etc.--received less than $.25 on their dollar.
The union said that under the plan, they saved the hourly wage, the pension plan, and the health benefits members enjoyed. Unexplained but mentioned in the letter was that they had agreed to a way to slow foreign competition. The letter listed China (huh?) and other countries--like Japan, I guess.
Yesterday the press did report that the UAW did make MAJOR concessions: they gave up two paid holidays, one being the Monday after Easter. They will no longer be paid for unused vacation time; THEY WILL JUST HAVE TO USE ALL THEIR VACATION. Boo Hoo. They agreed not to strike until 2015.
Why would they strike? They own a huge share of the company and would be striking against themselves. Picture negotiations. The negotiators come with two hats and change them each time they leap across the table to participate, sometimes as an owner, sometimes as a union worker. Negotiations could be very tiring and only fit for the athletically strong.
It's nice to know how well the union has been paid by the Obama administration for its support and how in-the-pocket union members are for the next presidential election. They more than balance out the screwed over bond holders whose guaranteed bonds really were TOXIC PAPER.
politics politicians opinion commentary Obama Chrysler UAW "auto+industry" auto "auto+bailout" bailout bankruptcy "auto+reorganization" nationalization bondholders Delaware "bankruptcy+law" vacation health "health+benefits" Easter holidays strike "Not+with+a+Whimper" marriage pension Technorati Tags:
politics politicians opinion commentary Obama Chrysler UAW "auto+industry" auto "auto+bailout" bailout bankruptcy "auto+reorganization" nationalization bondholders Delaware "bankruptcy+law" vacation health "health+benefits" Easter holidays strike "Not+with+a+Whimper" marriage pension
Monday, June 1, 2009
IN OBAMA'S WORLD, MERIT IS A PUNISHABLE OFFENSE
In Obama's dictionary, “merit” is a pejorative word. In Obama's world, it is a punishable offense, and he means to deal harshly with those miscreants who take personal responsibility to heart. Look at the consequences of the changes he proposes. In each case, the person, political faction, industry, or supporter is helped at the expense of those who have taken the straight and narrow.
POLITICAL APPOINTEES: One would assume that his vetted nominees would be beyond reproach, experts in their fields, and statesmen with deep backgrounds of proven and successful public service. Count the number of appointees with tax problems (labeled oversights), including our Secretary of the Treasury , Tim Geithner, whose job is to fix what ails the U.S. Economy. He can't even figure out his own taxes, but we are supposed to feel confident in his expertise—and the way he scoots the laws the rest of us follow.
Kathleen Sebelius, in charge of Health and Human Resources, also had tax problems caused by plumping up her deductions. She served as Kansas' governor, a state in such dire financial straits she contemplated issuing IOUs to state employees. She received contributions from Dr. Tiller, the man accused of making a fortune by doing late term abortions and breaking Kansas law by performing these on out-of-state women. Her job in the Obama administration is to shepherd his health reforms through the legislative process. Can we trust her to do that fairly and knowledgeably? I think not. She didn't even show expertise in Kansas, and we're not in Kansas anymore.
Obama's selections reiterate the problem many of us had with his acquaintances prior to being elected—Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers, to name just two. He does not choose his acquaintances by merit. He surrounds himself with people who stretch or break the law and then use their power or influence to avert the consequences. Dangerous stuff for our country, particularly as he rides the waves of popularity.
THE CAR INDUSTRY: This week reports announce that with Obama's control of the auto industry, the cost of a new car will rise approximately $1,700. Not to worry, says the president, you'll make it back in a few years of ownership. No one is against fuel efficient car, but how did it come to pass that the auto industry will build cars his way or not at all? Once again, merit and success are seen as evil, and the power and money go to the supporters and the greedy. Our rights as consumers to choose for ourselves is limited; he will tell us what is right for us.
Originally there was a cry for GM and Chrysler to avoid bankruptcy. Bailout money was supposed to allow time for them to make profitable cars. At the same time, foreign non-unionized companies like Toyota and Nissan were vilified, and when Toyota's sales fell, cheers practically rose from the printed page of the New York Times.
Again the question of merit arises. Treat your employees fairly, build a quality product, adhere to good business practices, and you will be successful and profitable. Avoid unionization and you are evil. The truth is that union demands have made it impossible for American car manufacturers to make a profit. They lose on every car they sell; so the more they sell, the deeper in red ink they drown. Any thinking person knew that when the bailouts began. But building a business based on sound judgement and practice isn't necessary in Obama's world. Loyalty and support are the vital elements; show them and you will profit. You will also know how to vote in the next election. Isn't that part of the plan? Look what happened.
When the smoke choking Washington DC cleared, Chrysler was in bankruptcy. The company might be acquired by Fiat—a foreign car manufacture. The unions (who Obama owed for their loyal and loud support during the election) will also own a share. Investors in the company would be paid very little on the dollar, and those who refuse to accept the deal were labeled un-American.. More bailout money poured from our pockets into Chrysler's coffers. Two things are certain; the unions did not chip in much to save their jobs, but now they own the company. Two more things are certain; Chrysler still is unable to turn a profit, and come next election, the flood of votes will continue to flow Obama's way.. He not only saved union jobs; he also saved union benefits. Here's my question: how will negotiations go when auto contracts expire? Will the union “owner” negotiate with union “workers”?
President Obama now holds a club over the car companies. The unions will support his every dream in order to keep the money flowing. The president can tell them what to build, how to build it, how to fuel it, etc., and there is no alternative to compliance. We see this already in his green car movement and the announcements about higher costs.
GM was ordered to close dealerships to avoid bankruptcy. In my neck of the woods, several dealerships have been ordered to close. At least three of them term themselves “profitable.” Cannot one consider operating a successful money making business a sign of business acumen and merit? Merit and profit don't work here, as noted by the continual failure to turn a profit by both Chrysler and GM.
What happens to the economy surrounding a closed dealership. With the closure is the loss of dealership jobs. Restaurants, coffee shops, local service businesses, gas stations, etc. lose business. That leads to more joblessness. Our president obviously is not a good chess player; he can't think of the consequences past his next move.
Additionally, eight billion dollars of TARP money has been funneled into GMAC, the lending arm of GM. It will be the principal lender of both GM cars and Chrysler cars. Consumer choice will dissipate as the government makes the business rules. As the government takes over the banks and car companies, we will be squeezed into changing the very character of American business. There has already been a question of political interference is choosing dealership.
One final question: With our money pouring in to prop up GM and Chrysler, how do other car companies compete? What happens to Ford, for instance?
CREDIT: No one denies that there are some positive changes in the laws impacting credit card companies,. The amount of consumer debt is staggering. Only 32% of consumers carry no credit card debt. People choose to live beyond their means, and eventually they get into trouble. Sears, for instance, profits more from its credit card business than from its retail business. Usurious interest rates don't help. These changes which might aid people not responsible enough to handle their money or credit wisely and people who live far beyond their means will also punish consumers who are responsible about their purchases and are rewarded by the credit card issuers. Merit is punished; irresponsibility is rewarded.
Credit card issuers project reinstituting annual fees and doing away with grace periods; interest accrues as soon as you sign the credit card receipt. Forget perks like rewards programs. You did the right thing—Obama will take you down!
Whoa....I've got to stop although there are so many more examples I can give. Write your congressmen and voice your concern. They may be listening a little better these days; there are elections in 2010.
Obama politics commentary politicians economy appointees GM Chrysler bailout bankruptcy Geithner Sebelius Tiller abortion Kansas Wright Ayers TARP credit
Friday, May 22, 2009
OBAMA, GITMO, AND THE NEWBURGH TERRORISTS
At the same time President Obama is vague on his plans for closing Gitmo and dealing with its dregs-of-humanity-prisoners, he has been rebuffed by Congress in his attempts to grab another bunch of billions of dollars. They insist on an exit strategy first. Finally!
Obama is still so convinced of his popularity that he sees no reason to be transparent, forthcoming, or honest with the American public, and it looks like Congress, anxious about the next round of elections, is beginning to take note. Obama is a “show me the money” guy and probably a very poor chess player. He cannot see the consequences of each move nor think several moves ahead. Chess strategy competence would be useful as long as the president realizes that combating terrorists is not a political game.
Hopefully the country will hear the wake-up call of this Wednesday's failed homegrown-terrorist plot to use explosives to destroy a synagogue and community center in Riverdale, Bronx, New York. They also planned to use Stinger missiles to down military planes at Orange County’s Steward International Airport. We need to remember 9/11 and to understand that the war on terror—domestic as well as international—is not over.
Particularly frightening is the birth of this homegrown plot. Only one of the four men was born outside of the country and a Muslim by birth. The other three were thugs from Newburgh, New York. They converted to Islam in prison where the four became friends and hatched the plot. Finalized plans emanated from a mosque in Newburgh, New York. An informant notified authorities. Thank goodness for that informant and thank goodness that the FBI and State Police Swat teams were prepared and ready. What if there had been no informant?
Let’s look at the bigger picture.
1. Our prisons are a fertile breeding ground for recruiting proven violent people to act out their psychopathic disregard for human life, laws, values, and customs. ARE THESE PLACES TO SEND THE GITMO DETAINEES AND GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPREAD THEIR POISON IN THE “BLAME AMERICA FIRST” TRADITION?
2. Will the Obama administration—indeed, the entire anti-Bush contingent—after unrelenting and unremitting attacks on methods used to foil homeland terrorist plots admit to the success of those methods and retain them or, as in the case of Gitmo where even the New York Times reports that seven out of ten released detainees return to terrorist activities, continue to rail and abandon successful methods?
3. At the expense of our country’s safety will Obama loyalists downplay the importance of these attempts and try to paint the participants as bungling idiots as they did with the Ft. Dix plot terrorists and the terrorist plot in Florida?
Already the Associated Press quotes Sen. Chuck Schumer as saying, “the group was relatively unsophisticated, penetrated easily and not connected to any outside group.” The idiocy is not on the part of the plotters. The idiocy is on the part of self-serving politicians who surmise that unsophisticated people cannot find ways to manufacture bombs. Just look on the internet. Hijacked aircraft took down the World Trade Center.
WABC news reported that the alleged suspects did not appear to have the ability to execute the plot. Perhaps they suggest we wait to see if they did. Pull back our experts and intelligence to level the playing field.
Returning to the Gitmo detainee connection, one has to wonder how these haters and murderers will fare once under the jurisdiction of Federal judges and the slew of lawsuits (probably ACLU) I prophesize will deluge the courts demanding swift trials, no isolation (cruel punishment), right to confront their accusers, government classified documents as evidence, etc. Will they be freed into society? They cannot be deported. No country will take them. (France took one person) Who will support them? Your tax dollars.
Obama should have learned a lesson after de-classifying enhanced interrogation documents. The backlash about releasing the photos (which I bet will be “leaked” anyway) caused problems. Then he denied the release of the documents outlining enhanced interrogation successes which Dick Cheney requested. He seems incapable of thinking ahead. Obama has to learn, before it’s too late, that when you put the cart before the horse, you aren’t going anywhere.
politics commentary opinion politicians Obama Gitmo detainees prison Newburgh "home-grown terrorists" terrorists plots Riverdale synagogue bombs FBI SWAT mosque Islam Muslim Congress Schumer WABC "enhanced interrogation" taxes elections Bronx "New York" missiles Bush York Times" "Ft. Dix" Florida France "Not With a Whimper"
Monday, April 20, 2009
NEW YORK STUDENTS AXED BY TAXES
A shocking article in the April 15th edition of the Times Herald-Record reported that SUNY New Paltz is axing its RN program as well as closing its graduate programs in teaching. The closings will make the SUNY Albany campus the nearest affordable state graduate school to residents of any area between New York City and Albany. The cuts are in programs where students typically work full time and attend classes part time. This is a tough cut. For students it will cost time and money. More change at the expense of the middle class.
College President Steve Poskanzer downplayed the nursing cuts. “These people are already nurses.” A student countered by saying, “The program is all about making better nurses.” Doesn't the college president know that's what further education is all about? It hones skills.
The grad teaching programs (and one must have a graduate degree to be a fully licensed teacher in New York), will eliminate programs in chemistry, earth science, French, Spanish, and math. This at a time when there's a cry for math and science teachers. Once-upon-a-time-candidate-Obama suggested that we all learn Spanish. With the cry out for “more qualified teachers,” is seems sickenly ironic that these cuts are seen as a way to save money.
At the same time, the college is increasing parking, academic-course and gym fees.
The SUNY system is also increasing tuition by $620.00. But read this from the Times Herald-Record: “Poskanzer blamed the 'deep cuts' on the state's decision to 'break faith' with the SUNY system by instituting a $620 tuition increase, most of which was swept into other parts of the state budget.” IN OTHER WORDS, THE STATE IS TAXING STUDENTS IN THE NAME OF TUITION INCREASES BUT USING THE MONEY FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
This debacle brings up, once again, the issue of what is happening in the country. The powers that be do not call these money-grabbing forays into our pockets TAXES. But they're taking the money just the same, and using the money for??????? In this case it's not for the students.
It’s important for us to realize what is happening. Are we being lied too? I guess that depends on your definition (as it so often does nowadays) of a lie. But at the very least, we are purposefully not being told the whole story. We better wake up and make our outrage heard!
"New+York" SUNY taxes tuition students school college "grad+school" nursing teaching "grad+programs" "graduate+school" gym parking "Times Herald-Record" math science Spanish French chemistry "earth+science" government
Thursday, April 16, 2009
TAX DAY & TEA PARTIES
The flood of changes washing over this country is the past 100 days is frightening. Sometimes I feel as if we are drowning. Several things happened that seem to put more leaks in my sinking ship of state.
If the United States is to run as a republic, it must have an informed citizenship. The media coverage of yesterday's Tea Parties is one further proof that the powerful media outlets are twisting our minds, and if it continues, America will be ruled by a few very powerful individuals out for self-aggrandizement. Even now I feel disenfranchised.
Yesterday's Tea Parties were not covered with any kind of honesty by any news outlet that I could discover other than Fox. That's chilling since Fox has been labeled by the Networks and other Cable stations as extremist, and many, without even looking at Fox, have bought that lie as truth. No other outlet mentioned that there were over 2,300 tea parties around the country with all kinds of numbers. In fact, I heard a CNN reporter verbally attacked a participant. She then turned to the camera and said that this was an “anti-government” rally, conservative rally, and one touted by Fox news. That statement is a blatant lie. It's not anti-government; it's anti-taxing government, and the people at the tea parties were Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and anyone else who thinks enough is enough! Mr. President, Congress, quit groping. Our pockets do not belong to you!
This morning, Robin Meade on CNN, gave the tea parties about twenty seconds of airtime, dismissing them as GOP rallies. No mention of numbers of rallies; no mention of number of participants. What we don’t know CAN hurt us.
Today's New York Times did not have anything about the rallies on its front page. My local paper, the Times Herald Record out of Middletown, had nothing, but they did have a paragraph touting Newt Gingrich as the new GOP “guru” and suggesting Newt Gingrich is attempting to re-insert himself in the political arena with an aim to run in 2012. What is that all about?
Anyone not tuned in to Fox news cannot be faulted for having missed the entire event. They fell prey to the media's obvious intent to deny them the right to judge the event and its participants for themselves. That's pretty scary. Uninformed, we are unarmed. Keep people ignorant and you can keep them under your thumb.
At the same time, Homeland Security “Czar” Janet Napolitano, who only a few weeks ago had no fear of our border insecurity, issued an "assessment" to law enforcement agencies: be wary of people who support single issues (pro-life, immigration, taxes, etc), returning military vets, supporters of third party candidates, and people whose paranoia made them suspicious of the “one world” view. Watch for bumper stickers supporting third party candidates. These people could be dangerous to the country. Huh? This morning I watched her defend the "assessment."
As if this is not bad enough, toss in the announcement that members of the President's staff serve on a special taskforce that reviews the President's speeches and appearances and “edits” them before they appear on youtube. What we see then, is “photo-shopped” perfection—no errors, no gaffs, no questionable lines.
The other day, for instance, President Obama, made an error some might call Freudian. He spoke about being against “privacy” when he meant to say “piracy.” Big difference, huh? Bet you won't hear that gaff on the internet. This type of instant revisionism is important since even the questionable pronunciation of the word “nuclear” by George W. Bush left Democrats rolling on the floor and insisting he was a bloody moron. When Obama spoke to the students in Turkey, he could not remember the Russian president's name. BTW, it's Medvedev Mr. President. He bowed to the Saudi King, then denied it. When he was called on it, he should have been singing that old country cheating song about “believing your lying eyes."
These are manipulative examples of which I am aware. What else is going on? Well, here's a President who can't give a speech without a teleprompter and is dismal at impromptu speaking. Who is writing the words for him, and when does he have time to make sure his speechwriters are really getting his ideas across? More and more I get the feeling that I am not getting the real story about anything, and that makes me very nervous. Think about it.
Obama taxes tea party protests news media opinion CNN FOX politics commentary reporting New York Times Times Herald-Record Napolitano Homeland Security immigration abortion photoshop
Monday, March 2, 2009
$410 BILLION IN PORK--BUT NOT EVERYONE IS GRABBING. FIND OUT WHO ISN'T CHASING PIG
Listen carefully folks. While you’re drowning on CHANGE (and this you can believe in), and you hope someone comes to the rescue, you better pray it’s your audiologist and your old English teacher. You’ve got to parse every word you hear from our government officials or you won’t know where you’ve sprung a leak in your savings, your future, and your children’s future. Remember that this “mandate” we keep hearing of came about with a 52% win of the popular vote. That number doesn’t become a synonym for landslide!
This monumental budget President Obama introduced will help him keep his campaign promises by plunging us into inconceivable debt. This budget was ready to present last summer (with Obama’s co-sponsored earmarks; see http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-removes-his-name-from-pork-barrel.html ), but Nancy Pelosi held it up waiting for the new administration. The result of all this spending will be that the middle class, which really came into existence after the Second World War, will be destroyed by tax increases. Maybe income taxes will rise “slightly” (depending on your definition of the word “slightly”), but we will be taxed in other ways—energy usage, loss of deductions for mortgage insurance, charitable donations, etc. The net result will be higher costs for everything!
I’m not surprised about the charitable donation change. When the numbers came out during the election, I was shocked to learn that I donated a higher percentage of my income than Barak Obama—and to a wider range of charities. Joe Biden’s charitable contributions were at best negligible. How telling. These are people who eschew personal responsibility toward others. They are not their brother’s keepers. They want government to take the responsibility. Scary. They’ll decide to whom we should be charitable.
Chuck Schumer says the American people “don’t care” about earmarks—those little bits of personal vote-buying tidbits officials bring home and hand out to thankful donors. It’s a perverted pay it forward: government to representative, representative to businessman, etc.
I can’t totally blame Democrats for the 9,000 pieces of pork, earmarks, special projects or whatever the name of choice is these days. The Democrats account for 60% of the barrel. The Republicans get 40%. So much for principle. But I listened to the President’s campaign speech when he said he was going to get rid of earmarks. I watched the President’s budget speech. I heard him say there were no earmarks in this budget, and I watched Pelosi, sitting behind him, break into that stiff botox-driven grin. They really do think we’re stupid. And some of us obviously are!
Those non-existent pieces of pork will cost us $410 billion. That's a lot of something for nothing! LOL I guess that number is considered inconsequential these days when our President pooh-poohs things that cost trillions. But the dollar I don’t contribute to the government is the dollar I get to keep, and $410 billion in a country with a population somewhat over 300 million means I get to hold on to some dollars for which I worked. I like that idea! Too bad my holding on to MY money doesn’t seem important to President Obama.
There is still some integrity in Congress. There are some Congressmen and Senators who do not take pork. This year all were Republican except for four Democrats who stood up to the broken campaign promise.
The people with anti-pork barrel integrity are (and not in any particular order): Flake, Boehner, Cantor, Campbell, Nunes, Westmorland, Kline, McCoud, Jones, Hensarling, McHenry, Foxx, Burton, Price Shadegg, Ryan Pitts, Jenkins, Lance, Pence, Chaffetz, Cooper, Waxman, Hunter, Rooney, McClintock, Coffman, DeMint, Coburn, Feingold, McCaskell, Burr, and McCain. That’s all, folks.
Kudos to these representatives. Go online and email them. Thank them for their integrity. Maybe if they know we know of and appreciate the right thing….
Know, too, that Rep. Jeff Flake (R. AZ) attempted to introduce a measure to have the House Ethics Committee investigate the relationship between earmarks and contributions. His measure was tabled—in other words, killed. All but two Republicans and 17 Democrats voted for the measure.
Terrible, huh? But what did you expect?
This monumental budget President Obama introduced will help him keep his campaign promises by plunging us into inconceivable debt. This budget was ready to present last summer (with Obama’s co-sponsored earmarks; see http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-removes-his-name-from-pork-barrel.html ), but Nancy Pelosi held it up waiting for the new administration. The result of all this spending will be that the middle class, which really came into existence after the Second World War, will be destroyed by tax increases. Maybe income taxes will rise “slightly” (depending on your definition of the word “slightly”), but we will be taxed in other ways—energy usage, loss of deductions for mortgage insurance, charitable donations, etc. The net result will be higher costs for everything!
I’m not surprised about the charitable donation change. When the numbers came out during the election, I was shocked to learn that I donated a higher percentage of my income than Barak Obama—and to a wider range of charities. Joe Biden’s charitable contributions were at best negligible. How telling. These are people who eschew personal responsibility toward others. They are not their brother’s keepers. They want government to take the responsibility. Scary. They’ll decide to whom we should be charitable.
Chuck Schumer says the American people “don’t care” about earmarks—those little bits of personal vote-buying tidbits officials bring home and hand out to thankful donors. It’s a perverted pay it forward: government to representative, representative to businessman, etc.
I can’t totally blame Democrats for the 9,000 pieces of pork, earmarks, special projects or whatever the name of choice is these days. The Democrats account for 60% of the barrel. The Republicans get 40%. So much for principle. But I listened to the President’s campaign speech when he said he was going to get rid of earmarks. I watched the President’s budget speech. I heard him say there were no earmarks in this budget, and I watched Pelosi, sitting behind him, break into that stiff botox-driven grin. They really do think we’re stupid. And some of us obviously are!
Those non-existent pieces of pork will cost us $410 billion. That's a lot of something for nothing! LOL I guess that number is considered inconsequential these days when our President pooh-poohs things that cost trillions. But the dollar I don’t contribute to the government is the dollar I get to keep, and $410 billion in a country with a population somewhat over 300 million means I get to hold on to some dollars for which I worked. I like that idea! Too bad my holding on to MY money doesn’t seem important to President Obama.
There is still some integrity in Congress. There are some Congressmen and Senators who do not take pork. This year all were Republican except for four Democrats who stood up to the broken campaign promise.
The people with anti-pork barrel integrity are (and not in any particular order): Flake, Boehner, Cantor, Campbell, Nunes, Westmorland, Kline, McCoud, Jones, Hensarling, McHenry, Foxx, Burton, Price Shadegg, Ryan Pitts, Jenkins, Lance, Pence, Chaffetz, Cooper, Waxman, Hunter, Rooney, McClintock, Coffman, DeMint, Coburn, Feingold, McCaskell, Burr, and McCain. That’s all, folks.
Kudos to these representatives. Go online and email them. Thank them for their integrity. Maybe if they know we know of and appreciate the right thing….
Know, too, that Rep. Jeff Flake (R. AZ) attempted to introduce a measure to have the House Ethics Committee investigate the relationship between earmarks and contributions. His measure was tabled—in other words, killed. All but two Republicans and 17 Democrats voted for the measure.
Terrible, huh? But what did you expect?
politics opinion politicians Obama Congress taxes stimulus recovery pork earmarks ethics Pelosi budget Flake Boenher Cantor Campbell Nunes Westmoreland Kline McCaul Janes Hensarling McHenry Jenkins Lance Hunter Rooney McClintock Coffman Foxx Price Ryan Burton shadegg Pitts DeMint Coburn Feingold McCaskill Burr McCain
Friday, February 27, 2009
OBAMA REMOVES HIS NAME FROM THE PORK BARREL
A quick point.
politics opinion Obama taxes budget Biden Republicans Democrats money pork earmarks
Of the 9,000 pieces of pork thrown in the budget--60% Democrat (oink, oink, Joe Biden) and 40% Republican (did you leave your principles at the door?)--the ones co-sponsored by then-Senator Obama have lost one sponsor. Obama's name, which appeared many times over, has been removed from all the legislation. His name has been removed; the pork remains under the aegis of others. Hmmmmm Nothing like trust, transparency, hope and change.
What did you expect?
politics opinion Obama taxes budget Biden Republicans Democrats money pork earmarks
REAL IDENTITY THEFT! TAXPAYER MONEY TO PAY CREDIT CARD BILLS???!!!
You can’t make this stuff up.
In Houston, the mayor proposed taking taxpayer money to pay off the credit card debt of individuals so that they could up their credit scores thus enabling them to qualify for mortgages. Apparently governments all over have caught the Obama bug and in their delusional state have come to see the taxpayers’ money as their own to hand out to whomever they choose.
In this case, up to $3,000 would go to pay off credit card debt or loans such as car loans. No matter that these people got themselves into credit score trouble buying things they couldn’t afford or buying that nice, big SUV or, since this is Texas, a truck instead of a Ford Focus. There’s the rest of us to bail them out. We can just cut back on our own spending, despite the fact that we are living within our means and paying our bills on time.
In America, apparently, paying your bills on time is definitely un-American.
Here’s the link to the Houston Chronicle article when this bill was billed. Read it and weep.
politics opinion taxes Texas Houston debt "credit+cards" stimulus recovery Obama
Monday, January 5, 2009
REPEATED WARNING ABOUT FUEL TAXES
Go back to June
(http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2008/06/gas-taxes-is-governments-cash-cow.html)
and July http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2008/07/more-on-our-gas-woes-dont-expect.html
when I warned about Congress and states working themselves into a lather about raising gas taxes. They just didn't have the nerve during the election period.
(http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2008/06/gas-taxes-is-governments-cash-cow.html)
and July http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2008/07/more-on-our-gas-woes-dont-expect.html
when I warned about Congress and states working themselves into a lather about raising gas taxes. They just didn't have the nerve during the election period.
Now that Obama is safely awaiting his inauguration and gas prices have stopped causing holes in our government-evaluated deep pockets, they feel it's time to act. It will come quickly.
BTW, the fall in gas prices coincided with George Bush's pronouncement that we SHOULD drill offshore. AFTER that announcement came the news about a change in our driving habits.
My biggest problem is that it appears I underestimated the extent to which the government is willing to steal from us. $.10 doesn't quite meet their needs, so we should start buying those little jars labled "gas money." Start saving now.
Not only that, there is the move to put GPS devices in cars to tax us additionally on milegage. Several states are considering it now. But here's the scoop: They will decide it is too much invasion on privacy because your destinations might be tracked. How to get around that? When you have your car's yearly inspection, a tax will be levied on the odometer readings. The ACLU will breathe a sigh of relief and we will follow like lemmings to our financial demise thinking the government is looking out for our rights.
And a final note. Thank you Gov. Corzine. The gas stations on the Jersey Turnpike are Lukoil--Russian owned. Nothing like supporting U.S. Yeah, nothing.
JUDGING DEMOCRATS: ONE MORE BLUNDER AS BILL RICHARDSON TRIPS UP AND OUT
The news about Bill Richardson's withdrawal as the Secretary of Transportation calls for some serious thinking about how to judge Democrats.
1. Remember the transistion from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. The Clintons themselves ransacked the White House taking with them everything they wanted that wasn't nailed down. Their staff wrecked the computers, stealing the W keys, and carving obsene messages in the desks. The offices were a mess and had to be redone--AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, created a Transition Coordinating Committee. Security Clearance was started months ago so that key positions could be filled ASAP. Remember that as late as 9/11, some Bush appointees had not been cleared. Apparently President Bush will conclude his terms as President with the respect the office deserves. Character counts when we judge a person.
ON THE OTHER HAND...
2. Barak Obama, haunted, if only by saavy voters, by his associations, continues to be shielded by the media as his appointees and past label him a political opportunist. Fighting his lack of experience, he choses Bill Richardson as Transportation Secretary. Here's a double whammy: experience and Hispanic. BUT Richardson is embroiled in a Federal investigation of his own, and the press has once again chosen sides.
There is no widespread reporting that the company that donated $100,000 normally donated to Republicans so was less likely to suddenly shift to donate to Bill Richardson-affiliated organizations. Nor are there reports that the multi-million state contracts went to this company--Los Angeles based. I'm sure the taxpayers of New Mexico are pleased with that.
3. Perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky because more important than this Federal Investigation is that Richardson was in the running for President. Once again a politician has publicly proven that personal gain is far more important than public good.
4. Harry Reid, our leading Senator, doesn't like the smell of tourists in the summer. He represents us smelling, nosy, folk!
5. Harry Reid, our leading Senator, publicly states that the Senate can seat (or not seat) anyone it chooses for no stated reason even if the person meets the Constitutional requirements. How's that for Chutzpah! We'll see how he reacts to Roland Burris.
politics commentary Demorcrats Bush Obama Clinton transition "political+appointee" Richardson Reid Burris Senate Congress government president
1. Remember the transistion from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. The Clintons themselves ransacked the White House taking with them everything they wanted that wasn't nailed down. Their staff wrecked the computers, stealing the W keys, and carving obsene messages in the desks. The offices were a mess and had to be redone--AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, created a Transition Coordinating Committee. Security Clearance was started months ago so that key positions could be filled ASAP. Remember that as late as 9/11, some Bush appointees had not been cleared. Apparently President Bush will conclude his terms as President with the respect the office deserves. Character counts when we judge a person.
ON THE OTHER HAND...
2. Barak Obama, haunted, if only by saavy voters, by his associations, continues to be shielded by the media as his appointees and past label him a political opportunist. Fighting his lack of experience, he choses Bill Richardson as Transportation Secretary. Here's a double whammy: experience and Hispanic. BUT Richardson is embroiled in a Federal investigation of his own, and the press has once again chosen sides.
There is no widespread reporting that the company that donated $100,000 normally donated to Republicans so was less likely to suddenly shift to donate to Bill Richardson-affiliated organizations. Nor are there reports that the multi-million state contracts went to this company--Los Angeles based. I'm sure the taxpayers of New Mexico are pleased with that.
3. Perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky because more important than this Federal Investigation is that Richardson was in the running for President. Once again a politician has publicly proven that personal gain is far more important than public good.
4. Harry Reid, our leading Senator, doesn't like the smell of tourists in the summer. He represents us smelling, nosy, folk!
5. Harry Reid, our leading Senator, publicly states that the Senate can seat (or not seat) anyone it chooses for no stated reason even if the person meets the Constitutional requirements. How's that for Chutzpah! We'll see how he reacts to Roland Burris.
politics commentary Demorcrats Bush Obama Clinton transition "political+appointee" Richardson Reid Burris Senate Congress government president
Saturday, August 2, 2008
DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU ABOUT TAXES!
On July 29th I warned that we would be flooded with news of failing infrastructure. Yesterday, our local rag, The Times Herald Record, screamed loud and clear from its front page that 61 area bridges etc. are in need of repair!!!!! SIXTY ONE. This morning on TV, CNN announced that 25% of the bridges in the country are in need of repair. ONE IN FOUR! All this as we are bombarded with reminders of the horrific bridge collapse about a year ago. That bridge is scheduled to re-open in Sept. This morning there was a news piece on the baby born after his pregant mother survived that collapse. It's all leading up to the same thing--a rise in gasoline taxes.
That as Congress calls it quits for the summer and leaves without any help for Americans. This when independent truck drivers are barely making ends meet. This when many Americans are having trouble getting to work. AT LEAST THE REPUBLICANS PROTESTED THE BREAK AND STAYED, DEMANDING THE DEMOCRATS RETURN AND GET IT DONE. They turned off the mics and lights on the Republicans.
The Republicans demand off shore drilling be included in the bill. The Democrats absolutely refuse. It doesn't matter to them that EVERY POLL INDICATES AMERICANS WANT OFF SHORE DRILLING INCLUDED IN A COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY BILL.
I have two feelings about these actions:
1. The Democrats have forgotten what their job is in Congress. They represent their constituents--not themselves or their party's line. Their constituents want relief, and they want relief in the form of more domestically produced oil.
This is what frightens me about Dems. THEY THINK THEY KNOW HOW WE SHOULD LIVE OUR LIVES, and they are going to cram their ideas down our throats whether we want it or not. THEY THINK WE ARE INCAPABLE OF MAKING DECISIONS FOR OURSELVES so they will gladly make them for us. People like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid do this everyday when they refuse to allow bills/amendments etc. to even come to a vote where members of Congress can do their jobs. THEY FEEL THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR EVERYONE and we citizens haven't even the right for our elective representatives to represent us!
2. Although Obama will come around (because it's expedient) to agree to some kind of off-shore drilling compromise, the DEMS ARE PROTECTING OBAMA FROM HAVING TO ACTUALLY VOTE TO ALLOW OFF-SHORE DRILLING. Talking isn't acting, and that is what Obama is good at doing. Better to take off for the summer, and let the country sizzle.
If Obama is elected and the Dems increase their hold on Congress, we are in big trouble!
politics politicians Obama Pelosi Reid congress senate oil fuel "off-shore+drilling" taxes liberal Democrats Dems Republicans recess summer vacation "Times+Herald+Record" CNN bridges infrastructure commentary opinion "political+opinion"
That as Congress calls it quits for the summer and leaves without any help for Americans. This when independent truck drivers are barely making ends meet. This when many Americans are having trouble getting to work. AT LEAST THE REPUBLICANS PROTESTED THE BREAK AND STAYED, DEMANDING THE DEMOCRATS RETURN AND GET IT DONE. They turned off the mics and lights on the Republicans.
The Republicans demand off shore drilling be included in the bill. The Democrats absolutely refuse. It doesn't matter to them that EVERY POLL INDICATES AMERICANS WANT OFF SHORE DRILLING INCLUDED IN A COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY BILL.
I have two feelings about these actions:
1. The Democrats have forgotten what their job is in Congress. They represent their constituents--not themselves or their party's line. Their constituents want relief, and they want relief in the form of more domestically produced oil.
This is what frightens me about Dems. THEY THINK THEY KNOW HOW WE SHOULD LIVE OUR LIVES, and they are going to cram their ideas down our throats whether we want it or not. THEY THINK WE ARE INCAPABLE OF MAKING DECISIONS FOR OURSELVES so they will gladly make them for us. People like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid do this everyday when they refuse to allow bills/amendments etc. to even come to a vote where members of Congress can do their jobs. THEY FEEL THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR EVERYONE and we citizens haven't even the right for our elective representatives to represent us!
2. Although Obama will come around (because it's expedient) to agree to some kind of off-shore drilling compromise, the DEMS ARE PROTECTING OBAMA FROM HAVING TO ACTUALLY VOTE TO ALLOW OFF-SHORE DRILLING. Talking isn't acting, and that is what Obama is good at doing. Better to take off for the summer, and let the country sizzle.
If Obama is elected and the Dems increase their hold on Congress, we are in big trouble!
politics politicians Obama Pelosi Reid congress senate oil fuel "off-shore+drilling" taxes liberal Democrats Dems Republicans recess summer vacation "Times+Herald+Record" CNN bridges infrastructure commentary opinion "political+opinion"
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
AP BUZZES ABOUT A RAISE IN FEDERAL GASOLINE TAXES
Since the beginning or June I’ve been pointing out just how much government loves gasoline taxes and how we’ll never see relief from the politicians. (http://a-big-bang.blogspot.com/2008/07/more-on-our-gas-woes-dont-expect.html) All of a sudden the news is filled with reports that our highway infrastructure is in tremendous disrepair. Believe me, folks, they’re preparing you for what is to come.
Just listen and read—in the coming weeks we’ll hear about bridges, tunnels, and major arteries that will cause horrific disasters because of neglect. We’ll be afraid to drive over a bridge or through a tunnel. BTW, according to an AP article on July 19, 2008, just three years ago the Highway Trust Fund had a 3 billion dollar surplus. So let me ask, “Why has our infrastructure fallen apart when there was money to spare? How did this happen so quickly?” Hmmmmmm
The skinny is, again according to the AP, that lawmakers are “quietly talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel.” That’s federal gasoline taxes we’re talking about. Seems to me the states will feel the same pinch and move in the same direction. Tighten your money belts; it’s gonna be a bumpy ride!
Meanwhile, Congress is adjourning for their summer break (but don’t let me get on that topic) without doing one thing to help us. While Pelosi is “saving the planet,” our country, despite promises made by the Democratic majority in Congress, is falling apart. No wonder Congress’ ratings are the way they are—far lower than the President’s. Let’s drill, go nuclear, employ wind and solar power, develop hydro-electric cars, etc. Let’s do it NOW!
Just listen and read—in the coming weeks we’ll hear about bridges, tunnels, and major arteries that will cause horrific disasters because of neglect. We’ll be afraid to drive over a bridge or through a tunnel. BTW, according to an AP article on July 19, 2008, just three years ago the Highway Trust Fund had a 3 billion dollar surplus. So let me ask, “Why has our infrastructure fallen apart when there was money to spare? How did this happen so quickly?” Hmmmmmm
The skinny is, again according to the AP, that lawmakers are “quietly talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel.” That’s federal gasoline taxes we’re talking about. Seems to me the states will feel the same pinch and move in the same direction. Tighten your money belts; it’s gonna be a bumpy ride!
Meanwhile, Congress is adjourning for their summer break (but don’t let me get on that topic) without doing one thing to help us. While Pelosi is “saving the planet,” our country, despite promises made by the Democratic majority in Congress, is falling apart. No wonder Congress’ ratings are the way they are—far lower than the President’s. Let’s drill, go nuclear, employ wind and solar power, develop hydro-electric cars, etc. Let’s do it NOW!
oil fuel gas taxes politicians commentary politics Congress President AP "Associated+Press"
Saturday, July 19, 2008
CONGRESS CONTINUES TO RUN AMUCK WITH OUR TAX MONEY
The Senate's vote on Wed to TRIPLE spending for a much acclaimed program to protect against AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis is a sign that the U.S.A. remains a leader in helping those around the world. We actually deliver what we pledge unlike many other countries in the world. It is the most ambitious health program ever in the history of the United States.
Unfortuately, this $48 billion dollar package DOES NOT HELP ANYONE HERE. It all goes to Africa--granted the continent is being decimated by these diseases, internal wars, external wars, corrupt governments, sectarian fighting, genocide, racial strife and practically every other man-made and natural disaster there is. BUT...
1. This is the same Congress that does not pass spending bills to keep our military safe and well-equipped. Replacement truck parts in Iraq, for instance, may be a year in waiting because vendors are unpaid; the newspapers are full of reports of faulty electrical work and shoddy electrical equipment resulting in military deaths and injuries, and Congress keeps screaming about the expense of the Iraq war.
This is the same Congress that complains about a "recession," "bad economy," and the plight of Americans who can't afford to buy the things they need WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING SUBSTANATIVE to control the situation.
This is the same Congress that talks about energy and reducing oil independence to bring down prices but which doesn't legislate consistent tax breaks for people to afford solar or wind energy or who add doors, window, etc. to lessen their individual use of resources or for companies to afford technological development. (Remember that Kennedy and Kerry opposed wind farms that might mar their Massachusetts views of the Atlantic ocean)
This is the same Congress led by that despicable Nancy Pelosi who damns the President with his low approval rating while leading a do-nothing Congress with an approval rating 20 points below President Bush's.
This is the same Congress that WILL BREAK FOR SUMMER RECESS WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING about any of the problems that beset us.
WHAT A WASTE THESE MEN AND WOMEN ARE!!!!
This bill, this latest assault on our wallets, is their own "feel good," global way of looking busy. It goes along with their interest in any possible sports irregularities such as steroid useage--obviously problems of vital national interest. Ha Ha It goes along with their constant supoenas issued to presidential aides, etc., to get headlines for their party while ignoring, with the media's complicity, the wrongdoing of such members as Charlie Rangel with his four rent-subsidized apts.--three to create a spacious home for himself and one as an office, or Chris Dodd's special treatment in getting mortgages, etc. Or my own Senator, Chuck Schumer (photo upChuck) whose comments may have contributed to IndyMac's bank failure. According to NPR,
"Twelve days earlier, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, had written to bank regulators warning that "a significant move by IndyMac's depositors to redeem their deposits could leave the firm in a disastrous financial situation." Once those letters became public, Schumer's worst fears were realized.
More ironically is that Schumer, when blamed, quickly pointed out that those pointing fingers at him were using "Bush tactics." DUH!
I know I'm rambling a bit, but launching the biggest health initiative ever--in Africa--at a time when we can't balance our budget, don't adequately fund the military (including Veteran hospitals, etc.), need to develop an energy policy (which will be expensive), seek to lessen the tax burden for our citizens, protect the Homeland (also expensive), rebuild failing infrastructure, and help those damaged by floods, fires, and other recent natural disasters is another example of Congress' misguided thinking, its inability to focus and accomplish anything positive for our country, its self-congratulatory smugness, and its damaging partisanship that puts party above country. Would that we could toss the whole lot out!
Congress politics politicians "political+blogs" Africa AIDS malaria tuberculosis health USA military Iraq recession economy energy Kennedy Kerry Massachusetts Bush Pelosi senate Schumer IndyMac
Unfortuately, this $48 billion dollar package DOES NOT HELP ANYONE HERE. It all goes to Africa--granted the continent is being decimated by these diseases, internal wars, external wars, corrupt governments, sectarian fighting, genocide, racial strife and practically every other man-made and natural disaster there is. BUT...
1. This is the same Congress that does not pass spending bills to keep our military safe and well-equipped. Replacement truck parts in Iraq, for instance, may be a year in waiting because vendors are unpaid; the newspapers are full of reports of faulty electrical work and shoddy electrical equipment resulting in military deaths and injuries, and Congress keeps screaming about the expense of the Iraq war.
This is the same Congress that complains about a "recession," "bad economy," and the plight of Americans who can't afford to buy the things they need WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING SUBSTANATIVE to control the situation.
This is the same Congress that talks about energy and reducing oil independence to bring down prices but which doesn't legislate consistent tax breaks for people to afford solar or wind energy or who add doors, window, etc. to lessen their individual use of resources or for companies to afford technological development. (Remember that Kennedy and Kerry opposed wind farms that might mar their Massachusetts views of the Atlantic ocean)
This is the same Congress led by that despicable Nancy Pelosi who damns the President with his low approval rating while leading a do-nothing Congress with an approval rating 20 points below President Bush's.
This is the same Congress that WILL BREAK FOR SUMMER RECESS WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING about any of the problems that beset us.
WHAT A WASTE THESE MEN AND WOMEN ARE!!!!
This bill, this latest assault on our wallets, is their own "feel good," global way of looking busy. It goes along with their interest in any possible sports irregularities such as steroid useage--obviously problems of vital national interest. Ha Ha It goes along with their constant supoenas issued to presidential aides, etc., to get headlines for their party while ignoring, with the media's complicity, the wrongdoing of such members as Charlie Rangel with his four rent-subsidized apts.--three to create a spacious home for himself and one as an office, or Chris Dodd's special treatment in getting mortgages, etc. Or my own Senator, Chuck Schumer (photo upChuck) whose comments may have contributed to IndyMac's bank failure. According to NPR,
"Twelve days earlier, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, had written to bank regulators warning that "a significant move by IndyMac's depositors to redeem their deposits could leave the firm in a disastrous financial situation." Once those letters became public, Schumer's worst fears were realized.
More ironically is that Schumer, when blamed, quickly pointed out that those pointing fingers at him were using "Bush tactics." DUH!
I know I'm rambling a bit, but launching the biggest health initiative ever--in Africa--at a time when we can't balance our budget, don't adequately fund the military (including Veteran hospitals, etc.), need to develop an energy policy (which will be expensive), seek to lessen the tax burden for our citizens, protect the Homeland (also expensive), rebuild failing infrastructure, and help those damaged by floods, fires, and other recent natural disasters is another example of Congress' misguided thinking, its inability to focus and accomplish anything positive for our country, its self-congratulatory smugness, and its damaging partisanship that puts party above country. Would that we could toss the whole lot out!
Congress politics politicians "political+blogs" Africa AIDS malaria tuberculosis health USA military Iraq recession economy energy Kennedy Kerry Massachusetts Bush Pelosi senate Schumer IndyMac
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
