Classified Listings

Find jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events.

USA Online local classifieds

Community - politics classifieds in los angeles

<![CDATA[Many of us on here are familiar with the rantings of a certain person known by many names but this post totally takes the cake and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt how totally unhinged this person is. Read carefully as he whines on that other people with opinions are liars and propagandists but what he says (HIS OWN VERY OWN OPINION) are in fact--just that--facts. --------------------------------------- "I'll repeat the facts... The facts are that the health care reform bill is not socialist, is not a government takeover of the health care industry, will not put private insurance companies out of business (unfortunately), will not result health care rationing, will not put bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions, won't kill your grandparents with death panels, will not result in reduced Medicare coverage, will not bankrupt America or even cost half of what it will cost America not to enact it, will not lower health care standards, will not force anyone to get an abortion if they don't want one but will make this medical procedure available to those who do as with any other medical procedure, etc. and anyone who denies any part of this paragraph is a liar trying to spread disinformation and propaganda. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts, and these are facts." <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/pol/1643323469.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/pol/1643323469.html</a> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Case closed. Liberalism is a mental disorder as documented by Dr. Lyle Rossiter. <a href="http://www.libertymind.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.libertymind.com/</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=283520" rel="nofollow">Arab-occupied Jordan is part of Greater Israel</a> <a href="http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=283520&Disp=31#C31" rel="nofollow">#31.</a> To: No 6 <a href="http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=283520&Disp=31#C26" rel="nofollow">(#26</a>) peaceful dismantling of the State of Israel Like Yamit - where 2,000 Jewish pioneers settled in the Sinai and later were forcibly evacuated from the seaside city on the Mediterranean? How about Gush Katif and the other <a href="http://beyondbabylon.blogspot.com/2009/06/jewish-pioneering-communities-in-judea.html" rel="nofollow">Jewish pioneering communities</a> treacherously surrendered to Arab enemies in exchange for more terror? <a href="http://www.davidbenariel.org/israel/ariel-sharon-zionist-traitor.htm" rel="nofollow">Ariel Sharon: From Zionist to Traitor</a> General Sharon could have enforced peace through strength, securing Israel a hard-earned victory, rather than rewarding terrorism and undermining Israeli security, breaching Jerusalem's sovereignty, permitting Roman wolves in sheep's clothing, "peacekeepers," to pollute the Holy Land of Israel. <a href="http://www.davidbenariel.org/israel/dont-expel-jews-gaza.htm" rel="nofollow">Don't Expel Jews from Gaza</a> Read and weep for the Israeli Jews of Gush Katif/Gaza, on whose behalf I wrote this article in July 2005 before their illegal expulsion by the bribed Ariel Sharon and criminal company working for foreign interests. Many of them remain homeless, depressed and basically abandoned by their lying government - their former homes history, stripped bare and destroyed by marauding Arab enemies who are now fighting among themselves, one terrorist group (Hamas) against another terrorist group (Fatah). How about the police brutality at Amona? Did your accursed Neturei Karta cheer with their Arab blood brothers over this outrage? <a href="http://wejew.com/media/5160/Amona_Expose_Film_Claims_Government_Ordered_Police_Violence/" rel="nofollow">Amona Expose Film Claims Government Ordered Police Violence</a> "On Feb. 1, 2006, the Israel Police were ordered to demolish nine Jewish homes in Amona, near Ofrah, 12 miles north of Jerusalem. In the video documentary below, police were filmed using excessive force against hundreds of youthful protestors, over 200 of whom were injured and taken to hospitals for treatment. The brief documentary film above was produced by Tzvi Fishman, who authors a popular blog on IsraelNationalNews.com." <a href="http://www.davidbenariel.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.davidbenariel.org/</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Health Care Reform passed in the house with a majority and the Senate with a super majority. The parts that are the same aren't going to be voted on through reconciliation. The only part that will be voted on are the few areas where they differ. So no, reconciliation is not being used to make sweeping changes to health care. It's only being used to iron out the details of sweeping changes that have already passed both houses. Another thing to keep in mind is the vast majority of the health care reform bill will cost ZERO. These parts merely force insurance companies to act ethically by preventing them from dropping people when they get cancer because they didn't mention they had acne treatment when they were 14. It means they must provide the services they've been paid for and this is something they have not been doing. Insurance companies make their money by screwing over the American people over and over and over again and being a middle-man who adds no value to health care, but who raises the cost by more than a third. You're not a liar based on the fact that you have a differing opinion. You're a liar because you are spreading lies. If you can think of a more accurate term, by all means let me know. I'll repeat the facts... <ul>The facts are that the health care reform bill is not socialist, is not a government takeover of the health care industry, will not put private insurance companies out of business (unfortunately), will not result health care rationing, will not put bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions, won't kill your grandparents with death panels, will not result in reduced Medicare coverage, will not bankrupt America or even cost half of what it will cost America not to enact it, will not lower health care standards, will not force anyone to get an abortion if they don't want one but will make this medical procedure available to those who do as with any other medical procedure, etc. and anyone who denies any part of this paragraph is a liar trying to spread disinformation and propaganda. </ul> You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts, and these are facts. Our money is going to be taken from government either way. It's my opinion that the money is better spent on providing health care, than increasing the size of our already bloated military. I'd rather see it buying MRI machines, medicines, and health care, than for bombs, tanks, and guns for military spending that exceeds that for every other nation on the planet earth combined. Health care costs might rise a percent or two by adopting health care reform. But this is nothing compared to the 15-20% it will rise if we do not pass health care reform. I also like the idea of helping the poor. Contrary to the disinformation being spread by Republicans, most poor people aren't poor due to a lack of education, effort, or skill on their own part. Most are poor because their company relocated to another country so they could make 35% profit rather than 30%. I don't put blind trust into government. I watch it diligently. I will say that I trust government more than the companies who have been stealing from the American people for decades, who buy and sell our politicians, and who make a dishonest profit by refusing to provide the services they've been paid for. They get money by doing all they can to deny sick people care. Not all things should have a profit motive attached to them. Sorry, but they shouldn't. The private sector is better for MOST things, but not ALL things. It is an absolute truth that France, the UK, Canada, and virtually every other industrialized western democracy has a better health care system than our own based on the results and the price they pay. We pay the most for health care on earth and get less than the countries who pay less. These countries rightly consider health care to be a moral imperative. While it's not a right, it is the duty of all decent people to make sure their fellow countrymen don't go bankrupt over hospital bills or have to choose between their health and their home. The legitimate role of any government is to protect the lives of its people and to provide for their general welfare. Why do you put so much blind trust into companies that openly steal from Americans? Why do you eschew the efforts of those who demand accountability on the part of these companies, regulations to prevent them from further victimizing Americans, and offering a non-profit government competition to keep them honest? Medicare is wildly successful and popular. Republicans wouldn't dream of getting rid of it. UCLA hasn't put USC out of business, and neither would a government health care option put private insurance companies out of business.]]>

<![CDATA[<table border="0"><tr><td colspan="2"><h2>Rooftop Revolutionaries</h2>No Candidates... No Partisanship... No Ideologies... ...Just U.S. You in? Please check out the blog: <a href="http://rooftoprevolutionaries.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://rooftoprevolutionaries.blogspot.com/</a> A quiet people is a helpless people. </td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.meetup.com/Rooftop-Revolutionaries/calendar/12810160/i3/cl" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://photos4.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/3/9/c/3/global_13634787.jpeg"></a></td><td>March 14th skype chat Sunday, March 14, 2010 at 5:00PMFeel like both sides have fucked up and aren't doing anything to fix it? Come join us, and move forward, not left and right! My skype name is rooftoprevolutionary. If you don't have skype, you can download it for free on skype.com See the full event details, including location, at <a href="http://www.meetup.com/Rooftop-Revolutionaries/calendar/12810160/i3/cl" rel="nofollow">http://www.meetup.com/Rooftop-Revolutionaries/calendar/12810160/</a>.</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Check out what members are saying about Rooftop Revolutionaries:"A future" - Pedestrian "If you think there's something wrong with this country, it's your duty, not just a right to do something. That's what we're trying to do. We'd love other informed citizens to join." - Eleanor G. "If you are more interested working towards real common sense in government, if you would like to see your inalienable civil rights vehemently argued for, if you are more interested in progress than partisan bickering, this is the group for you. If you would rather be given information upon which to make your own decisions rather than be fed a party line to adhere to, this group couldn't agree with you more. If you have "outrage fatigue" and feel like giving up because government just grinds its gears until black smoke comes out, this group is the breath of fresh air that can revitalize your desire to live up to your civic duty with pride and enthusiasm. As Eleanor, the founder of our group, so elegantly put it: "Moving Left and Right has gotten us nowhere. It's time to move Forward." Join this group if you want to see what tomorrow looks like, and you have the courage and determination to lay the cobblestones that lead to it." - Elliott </td></tr></table>]]>

<![CDATA[Seeking to overturn the city's medical marijuana ordinance even before it takes effect, a loose-knit coalition of Los Angeles collectives is quietly gathering signatures to force a referendum on the law. The scrappy, largely volunteer effort faces a Monday deadline to turn in 27,425 valid signatures. "We're getting down to the wire here," said Dan Halbert, who runs Rainforest Collective in Mar Vista and has coordinated the campaign. "It's going to be close." <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-referendum14-2010mar14,0,6946869.story?track=rss" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-referendum14-2010mar14,0,6946869.story?track=rss</a> Read about the petition here: <a href="http://www.thegapp.com/ClubPortal/ClubStatic.cfm?clubID=2733&pubmenuoptID=29937" rel="nofollow">http://www.thegapp.com/ClubPortal/ClubStatic.cfm?clubID=2733&pubmenuoptID=29937</a> Go HERE for your local petition signing location: <a href="http://www.thegapp.com/clubportal/ClubStatic.cfm?clubID=2733&pubmenuoptID=31207" rel="nofollow">http://www.thegapp.com/clubportal/ClubStatic.cfm?clubID=2733&pubmenuoptID=31207</a> Join for free here <a href="https://www.memberize.net/clubportal/MemberJoin.cfm?clubID=2733" rel="nofollow">https://www.memberize.net/clubportal/MemberJoin.cfm?clubID=2733</a> Work fast Black Sunday is TOMORROW March the 14th!!!! Pass it along-FAST]]>

<![CDATA[Barack Hussein Obama II Just the latest fraud of a long, long (too long!) list. ]]>

<![CDATA[again...why do you care about Penn, or what he supports or says? What would you like for him to support?]]>

<![CDATA[Ya gotta love a Lib if ya wanna do Holly Wood ! Penn has bills to pay... He's soooo cute!!!!!]]>

<![CDATA[Jail For Bribed Detroit Councilwoman Last Updated: Thu, 03/11/2010 - 11:22am In a pathetically desperate effort to avoid her destiny behind bars, the corrupt politician wife of the House Judiciary Committee chairman wants to withdraw her bribery guilty plea to dodge a three-year prison sentence. Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers, married to the famed Michigan Democrat (John Conyers) who heads the House committee that oversees the U.S. Attorney’s office and the FBI, clearly thought that pleading guilty to a few of her many transgressions was a noble enough deed that it would get her off the hook. The flamboyant politician’s reaction to her sentence this week indicates that she views herself as invincible despite her lengthy history of public corruption as one of Detroit’s most powerful lawmakers. When a federal judge slapped Conyers with a 37-month prison sentence and two years of probation, the irate councilwoman exploded in court and declared that she wasn’t going to jail for something she didn’t do. Audacious behavior considering that last summer Conyers admitted taking bribes from a developer to change her vote on a multi million-dollar city contract to haul and treat the city’s sewage sludge. After vehement denials, she pleaded guilty only because the FBI had electronic surveillance evidence of Conyers taking cash bribes in fast-food parking lots. The developer had already pleaded guilty in federal court to paying Conyers more than $6,000 in bribes and admitted using a courier on four separate occasions to the deliver the money. The Detroit newspaper that has thoroughly covered the Conyers scandal links the charging document and plea agreement that the disgraced councilwoman wants to withdraw in an effort to avoid jail. Her legal argument is decrepit because she signed a guilty plea in June that says if the sentence imposed falls at 60 months or less, “defendant waives any right to appeal her conviction or sentence.” Her signature effectively stymies an appeal, according to legal experts, and she must report to prison on July 1. In a boisterous tone seldom used by defendants in federal court, Conyers assured that she’s “not going to be made a scapegoat for other people.” She also gave the judge a bit of a lecture, chastising him for making an example out of her and caving into media pressure to send her to jail. Responding to the unmoved judge, a despondent Conyers then invoked her husband and son, pointing out that the “older man” and 14-year-old boy need her. Perhaps she should have thought of them when she took the bags of cash at the fast-food parking lots. Monica Conyers Judicial Watch Blog's blog Add new comment Read more ]]>

<![CDATA[WE MUST ELECT STEVE POZNER, MEG WHITMAN IS ALREADY BENDING OVER FOR HISPANICS. CHECK OUT HOW SHE DISAVOWED THE PROUD RACIST. GOOGLE: MEG WHITMAN DISAVOWED THE PROUD RACIST WATCH THE VID: STAND UP FOR AMERICA THEN I'M SURE YOU WILL NOT VOTE FOR WHITMAN. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- County Spends $600 Mil On Welfare For Illegal Immigrants Last Updated: Thu, 03/11/2010 - 3:14pm For the second consecutive year taxpayers in a single U.S. county will dish out more than half a billion dollars just to cover the welfare and food-stamp costs of illegal immigrants. Los Angeles County, the nation’s most populous, may be in the midst of a dire financial crisis but somehow there are plenty of funds for illegal aliens. In January alone, anchor babies born to the county’s illegal immigrants collected more than $50 million in welfare benefits. At that rate the cash-strapped county will pay around $600 million this year to provide illegal aliens’ offspring with food stamps and other welfare perks. The exorbitant figure, revealed this week by a county supervisor, doesn’t even include the enormous cost of educating, medically treating or incarcerating illegal aliens in the sprawling county of about 10 million residents. Los Angeles County annually spends more than $1 billion for those combined services, including $500 million for healthcare and $350 million for public safety. About a quarter of the county’s welfare and food stamp issuances go to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their anchor babies, according to the figures from the county’s Department of Social Services. In 2009 the tab ran $570 million and this year’s figure is expected to increase by several million dollars. Illegal immigration continues to have a “catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” the veteran county supervisor (Michael Antonovich) who revealed the information has said. The former fifth-grade history teacher has repeatedly come under fire from his liberal counterparts for publicizing statistics that confirm the devastation illegal immigration has had on the region. Antonovich, who has served on the board for nearly three decades, represents a portion of the county that is roughly twice the size of Rhode Island and has about 2 million residents. His district is simply a snippet of a larger crisis. Nationwide, Americans pay around $22 billion annually to provide illegal immigrants with welfare benefits that include food assistance programs such as free school lunches in public schools, food stamps and a nutritional program (known as WIC) for low-income women and their children. Tens of billions more are spent on other social services, medical care, public education and legal costs such as incarceration and public defenders ============================================]]>

<![CDATA[Actually yes, they are the filthy low lives you asked about. I've been accused of being some guy named Ireland a few times on here and seen the moron who thinks I'm Ireland call him fat, call his wife a whore, and talk shit about his kid. They lie about the President being born in other countries, make bigoted and racist remarks against gays, Mexicans, black people, Jews, etc. so I speaking ill of the dead doesn't seem out of the question for these classy guys.]]>

<![CDATA[you obviously don't care for Penn so why would you care who he likes? And if you don't like Penn, why give him free publicity? And Penn's father is dead, and he was a WW2 vet. Did you serve? Why drag a dead guy into it? Are you that much of a low life?]]>

<![CDATA[Judicial Watch Obtains Obama Commerce Department Documents Detailing ACORN Partnership for 2010 Census View Discussion Census Bureau refuses to partner with "Hate Groups, Law Enforcement, Anti-Immigrant Groups" Contact Information: Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305 Washington, DC -- May 28, 2009 Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents from the U.S. Census Bureau detailing the substantial involvement of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in the 2010 Census. Included among the 126 pages of documents, obtained by Judicial Watch under threat of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, is ACORN's original Census partnership application. The document describes 18 different areas of responsibility requested by the community organization, which is under investigation in multiple states for illegal activity during the 2008 election, including voter registration fraud. The documents also list the types of organizations ineligible for partnering with the U.S. Census. They include: "...Hate groups, Law enforcement, anti-immigrant groups, any groups that might make people fearful of participating in the Census..." The release of these Obama Commerce Department documents comes in the wake of an Obama Department of Homeland Security report released in April linking opposition to illegal immigration to "rightwing extremist radicalization." In its official statement responding to the ACORN controversy, the Obama Commerce Department downplayed ACORN's participation in the Census, and labeled "baseless" the notion that ACORN would be involved in any Census count. However, the Census Bureau offered ACORN the opportunity to "recruit Census workers" who would participate in the count. Moreover, as an "executive level" partner, ACORN has the ability to "organize and/or serve as a member on a Complete Count Committee," which, according to Census documents, helps "develop and implement locally based outreach and recruitment campaigns." According to its application ACORN also signed up to: "Encourage employees and constituents to complete and mail their questionnaire; identify job candidates and/or distribute and display recruiting materials; appoint a liaison to work with the Census Bureau; provide space for Be Counted sites and/or Questionnaire Assistance Centers; sponsor community events to promote participation in the 2010 Census," among 18 requested areas of responsibility. The documents also show the decision to add ACORN as a partner occurred in February, long after the January 15th Census partnership application deadline. (One Census official had bet "it was under Bush.") Among other conclusions from the documents: The Census Bureau requested that ACORN "help us highlight [ACORN's] innovation and hard work and share best practices so other organizations can learn from your experiences." Members of the Census Bureau and Department of Commerce staff assigned to organize the 2010 Census were unaware of when the decision to involve ACORN was made, how the Census Bureau choose and defined partners, or whether partners received payment. The Census Bureau did not conduct background checks on the 3.7 million people hired to conduct the 2000 Census, unless a preliminary name check provided a match. Overall, 8% of the applicants, or over 300,000 people, were considered risks for hire. According to the U.S. Census documents, among other things, census data is used to allocate $300 billion in federal funds. Census data also "determines how many seats each state will have in the House of Representatives as well as the redistricting of state legislatures, county and city councils, and voting districts." "Given its history of illegal activity and fraud, ACORN should be nowhere near the 2010 Census," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "And shame on the Obama Commerce Department for continuing to demonize conservatives by lumping together law enforcement and anti-immigration groups with 'hate groups.' This discriminatory policy raises First Amendment concerns. Indeed, these documents provide further evidence that the Obama administration is politicizing the 2010 Census." Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Census on March 23, 2009. After the Obama Commerce Department stonewalled, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on May 14, 2009. The documents were released to Judicial Watch on May 15, 2009. ]]>

<![CDATA[...That's no surprise; Sean Penn's bolshevik-loving father and mediocre director Leo Penn loved Stalin....Like father like son!]]>

<![CDATA[usa = ignorant slut]]>

<![CDATA[Rahm = Criminal Obama = Dumbshit America = Laughing stock]]>

<![CDATA[CERTAIN AMERICAN FEDERAL APPEAL JUDGES NATIONWIDE ARE DENYING THE POOR INNOCENT PRISON INMATES NEW RE-TRIALS RIGHT ALONG WITH THE GUILTY PRISON INMATES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO PROPERLY FORMULATE THEIR FEDERAL APPEAL LEGAL CASES !!! PRESIDENT OBAMA, DENYING OUR INNOCENT POOR IN U.S. PRISONS THEIR POSSIBLE FREEDOMS ARE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ISSUES THAT NEED CHANGE !!! IF THESE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY BEING INFLICTED ON THE POSSIBLE INNOCENT IN OUR U.S. PRISONS IN LOUISIANA ARE NOT CORRECTED PRESIDENT OBAMA ~ THEN WHAT IS TO BE WITH THE OTHER VARIOUS U.S. STATES ALLOWING THESE SAME EXACT INJUSTICES TO BE INFLICTED ON THE INNOCENT POOR IN THEIR PRISONS ??? POSSIBLE WRONGFUL EXECUTIONS BEING INFLICTED ON ONLY POOR AMERICANS NATION~WIDE (TROY DAVIS OF GEORGIA, MUMIA ABU~JAMAL OF PENNSYLVANIA ) , FALSE IMPRISONMENT FOR AN ESTIMATED 100,000 INNOCENT POOR AMERICANS WHO OBVIOUSLY WERE NEVER AFFORDED A PROPER LEGAL OR INVESTIGATIVE DEFENSE AND NOW THE HORROR OF OUR JUSTICES TO DENY NEW TRIALS IN LOUISIANA. WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING AT THEIR APPEALS ??? WILL THIS DEMOCRATIC US CONGRESS INVESTIGATE AND CHANGE THESE JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON OUR POORER AMERICAN’S ??? THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG OF OUR UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT NEEDS…C*H*A*N*G*E……. THIS HORROR HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A TRUE EVENT AFFECTING THE ENSLAVEMENT OF OUR POORER INNOCENT AMERICAN’S, & ALL OF AMERICA NEEDS TO BE MADE AWARE THAT THIS SAME EXACT TREATMENT OF OUR POORER INNOCENT CITIZENS NEEDS A FORMAL US CONGRESSIONAL, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND WORLD COURT INVESTIGATION !!! ————————————————————————– Posted on October 31, 2008 by Gideon ————————————————————————— I’m a little late on writing about this story (via several sources), but it sure is a doozy. You know how it’s common knowlege that most appeals aren’t successful? Well, if you were a pro-se petitioner in Louisiana for the last 13 years, you knew that you wouldn’t win. Why is that? Because the Chief Judge of their Court of Appeals directed his clerk to summarily deny all appeals from pro-se petitioners without circulating the appeal to other judges. The clerk, ridden with guilt, committed suicide earlier this year and left a note confessing everything. This immoral and apparently illegal policy was in place until Jerrold Peterson, the staffer charged with implementing it, blew his brains out in May of last year. Peterson was driven to it in part, his suicide note suggested, by guilt over the nefarious tasks the judges made him perform. In his note Peterson explained how the court gave indigent appellants the bum’s rush. Although every criminal writ application is supposed to be reviewed by three judges, he was deputed to winnow out any that had been filed pro se and arrange for their automatic rejection. Thus were an estimated 2,500 appeals deep-sixed without any judicial consideration whatsoever. Now, facing public embarassment and possible ethical violations, the Louisiana Supreme Court has stepped in and asked…get this…the same appellate court to look at the appeals again. Note that they did not ask the Court to conduct an investigation into this practice, but simply to consider those appeals that were so summarily denied. Because, if we placate the defendants with another cursory look at their appeals, we can sweep the ethical violations under the carpet. At first this whole thing seemed rather odd to me. After all, how is this even possible? Here’s how: Edward Dufresne, Chief Judge of the Fifth Circuit, took charge of pro se appeals in 1994. He then had Peterson prepare rulings denying writs for all of them and signed off “without so much as a glance,” according to the suicide note. “No judge ever saw the writ application before the ruling was prepared by me,” Peterson wrote in a second suicide note to the Judiciary Commission. The rulings also bore the names, though not the signatures, of judges Marion Edwards and Wally Rothschild. Neither Edwards nor Rothschild had any clue as to what was in the applications, or even knew that they had been filed, according to Peterson. So you’ve got one complicit judge and maybe three. But there are 5 more on that court. What of them? Are we to really believe that these 5 (or 7) other judges never once questioned the stark absence of pro-se appeals? Particularly in Louisiana, whose system has the following characteristics: About 90 percent of criminal defendants in Louisiana are indigent. Louisiana only provides post-conviction legal aid in death penalty cases. Everyone else must either hire a lawyer, find a lawyer to handle their case pro bono, or handle the appeal themselves. Obviously, most have no choice but to opt for the latter. One criminal defense lawyer in Louisiana told me that if you’re convicted of murder in Louisiana and you’re innocent, you’re actually better off getting the death penalty. At least then you’ll get a team of lawyers, investigators, and experts to help with your appeal. This from a state whose criminal justice system was already crumbling. It’s hard to believe that people such as Judge Dufresne take an oath to uphold the law and to prove equal protection under it. Disbarment may be enough, but only barely. Justice delayed is no justice at all. THE SMOKING GUN LINK TO AMERICA’S JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN’S ! <a href="http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf" rel="nofollow">http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf</a> NAME OF PUBLICATION: PICAYUNE NEWSPAPER AUTHOR : MR. JAMES GILL TITLE OF ARTICLE: IN A SUICIDE NOTE, RELECTIONS OF GUILT DATE PUBLISHED: OCT 10 2008 LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A WWW LOBBY THAT SINGS OUT FOR MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS.WE CAN BE FOUND WITH ANY SEARCH ENGINE UNDER OUR NAME OR TELEPHONE NUMBER.(424-247-2013) ~WE ENJOY BRINGING THE GOOD LIFE TO ALL the little people of America ON THE WEB BECAUSE MOST POORER AMERICANS ARE LIVING THIRD WORLD LIFE~STYLES WITHOUT PROPER HEALTHCARE OR LEGAL CARE FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES ! WE ARE ALL VERY WELL AWARE THAT OUR U.S.WEALTHY ELITE BILLIONAIRES WHO CONTROL OUR U.S.CONGRESS THROUGH THEIR BIG $$ LOBBYISTS HAVE DECIDED THAT THE WORLD'S POOR SOMEHOW ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO ASSIST THEN THEIR OWN FELLOW AMERICANS. THIS NEW WORLD ORDER MENTALITY BY OUR AMERICAN BILLIONAIRE CABAL NEEDS CHANGE ... AMERICAN FEDERAL APPEAL JUDGES NATIONWIDE ARE DENYING THE POOR INNOCENT PRISON INMATES NEW RE-TRIALS RIGHT ALONG WITH THE GUILTY PRISON INMATES WHO DO NOT DESERVE NEW RE-TRIALS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO PROPERLY FORMULATE THEIR FEDERAL APPEAL LEGAL CASES !!! DENYING OUR INNOCENT POOR IN U.S. PRISONS THEIR POSSIBLE FREEDOMS ARE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ISSUES THAT NEED CHANGE !!! IF THESE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY BEING INFLICTED ON THE POSSIBLE INNOCENT IN OUR U.S. PRISONS IN LOUISIANA ARE NOT CORRECTED PRESIDENT OBAMA ~ THEN WHAT IS TO BE WITH THE OTHER VARIOUS U.S. STATES ALLOWING THESE SAME EXACT INJUSTICES TO BE INFLICTED ON THE INNOCENT POOR IN THEIR PRISONS ??? POSSIBLE WRONGFUL EXECUTIONS BEING INFLICTED ON ONLY POOR AMERICANS NATION~WIDE (TROY DAVIS OF GEORGIA, MUMIA ABU~JAMAL OF PENNSYLVANIA ) , FALSE IMPRISONMENT FOR AN ESTIMATED 100,000 INNOCENT POOR AMERICANS WHO OBVIOUSLY WERE NEVER AFFORDED A PROPER LEGAL OR INVESTIGATIVE DEFENSE AND NOW THE HORROR OF OUR JUSTICES TO DENY NEW TRIALS IN LOUISIANA. WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING AT THEIR APPEALS ??? WILL THIS DEMOCRATIC US CONGRESS INVESTIGATE AND CHANGE THESE JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON OUR POORER AMERICAN’S ??? THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG OF OUR UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT NEEDS…C*H*A*N*G*E……. WHEN THIS HORROR IS PROVEN TO BE A TRUE EVENT AFFECTING THE POSSIBLE ENSLAVEMENT OF 2,500 POORER AMERICAN’S, THEN ALL OF AMERICA WILL BE AWARE THAT THIS SAME EXACT TREATMENT OF OUR POORER CITIZENS NEEDS A FORMAL US CONGRESSIONAL AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION NATIONWIDE !!! ————————————————————————– Posted on October 31, 2008 by Gideon ————————————————————————— I’m a little late on writing about this story (via several sources), but it sure is a doozy. You know how it’s common knowlege that most appeals aren’t successful? Well, if you were a pro-se petitioner in Louisiana for the last 13 years, you knew that you wouldn’t win. Why is that? Because the Chief Judge of their Court of Appeals directed his clerk to summarily deny all appeals from pro-se petitioners without circulating the appeal to other judges. The clerk, ridden with guilt, committed suicide earlier this year and left a note confessing everything. This immoral and apparently illegal policy was in place until Jerrold Peterson, the staffer charged with implementing it, blew his brains out in May of last year. Peterson was driven to it in part, his suicide note suggested, by guilt over the nefarious tasks the judges made him perform. In his note Peterson explained how the court gave indigent appellants the bum’s rush. Although every criminal writ application is supposed to be reviewed by three judges, he was deputed to winnow out any that had been filed pro se and arrange for their automatic rejection. Thus were an estimated 2,500 appeals deep-sixed without any judicial consideration whatsoever. Now, facing public embarassment and possible ethical violations, the Louisiana Supreme Court has stepped in and asked…get this…the same appellate court to look at the appeals again. Note that they did not ask the Court to conduct an investigation into this practice, but simply to consider those appeals that were so summarily denied. Because, if we placate the defendants with another cursory look at their appeals, we can sweep the ethical violations under the carpet. At first this whole thing seemed rather odd to me. After all, how is this even possible? Here’s how: Edward Dufresne, Chief Judge of the Fifth Circuit, took charge of pro se appeals in 1994. He then had Peterson prepare rulings denying writs for all of them and signed off “without so much as a glance,” according to the suicide note. “No judge ever saw the writ application before the ruling was prepared by me,” Peterson wrote in a second suicide note to the Judiciary Commission. The rulings also bore the names, though not the signatures, of judges Marion Edwards and Wally Rothschild. Neither Edwards nor Rothschild had any clue as to what was in the applications, or even knew that they had been filed, according to Peterson. So you’ve got one complicit judge and maybe three. But there are 5 more on that court. What of them? Are we to really believe that these 5 (or 7) other judges never once questioned the stark absence of pro-se appeals? Particularly in Louisiana, whose system has the following characteristics: About 90 percent of criminal defendants in Louisiana are indigent. Louisiana only provides post-conviction legal aid in death penalty cases. Everyone else must either hire a lawyer, find a lawyer to handle their case pro bono, or handle the appeal themselves. Obviously, most have no choice but to opt for the latter. One criminal defense lawyer in Louisiana told me that if you’re convicted of murder in Louisiana and you’re innocent, you’re actually better off getting the death penalty. At least then you’ll get a team of lawyers, investigators, and experts to help with your appeal. This from a state whose criminal justice system was already crumbling. It’s hard to believe that people such as Judge Dufresne take an oath to uphold the law and to prove equal protection under it. Disbarment may be enough, but only barely. Justice delayed is no justice at all. THE SMOKING GUN LINK TO AMERICA’S JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN’S ! <a href="http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf" rel="nofollow">http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf</a> NAME OF PUBLICATION: PICAYUNE NEWSPAPER AUTHOR : MR. JAMES GILL TITLE OF ARTICLE: IN A SUICIDE NOTE, RELECTIONS OF GUILT DATE PUBLISHED: OCT 10 2008 LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A WWW LOBBY THAT SINGS OUT FOR MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS.WE CAN BE FOUND WITH ANY SEARCH ENGINE UNDER OUR NAME OR TELEPHONE NUMBER.(424-247-2013) ~WE ENJOY BRINGING THE GOOD LIFE TO ALL the little people of America ON THE WEB BECAUSE MOST POORER AMERICANS ARE LIVING THIRD WORLD LIFE~STYLES WITHOUT PROPER HEALTHCARE OR LEGAL CARE FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES ! WE ARE ALL VERY WELL AWARE THAT OUR U.S.WEALTHY ELITE BILLIONAIRES WHO CONTROL OUR U.S.CONGRESS THROUGH THEIR BIG $$ LOBBYISTS HAVE DECIDED THAT THE WORLD'S POOR SOMEHOW ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO ASSIST THEN THEIR OWN FELLOW AMERICANS. THIS NEW WORLD ORDER MENTALITY BY OUR AMERICAN BILLIONAIRE CABAL NEEDS CHANGE ... ~ DENYING OUR INNOCENT POOR THEIR POSSIBLE FREEDOM IN LOUISIANA & BEYOND NEEDS CHANGE PRESIDENT OBAMA ~ ]]>

<![CDATA[NBC, New York Times, CBS....unbiased?? Well, I guess you got me! All conservatives don't care if Americans suffer Are only against health care because we hate President Obama Are only interested in the millions from insurance companies (not the millions Dems get from lawyers; guess that's why no tort reform) and we are all evil They found us out guys, game over, guess we have to go to plan B.]]>

<![CDATA[At least you didn't resort to name calling this time...guess that's "progress" Why is it that liberals (the party of inclusion) think everyone has a right to speak their voice, unless it's goes against liberal opinion. Why am I a liar because I have a different point of view? Are you so arrogant to think that you know all the answers? You are correct; the health care bill has not passed. It hasn't happened. So when you state, "The facts are that the health care reform bill is not socialist, is not a government takeover of the health care industry, will not put private insurance companies out of business (unfortunately), will not result health care rationing, will not put bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions...." How can you be so sure? How many times has the government started with what seemed like a "good idea" only to see it grow out of control? Why do you put so much blind trust in big government?]]>

<![CDATA[Be aware that you are going back and forth with the resident useful idiot enemy of patriotic Americans known as turdland and other names. turdland is an attention whore and thinks his OPINIONS are facts. He is for everything that undermines a civilized society and ordered liberty needed for limited government which our Founders so brilliantly envisioned. Don't waste too much time with him--string him along for awhile for some entertainment that many of us here enjoy--but in the end you'll find (like another poster has said) he's just a worthless POS.]]>

<![CDATA[Any polls by Rasmussen are biased, inaccurate, and slanted. I reject any poll they've ever done. Let's use more accurate polls. NBC/Wallstreet Journal did a poll that says 76% of Americans want health care reform and they want it with a public option. New York Times/CBS did a poll that says 59% of Americans say the government should provide national health insurance (Single-Payer), including 49% who say such insurance should cover all medical problems. Only 32% think that insurance should be left to private enterprise. Those polls are as good or better than yours and none of them proves shit. The truth is the only people who oppose health care reform being passed are those have something to gain by opposing it like the Republican politicians who take millions from health insurance and pharmaceutical companies, those who hate President Obama more than they love America and don't care if Americans suffer as long as they think the President is harmed by their opposition, or those who are stupid or gullible enough to believe the outright lies and propaganda being spread by these dishonest scumbags like you for instance. Anyone who actually understands health care reform and cares about America supports health care reform.]]>

<![CDATA["Except for....it's not wildly unpopular unless you're taking a poll of teabaggers. A full two-thirds of Americans WANT this bill to pass and health care reform would not cost a sixth of the American economy or even come close to 1/3 of our military spending which exceeds that of every other nation on earth combined. The only people who oppose the health care reform bill are those too stupid to understand it or so gullible they believe the lies of morons like you so they are frightened of it." 57% Predict Health Care Plan Will Hurt The Economy Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters say the health care reform plan now working its way through Congress will hurt the U.S. economy. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 25% think the plan will help the economy. But only seven percent (7%) say it will have no impact. Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure. Two-out-of-three voters (66%) also believe the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats is likely to increase the federal deficit. That’s up six points from late November and comparable to findings just after the contentious August congressional recess. Ten percent (10%) say the plan is more likely to reduce the deficit and 14% say it will have no impact on the deficit. 53% Remain Opposed to Health Care Plan As President Obama and his congressional allies search for a way to pass their proposed health care plan, most voters remain opposed to the legislative effort. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% favor the plan while 53% are opposed. These figures include just 20% who Strongly Favor the plan and 41% who are Strongly Opposed. <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Have you ever heard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? No? Well, you see, that's the problem. Not enough people even know they have those basic rights because nobody had ever told them. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created by the United Nations in 1948. Today there are 192 countries that are part of the United Nations. In theory, every member nation has agreed to follow this Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In practice, they don't. The result is human misery across the entire globe, in terms of millions of people unjustly treated by the governments which are supposed to protect them. Go to www.youthforhumanrights.org. Find out all about it. Tell your kids. Tell your neighbors. Tell your schools. Tell everybody. If we all take responsibility for enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we will have a happier and saner planet. ]]>

<![CDATA[fyi.....midterm elections = 2010. So your hysterical rant about 2012 is meaningless along with all your other ridiculous and unproven accusations....funny how you have no facts to back anything up....guess I shouldn't be surprised. Just proves what I posted earlier: (As I've read posts, I have come to realize one thing--Libs don't know how to argue. I don't mean that they don't know how to USE ALL CAPITAL LETTERS and sling around phrases like "your'e a Nazzi!" and "no YOU'RE a Nazi, and learjn to splell, idiot". What I mean is that people have forgotten (or never knew) how to form a logical, amiable thread of conversation that informs and ties back to the idea or solution they are proposing or debating.)]]>

<![CDATA[Where are the anti war "movie stars" - (Hollywood hypocrites!) .........The men are with their boy friends, the girls are with their girl friends.]]>

<![CDATA[L.A. $600 MILLION DEFICITS - $600 MILLION WELFARE ILLEGALS! my friend - your fiq. is all wrong, you say 600 mil - sorry to differ but more then that just in the schools. five dollars per student just for lunch, what kind of bull-shit is that - when i went to school, in my bag a baloney sand w/lettuce and tomato. my friends kid said in his school theirs kids that only speak spanish. that means they have to have spanish teachers, if not la raza will get mad. i could go on and on but some of these libs ]]>

<![CDATA[By SHAWN POGATCHNIK, Associated Press Writer Shawn Pogatchnik, Associated Press Writer – 49 mins ago DUBLIN – It often starts as a voice in the wilderness, but can swell into an entire nation's demand for truth. From Ireland to Germany, Europe's many victims of child abuse in the Roman Catholic church are finally breaking social taboos and confronting the clergy to face its demons. Ireland was the first in Europe to confront the church's worldwide custom of shielding pedophile priests from the law and public scandal. Now that legacy of suppressed childhood horror is being confronted in other parts of the Continent — nowhere more poignantly than in Germany, the homeland of Pope Benedict XVI. The recent spread of claims into the Netherlands, Austria and Italy has analysts and churchmen wondering how deep the scandal runs, which nation will be touched next, and whether a tide of lawsuits will force European dioceses to declare bankruptcy like their American cousins. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOOK AT SO CALLED CHURCH'S LIKE SCIENTOLOGY. SHOULD THEY BE TAX EXEMPT, EVERYONE KNOWS THEY ARE NOT A CHURCH. AT LEAST THE CATHOLICS, JEWS, MORMONS, ETC HAVE CHARITIES BUT SCIENTOLOGY DOES NOT HAVE ONE. BETTER "WE KEEP" THE BILLIONS THEY SAVE BECAUSE OF NOT PAYING TAX'S. ------------------------ IF YOU AGREE CALL YOUR REP'S AND DEMAND NO MORE BULL-SHIT WITH YOUR POLITICS..========= -------------------]]>

<![CDATA[Why you should fight everything the President tries to do? We the American people don't want want change! we like things the way they are. And if Bush was President, this country would be better off! I'm a Republican traditionalist, and the white man should run this country! Our President now is what you call a socialist. I believe thats bad, thats what they're saying on fox news, so i guess it's true. We the American people don't want change. We want things the same! If this country is going to be fixed, it's going to be fix by a white man! Not a half nigger! It's better that why. We do not need health care! It's fine! The best in the world! I really can't understand why every one doesn't have it! Lets get it together, I'm getting tired of posting all day. AND DON'T FLAGG ALL MY POSTS WITH FACTS YOU DEMS! ]]>

<![CDATA[MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com OBAMA’S SELLOUTS: first for he bankster donors. Didn’t he spend his first year servicing them, and did it as limp as they demanded! No-strings, and anything the bankster wrote up! Just like the OBAMA NO BANKSTER REGULATION. Now, even with the staggering unemployment, Mexican welfare and gang crimes in all state, OBAMA is selling us out to LA RAZA for more staggeringly expensive “cheap” Mexican labor. Obama know who he works for, and they all live on WALL STREET! OBAMA IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN ACCELERATED VERSION OF THE 20 YEARS OF CORPORATE RAPE AND PILLAGE of BUSH, HILLARY, BILLARY, BUSH and their combined war profiteer, DIANNE FEINSTEIN! You thought this nation’s meltdown was an act of nature??? Obama’s policies have encouraged these attacks on public schools. The administration and the Democratic-led Congress have refused to provide emergency funds to enable states and localities to close huge budget deficits resulting from rising unemployment and falling tax revenues, even as they handed over trillions in taxpayer dollars to bail out the banks. WSWS.org * Wsws.org – get on their free no ads newsmail * Obama spearheads nationwide assault on public schools By Kate Randall 13 March 2010 The Obama administration is spearheading an unprecedented assault on public education in the US. The White House and Education Secretary Arne Duncan are promoting a nationwide wave of school closures, teacher and staff layoffs, attacks on teachers’ wages and conditions, and an expansion of privately run charter schools—all in the guise of education “reform.” This agenda is being carried out in school districts across the country over the angry opposition of students, parents and teachers. At a highly-charged meeting packed with parents and teachers on Wednesday in Kansas City, Missouri, the district’s school board voted to endorse a plan by the superintendent to shut down 28 of the city’s 61 schools and to cut 700 of 3,000 jobs, including 285 teachers’ jobs. Enrollment in Kansas City Schools has eroded in large part through the siphoning off of students by charter and private schools. Kansas City, with a population of 480,000, presently has about the same number of public school students, 17,000, as were enrolled in 1890 when the city population was just over 132,000. This is down from a high of 77,000 students in 1964. In Detroit, a proposed plan by a coalition called “Excellent Schools Detroit” would shut down and sell off as many as 70 public schools and open up charter schools in their stead. Detroit Public Schools Emergency Financial Director Robert Bobb has endorsed the business-backed scheme. Bobb, who has overseen the closure of dozens of schools and a huge cut in Detroit teachers’ pay, has won warm praise from Obama and Education Secretary Duncan. The Detroit News on Thursday quoted Bobb as saying that he is “open to chartering DPS (Detroit Public School system) schools, selling buildings to charter school operators and turning schools over to charter operators.” In praise of the plan, Bobb told the News, “It has a very strong market-driven component to it.” LOS ANGELES PUTS OUT $600 MILLION IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, AND THAT’S ONLY PART OF WHAT THEY GET! In California, school districts across the state are handing out thousands of pink slips to teachers in advance of the March 15 deadline when all public school employees must be notified of potential layoffs. The Los Angeles Unified School District, which faces a $640 million budget gap, voted March 2 to send layoff notices to more than 5,200 employees, including teachers, support staff and management. On March 4 in Massachusetts, the state’s Department of Education released a list of 35 schools where the jobs and contracts of teachers are directly threatened by the Obama administration’s policy of closing down so-called “underperforming” schools. The Boston Public Schools responded by ordering teachers at six of these schools to reapply for their jobs. Cash-strapped school districts nationwide are grappling with growing budget shortfalls at both the local and state level. “NBC Nightly News” reported Thursday that school officials in at least 34 of the 50 states have carried out cuts. Sixty-six percent of school districts across the country have cut jobs this year, while 83 percent project cuts for the 2010-2011 academic year. Obama’s policies have encouraged these attacks on public schools. The administration and the Democratic-led Congress have refused to provide emergency funds to enable states and localities to close huge budget deficits resulting from rising unemployment and falling tax revenues, even as they handed over trillions in taxpayer dollars to bail out the banks. The White House is seeking to exploit the fiscal crisis to push through its anti-public education agenda, tying whatever federal funds are on offer to attacks on teachers’ jobs and pay, the closure of schools in working class communities, and the expansion of publicly subsidized but privately owned charter schools. Speaking before an audience of business executives at the US Chamber of Commerce March 1, the president welcomed the mass firing of teachers at a public high school in Rhode Island. Obama insisted that the 74 teachers and 19 other school employees at Central Falls High School, a “failing school,” had to be held “accountable.” As with Ronald Reagan’s mass firing of the PATCO air traffic controllers in 1981, the White House endorsement of the Central Falls firings is a signal to state and local authorities across the country to demand that teachers accept lower pay, fewer benefits and longer hours, or face the loss of their jobs. Teachers are being scape-goated for an education crisis for which they bear no responsibility. The media has fallen into line. The editorial in Thursday’s USA Today was headlined, “Unions protect bad teachers, harming kids’ education.” The cover story of the latest edition of Newsweek is entitled “Why We Must Fire Bad Teachers.” Under Obama’s “Race to the Top” program, states are being forced to compete for $4.3 billion in federal stimulus funds. States that prohibit merit pay or the use of test scores in teacher evaluations are ineligible for funds. Those opening up more charter schools with new, lower-paid teachers will be rewarded. Obama’s budget for 2011 contains sweeping changes in funding for primary and secondary education, radically altering the guidelines for the distribution of federal funds to schools with high concentrations of low-income students. A significant proportion of so-called Title I funds would be distributed to poorer districts—not on the basis of economic need, but according to their “performance.” The unstated agenda behind these moves is nothing less than the dismantling of the public school system as it has been known in the US. It is to be replaced by a largely privatized system more directly based on social class and geared more closely to the profit interests of big business. A Democratic administration that came to power by appealing—cynically and dishonestly—to popular hostility to war and the Bush administration’s pro-business policies, has become the vehicle for carrying out the type of radical assault on public education that had long been advocated by the Republican right. Obama’s African-American background was utilized to mask his right-wing policies, lulling working class and young voters into believing he would be more sympathetic to their needs. In this mass deception, the liberal and phony “left” advocates of identity politics played a critical role. The far-reaching and reactionary character of the administration’s education policy is summed up by the vocal support being given by the former Republican House Speaker, Newt Gingrich. A supporter of school privatization and long-time opponent of government social programs, Gingrich has been paired with Education Secretary Duncan and Al Sharpton to promote Obama’s “Race to the Top” program. A broad consensus has emerged within the ruling elite in support of the drive to gut the public school system, with virtually the entire liberal Democratic Party establishment on board. This is driven, in part, by the financial crisis and the bankrupting of government at every level as a consequence of the bailout of Wall Street. More fundamentally, it is the outcome three solid decades of social and political reaction, during which public education has been starved of funds and private charter and for-profit schools have been encouraged. The democratic and egalitarian conceptions historically associated with public education have become anathema to a ruling elite that presides over staggering and ever-growing levels of social inequality. CORPORATE AMERICAN, FRONTED BY THE U. S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE PUSHES FOR OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY TO ASSURE THERE IS A STEADY FLOW OF HEAVY BREEDING MEXICANS HOPING OUR BORDERS AND INTO OUR JOBS. THE MEXICAN INVASION DEPRESSES WAGES FOR LEGALS $300 - $400 PER YEAR! THAT’S WHAT’S ALL ABOUT! MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO LA RAZA “THE RACE” THE MEXICAN FASCIST POLITICAL PARTY, AND FASTEST GROWING PARTY IN AMERICA! Corporate America has no interest in siphoning off a portion of its profits to pay for educating working class youth who will leave school to find only unskilled, low-paying jobs, or no jobs at all. Obama’s major innovation in adopting the anti-education program previously associated with the Republican right is the enlistment of the support and participation of the teachers’ unions. He chose Duncan as his education secretary for precisely that purpose. As CEO of the Chicago Public Schools, Duncan made his name by getting the teachers’ union to sign onto his program of closing public schools and setting up new charter schools. The unions have joined the assault on public education and their own rank-and-file members in return for assurances that the inflated salaries and perks of the union executives will be preserved. The teachers’ unions have done, and will do, nothing to defend teachers from layoffs, arbitrary firings and other attacks on their jobs and working conditions. Nor will they fight against school closures or defend the right of students to decent, quality education. The drive to destroy public education must be stopped! The Socialist Equality Party proposes a united fight by teachers, students, parents and working people as a whole for the following demands: • Stop all school closures and teacher layoffs. Rehire all laid-off teachers and staff! • No charter schools. Reintegrate existing charter schools into a public education system democratically controlled by teachers, parents and the working population! • Allocate trillions to rebuild the schools, hire new teachers, reduce class sizes and provide the most modern facilities to ensure quality education for all, from kindergarten through college! Neither the Obama administration nor either of the two big business parties will carry out these demands. An independent mass political movement of working people must be built to fight for such a program. This requires a new political strategy and perspective, based on a socialist program. The banks and major corporations must be nationalized under workers’ control to provide the resources to fund public education and other vital social programs. A radical restructuring of the tax system is required to redistribute the wealth from the top layers of society to the masses of working people. The defense of education must be linked to the fight for health care, housing and other basic social needs. The colonial wars that are consuming hundreds of billions of dollars and costing the lives of millions of people in the Middle East and Central Asia must be ended, and all US and foreign troops removed from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Socialist Equality Party, its youth movement, the International Students for Social Equality, and the World Socialist Web Site are holding an Emergency Conference on the Social Crisis and War in Detroit on April 17 and 18 to discuss a socialist program to defend the working class and a strategy for building a mass political movement in the US and internationally to fight for it. All those looking for the means to fight school closings and defend public education should make plans to attend. For further information and to register for the conference, click here. * FROM: JUDICIALWATCH. Org… get on their emails SANCTUARY COUNTY LOS ANGELES SPENDS $600 MILLION ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS County Spends $600 Mil On Welfare For Illegal Immigrants Last Updated: Thu, 03/11/2010 - 3:14pm For the second consecutive year taxpayers in a single U.S. county will dish out more than half a billion dollars just to cover the welfare and food-stamp costs of illegal immigrants. Los Angeles County, the nation’s most populous, may be in the midst of a dire financial crisis but somehow there are plenty of funds for illegal aliens. In January alone, anchor babies born to the county’s illegal immigrants collected more than $50 million in welfare benefits. At that rate the cash-strapped county will pay around $600 million this year to provide illegal aliens’ offspring with food stamps and other welfare perks. THE EXORBITANT FIGURE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ENORMOUS COST OF EDUCATING, MEDICALLY TREATING, OR INCARCERATING ILLEGALS ALIENS. THIS COSTS THE COUNTY AN ADDITIONAL ONE BILLION DOLLARS. The exorbitant figure, revealed this week by a county supervisor, doesn’t even include the enormous cost of educating, medically treating or incarcerating illegal aliens in the sprawling county of about 10 million residents. Los Angeles County annually spends more than $1 billion for those combined services, including $500 million for healthcare and $350 million for public safety. About a quarter of the county’s welfare and food stamp issuances go to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their anchor babies, according to the figures from the county’s Department of Social Services. In 2009 the tab ran $570 million and this year’s figure is expected to increase by several million dollars. Illegal immigration continues to have a “catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” the veteran county supervisor (Michael Antonovich) who revealed the information has said. The former fifth-grade history teacher has repeatedly come under fire from his liberal counterparts for publicizing statistics that confirm the devastation illegal immigration has had on the region. Antonovich, who has served on the board for nearly three decades, represents a portion of the county that is roughly twice the size of Rhode Island and has about 2 million residents. His district is simply a snippet of a larger crisis. Nationwide, Americans pay around $22 billion annually to provide illegal immigrants with welfare benefits that include food assistance programs such as free school lunches in public schools, food stamps and a nutritional program (known as WIC) for low-income women and their children. Tens of billions more are spent on other social services, medical care, public education and legal costs such as incarceration and public defenders. ]]>

<![CDATA[Where are all the liberal anti-war protesters marching in the street? War still going on in Iraq and Afganistan, no one cares anymore? At the Oscars not a word about Obamas two war's, how come? A liberal gets elected, protest stop. The protests had nothing to do with concern for the troops or world peace and everything to do with politics. Pathetic! Matt Damon, Tina Fey, Demi Moore, Susan Sarandon, Michael Moore, Tom Hanks, you are all bullshit, just like your fraud of a president that you pushed on America! ]]>

<![CDATA[Dick Morris: Crist Likely to Quit Fla. Senate Primary Thursday, 11 Mar 2010 04:54 PM Veteran political analyst and author Dick Morris tells Newsmax that Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is so far behind his rival for the Republican nomination for the Senate that he will drop out of the race before election day. Morris also says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is engaged in “hand-to-hand combat” with House Democrats to win support for what Morris calls a “utopian socialized medicine scheme.” A frequent Newsmax contributor and Fox News Channel commentator, political consultant Morris has handled the winning campaigns of more than 30 senators and governors. In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, he notes that former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio now leads Gov. Crist by more than 30 percentage points, according to a recent poll. Asked if Rubio will win the GOP nomination and can he win the general election, Morris responds: “Yes and yes. I also think Crist is going to pull out because he can’t survive a 30-point defeat and still serve as governor. For Crist “to lose a Republican primary, when he’s the sitting Republican governor, by two to one or more would effectively disenfranchise him as governor. It would be tantamount to making him a lame duck. “He could run for re-election, but if he can’t win even a decent vote share in his own party’s primary, I don’t think he can stay on as governor. “And hats off to Rubio for running a heck of a campaign. Absolutely I think he’s going to walk in in November.” Morris says he doesn’t believe Speaker Pelosi has the votes right now to pass President Obama’s healthcare reform plan, and her struggle to win votes “is hand-to-hand combat, congressional district by district. It really amounts to the people against Pelosi because each congressman is being pressured by Pelosi but being pressured the other way by the people of his district.” A Rasmussen poll reveals that 78 percent of Americans believe it is at least somewhat likely that taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of healthcare reform. Whether constituents can put enough pressure on members of Congress to stop Obamacare “depends on the people who are watching this video,” Morris declares. “You need to go on dickmorris.com. There’s a list of 30 congressmen who could go either way, all of whom voted yes last time. I have their district numbers and their Washington numbers. Get on the phone and call them, then go to the left side of the site, click on the League of American Voters and give us money to run ads in their districts pressuring them.” The League is now on the air with ads in 18 of the 30 congressional districts and is shooting ads for the remaining 12. When the ads are running in all 30 districts, “this is going to be a major, major offensive,” says Morris, whose latest book is "Catastrophe: How Obama, Congress, and the Special Interests Are Transforming a Slump into a Crash, Freedom Into Socialism, and a Disaster into a Catastrophe . . . and How to Fight Back." “What we’re trying to do is drill down to each of these House districts, and run ads in those districts putting the congressman on the spot and putting his number on the screen. I think this is having a tremendous effect.” Morris agrees that Obama and many Democrats are “hypocritical” in continually vilifying health insurance companies, which stand to profit tremendously from Obamacare by gaining 30 million new customers when the uninsured have to be covered. “Obama is being completely disingenuous in attacking the insurance companies,” Morris says. “All of us agree that if a stand-alone bill came before the United States Congress that required insurance companies to cover people with preexisting conditions, banned them from dropping people or raising their rates when they become sick, prohibited lifetime caps, and permitted interstate competition, it would pass overwhelmingly. I would support that bill in a heartbeat. “So by identifying three of those four provisions — he’s not for the interstate stuff — as being essential to his bill, he’s being disingenuous. Everybody’s for that. It’s the rest of the utopian socialized medicine scheme in his bill that we all object to.” New York Rep. Eric Massa, facing a harassment complaint from a male staffer, resigned from the House on March 8. He was one of 39 Democrats who voted against an earlier version of the healthcare bill, and Morris believes he was pressured by leading Democrats into stepping down quickly so he wouldn’t be able to cast another no vote against healthcare reform. Morris also commented about President Obama’s waning support among voters under age 30 — 70 percent supported Obama in the 2008 election but now only 54 percent give him a favorable rating. “There are those of us who oppose the healthcare bill because of the cuts, there are those who oppose it because of the deficit. But then there are a whole group of Democrats who say this is the wrong issue. We want him to focus on jobs and the economy, not on some utopian healthcare scheme. “I think that’s what is undermining him among young people.” ]]>

<![CDATA[GOV'T WORKERS FEEL NO ECONOMIC PAIN The recession and the ongoing jobless recovery devastated much of the private-sector workforce last year, sending unemployment soaring, but government workers emerged essentially unscathed, according to data released Wednesday by the Labor Department. Meanwhile, the compensation for state and local government employees continued to easily outdistance the wages and benefits for workers in private business, a separate Labor Department report showed: Private-industry employers spent an average of $27.42 per hour worked for total employee compensation in December, while total compensation costs for state and local government workers averaged $39.60 per hour. The average government wage and salary per hour of $26.11 was 35 percent higher than the average wage and salary of $19.41 per hour in the private sector. But the percentage difference in benefits was much higher; benefits for state and local workers averaged $13.49 per hour, nearly 70 percent higher than the $8 per hour in benefits paid by private businesses. Paul Booth, executive assistant to the president at the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), attributed the pay difference to a changing government workforce that has increased its proportion of higher-skilled workers during the past 15 to 20 years. Small-government advocates see it differently. Compensation for government workers "is a gigantic problem" that will only get worse in the future, says Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute: The defined-benefit pension plans for state and local workers and their post-retirement health care costs do not include the extent to which those benefits are underfunded or overpromised. The cost of today's benefits for government employees ($13.49 per hour) assumes that these retirement benefits are fully funded, however, the benefits are underfunded by an estimated $3 trillion. Benefit costs eventually will soar, and taxpayers will be required to pay the difference between available resources and the overpromised benefits as government workers of the baby boom generation, who start to turn 65 next year, begin to retire en masse. Also, government workers also have the rare privilege of being able to retire at age 55. Source: David M. Dickson, "'Gov't workers feel no economic pain,"' Washington Times, March 11, 2010. For text: <a href="http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/11/government-workers-feel-no-pain/" rel="nofollow">http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/11/government-workers-feel-no-pain/</a> For more on Government Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=33" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=33</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[DETROIT LOOKS AT DOWNSIZING TO SAVE CITY Detroit, the very symbol of American industrial might for most of the 20th century, is drawing up a radical renewal plan that calls for turning large swaths of this now-blighted, rusted-out city back into the fields and farmland that existed before the automobile, says the Associated Press (AP). Operating on a scale never before attempted in this country, the city would demolish houses in some of the most desolate sections of Detroit and move residents into stronger neighborhoods. Roughly a quarter of the 139-square-mile city could go from urban to semi-rural, says the AP. Mayor Dave Bing, who took office last year, is expected to unveil some details in his state-of-the-city address this month: Politically explosive decisions must be made about which neighborhoods should be bulldozed and which improved. Hundreds of millions of federal dollars will be needed to buy land, raze buildings and relocate residents, since this financially desperate city does not have the means to do it on its own. It isn't known how many people in the mostly black, blue collar city might be uprooted, but it could be thousands; some won't go willingly. For much of the 20th century, Detroit was an industrial powerhouse, the city that put the nation on wheels, says the AP: Now, a city of nearly two million in the 1950s has declined to less than half that number. On some blocks, only one or two occupied houses remain, surrounded by trash-strewn lots and vacant, burned-out homes. Scavengers have stripped anything of value from empty buildings. According to one recent estimate, Detroit has 33,500 empty houses and 91,000 vacant residential lots. Faced with a $300 million budget deficit and a dwindling tax base, Mayor Bing says the city can't continue to pay for police patrols, fire protection and other services for all areas: The current plan would demolish about 10,000 houses and empty buildings in three years, and pump new investment into stronger neighborhoods. In the neighborhoods that would be cleared, the city would offer to relocate residents or buy them out. The city could use tax foreclosure to claim abandoned property and invoke eminent domain for those who refuse to leave, much as cities now do for freeway projects. Source: David Runk, "'Detroit looks at downsizing to save city,"' Associated Press/Washington Times, March 9, 2010. For text: <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/09/detroit-looks-at-downsizing-to-save-city/" rel="nofollow">http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/09/detroit-looks-at-downsizing-to-save-city/</a> For more on State and Local Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=40" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=40</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Federal Spending & Budget Issues THE NATIONAL DEBT: DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOU NOW OWE? President Obama announced his 2011 Budget which is $3.834 trillion dollars with a projected deficit of $1.267 trillion or 8.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). As of Feb. 7, our total national debt was $12,348,804,540,946.54 or $12.35 trillion which is larger than the economies of China, the United Kingdom and Australia combined, says Don C. Brunell, President of the Association of Washington Businesses. The national debt is growing with the spending spree in Washington, D.C. According to the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget: Our national debt will grow an additional $9 trillion over the next decade, to more than $20 trillion. During that time, the United States will accumulate $2.5 billion in new debt each and every day. That's $1.72 million per minute, for the next ten years. According to the Department of the Treasury: Foreign holders of our national debt are owed a combined total of about $3.3 trillion. The top 10 countries and entities holding U.S. debt are: China, Japan, the United Kingdom, Oil Exporters, Caribbean Banking Centers, Brazil, Russia, Luxembourg, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Our debt to China is approximately $776.4 billion, having grown more than $240 billion in the last year; that is more than $10,000 in debt for the average American working family -- just to China. The estimated population of the United States is 307,795,997 so each citizen's share of this debt is $40,146.02. The National Debt has continued to increase and that is before Congress tacks on trillions for health care, cap and trade, new federal stimulus programs, and other yet to be identified spending programs, says Brunell. Part of the way President Obama plans to pay for his new round of spending is to eliminate the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts families making more than $250,000 per year which impacts a ton of family-owned, small businesses which are the backbone of our economy and nation, says Brunell. Source: Don C. Brunell, "The National Debt: Do You Know How Much You Now Owe?" Olympia Business Watch/Association of Washington Businesses, February 7, 2010. For text: <a href="http://www.olympiabusinesswatch.com/2010/02/the-national-debt-do-you-know-how-much-you-now-owe.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.olympiabusinesswatch.com/2010/02/the-national-debt-do-you-know-how-much-you-now-owe.html</a> For more on Federal Spending & Budget Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=25" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=25</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[With Absolute Power, Team Obama Grows Stupid By Michael Barone How could such smart people do so many stupid things? That question, or variations on it, is being asked in Washington and around the country about the Obama administration. The same people who directed the campaign that defeated Hillary Clinton and routed John McCain, a campaign that raised far more money and attracted far more volunteers than any before it, have within a year come up with a legislative program that is crashing in ruins and that, to judge from recent polls, has left the Democratic Party weaker than I have seen it in almost 50 years of closely following politics. The 2008 campaign was an impressive achievement. So, in a negative way, is the 2009 legislative program that has left the Democrats in such woeful shape in 2010. Some in Washington say that the problem is that Barack Obama has chosen to rely on his campaign staff rather than the wise old heads in Washington. But Obama and his team has had the benefit of advice from those wise old heads and from the smartest political strategist the Democratic Party has produced in the past half-century, Bill Clinton. A truly wise Washington analyst, National Journal's Jonathan Rauch, says the problem is one-party government. Presidents lead better, he argues, when they are constrained by the need to get bipartisan support. There's something to that. Obama's three predecessors all had bipartisan initiatives: the 1990 tax package for George Bush 41, NAFTA approval for Clinton, the 2001 education bill and the 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit for George Bush 43. Obama has had no bipartisan initiatives of his own. The fact that Democrats, from last July until last week, had a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to go along with Nancy Pelosi's strong majority in the House seems to have tempted Team Obama to go the all-Democratic route on health care, cap-and-trade and fiscal policy. But even strong temptations should sometimes be resisted. I think the problem is more basic and helps to explain why the people who put together a successful campaign have not, so far at least, provided successful governance. Obama campaigned as someone who would rise above partisan divisions. He first attracted national attention in 2004, when our politics was a kind of culture war, by stressing what red state America and blue state America had in common. He campaigned in a similar vein in 2007 and 2008. But when he came to office in 2009, the cultural issues that had occupied so much of the political landscape for a dozen years had been eclipsed in importance by the financial crisis and the deepening recession. So Obama was faced with a fundamental choice. He could either chart a bipartisan course in response to the economic emergency, or he could try to expand government to Western European magnitude as Democratic congressional leaders, elected for years in monopartisan districts, had long wished to do. The former community organizer and Chicago pol chose the latter course. To the surprise of many who watched previous presidents present specific administration policies to Congress, he allowed Democratic leaders to design the stimulus package they rushed into law in six weeks. One-third of the money went to state and local governments -- an obvious payoff to the public employee unions that contributed so much money to Democrats -- and much of it went to permanently increase the baseline spending of discretionary programs, a longtime goal of Democratic congressional leaders. Federal spending was raised from about 20 percent to about 24 percent of gross domestic product, putting the U.S. on a trajectory to double the national debt as a percentage of GDP in less than 10 years. Team Obama overestimated the stimulative effect of the stimulus package and underestimated the strength of the spontaneous tea party movement that flared up in protest of this expansion of government. They underestimated as well the opposition to expanding government control over health care and, through the cap-and-trade bill, to the energy sector. And the disgust over conspicuous vote-buying on health care -- the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Labor Loophole. Team Obama failed to realize they were no longer running in Chicago or in the Democratic primaries or facing an electorate fed up with Republicans. And, more important, they failed to realize that vastly expanding government goes deeply against the American grain -- and against the basic appeal of their successful campaign. --- Michael Barone is senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner. ]]>

<![CDATA[ Fixing Seasons of California Discontent By Stu Woo The prospect of more California-statehouse dysfunction this year is adding momentum to two efforts to overhaul California's budget process—including one that could rewrite much of the state's constitution. California legislators are heading this month into what promises to be another season of bickering over the state's big budget shortfall for the current fiscal year, ending June 30, and the next. Last year, they passed two austere budgets after impasses that forced California to delay payments and issue IOUs to creditors. Credit agencies cut the state's rating to the lowest in the nation, and the California statehouse became the butt of jokes nationwide. Two groups are pushing ballot initiatives they say would purge that chaos from Sacramento's budget process. A bipartisan group, California Forward, is pushing a reform to let legislators pass budgets by a simple majority instead of the current two-thirds threshold. Repair California, which is affiliated with a pro-business group, is gathering support to hold a constitutional convention to rewrite state laws. Such a convention could alter the budget process and other facets of governance in California. The recession has pinched state budgets across the nation, prompting legislatures to enact tax increases and spending cuts. California has an especially tough time solving its fiscal woes because it is one of only three states that require at least two-thirds of its state legislators to approve a spending plan. That means budget negotiations usually stall as Democrats, who make up 64% of California's legislature, struggle to win Republican votes. Prior efforts to fix California's budget process have failed. "The odds are long" for both groups, says Larry Gerston, a political scientist at San Jose State University. California ballot initiatives are tough to pass against well-funded opposition, and conservative groups say they are lining up against the measures. Still, the groups contend that extreme voter discontent makes this time different. A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonpartisan think tank, shows that 83% of likely voters believe the state's budget situation is a big problem. "People are much angrier about California government than they've ever been in recorded polling history, and because there's a critical mass of reform measures on the ballot, they're less likely to get lost in the shuffle," said Thad Kousser, a political-science professor at Stanford University's Bill Lane Center. California Forward hopes to place a measure on the November ballot that would alter the budget process both for the state and local governments. It would let state legislators pass budgets by a simple majority, while maintaining the two-thirds vote requirement to raise taxes. The measure would also institute what is known as a pay-as-you-go system, in which lawmakers must identify funding sources for any new programs. "We just have to stop the madness of these IOUs being issued and these horrible budget delays," said Bob Hertzberg, a former Democratic speaker of the California Assembly who is co-chair of California Forward. "It sends a message...that California is dysfunctional." The local-government part of the proposal would make it easier for municipalities to raise sales taxes, by one percentage point, to fund education and other services. It would also prohibit the state from tapping the coffers of local governments during budget emergencies, as it did last year. Repair California proposes measures to organize a constitutional convention for 2011 to discuss altering the state's governing efficiency and structure, electoral system and budget process. The resulting proposals would be bundled into a single initiative for a statewide election in 2012. Statehouse Republicans will fight California Forward's initiatives, said Tony Strickland, the state Senate's Republican assistant minority leader. If the budget-approval threshold is lowered, then Republicans would lose their outsized influence in the statehouse because Democrats could pass budgets without GOP votes. The California "Central valley, the farmers, agriculture"—constituencies typically represented by Republicans—"will lose their voices," Mr. Strickland said. The antitax Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association will oppose any effort that would ease local governments' ability to raise taxes, said Jon Coupal, the group's president. He and Mr. Strickland said they will also oppose Repair California's constitutional convention because it could result in a repeal of Proposition 13, a 32-year-old law that caps property-tax rates. John Grubb, Repair California's campaign director, acknowledged the challenges, but said there is now a window of opportunity for major reform. "All the easy answers have already been exhausted,'' he said. ]]>

<![CDATA[ MILWAUKEE'S VOUCHER GRADUATES President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget calls for a 9 percent increase in federal education spending, and he has famously said that the money should go to "what works" in education. So he ought to take another look at Milwaukee, where the nation's oldest and largest publicly funded school voucher program is showing academic gains, says the Wall Street Journal. A report released last week by School Choice Wisconsin, an advocacy group, finds that between 2003 and 2008, students in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program had a significantly higher graduation rate than students in Milwaukee Public Schools: In 2008, the graduation rate for voucher students was 77 percent, versus 65 percent for the non-voucher students. This is despite the fact that non-voucher students receives $14,000 per pupil in taxpayer support, or more than double the $6,400 per pupil that voucher students receive in public funding. The Milwaukee voucher program serves more than 21,000 children in 111 private schools, so nearly 20 percent more graduates mean a lot fewer kids destined for failure without the credential of a high school diploma. The finding is all the more significant because students who receive vouchers must, by law, come from low-income families, while their counterparts in public schools come from a broader range of economic backgrounds, says the Journal. Vouchers are of course taboo among most Democrats, and President Obama has done nothing to stop Congress from killing the small but successful voucher program for poor families in Washington, D.C. The Milwaukee program has survived for 20 years despite ferocious political opposition, and it would have died long ago if parents didn't believe their children were better off for it, says the Journal. Source: Editorial, "Milwaukee's Voucher Graduates," Wall Street Journal, February 8, 2010. For text: <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704022804575041383293960178.html" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704022804575041383293960178.html</a> For more on Education Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=27" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=27</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[____Welfare -- 23 million added to immigrant households each decade 1/2 immigrant households use welfare -- 23 million added to immigrant households each decade ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT AND THE FEDERAL DEBT? NumbersUSA doesn't take a stand on whether government should be smaller or bigger. But we are amazed at the national Republican leaders who criticize Pres. Obama for bloating government but then they do nothing to reduce immigration. In fact, we have learned that GOP leaders in Washington are telling their colleagues that they don't want Congress to do anything about immigration during this election year. They don't want to deal with immigration even though government data shows that ONE-HALF of all immigrant households with kids use the welfare system -- while federal immigration policy adds 23 million people to those households every decade! ACTION: If at least one of your 3 Members of Congress is a Republican: You should find a fax to send them here telling them how disgusted you are that Republican leaders don't want to reduce immigration and its gigantic cost to government. ACTION: If you have taken our Interests Survey and indicated you are an Independent or Swing Voter, you should find two faxes to send: (1) Fax to Republican National Chairman Michael Steele, telling him that he is wrong to tell Congress not to try to fix immigration this year because most Independent voters are holding their votes for politicians who will reduce deficits by getting rid of unnecessary costs like immigration. (2) Fax to Republican leaders of the Senate and House, and give them the same message you are giving Steele. ACTION: If your U.S. Representative is one of the few good guys and gals who is actually working to reduce immigration this year, you will find a fax here to cheer them on. ACTION: If all of your Members of Congress are Democrats: Look on your customized Action Board for other faxes that need sending. Friends, it appears that national Republican leaders believe they can win back Congress by just letting the Democrats mess up while the Republicans do nothing to try to help protect Americans from the burdens of radically high immigration levels. It is up to all of us to let them know that this behavior is not acceptable and will not be rewarded. READ MY BLOG FOR DETAILS ON MASSIVE WELFARE DRAIN OF LEGAL & ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION I hope you will click for a quick read of my blog explaining this issue and what congressional leaders are ignoring. Here are a few of my points: "For those of you whose primary political interest is stopping the growth of government or even shrinking it, you have to contend with national leaders who say they agree with you but who refuse to deal with immigration. They say immigration is a "social" issue that isn't related to government spending and deficit issues. They couldn't be more wrong." "With one-half of immigrant households with kids being poor enough to use the federal, state and local welfare systems, is there anybody blind enough to think that adding 2.3 million people a year to immigrant households is not driving huge increases in government?" "Republican leaders may say they want to shrink Big Government, but not if it gets in the way of pleasing their cheap-labor corporate donors and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce." "The intent of the Republican leaders is to ensure that 23 million people continue to be added to the heavily welfare-using immigrant households each decade. That is one form of bigger government that the Republican leaders love." YOU DON'T HAVE TO WANT SMALLER GOVERNMENT TO WANT LESS IMMIGRATION . . . . . . BUT YOU HAVE TO WANT LESS IMMIGRATION IF YOU ARE TO HAVE ANY HOPE OF SMALLER GOVERNMENT, P.S. Yes, our Washington-area NumbersUSA offices and staff homes have been encased in the blizzard of the last week. But I'm proud to tell you that our offices have been manned every day. And 100% of our staff have remained on the job throughout, even though the federal government, all schools and most non-profits and businesses have been closed. You don't send donations to pay us to take snow days off while the country daily deteriorates from the 6,300 people who are added to immigrant households EVERY DAY. We continually look for ways that your actions can make a difference. Thanks for all you do. ]]>

<![CDATA[ Obama lectures Americans on spending The President, without the slightest hint of irony, lectured the American people on how they should be spending their money. He apparently really thinks he knows how to stick to a budget better than you. Try not to LOL as you watch this clip of Obama’s lecture on spending and saving, and check out Glenn's reaction in the latest Beck Talks video blog. WATCH Restoring Honor Rally: Join Glenn at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 2010 for the Restoring Honor Rally. Get details about the event HERE. Why liberals stink at national security The First Lady has come out and declared the newest threat to our national security. Quick! Pull the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and start rounding up the little fatty kids who are trying to destroy America! Read the interesting thoughts from our First Lady . www.glennbeck.com ]]>

<![CDATA[OBAMA'S BUDGET SEEKS $2 TRILLION MORE IN SPENDING AND DEFICITS THAN LAST YEAR Last year, President Obama swept into office on a promise to confront tough choices -- and then released a budget proposing the largest debt-and-spending spree in American history. With Washington having committed itself to more government than its taxpayers could realistically afford, basic fiscal responsibility suggests that the President scale back his expensive proposals. Instead, this year's budget is even more fiscally irresponsible, says the Heritage Foundation. Over the 10 years in which both budgets overlap (FY 2010-2019), this year's budget would spend an additional $1.7 trillion and run up an additional $2 trillion in budget deficits. In fact, this year's proposal shows annual budget deficits as much as 49 percent larger than last year's proposal -- raising the debt by an additional 6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over the same period. It is a spending spree that will drive up both taxes and deficits, says Heritage. In addition, the President's budget would: Permanently expand the federal government by nearly 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over 2007 pre-recession levels. Raise taxes on all Americans by more than $2 trillion over the next decade (counting health care reform and cap and trade). Raise taxes for 3.2 million small businesses and upper-income taxpayers by an average of $300,000 over the next decade. Borrow 42 cents for each dollar spent in 2010. Run a $1.6 trillion deficit in 2010 -- $143 billion higher than the recession-driven 2009 deficit. Leave permanent deficits that top $1 trillion in as late as 2020 and double the publicly held national debt to over $18 trillion. Before the recession, federal spending totaled $24,000 per U.S. household. President Obama would hike it to $36,000 per household by 2020 -- an inflation-adjusted $12,000-per-household expansion of government. Even the steep tax increases planned for all taxpayers would not finance all of this spending: The President's budget would add trillions of dollars in new debt, says Heritage. Source: Brian M. Riedl, "Obama's Budget Seeks $2 Trillion More in Spending and Deficits Than Last Year," Heritage Foundation, WebMemo No. 2787, February 1, 2010. For text: <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm2787.cfm" rel="nofollow">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm2787.cfm</a> For more on Economic Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[THE PERILS OF PROSPERITY Viewed historically, the housing and financial crisis was a classic boom and bust. Prolonged prosperity dulled people's sense of risk. The crucial question is: Why? One answer is speculation and complacency flourished because the prevailing view was that the economy and financial system had become safer, says columnist Robert J. Samuelson. For example: For a quarter century, from 1983 to 2007, the United States enjoyed what was arguably the greatest prosperity in its history. The boom was triggered by the conquest of high inflation, which had destabilized the economy since the late 1960s; from 1979 to 1984, inflation dropped from 13 percent to 4 percent; and by 2001, it was 1.6 percent. As inflation fell, interest rates followed -- though the relationship was loose -- and as interest rates fell, the stock market and housing prices soared. From 1980 to 2000, the value of household stocks and mutual funds increased from about $1 trillion to nearly $11 trillion; the median price for existing homes rose from $62,200 in 1980 to $143,600 in 2000; by 2006, it was $221,900. The paradox is that, thinking the world less risky, people took actions that made it more risky. The pleasures of prosperity backfired. They bred carelessness and complacency. If regulation was lax, the main reason was that regulators -- like the lenders, investors and borrowers they supervised -- shared the conventional wisdom. Markets seemed to be working. Why interfere? That was the lesson of experience, not an abstract devotion to the theory of "efficient markets," as is now increasingly argued, says Samuelson. The quest for ever-more and ever-better prosperity subverts itself. It might be better to tolerate more frequent, milder recessions and financial setbacks than to strive for a sustained prosperity that, though superficially more appealing, is unattainable and ends in a devastating bust. That's a central implication of the crisis, but it poses hard political and economic questions that haven't yet been asked, let alone answered, says Samuelson. Source: Robert J. Samuelson, "The Perils of Prosperity," Newsweek, February 8, 2010. For text: <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/232784" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsweek.com/id/232784</a> For more on Economic Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[RASH OF RETIREMENTS PUSHES SOCIAL SECURITY TO BRINK Social Security's annual surplus nearly evaporated in 2009 for the first time in 25 years as the recession led hundreds of thousands of workers to retire or claim disability, says USA Today. The impact of the recession is likely to hit the giant retirement system even harder this year and next. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had projected it would operate in the red in 2010 and 2011, but a deeper economic slump could make those losses larger than anticipated. "Things are a little bit worse than had been expected," says Stephen Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration. "Clearly, we're going to be negative for a year or two." Since 1984, Social Security has raked in more in payroll taxes than it has paid in benefits, accumulating a $2.5 trillion trust fund. But because the government uses the trust fund to pay for other programs, tax increases, spending cuts or new borrowing will be required to make up the difference between taxes collected and benefits owed. Experts say the trend points to a more basic problem for Social Security: looming retirements by Baby Boomers will create annual losses beginning in 2016 or 2017. "The moment of truth has arrived," says Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), top Republican on the House Budget Committee. "This is a wake-up call." Social Security took in only $3 billion more in taxes last year than it paid out in benefits -- a $60 billion decline from 2008, according to federal data. The slide in revenue occurred sooner than Social Security actuaries had expected, for three reasons: Payroll tax revenue that was growing at a 4.5 percent average annual clip along with wages flattened out in 2009 because of rising unemployment and pay raises that largely disappeared. The number of retired workers who began taking benefits increased by 20 percent; those taking disability jumped by 10 percent. Monthly benefits were raised 5.8 percent because of a spike in energy prices the year before. Social Security was saved from bankruptcy in 1983 by a bipartisan deal that increased payroll taxes, taxed some benefits and gradually raised the retirement age to 67. That was supposed to keep the system solvent at least until 2058, but the projection has slipped to 2037. Source: Richard Wolf, "Rash of retirements pushes Social Security to brink," USA Today, February 8, 2010. For text: <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-02-07-social-security-red-retirements_N.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-02-07-social-security-red-retirements_N.htm</a> For more on Social Security Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=39" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=39</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[**DOES ANYONE IN D.C. KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING?? AND THEY WANT TO BE IN CONTROL OF YOUR HEALTH CARE NEEDS?!!** Updated March 13, 2010 AP Obama's proposal to eliminate state-specific items in the health care bill comes with polls finding heightened public opposition to backroom political deals. WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama says he wants projects helping specific states yanked from the health care bill Congress is writing. Democratic senators, being senators, beg to differ. The Senate-approved health measure lawmakers hope to send to Obama soon would steer $600 million over the next decade to Vermont in added federal payments for Medicaid and nearly as much to Massachusetts. Connecticut would get $100 million to build a hospital. About 800,000 Florida seniors could keep certain Medicare benefits. (***THAT BEING SAID; MEDICARE WILL BE CUTTING BENEFITS TO ALL SENIORS!!***) Asbestos-disease victims in tiny Libby, Mont., and some coal miners with black lung disease or their widows would get help, and there are prizes for Louisiana, the Dakotas and more states. "We're going to do what we have to do to get a bill out of the House and Senate," said James Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. As for Obama's wish list of deletions: "We'll certainly keep it in mind as we pull together a final bill." That tepid salute underscores the prickliness with which many senators have greeted what they consider Obama's meddling in their business and raises questions about how successful the president will be in erasing the special projects from final legislation. It also highlights a spat between a White House and Senate, dominated by the same party, that the president has ignited just as he needs to garner support to finally push his No. 1 legislative goal to passage over monolithic Republican opposition and nervous Democrats. Obama's proposal to eliminate state-specific items comes with polls finding heightened public opposition to backroom political deals. Republicans have been happy to fan that discontent. Many Democrats, particularly House moderates facing tight re-election battles this fall, are eager to dissociate themselves from such spending. The president wants votes from House Democrats "who were deeply offended by those provisions in the Senate bill," said Sheryl Skolnick, who analyzes federal health legislation for CRT Capital Group of Stamford, Conn. "Clearly the math was, 'I gain more in the House by taking out those provisions than I lose in the Senate."' Obama has railed against the "ugly process" of cutting special deals, but the president and his top advisers were prime players in negotiations on the agreements to win votes and push the legislation forward. Republicans say Obama's push to remove deals for states won't help. Because every Democratic senator voted for that chamber's bill and all its special provisions, even voting later to remove them leaves those Democrats in a pickle, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters Friday. "They will have then voted for them before they voted against them," McConnell said of the bill's projects, an echo of the line that 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry uttered that proved politically damaging. Obama came out with a summary last month of the nearly $1 trillion health overhaul legislation he wants. It specifically eliminates $100 million in extra Medicaid money the Senate bill provided solely to Nebraska to help win support from that state's Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson. The so-called Cornhusker Kickback drew such widespread scorn that even Nelson favors repealing it. Obama also proposed changes in the Senate bill that, without mentioning it, deleted extra Medicaid money for Massachusetts and Vermont, the Florida Medicare exemption and some money for Michigan, according to White House officials. Days later, at Obama's nationally televised meeting with bipartisan leaders on health care, his 2008 presidential rival, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., criticized the Senate bill for exempting 800,000 Florida seniors from cuts in the privately run Medicare Advantage program. Obama surprised him by agreeing, and that tone has carried over as the White House and top congressional Democrats labor to complete a compromise health package. "We've made it clear to the Senate that the president's position in the final legislation should not contain provisions that favor a single state or a single district differently than others," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said this week. There are exceptions. The White House says $300 million for Louisiana, which helped win support from moderate Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., should survive because of that state's struggle to rebound from its 2005 pummeling by Hurricane Katrina. Even so, Obama's targeting of state projects is going over poorly in the Senate. Take Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who helped win extra Medicaid money for his state in the Senate health bill. Vermont is one of several states that have already boosted the benefits they provide to many poor people. All states would get added federal financing for a nationwide Medicaid expansion under the Senate bill. But states such as Vermont -- already providing more generous benefits -- say they're being shortchanged and don't want Obama taking that money away. "What I told Harry Reid is that Vermont does the right thing, and I don't want Vermont to be penalized for doing the right thing," Leahy said. The White House asked lawmakers to delete $100 million to build a public hospital in Connecticut inserted by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. But the money will remain in the final bill, according to people familiar with Democratic negotiations who spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose the unannounced decision. Less certain is the fate of other money the White House wants eliminated for Montana. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., put a provision in the Senate health bill allowing many of the 2,900 residents of Libby to qualify for Medicare benefits. Some of them have asbestos-related diseases from a now shuttered mine. "It simply doesn't make sense to ignore this obligation, or victims of these disasters," Baucus said. Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., won a Senate provision making it easier for longtime coal miners or miners' widows to get compensation for black lung disease. The Senate bill also has extra money for hospitals and doctors in North and South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming. <a href="http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/pol/1640843832.html" rel="nofollow">http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/pol/1640843832.html</a> <a href="http://www.repealthebill.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.repealthebill.org/</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[ANTI-WARMING SCAM AT WORK IN NY Last November, New York Governor David Paterson issued an executive order setting up a Climate Action Council. This panel of state bureaucrats will supposedly address ways the state can fight warming. In fact, the fix is in: The report will push strongly toward a phase-out of New York's fossil-fueled power plants and motor vehicles, says Paul Chesser, a special correspondent for the Heartland Institute. This drill has been run already in 33 states, from Alaska to Florida. Behind most of those efforts -- and now New York's -- is the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS), a Washington-based warming-alarmist group that lobbies governors to use its services. The nonprofit usually collects about a half-million dollars each time it's hired -- some from state coffers, but more from such wealthy activist foundations as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, says Chesser: In state after state, CCS signs on as "technical experts" -- dispassionate "facilitators" assisting a "stakeholder process." In fact, it winds up exerting total control over the climate panel's process -- running the meetings, limiting the menu of acceptable ideas and prohibiting discussion of science. When the process is done, the result is always 50-some recommendations to the governor (for making executive orders) and the legislature (to make laws) that raises energy prices and diminishes consumer freedom. Ideas that have taken hold with other states' commissions include biofuel mandates and subsidies, vehicle-idling limits, taxpayer-funded incentives to live near rail stations and pay-by-the-mile insurance premiums. Beyond these specifics, the agenda of the CCS mainly seeks to replace efficient fossil-fuel energy with such inadequate, expensive "renewables" as solar or wind power -- or at least to massively penalize the use of fossil fuels and subsidize "renewables." Such policies would force New Yorkers to pay millions more for energy -- a burden that would fall hardest on the poor, says Chesser. In the meantime, the "science" behind global warming has been falling apart. We've learned that researchers at the United Kingdom's Climatic Research Unit fudged important data and withheld records from outside scientists who wanted to test their work. This CCS exercise is an exercise in futility. It might be great for keeping the nonprofit's staff rolling in grant money -- but it can do nothing for New York. Paterson should shut the panel down now, says the Chesser. Source: Paul Chesser, "Anti-warming scam at work in NY," New York Post, February 9, 2010. For text: <a href="http://ow.ly/15u7a" rel="nofollow">http://ow.ly/15u7a</a> For more on Global Warming: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=32" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=32</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[TEN GOP HEALTH IDEAS FOR OBAMA "If you have a better idea, show it to me." That was President Barack Obama's challenge two weeks ago to House Republicans regarding health care reform. He has since called for a bipartisan forum, not to start over on health reform but to "move forward" on the "best ideas that are out there." The best ideas out there are not those that were passed by the House and Senate last year, which consist of more spending, more regulations and more bureaucracy. If the president is serious about building a system that delivers more quality choices at lower cost for every American, here's where he should start, say Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and founder of the Center for Health Transformation, and John C. Goodman, President, CEO and the Kellye Wright Fellow of the National Center for Policy Analysis. Make insurance affordable. Make health insurance portable. Meet the needs of the chronically ill. Allow doctors and patients to control costs. Don't cut Medicare. Also: Protect early retirees. Inform consumers. Eliminate junk lawsuits. Stop health-care fraud. Make medical breakthroughs accessible to patients. The solutions presented here can be the foundation for a patient-centered system. Let's hope the president has the courage to embrace them, say Gingrich and Goodman. Source: Newt Gingrich and John C. Goodman, "Ten GOP Health Ideas for Obama," Wall Street Journal, February 10, 2010. For text: <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704820904575055190217079952.html" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704820904575055190217079952.html</a> For more on Health Issues: <a href="http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=16" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=16</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[In the belly of the beast... It's a lonely place to be - just ask Senator Jim DeMint. He's one of the few principled conservatives in Washington D.C. and now he's getting heat from Republicans. Glenn encourages you to let the few who are working to save the republic know that you appreciate what they are doing. Keep them energized. Glenn talks to Senator DeMint on radio this morning about keeping up the fight, and about a new Obama nominee who, shockingly, may have Marxist roots. ( Transcript, Insider Audio) Glenn Beck: In the belly of the beast... Audio Available: March 12, 2010 - 12:51 ET Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America's Slide into Socialism - Buy now from Amazon - Buy now from Barnes & Noble GLENN: I know there are times that I feel alone and I get to talk to you all the time. You can write me, and you do and et cetera, et cetera. I know I feel alone. I can't imagine being inside the Beltway in how alone you feel. When I gave the speech to CPAC, it amazed me on how many people that claimed to be my friends turned, how many arrows in the back I received from quote/unquote the same side. I disagree with many things that some Republicans are doing. I agree with some Republicans. I'm not a party guy. I'm a principle guy. Jim DeMint is a principle guy. He's on the phone with us now. Senator, how are you, sir? SENATOR DeMINT: Glenn, I'm doing great. And I really appreciate your segment on TV yesterday about the association of unions and socialism. Something I researched going all the way back into the 1800s. GLENN: It's amazing. SENATOR DeMINT: The collectivist concepts ‑‑ GLENN: Yep. SENATOR DeMINT: ‑‑ are very consistent. But it relates to Greece and what's happening there. GLENN: Yes, it is. SENATOR DeMINT: And it also is going to relate to America because the majority of union members now in our country work for the government. GLENN: You know, Senator, I have to first of all thank you because there are very few people ‑‑ I really think I can name them and count them on both my hands that that would be where you have a depth of knowledge and you have the spine to be able to stand up for what you know to be true. So I have to thank you on that. But I have to ask you two questions. SENATOR DeMINT: Sure. GLENN: First of all, you came out this weekend, and it blew me away about Lindsey Graham. Can you explain to me how a guy who is currently pushing for cap and trade, pushing for identity cards, pushing for immigration reform, for closing Guantanamo, how you are saying right on, Lindsey Graham? SENATOR DeMINT: Well, I don't agree with those issues, and he hasn't voted for them yet, and that will become a problem. A lot of what he's doing is trying to pull some of the Democrats our way, which I have not seen to work. But what I was saying about Lindsey is one thing he's not short on is courage. And when I've tried to do some major things like Social Security reform or tax reform, he hasn't hesitated to sponsor those things and to speak out. Just like a couple of weeks ago a moratorium on earmarks and a balanced budget amendment, you know, he was the first one to sign up and show up at the press conference. So he and I have had some battles on some pretty big issues but frankly I'd rather deal with someone I disagree with every now and then who has some courage than the problem we have in the Senate right now which is just a lack of vision and courage. GLENN: Okay. SENATOR DeMINT: So I'll battle with Lindsey on some of these things, and this would be a terrible time to vote for anything related to cap and trade. GLENN: Yeah, it does take courage to go into the Republican ‑‑ I mean, you can talk to Lindsey and ask him why would I get a watered down version of cap and trade or, you know, universal healthcare or any of that stuff when I can get the real deal from the other side. But that's a different story. SENATOR DeMINT: Well, he's been a big help on healthcare. And frankly after the immigration debate, once we stopped the amnesty provisions, he's really helped us with border security. So you've got to wake up every day and find the allies you need that day. And on most days Lindsey Graham is going to work with me on the big things. GLENN: Okay. I'm glad I'm not in your position because I wouldn't, I wouldn't be able to ‑‑ my head would explode. I wouldn't be able to do that. But that's why I'm not a politician. SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. GLENN: So Senator, here's the second part. The second question is, is it true that you are getting heat from the Republicans because you won't endorse, just blanket endorse and say, hey, you know, these guys are great? SENATOR DeMINT: Well, that's true. I mean, there's some Republicans frankly that still don't get it and, you know ‑‑ but I really think it's coming down to a few hold‑outs now in the Senate who still think earmarks are a wonderful thing, who will say that debt's a problem but keep voting for spending. That's kind of the core issue of ‑‑ that the American awakening right now is what are we going to do about all this debt. And so I do think that we've got some great candidates out there for the Senate and a few of them are running against incumbents. So I ‑‑ GLENN: If you had to have ‑‑ if you picked one person and you said, oh, please, America, please send this person my way, please send in the Alamo, give me two people. Can you give me two people that you see that are out there that you say, oh, this person would be great? SENATOR DeMINT: Well, there are several I'm working for. I don't know if I can do just two. But Marco Rubio is a true American in Florida, Pat Toomy in Pennsylvania. Chuck DeVore in California is someone who stood up to the spending in the Republican Party out there. GLENN: Yeah, I like him. SENATOR DeMINT: So he's a tough guy. I want somebody who is going to come and not join the club but really join the fight, and I'm optimistic that some of these new guys are going to make it. GLENN: Well, it looks like Rubio, what was this poll I just saw? PAT: 60‑28. GLENN: I mean, he's clobbering Crist. SENATOR DeMINT: He was 40 points behind when I endorsed him and now he's almost 30 points ahead. GLENN: Yeah. SENATOR DeMINT: But the people of Florida are just embracing an American who believes in common sense principles. And Glenn, these aren't far right ideas, you know. GLENN: No, they're not. SENATOR DeMINT: And like I tell people, there's nothing moderate about spending more than you are bringing in and bankrupting our country. So ‑‑ GLENN: No. My grandfather was a lifelong Democrat. He was an FDR guy and blah, blah‑blah. He bought into the whole thing. There's no way he would have believed in any of this stuff. SENATOR DeMINT: No. GLENN: There's no way he would have believed in spending more than you could, than you could afford. That's just ‑‑ I mean, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. Well, 35% of the people who go to tea parties are Democrats. They are disillusioned with the radicalization of the party. GLENN: Hang on. Where did you get that poll? I've never heard that. SENATOR DeMINT: We got a lot of statistics on the demographics of tea party members. They are a lot of Democrats and independents and some Republicans. They are better educated than the general population. I'll send you that when ‑‑ GLENN: Please do. SENATOR DeMINT: I'll call my office today and get it to your producer. GLENN: Please do. One more thing, and I'm going to get into this story on Monday because I find this to be, you know, just another piece of the puzzle. It's one ‑‑ I mean, how long, how many Marxists and ‑‑ how many people do we need to find before we say, okay. You want to talk a little bit about a new nominee that has just been nominated by the president? SENATOR DeMINT: Well, you are probably talking about Ms. Aponte. GLENN: Yeah. SENATOR DeMINT: There seem to be some significant problems, security‑related problems from several years ago. GLENN: Explain who she is. SENATOR DeMINT: Well, she's been nominated as the ambassador to El Salvador, and I don't really want to go into too much of the details until I document it all, but the initial things that we got suggested that there were some security issues ten years ago and she withdrew from a nomination that Clinton made. And I'd just ask for another week to look into this and now the Democrats are accusing me of holding up a nominee. GLENN: What? SENATOR DeMINT: I mean, we need a little time when there's some real serious questions because the White House is clearly not vetting their nominees very well. GLENN: Oh, no. No ‑‑ yes, they are. You can ‑‑ see, this is why, this is why, you know, you're in Washington and your head doesn't explode. I can't take it. Van Jones said that he was very open. He let them know exactly what he was, who he was, what he had been involved with. They vet, they know. These people are on the same page as the president of the United States. SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. GLENN: This individual has some ‑‑ and, you know, we'll get into ‑‑ because I'm going to get into this on Monday as well. It is amazing to me what we could send somebody down to El Salvador where there's no problem with communists or Marxists ‑‑ SENATOR DeMINT: Right. GLENN: ‑‑ down in El Salvador and we have somebody whose credentials have already been questioned once. She withdrew. SENATOR DeMINT: Right. GLENN: And now they are trying it again. SENATOR DeMINT: Either the problem that I have with what they're doing, they are demanding that we pass her unanimous consent essentially and if you ask for more information, they delay it and then they report to the media that I'm holding the nomination. GLENN: Unbelievable. SENATOR DeMINT: But I'm going to look at these people closely, particularly when it deals with foreign policy. Because I saw what happened in Honduras when they mishandled that. Fortunately we turned that around, but ‑‑ GLENN: Will you do me a favor. When you're ready with all the information, you bring it here, will you? SENATOR DeMINT: I will, Glenn. GLENN: We'll help you expose it because this is a ‑‑ this is just ‑‑ I mean, the arrogance of being able to think that you can put people in place that have nefarious ties or ties with Marxism or out‑and‑out anticapitalist Marxists all through this administration and then continue to do it as it's exposed and you say, oh, it's ridiculous that I might be a Marx ‑‑ it is, the arrogance is going to be the undoing of either them or us. SENATOR DeMINT: Yeah. Well, I appreciate you exposing this because that gives us an informed electorate that can help us stop it. So you are doing a lot of good work. GLENN: Senator, I appreciate it. Thank you again. SENATOR DeMINT: Thanks, Glenn. GLENN: We'll talk again. SENATOR DeMINT: Bye‑bye. Most Popular Stories: Glenn Beck: This land is your land, this land is my land...or is it? Glenn recaps Mr. Tickle with Michelle Malkin Glenn and the census Glenn Beck: Rep. Kennedy goes berzerk Video of the Day - March 11, 2010 America's Quiz: Are you a conservative? Do You Have What it Takes to Beat the Odds? Glenn Beck: Land Grab By the Federal Government? Glenn Beck: Pelosi - Don't peek! Picture of the Day - March 09, 2010 ]]>

<![CDATA[You want to support Illegal aliens and rampant immigration? then support Karen Bass and the continued declined of Los Angeles. Immigration Date 08/31/2008 Extending Student Financial Aid Eligibility SB 1301 Y Bill Passed - House (46 - 29) 08/29/2008 Expanding Driver's License Eligibility SB 60 Y Bill Passed - House (41 - 31) 05/29/2008 Prohibiting E-verify AB 2076 Y Bill Passed - House (43 - 31) 05/22/2006 Endorsing Federal Amendments to Immigration Law AJR 51 Y Joint Resolution Passed - House (43 - 27) <a href="http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=28963" rel="nofollow">http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=28963</a>]]>

<![CDATA[screw all politicians in their crooked smelly lying ass]]>

<![CDATA[Article I, Section 2 of the Submitted by libertarian4321 on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 04:12. Article I, Section 2 of the US Constitution gives Congress the right to ENUMERATE the number of citizens in order to apportion members of congress: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct." Enumerate means "to count, or determine the number of". Congress can COUNT the number of citizens- but it can't demand to know what race we are, how much we earn, how many big screen TVs we own, or how many times we masturbate each day. So when I get the census forms, I fill out the first question (the one asking how many people live at my home), then paste a copy of Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution right below that, along with a statement that I have fulfilled my duty as a citizen by helping them enumerate, and I'm not required to answer any more questions. ps i hear they enumerate ilegal aliens in the census as well. so border states like CA,AZ,TX,NM etc will get more politicians & pork spending will increase with a burrito tilt or racist slant.]]>

<![CDATA[Your right!! He's a fraud! WARNING!!]]>

<![CDATA[Only in your wet dreams princess. 2012 is a long way away and health care reform is about to pass. The President has been keeping more of his campaign promises than any other president and by the time and has already accomplished sweeping positive change. When 2012 rolls around even more will have been accomplished and the geezers, morons, religious whackos, racists, liars, propagandists, and Karl Rove sleazeballs won't be able to deny that real positive change has happened. Most Americans support health care reform and will be so happy it will start in 2013, they will re-elect President Obama by a landslide. People don't so quickly forget that it was Republicans who put us into this economic hole, and who put us into 2 illegal wars, and wrecked our reputation throughout the world, violated the civil rights of all Americans, championed torture, etc. Seriously, who in the Republican Party can beat him? Sarah Palin? You're smoking crack if you think she can win. Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee? Can you say religious nutjob? Newt Gingrich? That's a joke. They'd all lose without the President spending a single penny or a single minute campaigning against them. Then you've got the pathetic upstarts, idiots, and scumbags like Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindall, Charlie Crist, Haley Barbour, Ron Paul, or Jeb Bush who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. Unless the Republicans can pull a new candidate who is a centrist, and not a religious anti-abortion nutjob, they will lose again. Feel free to name a single person who can beat Obama today, let alone in 2012 when the economy is much better than when it was spiraling out of control thanks to Bush's failed policies. When people have jobs again, and better health care, and when small businesses don't have to shoulder the burden of health care and their taxes have not gone up, who will vote against President Obama other than idiots? History proves over and over and over again that Republicans are more fiscally irresponsible than Democrats. In the last 35 years there hasn't been a single Democrat who has increased the national debt by a higher percentage than even the most conservative Republican and that includes President Obama. The worst spender of all was the failure Republicans like to jerk off to.....Ronald Reagan. He ran up the credit card, tripled the national debt, smuggled cocaine into America, and called it prosperity. Then he skipped out on the check and left it for generations of American children to pay.]]>

<![CDATA[One of President Obama's top campaign advisers told CNN that Democrats should be worried about this year's midterm elections. "I think that there is a real shot we are going to get slaughtered in elections this fall if we aren't leading the efforts to reform Washington," Steve Hildebrand said Wednesday. "We campaigned in '06 and '08, and if voters don't see that change, we haven't lived up to that promise." Hildebrand was Obama's deputy national campaign director and one of the principal architects the candidate's field operation. After the election he went back to private consulting.]]>

<![CDATA[LOVE THIS GUY! HE IS THE ONLY ONE STANDING UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT. MEG WHITMAN IS BENDING OVER TO THE HISPANICS - IS THIS A LEADER FOR CALIFORNIA? GIVE ME STEVE POZNER, PLEASE, HE WILL DO WHAT'S GOOD FOR CALIF. ----------------------------------------------- E-Mails Give Inside Look at Race for CA Governor ABC News 1 month ago "She wants to be ordained. She wants to be the only one running so she doesn't have to answer your questions," Poizner told reporters. Murphy later confirmed that he sent the e-mail and mocked Poizner's... Former Gov Backs Poizner in CA Gubernatorial Race ABC News 1 month ago California gubernatorial hopeful Steve Poizner says he's won the backing of former California Gov. George Deukmejian. Poizner's campaign told The Associated Press about the endorsement Monday ahead of... Candidate Flip Roils Calif. Governor, Senate Races ABC News 1 month ago Whitman has held a substantial lead over Campbell and the other candidate in the Republican gubernatorial primary, state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, another wealthy Silicon Valley entrepreneur... Poizner to Add $15M to Campaign for Calif Governor ABC News 2 months ago State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner will contribute $15 million of his personal fortune to his GOP campaign for governor this month as he battles another Silicon Valley multimillionaire for the... ---------------------------------------------------- ]]>

<![CDATA["chances are very slim that Democrats will lose any seats at all to Republicans" we'll see paul ireland and you said scott brown would lose--HA! bring it on November 2010]]>

<![CDATA[Oh my god is that funny, i just did research on who that poster is, get this: his name is "abdullahi farah" and he is stationed in South Africa.... he only posts to get you to visit his website and CLICK on the links - it's on the cash parking program :) In other words, he's not an American or Republican at all, but Just Another Businessman Taking Advantage of their gullible Right!!! Congratulations Abdullahi, another one of us.... You are the man, i'm also a 'communist lefty' who just happens to be making about fifteen hundred bucks a month selling bullshit to the right. My cousin goes to every rally and plays the part and makes $$$ big bucks... those guys are really dumb-dumb and i understand now why the telemarketing fraud rings target the GOP states. I knew if a dummy like Palin could lead them, I could do it, and sure enough.... $43,000+ in pro-Palin merchandise to date all from 2 websites! (not since the election, only since she "came back" with her book.. barely one year. Next stop - "The planet doens't feel any warmer to me" and other stupidiites they'll eat up like jellybeans.... climate deniers, here i come. hehehhehe, now pay me, the commie $$$ !!! ]]>

<![CDATA[This is one time I have no sympathy either way <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/triple-shooting-tied-to-illegal-immigrant-smuggling-drop-house.html" rel="nofollow">http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/triple-shooting-tied-to-illegal-immigrant-smuggling-drop-house.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[The reconciliation process has never been used to pass legislation that is wildly unpopular as this one is. 2/3 of Americans are against the current bill. Reconciliation has never been used to fundamentally restructure a sixth of the American economy, never been done on an issue of this magnitude on a strictly partisan basis. Except for....it's not wildly unpopular unless you're taking a poll of teabaggers. A full two-thirds of Americans WANT this bill to pass and health care reform would not cost a sixth of the American economy or even come close to 1/3 of our military spending which exceeds that of every other nation on earth combined. The only people who oppose the health care reform bill are those too stupid to understand it or so gullible they believe the lies of morons like you so they are frightened of it. Republicans love welfare for defense contractors, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies and happily put their desires above the needs of the American people. Reconciliation has been used plenty of times by Republicans for the exact reason it will be used by Democrats. They wanted to bring important legislation to a vote....AS IT SHOULD BE. It's called Democracy, you jackass. The health care reform bill IS a budget legislation. It's setting aside part of the budget to pay for health care so unlike defense spending, Americans will actually get something back for the money that's taken from them. Any intelligent and honest person who actually understands the health care reform bill supports it. Those who don't either don't understand it, aren't very intelligent, or they are dishonest. This pretty much describes everyone in the Republican Party, Fox News, or the teabaggers.]]>

<![CDATA[The reconciliation process has never been used to pass legislation that is wildly unpopular as this one is. 2/3 of Americans are against the current bill. Reconciliation has never been used to fundamentally restructure a sixth of the American economy, never been done on an issue of this magnitude on a strictly partisan basis. Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia is one of the people who came up with the rule back in 1974. Here's what he wrote to his colleagues just last year about using reconciliation, this process for health care. "I oppose using budget reconciliation to pass health care reform and climate change legislation. Such a proposal would violate the intent and spirit of the budget process and do serious injury to the constitutional role of the Senate." That's from April of last year. Democrats Admit Reconciliation Has Never Been Used On A Non-Fiscal Issue A list of bills that have been passed by reconciliation, as compiled by the Senate Democratic caucus. There are twenty-two bills on the list, and all of them relate to budget issues -- the only issue reconciliation was designed to deal with. 1981 H.Con.Res. 307 Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-499) 1982 H.Con.Res. 115 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (P.L. 97-35) 1983 S.Con.Res. 92 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248) Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-253) 1984 H.Con.Res. 91 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1983 (P.L. 98-270) 1986 S.Con.Res. 32 Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-272) 1987 S.Con.Res. 120 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-509) 1988 S,Con.Res. 93 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-203) 1990 H.Con.Res. 106 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-239) 1991 H.Con.Res. 310 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-508) 1994 H.Con.Res. 64 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66) 1996 H.Con.Res. 67 Balanced Budget Act of 1995 1997 H.Con.Res. 178 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193) 1998 H.Con.Res. 84 Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-34) 2000 H.Con.Res. 68 Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 1999 (H.R. 2488) 2001 H.Con.Res. 290 Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000 (H.R. 4810) 2002 H.Con.Res. 83 Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-16) 2004 H.Con.Res. 95 Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-27) 2006 H.Con.Res. 95 Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-222) 2008 S.Con.Res. 21 College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-84) It is worth noting the inclusion in this list of the 1985 Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985. This is the well known COBRA that included the provision providing continuing health insurance coverage for terminated employees, so it is a precedent for using reconciliation in the health care area. COBRA originally was paid for solely by the participant, not by the government. I belive there are some subsidies now that were added through normal procedures. Thus the original COBRA idea was budget neutral, the "big plan" of today is not.]]>

<![CDATA[GOP's Whitman disavows 'proud racist' councilman - .SHE IS BENDING OVER FOR HISPANICS SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Republican gubernatorial hopeful Meg Whitman is severing ties with an elected official who described himself as a "proud racist." The Whitman campaign issued a statement Saturday disavowing Santa Clarita Councilman Bob Kellar. The statement comes one day after state Democrats called on the former eBay chief executive to distance herself from Kellar. Kellar has said he has no regrets over the remark. ====================================================== WATCH THE YOUTUBE AT: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Take+A+Stand+For+America%21+&search_type=" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Take+A+Stand+For+America%21+&search_type=</a> =============================================== SHE IS BENDING OVER FOR HISPANICS - WE DON'T NEED MORE BULLSHIT IN CALIFORNIA. SOMEONE LIKE HER WITH NO BACKBONE IS NOT WHAT WE NEED.------------------------------ PLEASE VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE, NOT WHITMAN. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALIPAC Forums-viewtopic-GOP's MEG WHITMAN DISAVOWS 'PROUD RACIST ...10 posts - 10 authors - Last post: Feb 4 SACRAMENTO - Republican gubernatorial hopeful Meg Whitman announced .... Bob Kellar had dared to speak out against the crimes of the illegal ... <a href="http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-187036.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-187036.html</a> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ]]>

<![CDATA[Reconciliation is NOT part of the federal budget process. It is part of the federal legislation process and has been used for many things other than budgets. In fact, since 1981, it has been used 16 times by Republicans and only 6 by Democrats. It is a standard process of getting past obstructionists, and to vote on an issue...which is the job of our legislators. Reconciliation means DEMOCRACY. It means those who were elected based on their position on the issues will vote accordingly and the majority will win. The Republicans are now saying they are shocked that the Democrats would use the same tactic they've used nearly triple the number of times as the Democrats and accuse the Democrats of shoving health care down their throats. It's called Democracy. The Republicans say if the Democrats use Reconciliation they are going to destroy the Democrats at the next election. Really? President Obama was elected by people who wanted exactly the kind of change this health care bill represents. President Obama was elected, not a Republican because more Americans want what he stands for. I find it hilarious that the Republicans are basically saying, "If you pass this health care bill, we're going to try to beat you at the next election!" as though they wouldn't have tried to win anyway. How is that any different than what they would have done anyway? Also, chances are very slim that Democrats will lose any seats at all to Republicans no matter what kind of stupidity the teabaggers say to the contrary. Also, a filibuster is anything but permanent. It only goes for as long as someone can continue speaking. As soon as they can no longer continue speaking or are too tired to yield to another obstructionist, the issue comes up for a vote. The Republicans love the empty threat of a filibuster. Luckily Harry Reid is doing the right thing by denying these jerks the ability to derail the important health care reform that America so desperately needs. Health care reform is going to happen...PERIOD. End of story. Thank goodness for America, there is NOTHING the Republicans can do to stop it. ]]>

<![CDATA[Re: JUDICIAL WATCH - Staggering Welfare L.A. paid to ILLEGALS --------------------------------------- Something has to be done about these Hispanic groups demanding amnesty for illegals. These shit ass-politicions like Meg Whiteman are bending over for them. Right now Shulmer is working on a bill for amnesty for illegals --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALIPAC Forums-viewtopic-GOP's MEG WHITMAN DISAVOWS 'PROUD RACIST ...10 posts - 10 authors - Last post: Feb 4 SACRAMENTO - Republican gubernatorial hopeful Meg Whitman announced .... Bob Kellar had dared to speak out against the crimes of the illegal ... <a href="http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-187036.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-187036.html</a> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ]]>

<![CDATA[Thu Mar 11, 7:24 pm ET Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed today that he plans to use the "reconciliation process" to pass the final changes to the Senate's health care reform legislation. So... what the heck is it? Reconciliation is a part of the federal budget process in which debate in the Senate is limited and only a simple majority of 51 votes is needed to pass a bill. Specifically, within the reconciliation process, floor time for debate in the Senate is limited to 20 hours and members can only debate the "conferenced" version — the one both the House and Senate have agreed to. Reid, like Senate leaders in the past, hopes to use the limited debate and lower threshold of 51 votes for passage to avoid a Republican filibuster. Under normal circumstances, the opposition can stop a bill with a filibuster (a permanent continuation of debate that can only be stopped with a 60-vote supermajority). And though the Senate passed an initial bill with 60 votes in December, Reid needs to pass additions to it to reconcile it with what the House will pass. Only when the bills from each chamber match can President Obama sign health care reform into law. ]]>

<![CDATA[A proposal that's up for grabs in the Senate would prohibit the private sector from making any education loans whatsoever, removing this area of the market from private control. But sixty votes are needed in the Senate to allow this proposal to pass, and Harry Reid doesn't have them. So Reid and Obama are considering using reconciliation to pass the education bill as well as the health care bill. There's something of a case to be made financially for the government take-over of private educational loans, if you use the warped parameters set by Democratic accounting standards. Since the student loan industry is so highly regulated by Uncle Sam -- to the point that the government suffers a loss if a student defaults on a private loan -- having the government take over the loan actually might save the government money. The free-market solution to this might be to remove all the regulations on private student loans, and let the market make the decisions. But Democrats prefer to have the government take over the entire industry. This will ostensibly help the government save money, help students because they will have easier access to loans, and help society fund higher education. But the ramifications of artificial subsidies for higher education never enter the discussion. What if the higher education bubble bursts? What if a student would be better off not going to college? What about the U.S. taxpayer, who is being forced against his will to pay for the education of his neighbor? The bill passed the House last year, in a move that the New York Times characterized as a victory over "an intense lobbying effort by the for-profit lenders." The NYT says the insurmountable 60-vote threshold in the Senate was because of "the industry's allies in the Senate." While it's true that legislators from states where student loan companies are located are fighting this bill, there's a bigger principle at stake: propping up an industry that, like all other industries, is better left in the hands of the market.]]>

<![CDATA[Mr. Obama's term in office is like Disney's Mr. Toad's Wild Ride. His reckless policies and actions cause destruction to whatever he touches. He needs to be stopped. Obama and his special-interest allies, especially his lap-dog media, are doing everything they can to keep government growing and eroding our rights. If ordinary people like us don't stand up and continue the rebellion, Washington will soon forget the discontent in the hinterlands. Recently on MSNBC, Dylan Ratigan assailed Mark Williams of the Tea Party Express. In the midst of Rattigan's angry rant about the supposed anger, racism and anti-Semitism in the Tea Party movement, the MSNBC host revealed who actually has the anger problem. Williams calmly explained that Tea Parties have nothing to do with racism; Rattigan responded by shouting him down and cutting Williams' microphone. The Tea Party movement ignited a blaze; now the political left is doing their best to disparage the movement. Reportedly, even Bill Clinton is personally attacking the leaders of the Tea Party movement. Anyone who watches cable television knows that the left is marshalling their forces. The problem for these media allies of Obama lies in their refusal to accept the simple truth that Americans actually believe in the U.S. Constitution. They constantly push stories about organizations aligned with their viewpoint. The Washington Post and The New York Times, for example, have devoted intensive coverage to an online group named the Coffee Party. This group, run by a former Obama staffer, is nothing other than an attempt by leftists to counteract the Tea Parties. Their coverage neglected to mention anything about the Obama connection. The media paint Tea Partiers as radical, but average Americans see through this bias. A recent survey by the Sam Adams Alliance vindicated Tea Party leaders and showed that these Americans are not radicals, they are just individuals who are becoming politically active, many for the first time. Their motivation is a feeling that government is spinning out of control. The Tea Party movement must not falter in the face of these attacks. It is time to advance, not compromise. The groundwork is set for a massive return to fiscal responsibility and government that abides within its constitutional framework. Fiscal conservatives have won in New Jersey, Virginia, and even in Massachusetts. Voters have overwhelmingly rejected government takeover of the healthcare system and the bailout culture in Washington, D.C. This is a rare opportunity for "we the people" to take back our government. Anti-Washington, D.C. sentiment is at an all time high, as the recent primary election in Texas illustrates. Texans overwhelmingly supported Gov. Rick Perry based on his campaign against Washington, D.C. and federal encroachment. Voters are so opposed to the back-room deals and political chicanery that even President Obama is now trying to cast himself as the outsider. In reality, Obama is one of the prime culprits. From his close relationships with lobbyists, his attempts to bribe certain Democrats not to run primary campaigns, his firing of independent investigators, his penchant for pork-laden projects to curry votes, and finally, his recently appointing a Congressman's brother to the federal bench in a blatant attempt to buy a vote, Obama has shown that he epitomizes what is wrong with Washington. This year could usher in a new era of responsible and constitutional governance. We need to elect people who will truly make a change in Washington. And then we need to stay involved and hold elected officials accountable for promises made. Reagan needed a Carter, Gingrich needed a Clinton, and the Tea Party has Obama. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for freedom-loving individuals to restore our government to its constitutional limitations. If we had predicted that a year after Obama was elected a Republican would be elected in Massachusetts, you would have called us crazy. This is our time. It is time for Obama's wild, destructive ride to end. What are you going to do between now and November to win back our government?]]>

<![CDATA["Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House," Nancy Pelosi boasted before the 2006 midterm elections. Looks like those XX chromosomes didn't give her much advantage over the old cleaning crew. The swamp she was supposed to drain is overflowing. And fewer than four years after a sordid sexual predation scandal involving a creepy congressman rocked the Republican Party, a sordid sexual predation scandal involving a creepy congressman is now rocking the Democratic Party. The same questions that dogged House leaders then are dogging House Speaker Pelosi now: What did she and her staff know, and when did they know it? On Thursday afternoon, by a vote of 402-1, the House overwhelmingly passed a privileged resolution offered by the Republican leadership demanding a formal House Ethics Committee investigation of Pelosi and her (mis)handling of harassment allegations concerning disgraced former New York Rep. Eric Massa. The soft-on-corruption ethics panel had decided to shut down its investigation after Massa abruptly resigned on Monday. But with reports piling up on how Massa kept a Capitol Hill playhouse filled with young, low-paid male staffers, and how Pelosi's office had fielded complaints of his bizarre and inappropriate behavior back in October, the House decided to pry the lid back open and put a stop to what the resolution calls the "public ridicule" the seeming cover-up has invited. Housecleaner Pelosi cannot be pleased by the second-guessing of her handiwork. Color her an un-merry maid. Even Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy, fresh from his raving House floor meltdown over media coverage of the Massa mess, voted for the GOP-initiated House resolution. Finally: Bipartisanship we can believe in! With the exception of lone Democratic Rep. Chaka Fattah who voted "no" and 27 members (including those who sit on the House Ethics Committee) who voted "present" or "not voting," every other member of Pelosi's House supported the petition to direct the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to investigate fully "which House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs had knowledge prior to March 3, 2010 of the aforementioned allegations concerning Mr. Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer having any such knowledge took after learning of the allegations." The resolution stipulates that "numerous confusing and conflicting media reports that House Democratic leaders knew about, and may have failed to handle appropriately, allegations that Rep. Massa was sexually harassing his own employees have raised serious and legitimate questions about what Speaker Pelosi as well as other Democratic leaders and their respective staffs were told, and what those individuals did with the information in their possession." Democratic Rep. Barney Frank, who earned a House Ethics Committee slap on the wrist in 1990 after using his congressional office to fix parking tickets for male prostitute Steven Gobie, was one of those leaders in the know. After voting for the resolution, he disclosed for the first time that Massa had invited one of his young staffers to dinner. "Although this was not an ethical violation," Frank said in a published statement, one of his senior staffers was informed of the dinner and alerted Massa's Chief of Staff Joe Racalto. In other words: Frank's office knew it smelled illicit. And Frank would know. Racalto went on to contact Pelosi's office directly in October. Tick, tick, tick. Five months later, in the wake of Massa's own self-professed proclivity for tickle parties and victim/witness accounts of Massa's alleged sexual assaults on his Navy underlings, Pelosi is pooh-poohing the scandal: "I have a job to do and not to be the receiver of rumors." Translation: Don't bother me with concerns about my members' indiscretions. I'm busy. How quickly we've accelerated from the "most ethical" House ever to "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." There was a time when Pelosi the protector held House leaders to the highest standards and expectations in guarding young people working on Capitol Hill. During the GOP Mark Foley scandal, she inveighed: "The children who work as Pages in the Congress are Members' special trust. Statements by the Republican Leadership indicate that they violated this trust when they were made aware of the Internet stalking of an underage Page by Mr. Foley and covered it up for six months to a year." Yet, she remains silent on the plight of the 20-somethings with whom Massa was keeping house under circumstances that rate an Ick Factor of 10-plus. Massa's alleged targets are someone's children, too. Deflecting accountability for her own office's violations of trust, Pelosi feigned sympathy for Massa and attributed his impaired ethical judgment to his medical condition (he has cancer). "Poor baby," she said through gritted teeth. He's "a very sick person." So, what's Pelosi's excuse?]]>

<![CDATA[When we last saw New York Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, she had succesfully buried an outrageous provision in an Intelligence Appropriations Bill coming out of her committee. A few weeks ago, she had OK’d a clause that would have allowed the prosecution of CIA agents involved in using enhanced interrogation techniques on al Qaeda terrorists. Even some of her fellow Democrats saw the insanity of what she tried to do and worked with Republicans to have the provision removed. Now Ms. Slaughter is up to new antics. As head of the House Rules Committee, she’s come up with one doozy of a rule to get health care through: she’s suggesting that the House simply “deem” acceptance of the Senate bill. That way, no House Democrats actually have to vote on it! Problem solved! Yay! The Democrats, with huge majorities in both chambers of Congress and the presidency, cannot get their health care “reform” done the old-fashioned way, so they have to resort to special deals, union exemptions, payoffs, flat-out bribery, and behind-closed-doors body-slamming (they’re at it again today.) They cannot get their own party to vote for the thing. The American people hate it. So now Ms. Slaughter wants to channel her inner Chairman Mao and simply “deem” the Senate bill accepted by the House. No more debate. No more discussion. No more votes. Shut up and sit down. The Democrats are subverting democracy in every way possible. They no longer deserve their party name.]]>

<![CDATA[The Tax Foundation recently released its annual report on the number of tax returns filed that have no tax liability, and the study shows a record number of “nonpayers” in 2008. Taxpayers become “non-payers” when credits and deductions wipe out any income tax they owe. According to the Tax Foundation report, of the more than 142 million returns filed in 2008, almost 52 million have no tax liability. That means more than 36 percent of tax filers paid no income taxes in 2008 – a new record high. This was a steep increase over 2007 when fewer than 33 percent of filers paid no taxes. As the table below shows, the growth of non-payers is a long-term trend that has been accelerating in recent years. For instance, 21 percent of taxpayers were non-payers in 1990. The amount of income that a family can earn and still be non-payers is also alarming. In 2010, a family of four can earn up to $51,000 and still pay no income taxes. Not only do a record number of taxpayer’s pay no taxes, but many of them actually receive cash payments through the tax code because of refundable credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit. According to the Tax Foundation, cash payments from these two credits alone totaled over $70 billion. President Obama’s policies will add to the numbers of non-payers and the amount of income redistributed because he wants to expand and add even more refundable credits. Like the Tax Foundation’s report, the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Dependence on Government shows a growing dependence on government and a substantial increase in recent years. According to the report, the average recipient of government aid received over $26,000 in assistance in 2008 – a record high. The growing dependency on government and shrinking number of taxpayers is troubling and will lead to an even faster rise in unsustainable government spending unless the trend is reversed. Congress should start by ceasing the expansion of refundable tax credits. It should then reform entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare before baby-boomers start collecting benefits from them and dependency on government explodes even further. If Congress starts soon perhaps it won’t be too late to stop the impending fiscal implosion.]]>

<![CDATA[Yesterday the White House circulated a memo by pollster Joel Benenson. It was designed to create momentum for Obamacare by convincing wayward House Democrats that support for the President's plan has been building since the State of the Union. As with everything else that comes out of the White House on health care these days, the memo is nothing but pure fantasy. This Tuesday, Gallup released its latest poll showing that by a 48%-45% margin Americans would tell their representative in Congress to vote against President Obama's health plan. Compare that to the last time Gallup asked the question in January, Americans supported the President's plan 49%-46%. That's a net six point loss in support for the President's plan since the State of the Union. That is momentum. Against Obamacare. And Gallup isn't alone. The Associated Press released a poll this week showing that 68% of Americans believe the President and Congressional Democrats shouldn't pass their health care plan without Republican support. "Nothing has been more disconcerting than to watch Democratic politicians and their media supporters deceive themselves into believing that the public favors the Democrats' current health-care plan," Democratic pollsters Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen add in today's Washington Post, "A solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan." Yesterday was particularly tough for the President's plan. First, the White House underwhelmed the Democratic Caucus in a presentation of the new (still unwritten) reconciliation bill. Then, the Senate Parliamentarian killed the Democrats favored procedural path for passage by signaling he would rule that President Obama must sign the original Senate bill into law before the Senate could act on the President's new reconciliation package. Finally, the Associated Press reported that House leaders have abandoned all hope of finding language to satisfy Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-MI) concerns that the Senate bill funds abortion. By the end of the day, the leftist firedoglake site had dropped its count of committed House Democrats for passage to 189 (Speaker Pelosi needs 216 for passage). With the loss of Stupak and his 7-12 member caucus opposed to taxpayer-funded-abortions, Speaker Pelosi will have to find the remaining dozen plus votes from the ranks of cost conscious Blue Dog Democrats. For example, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) who voted against the House bill in the fall explained at the time: "According to the Congressional Budget Office, the House health care bill will actually increase federal health care spending over the long term, while proposals being considered by the Senate would have a net decrease." But according to a new CBO score of the Senate bill passed on Christmas Eve (the one with the Cornhusker Kickback), it actually increases health care spending. And the reconciliation bill only make things worse, since, among other increased spending measures, President Obama "fixed" the Cornhusker Kickback not by eliminating the new spending, but by extending it to all 50 states. With no votes piling up, and "yes" votes materializing, the Democratic plans to shove Obamacare down the throats of the American people are becoming more and more desperate. This Monday, the House Budget Committee will begin markup on the new reconciliation bill even though actual legislative text does not exist for it yet. The Democrats plan to pass a shell of a bill through the appropriate committees so that the Rules Committee can then substitute the bill that is being drafted completely behind closed doors by the White House and Senate and Democrat leaders. Politico reports that despite the Parliamentarian's initial verbal ruling, they will press on with their Slaughter Rule plan to pass the Senate bill without voting on it. NRO's Yuval Levin quips: "Democratic leaders should be asking themselves just how they have gotten to the point that their strategy is to amend a law that doesn’t exist yet by passing a bill without voting on it." But President Obama's progressive base is way past rational thought when it comes to health care. They want it passed at any cost. And as George Will pointed out yesterday, the very essence of progressivism sublimates the democratic process to the rule of experts in Washington. No one can say if this bill will finally pass, but if it does, it is abundantly clear that our republic form of government will be permanently damaged by it.]]>

<![CDATA[ Maybe a nice Mexican consortium will purchase one of our major healthcare insurers hahahaha don't we deserve it]]>

<![CDATA[MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com CURRENTLY SEN. BARBARA BOXER, RUNNING FOR SENATE VOWS TO CONTINUE PUSHING FOR AMNESTY NO –VERIFY, NO I.C.E. ENFORCEMENT AND NO ENGLISH ONLY! THE ONLY GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE THAT CLAIMS THE WOULD END THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION A ND EVER EXPANDING WELFARE STATE IS STEVE POIZNER. FROM: JUDICIALWATCH. Org… get on their emails SANCTUARY COUNTY LOS ANGELES SPENDS $600 MILLION ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS County Spends $600 Mil On Welfare For Illegal Immigrants Last Updated: Thu, 03/11/2010 - 3:14pm For the second consecutive year taxpayers in a single U.S. county will dish out more than half a billion dollars just to cover the welfare and food-stamp costs of illegal immigrants. Los Angeles County, the nation’s most populous, may be in the midst of a dire financial crisis but somehow there are plenty of funds for illegal aliens. In January alone, anchor babies born to the county’s illegal immigrants collected more than $50 million in welfare benefits. At that rate the cash-strapped county will pay around $600 million this year to provide illegal aliens’ offspring with food stamps and other welfare perks. THE EXORBITANT FIGURE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ENORMOUS COST OF EDUCATING, MEDICALLY TREATING, OR INCARCERATING ILLEGALS ALIENS. THIS COSTS THE COUNTY AN ADDITIONAL ONE BILLION DOLLARS. The exorbitant figure, revealed this week by a county supervisor, doesn’t even include the enormous cost of educating, medically treating or incarcerating illegal aliens in the sprawling county of about 10 million residents. Los Angeles County annually spends more than $1 billion for those combined services, including $500 million for healthcare and $350 million for public safety. About a quarter of the county’s welfare and food stamp issuances go to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their anchor babies, according to the figures from the county’s Department of Social Services. In 2009 the tab ran $570 million and this year’s figure is expected to increase by several million dollars. Illegal immigration continues to have a “catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” the veteran county supervisor (Michael Antonovich) who revealed the information has said. The former fifth-grade history teacher has repeatedly come under fire from his liberal counterparts for publicizing statistics that confirm the devastation illegal immigration has had on the region. Antonovich, who has served on the board for nearly three decades, represents a portion of the county that is roughly twice the size of Rhode Island and has about 2 million residents. His district is simply a snippet of a larger crisis. Nationwide, Americans pay around $22 billion annually to provide illegal immigrants with welfare benefits that include food assistance programs such as free school lunches in public schools, food stamps and a nutritional program (known as WIC) for low-income women and their children. Tens of billions more are spent on other social services, medical care, public education and legal costs such as incarceration and public defenders. ]]>

<![CDATA[Seeking volunteers to improve energy efficiency. There are billions of tiny holes throughout the hull and mainframe. Friction causes heat.]]>

<![CDATA[<blockquote> As hard as it may be to believe, this very dysfunctional human family (with the right trying to mutilate the left, and vice versa) of ours, will eventually become a functional entity of great beauty, finally living up to it's potential. We the people are going to have to run off all the corrupt politicians and replace them with honest, uncorruptable people - who live to serve the people. Here's an outline of what to expect from the future (it was compiled in the 1990s): THE PROMISE OF THE FUTURE A new sense of oneness will replace the present sense of separation. This will demonstrate as brotherhood, justice, and sharing. We will enter an era of tranquility and peace—in exact proportion to the present discord. The violence and hatred of today will be transmuted into goodwill. A new livingness will characterize our relationships and institutions; a new freedom and sense of joy will replace the present fear. Contributions by the highest type of artists will lead to a regeneration of our lives. Everyone will become creative in his or her living in an altogether new way. The family will gain, not lose, importance as the basic unit of society. A new science, the psychology of the soul, will be the basis of all future educational efforts and will transform life for both the child and the teacher. The media will have a very responsible role to play in education. Gradually, the worst areas of slums and decayed buildings in the major cities will go. They will be replaced by recreational parkland and by ordinary housing, on a human scale, interspersed with parks and shopping areas. New buildings will be quite different in shape from buildings of the past. Some of them, by their very shape, will focus and accumulate particular energies. Transportation systems will be devised which will be so silent, so apparently motionless, that travel fatigue will completely disappear. The growing concern for nature and environment will be embodied in legislation, universally accepted, and will lead to a wise husbandry of nature’s gifts. There will be a new reverence for all manifestations of life, thus bringing humanity into better alignment with the animal and other sub- human kingdoms. Most farming will be organically based. This will enhance the vitality and health of the people. A much simpler style of living will distinguish the coming civilization. Humanity will be emancipated from the drudgery of needless work. Machines will gradually take over the tasks of manufacture. Increased leisure will evoke undreamed-of skills and talents, allow men and women to reach their full potential, and permit close involvement in community and national life. Following a world stock market crash, a complete change in our economic system will come about. A rational and sustainable economic structure based on sufficiency will become the norm. Cooperation will replace competition. There will be a phased, gradual transfer of resources from military to civilian production, which will provide useful work for many. The blind following of market forces, whose myopic rule causes such misery today, will give way to an enlightened and just consideration for the needs of all. A new political/economic structure—Democratic Socialism or Social Democracy—will become the norm throughout the world. All political groupings will tend to the center. Extremes will be a thing of the past. In the Middle East, governments elected by the people will replace the present sheiks and emirs as rulers. In Latin America, a process of democratic consensus will unfold in almost every country. The voice of the people will be heard, and land will be redistributed and given to them. National and cultural identities will be maintained, but barriers will be taken away so that passports will no longer be necessary to travel from country to country. The world’s legal matters, which concern global issues such as the exploration of the seabed, will be governed by international law. The United Nations will be the central debating, law-giving forum for the nations of the world. As a result of the changed conditions on earth—the reduction of tension and fear, greater leisure, the eradication of disease, new meaning and impetus to life—the health of mankind will improve enormously and the physical body will take longer to ‘wear out. The alternative medicines of today will take their place beside the more orthodox methods. Healing waters will be discovered, one by one, which will help cleanse the physical body. We will understand that there is no such thing as death, but simply a shift of consciousness from this to another plane. The desire to know better the nature of God and to come into closer relationship with that Divinity will become paramount in the lives of millions. Humanity will be taught the great science of invocation, which will take the place of worship and prayer as we know it today. Methods and technology will be found to demonstrate the fact that everything is energy. By understanding the technology of light, physicists will discover how to control matter, distance and time—and how to neutralize toxic waste and stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The fusion process of nuclear power—a cold, safe, wasteless process using a simple isotope of water, universally available—will solve all humanity’s future power needs. By the end of this century, we will build structures with the scientific use of sound. We will accept the fact that all the planets are inhabited and that we are all brothers and friends. Gradually, we will take our place in the cosmic brotherhood. These forecasts for the coming times have been compiled from the writings of Benjamin Creme and include information from the Master of Wisdom with whom he has been associated for over 40 years. ### Source: Share International <a href="http://www.taracanada.com/Promise.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.taracanada.com/Promise.html</a> <hr> One wouldn't know from reading American newspapers that a popular revolution is taking place in Latin America. The forces of social democracy are valiantly battling the forces of tyranny & unbridled greed. The USA is clearly on the side of the tyrants. “I swear by the God of my parents, I swear by my nation, I swear by my honor that I will not allow my soul to rest, nor my arm to relax until I have broken the chains that oppress my people through the will of the powerful. Free elections, free land and free men, horror to the oligarchy.” Oath used by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez - (when he was 28) -copied from Page 80, !HUGO! by Bart Jones <hr> "Without sharing there can be no justice; without justice there can be no peace; without peace there can be no future... Man must change or die. There is no other course." Maitreya, the World Teacher <a href="http://www.share-international.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.share-international.org</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Rare Siberian tigers starve to death in China's zoos. Other animals do too. Gosh, I guess after the Olympics, when show time was over, things went back to normal. Let's see, this is a country that puts poison in milk to make the milk appear to be fuller than it is. Put antifreeze in toothpaste to extend it to, and kills people. Kills people without concern in their unsafe coal mines. Manufactures 'crap' for the American public. Wants google to follow the law, although they don't have to.. Home of the hackers that are inflitrating cyberspace. Killed prisoners to sell body parts. This country has NO Human Rights! Why are people worried about Muslims? China is the one to put us all out of business, and they didn't have to fly planes into the World Trade Center to do it. Jokes on you ben Ladin...... you didn't have to do a thing, because China is doing it for you.]]>

<![CDATA[The mental health industry dominated by psychiatric influences does not work because there are several fundamental defects in psychiatry itself. Psychiatry never has and never will deliver the results it promised because 1. They shy away from teaching traditional values. They do not teach right from wrong probably because they do not know right from wrong. In fact, quoting co-founder of the World Federation of Mental Health, psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm announced that the key aim of psychiatry is “reinterpretation and eventual eradication of right and wrong.” This tendency to stay away from right and wrong permeate every literature of psychiatry. 2. They shy away from teaching responsibility. The psychiatric system is geared to blame all things on chemical imbalances, genetics, and indefinite childhood experiences. If a person does something wrong, it’s because he has a mental disease; he is prescribed medications, not responsibility. This is another fundamental attitude of the psychiatric profession. And that is why when we take a failing student to a psychiatrist, he does not do better in school (Our education system is failing despite years of psychiatric involvement in our schools), and when we take a criminal to a psychiatrist, he is likely to commit another crime. (Current rate of immates returning to jail is 60%.) Responsibility level was never increased by psychiatric treatments. 3. They are purely profit driven. They make $69 billion annually paid by insurance companies alone. They hire thousands upon thousands of lobbyists to seek governmental protection of their interests and grants. They form financial relationships with drug companies. Yet we find uncaring attendants, unavailable doctors, and psychiatrists who charge hundreds of dollars to insurance companies for just listening to someone for a short interval and then prescribing some medications. They are not there to help people; they are there to make money because there is easy money in this field. 4. They do not keep their noses clean. Probably because of the above points 1-3, the psychiatric industry is filled with fraudulent and criminal activities. A study showed that at least 10% of the 650,000 psychiatrists and psychologists worldwide admit to sexually abusing their patients. A factual review of more than 800 convictions over a six-year period, shows 43% were convicted of fraud, theft and embezzlement; 32% for sex crimes; 7% for patient assault and violent crimes; 6% for drug offenses and 6% for manslaughter and murder. Unethical activities have been part of the picture in the field of psychiatry from its earliest days. 5. They use a system of voting mental illnesses into existence which makes the whole subject ludicrous. Disorders voted into existence included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the most authoritative book on officially recognized mental disorders, include “reading disorder,” “disruptive behavior disorder,” “disorder of written expression,” “mathematics disorder,” “caffeine intoxication,” and “nicotine withdrawal disorder”. The increase of mental disorders listed in the book coincides with U.S. government insurance becoming available to the mental health industry in 1968. Because of these reasons, psychiatry did not make it. These are fundamental flaws. They are embedded in the basic theories of psychiatry itself, and these are what's wrong with the mental health system in this country. If you want to learn more about this or do more about this, go to www.cchr.org. Call Clare at 818-241-2381. Email:clareanahu@gmail.com. ]]>

<![CDATA[why don't you see THIS on the news <a href="http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/03/israeli-historian-israel-could-find-itself-forced-to-wipe-out-europe/" rel="nofollow">http://www.politicaltheatrics.net/2010/03/israeli-historian-israel-could-find-itself-forced-to-wipe-out-europe/</a>]]>

<![CDATA[MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com There are only eight states that have a greater population than Los Angeles. In this “sanctuary” city, 47% of those employed are ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS! latimes.com Editorial E-Verify: 'E' is for error Too many illegal immigrants are slipping through the government background check. 5:38 PM PST, March 8, 2010 To think that for all these years, we were wrong about E-Verify, the government background check that tells employers whether their employees are authorized to work legally in the United States. We thought the reason to distrust the program was its tendency to get things wrong, ensnaring legal, permanent residents and citizens in red tape, halting their legitimate employment. Now it turns out that E-Verify is not misidentifying legitimate workers in troubling numbers but clearing undocumented immigrants. According to a recent report by Westat, a research company that evaluated the program for the Department of Homeland Security, E-Verify fails to flag illegal workers 54% of the time. The problem is identity fraud. The online program checks a worker's information against Homeland Security and Social Security databases. And if a valid Social Security number is presented, even if it's already in use, the program often recognizes it as legitimate. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says that she doubts the error rate is that high and that improvements to root out identity fraud are being developed. They cannot come too soon. E-Verify is a cornerstone not just of the Obama administration's immigration policy but of any hoped-for comprehensive reform legislation. There can be no agreement between congressional Democrats and Republicans without a reliable enforcement mechanism. We believe that fixing our broken immigration system requires legalizing the 11 million undocumented immigrants already living here, and also managing the future flow of illegal immigrants. That meanscreating ways for foreign workers to come to the U.S., such as temporary visas, while cracking down on illegal employment. E-Verify is, in theory at least, one of the best ways to do so, but the Westat report suggests that its rapid expansion is not yet justified. At the moment, Arizona and Mississippi require all employers to use it, and the calls for implementation have been growing louder. Currently, about 184,000 of the nation's 7 million to 8 million employers use it. Eventually, when E-Verify is working well, we can talk about whether it should be mandated so that employers can be held accountable. But for now, the focus should be on reducing the error rate. The Westat report is encouraging in some respects: Although the program used to regularly mistake legal workers for illegal ones, it now correctly evaluates documented workers 99% of the time. Still, expansion is premature. Before employers can be held accountable, they need a tool that works. ]]>

<![CDATA[LA RAZA “THE RACE” FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY AND HISPANDERING OBAMA HAS GENERATED A NON-TRANSPARENT SCHEME TO GET THE ILLEGALS IN THE VOTING BOOTHS AGAIN. IT IS DEVISED TO BE UNENFORCEABLE. THE BORDERS THAT THE LA RAZA DEMS HAVE DETERMINED WILL NEVER BE SECURE, STILL WILL NEVER BE SECURE. ILLEGALS THAT WANT A SPECIAL WORTHLESS SOCIAL SECURITY CARD WILL START MANUFACTURING THEM DOWN AT THE PARK. IT IS NOW DETERMINED THAT 50% OF E-VERIFY TEST OF ILLEGALS IN AMERICAN JOBS ARE WRONG DUE TO THE FACT THE ILLEGAL HAS A STOLEN BUT VALID SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. THE FACT THAT THE ILLEGAL CAN’T SPEAK A WORD OF ENGLISH, DOESN’T KNOW WHERE THE CAPITAL OF MEXIFORNIA IS, WILL NOT DAMPER THE LA RAZA DEMS’ CONTINUING WHOLESALE SELLOUT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE! TEMPORARY WORKERS ARE LIKE H-1VISA WORKERS. DURING THE LAST TWENTY YEARS BOATLOADS OF INDIANS AND CHINESE, NOT ALL SPIES THOUGH, WERE IMPORTED IN TO TAKE OUR TECH JOBS. THEIR VISA PERMITTED THIS FOR A SEVEN-YEAR PERIOD. BECAUSE THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT, THESE PEOPLE NEVER LEFT. IN FACT, THEY IMPORTED THEIR EXTENDED FAMILIES, WHO CAME OVER ON OTHER BOATLOADS OF INDIANS AND CHINESE. KEEPS WAGES DEPRESSED. THIS IS WHOM THE “TEMPORARY” WORKER PROGRAM WILL WORK. IT’S CALLED THE “RIDDLED WITH CORRUPTION ANOTHER FAILED AMNESTY LIKE 1986 PROGRAM”. LA RAZA FEINSTEIN AND BOXER HAVE TWICE PUSHED FOR A SPECIAL “AMNESTY” FOR 1.5 MILLION “CHEAP” LABOR FARM WORKERS FROM MEXICO, DESPITE THE STAGGERING UNEMPLOYMENT, AND THE FACT THAT ONE-THIRD OF THESE “CHEAP” LABOR ILLEGALS WILL END UP ON WELFARE. NO STATS AS TO HOW MANY HOPS THE BORDER PREGNANT FOR 18 YEARS OF WELFARE, OR JOINS GANGS. FEINSTEIN AND BOXER HAVE LONG TAKEN BIG BRIBES FROM BIG AG BIZ DONORS TO SELL US OUT. DIANNE FEINSTEIN HAS LONG ILLEGALLY HIRED ILLEGALS “CHEAP” FOR HER S. F. HOTEL. . SHE IS LA RAZA ENDORSED FOR HER SERVICES TO EXPAND THE MEXICAN WELFARE SYSTEM IN OUR BORDERS. NANCY PELOSI HAS VOWED THE WALL WILL NEVER BE BUILT. PELOSI HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER $20 MILLION NAPA WINERY. SHE IS LA RAZA ENDORSED FOR HER SERVICES TO EXPAND THE MEXICAN WELFARE SYSTEM IN OUR BORDERS. LA RAZA AND THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT HAVE LOBBIED HARD TO MAKE SURE THE MEXICAN WELFARE SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY INCLUDES ILLEGALS. FEINSTEIN, BOXER, PELOSI AND BARACK OBAMA HAVE PROMISED THEM IS WILL AS THEY LIE TO US WHO WILL ULTIMATELY PAY FOR IT, THAT IT DOESN’T. YES, HE LIED! latimes.com Senators give Obama a bipartisan plan on immigration The president is encouraged, but healthcare politics could jeopardize the proposal. By Peter Nicholas March 12, 2010 Reporting from Washington A pair of influential senators presented President Obama with a three-page blueprint for a bipartisan agreement to overhaul the nation's immigration system, but the proposal's viability is threatened by politics surrounding the healthcare debate. Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in a 45-minute meeting Thursday in the Oval Office, also asked for Obama's help in rounding up enough Republican votes to pass an immigration bill this year. Although details of their blueprint were not released, Graham said the elements included tougher border security, a program to admit temporary immigrant workers and a biometric Social Security card that would prevent people here illegally from getting jobs. Graham also said the proposal included "a rational plan to deal with the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States." He did not elaborate on what the plan would be. But in a recent interview, he suggested that onerous measures were unrealistic. "We're not going to mass-deport people and put them in jail, nor should we," Graham said. "But we need a system so they don't get an advantage over others for citizenship." In a statement after the Obama meeting, Graham predicted that their effort would collapse if Senate Democrats proceeded with a strategy to pass a healthcare bill through a simple majority vote -- a process known as "reconciliation." Senate leaders say they are committed to doing just that. "I expressed, in no uncertain terms, my belief that immigration reform could come to a halt for the year if healthcare reconciliation goes forward," said Graham, who portrayed the document handed to Obama as "a work in progress." Graham added: "For more than a year, healthcare has sucked most of the energy out of the room. Using reconciliation to push healthcare through will make it much harder for Congress to come together on a topic as important as immigration." In their own statements, Obama and Schumer sounded more upbeat. The president said: "Today I met with Sens. Schumer and Graham and was pleased to learn of their progress in forging a proposal to fix our broken immigration system. I look forward to reviewing their promising framework, and every American should applaud their efforts to reach across party lines and find common sense answers to one of our most vexing problems." Immigration has gotten scant attention of late. Obama had initially promised to address the issue in his first year, but the deadline slipped as he struggled to pass a healthcare bill. Latino voters, who were a crucial piece of Obama's winning coalition in the 2008 campaign, have grown impatient. Some advocates of an immigration overhaul warn that Latino voters will stay home in the November mid-term elections if the issue is delayed again. In an attempt to defuse the anger, Obama met with a group of 14 immigration advocates in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, hours before his meeting with the two senators. Afterward, some of the guests described the atmosphere in the room as tense. They said they told Obama that families were being severed by widespread deportations. In the fiscal year that ended in September, the U.S. deported 388,000 illegal immigrants, according to the Department of Homeland Security -- up from 369,000 the year before. "I don't think the president liked hearing that the immigration system is tearing apart families. But that's our reality," said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, who attended the meeting. Obama agreed to have them meet with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to discuss deportation policies, the White House said. Even without the healthcare obstacle, passing an immigration bill would be difficult. Schumer has been trying to line up additional Republican co-sponsors in hopes of broadening the bill's bipartisan support. None has signed up. Those who attended the meeting said that Obama committed to helping find Republican votes. But he also conceded that in a polarized Senate, that was a difficult mission. "He was very frank about the challenge of moving this or anything else in the U.S. Congress," said John Wilhelm, president of the labor union Unite Here. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Wednesday, October 28, 2009 Joining Lou in the Independent Nation on Wednesday will be MARK KNOLLER of CBS News. Knoller has identified two areas in which President Barack Obama has already surpassed former President George W. Bush: rounds of golf played and number of fundraisers attended. And WAYNE ALLYN ROOT, author of The Conscience of a Libertarian, says he sees parallels between President Obama and… Bernard Madoff. So does Root smell a big political Ponzi scheme brewing? The former Libertarian vice presidential candidate will explain. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, October 22, 2009 The federal government has declared war on Sheriff JOE ARPAIO of Maricopa County, Arizona, for enforcing our nation’s immigration laws. “America’s Toughest Sheriff” will give Lou an update. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Friday, October 16, 2009 E-Verify- the single most successful federal program aimed at keeping illegal immigrants out of the workforce- is once again threatened. This time, E-Verify was stripped from a Senate Amendment behind closed doors and without explanation. Instead of becoming a permanent program E-verify has been reduced to only three years. Critics are calling this a stall tactic and an attempt at killing an employment enforcement system. We will have a full report tonight. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, October 15, 2009 E-Verify -- the single most successful federal program aimed at keeping illegal immigrants out of the nation's workforce is once again being threatened. Permanent reauthorization for the program -- which has a 99.7-percent accuracy rate -- has been pulled from pending legislation. Now the program is set to expire in just 3-years. The change was made behind closed doors in the Senate -- without public comment or debate. Lou Dobbs Tonight Wednesday, October 14, 2009 New attempts to put comprehensive immigration reform back on the front burner. Congressman Luis Gutierrez -- the chair of the Democratic Caucus Immigration Task Force -- is unveiling new legislation that would call for amnesty for the up to 20 million illegal immigrants in this country. Congressman Gutierrez will join me tonight * Lou Dobbs Tonight Tuesday, October 6, 2009 The Obama administration could be weakening a successful joint federal and local program aimed at keeping illegal immigrants off our streets. "287 G" gives local police the training and authority to enforce federal immigration law. Supporters of the program believe the ministration wants to limit the program to criminal illegal immigrants already in custody -- limiting the investigative authority of police. Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, October 5, 2009 Has American society and capitalism run its course? Foreign critics and academics are predicting the fall of capitalism -- and the collapse of America's dominance in world affairs. It's not the first time dire predictions have been made. We'll report on just who is making these predictions -- and why. JIM PETHOKOUKIS, the money and politics columnist for Reuters, will explain the president’s not-so-secret plan to raise your taxes. And Father PATRICK BASCIO has a remarkably different perspective on illegal immigration from that of most Christian clergymen-one he’s outlined in a remarkable new book entitled On the Immorality of Illegal Immigration: An Alternative Christian View. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, September 28, 2009 And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed. Lou Dobbs Tonight Tuesday, September 08, 2009 Federal contractors now must use E-verify to check the status of their employees on federal projects. The rule which goes into effect today will affect almost 169,000 contractors and some 3.8 million workers. The E-verify program has an accuracy rating of 99.6% but has been repeatedly challenged by the U.S. Chamber of Congress. We will have a full report tonight. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Wednesday, August 19, 2009 Also, is there something “fishy” at the White House over healthcare and President Obama’s senior adviser David Axlerod? Axlerod is connected to a Chicago-based PR firm that’s being paid millions of dollars to push the president’s healthcare message. It just so happens.. the same firm owes Axlerod millions of dollars as well. Television *The White House is stepping up its efforts to silence opponents of President Obama’s health care plan and demonstrators who are exercising their constitutional rights to protest. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs saying it’s “manufactured anger”. We’ll have complete coverage of the Administration’s attempts to crack down on anyone who dares to challenge its policies. Also.. Americans are opposing the Democratic Party’s health care agenda in ever increasing numbers. A new opinion poll says the number of people who disapprove of the way the President is handling health care has risen from 42 percent to 52 percent in just one month. We’ll analyze those numbers .. and what they mean for the Obama Administration. Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, July 9, 2009 And Harvard economics professor JEFFREY MIRON will weigh in on the state of the U.S. economy—and why the only plausible argument for bailing out banks crumbles on close examination. * Lou Dobbs Tonight And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Senator Ted Kennedy kicked off a week of events and meetings focusing on immigration before he introduces legislation promoting amnesty for millions of illegal aliens living in the United States. Today, Kennedy met with Cardinal Roger Mahony, an outspoken and controversial supporter of illegal aliens and Kennedy’s bill. Senators McCain, Kennedy and Representatives Flake and Gutierrez are expected to unveil their legislation later this month. We’ll have a full report. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, September 18, 2008 Another victory for American workers in Arizona. Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the get-tough employer sanctions law in the state. The law hits employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens with strict penalties and in some cases even strips businesses of their licenses. A lower court upheld the same law in February. But open-borders and amnesty groups along with the business lobby are considering yet another appeal. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, February 11, 2008 In California, League of United Latin American Citizens has adopted a resolution to declare "California Del Norte" a sanctuary zone for immigrants. The declaration urges the Mexican government to invoke its rights under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo "to seek third nation neutral arbitration of ....disputes concerning immigration laws and their enforcement." We’ll have the story. Last year, Prince William County, Virginia passed an initiative to allow local police to check the immigration status of anyone in police custody. The county recently held its first immigration training session for local police officers. We’ll have a look inside the training. Mexican President Felipe Calderon is in New York today on the first leg his five day tour across America to meddle in immigration issues in the United States. This is his first visit to the U.S. since he became President in 2006, but he will not meet with President Bush or any of the presidential candidates, who he has accused of spewing anti immigrant rhetoric. Join us for that report. ....................... Lou Dobbs Tonight Wednesday, March 5, 2008 Immigration experts are appearing on Capitol Hill today to release the results of a study showing the cost of illegal immigration on the criminal justices system in the 24 U.S. counties bordering Mexico–more $1 billion in less than a decade. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Wednesday, June 10, 2009 Gov. Schwarzenegger said California is facing “financial Armageddon”. He is making drastic cuts in the budget for education, health care and services. But there is one place he isn’t making cuts… services for illegal immigrants. These services are estimated to cost the state four to five billion dollars a year. Schwarzenegger said he is “happy” to offer these services. We will have a full report tonight. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, May 28, 2009 Plus drug cartel violence is spreading across our border with Mexico further into the United States. Mexican drug cartels are increasingly being linked to crimes in this country. Joining Lou tonight, from our border with Mexico is the new “border czar” Alan Bersin, the Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Special Representative for Border Affairs. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, April 20, 2009 And compelling new evidence that H-1B visas for foreign workers lower the pay of information technology workers in this country. Critics say the report, by NYU’s Stern School of Business and Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, proves that corporate elites are importing cheap overseas labor simply to lower the wages of American workers. We’ll have a special report. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, April 9, 2009 Plus, outrage after President Obama prepares to push ahead with his plan for so-called comprehensive immigration reform. Pres. Obama is fulfilling a campaign promise to give legal status to millions of illegal aliens as he panders to the pro-amnesty, open borders lobby. Tonight we will have complete coverage. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, February 16, 2009 Construction of the 670 miles of border fence mandated by the Bush administration is almost complete. The Border Patrol says the new fencing, more agents and new technology have reduced illegal alien apprehensions. But fence opponents are trying to stop the last few miles from being finished. We will have a full report, tonight. Plus, even open border advocates agree that the most effective way of fighting illegal immigration is to crack down on the employment of illegal aliens. Yet, those same groups are opposed to E-Verify, which has an initial accuracy rate of 99.6% making it one the most accurate programs ever. E-Verify was stripped from the stimulus bill but who stripped it out and who is opposed to verifying employment status is still not clear. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Friday, October 17, 2008 Tonight, a Supreme Court ruling is putting our democracy at risk. The court today overturned a federal appeals court decision that would have forced Ohio to do more to verify questionable voter registrations. We’ll have the very latest in our special report. Plus, in the War on the Middle Class tonight, a government program is found to be rampant with fraud and abuse, giving even more American jobs to foreign workers. A new Department of Homeland Security report shows cases of violations, forgery and shell businesses in the H-1B visa program. We’ll have that and much more. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Tuesday, January 13, 2009 In Colorado, over 1,300 illegal aliens are being investigated for applying for improper tax refunds. The ACLU has written a letter to the judge threatening to sue if the judge convenes a grand jury to investigate the case. We will have all the latest developments of the case as well as the ACLU’s bullying in pursuit of their amnesty agenda. * Lou Dobbs Tonight Tuesday, February 3, 2009 And WILLIAM GHEEN, the president of Americans for Legal Immigration, breaks down his push for E-Verify—and why the Obama administration is wrong to delay its implementation when it comes to federal contractors. * Judicial Watch Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration last Updated: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:02pm If President Obama keeps his promise of giving the nation’s 12 million illegal aliens amnesty it will encourage more Mexicans to enter the United States, according to residents of the struggling Latin American country who are undoubtedly rooting for the commander-in-chief’s plan. The majority of illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico therefore the president’s reprieve project will greatly affect that nation. Two-thirds of Mexicans say they know someone living in the United States and around one-third have an immediate member of their household or close relative living in the U.S. A majority of those residing south of the border say legalizing their undocumented countrymen will inspire more Mexicans to head north, according to a recent survey conducted by an internationally known polling and market research company. A vast majority of Mexicans with a relative in the United States said a legalization program would make people they know more likely to go to America illegally. The results of the survey were made public this week by a research organization dedicated to studying the economic, social, fiscal and demographic impacts of immigration in the U.S. It reveals that nearly one-third of Mexican residents (nearly 40 million people) would like to live in the U.S. and if there was an amnesty a large number would come illegally with the hope of qualifying for a future exoneration. An amnesty, therefore, would stimulate more illegal immigration which is the last thing this country needs. Furthermore, rewarding those who have violated our nation’s laws with coveted U.S. residency and possibly citizenship demeans the system, especially for those who follow the appropriate steps to come lawfully. It’s bad enough that U.S. taxpayers annually dish out billions of dollars to educate, medically treat and incarcerate illegal aliens who are, in many cases, depleting local governments. Los Angeles County alone spends more than $1 billion a year, including $48 million a month in welfare costs, to provide services for illegal aliens. The crisis is hardly limited to border states, which have traditionally been the most impacted. Georgia’s skyrocketing illegal population costs taxpayers nearly $2 billion a year. * ]]>

<![CDATA[Visit strike2010.com for more information. ]]>

<![CDATA[ YouTube - HAMAS USE OF CIVILIANS AS HUMAN SHIELDSUnbelievable!! Hamas terrorists kill innocent Palestinian in Gaza .... Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. ... <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKpoqVMcVcA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKpoqVMcVcA</a> - Cached this is a must see ]]>

<![CDATA[PLEASE FLAGG THIS SPAM BULLSHIT OVER POSTING FUCKIN CHINA SHIT! CLOGGIN UP THE POLITICAL SECTION!! THEY ARE BANNED FROM THE ELECTRONICS SECTION, SO THEY DO IT HERE! FUCK THEM! FLAG UM OFF OF HERE PERMENENTLY!! PLEASE COPY THE POSTING ID NUMBER AND SEND IT TO THE CRAIGSLIST spam@craigslist.org, or abuse! Don't forget to say political section <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640253801.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640253801.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640253550.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640253550.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640251182.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640251182.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640252248.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640252248.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640252836.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640252836.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640249370.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640249370.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640249694.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640249694.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/pol/1640248707.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/pol/1640248707.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640247960.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640247960.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640222493.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640222493.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/pol/1640223797.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/pol/1640223797.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640224441.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/pol/1640224441.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640221518.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640221518.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640222028.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/pol/1640222028.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/pol/1640223391.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sfv/pol/1640223391.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640224123.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/pol/1640224123.html</a> <a href="http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640224613.html" rel="nofollow">http://losangeles.craigslist.org/ant/pol/1640224613.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[why don't you see this vid on the news YouTube - HAMAS USE OF CIVILIANS AS HUMAN SHIELDSUnbelievable!! Hamas terrorists kill innocent Palestinian in Gaza .... Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. ... <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKpoqVMcVcA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKpoqVMcVcA</a> - Cached ----------------------------------------------------------------------- <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhxKPhZpQF8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhxKPhZpQF8</a> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- this is a must see]]>

<![CDATA[An Encino attorney, three chiropractors and a handful of legal aides were arrested Thursday for alleged involvement in a large-scale auto insurance fraud ring involving more than 300 suspects, authorities said Thursday. Dubbed "Operation Big Fish," the case is one of the largest in a string of auto insurance fraud rings the District Attorney's Office has broken up in recent years, Auto Insurance Fraud Division Deputy District Attorney Gregory Alker said. The defendants, one of whom fainted when he opened the door to investigators Thursday morning, are accused of defrauding 19 insurance companies by filing false claims for staged accidents. The total losses are estimated at $549,000, Alker said. The ring allegedly carried out what Alker called "paper accidents." <a href="http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_14660073" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_14660073</a>]]>

<![CDATA[The court ruled in god we trust wasn't religous. Now that's telling the jesus freeks to fuck themselves!]]>

<![CDATA[They just didn't want to recall all the money and reprint it!]]>

<![CDATA[your attempt to get a bunch of cockroach brained drones to engage in civil discourse is admirable ! i think we know by now it'a an exercise in futility ! good luck, anyway !]]>

<![CDATA[Another fake post?? Thats all you got?? Oh well....here is something interesting. As I've read posts, I have come to realize one thing--Libs don't know how to argue. I don't mean that they don't know how to USE ALL CAPITAL LETTERS and sling around phrases like "your'e a Nazzi!" and "no YOU'RE a Nazi, and learjn to splell, idiot". What I mean is that people have forgotten (or never knew) how to form a logical, amiable thread of conversation that informs and ties back to the idea or solution they are proposing or debating. Tips for Libs: No name calling. Just don't do it. It just turns into those playground affairs where someone goes running to their teacher (or the ACLU). No typing IN ALL CAPS. Not only does it reveal your inability to express yourself intelligently, it's hard to read, off-putting, and distracts readers from your points. Feel free to post counterpoints on opposition blogs and web sites. Get your facts straight before you post. Make sure timelines make sense and that your sources are worthy of some amount of trust. Understand that "argument" in the academic sense doesn't mean shouting down. It means having a reasoned and courteous debate using facts and truth as the foundation of your point of view. From, The "real" VoteNoObama2012.com]]>

<![CDATA[ The final details of the financial regulatory reform bill being negotiated by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Bob Corker (R-TN) are still being hammered out, but the underlying contours are clear: more government bureaucracy layered on top of our existing impenetrable and unaccountable financial regulatory system. Specifically, the Dodd/Corker plan reportedly still contains these elements: Pro abortion: But this should not surprise anyone who observes the allegedly "fiscally conservative," "pro-free market," "limited government" party in action. >From the acceptance of the New Deal to government bailouts of private industry, Republicans — sooner or later — go along. Last week’s news wasn’t “mildly positive” at all. It was a continuation of bad news. The reason the overall rate didn’t go upward wasn’t because job losses had stabilized but because of movement of discouraged workers out of the work force. The U-6 category, combining the unemployed with the marginally attached workers and part-time workers who want to work full time, had dropped from 17.4% in October to 16.5% in January. It went back up to 16.8% in February, as did the U-4 number from 10.3% to 10.4%. By my figures 0% of the dow at 8.5%, less we codgrude, 77= 6.%! Tiff, tiff little bear, all is not well, i'm mean who's the Cheese marchant? HUH! 16% of cognotics are 16.99%! ÿ WAIT!...Look>..>>> ’3 „%5Ccs£tU”³ã¤ÄEQq Add the difference and obamacare is flawed!‘!1a¡2RA±áðB"Ññb3ÿÚ? I mean who new!! But figure this...>>>rCçR<¥æBßôëÕ…qJ‡Ž‹Øýó/ÿ]{Àaëæ²ýŽó6«®ü?$©Ð¸x¨½¯Øß3»~WOW! Or ....®ºç'Ž_ÊYþÄù¢Ÿôù‡Ã½ –×o×M³¤¥Æªò+ìšÿAÿÜ·ÙõÔþÀù«ô.oâ[fãí¦ÙÒKUÔVOÝ÷š¿D/ÊÛ Zåœ~Î¼ÔCû´/¹I6Î’\j¬"´ÇìãÍ'ÿØÃ±Ï±Hû7ó9-Ù<¼@å¸Q6å¤—ª¨ gìÛÍÞ’I œ¶á¸ÝôeÛ–…Æª‚+î¿Ì´&[m&º¼I7ú‹`û+ëî·XƒOjç?ü±Á]¹h\)H¾gì“¨LµÝý¸Ÿ«fEø1”W]¿²["/w}rF§¹Œ1Ä”Ù–†è|ÑÕ ý”txÿK¹Ý\5öM¸³"K¢ßÙo—€sï7ÿ[öm…{y¡ò_d?f~Yƒ¶ žÿsáá;²DSå_@ ¸[ Óî M¦Éž£Ÿ µbßÐ 9Ì[Hœ—¯g«[¿jçP uøH‰*—ž7r·jpÖMÍýàoO?gè†Þ»)Épùe1?™ñÿÃ§”Dúx*ÅíîêþûtÞ>æá»p¿tH—-"ƒ“,%Gr BA‰-ÃR½{—Oò_EÛõ=ÞØnüÃ½‹mlÊ¢Üy£GŽŸ¤EI ^ïY‡VßômE½CªuxB=Fq‡rÅ˜=ÅÙ988 ¡¯ÌžWèÝ7ËS á›‚~4Yj'Ç Ä“Rj$ù0àÎk*d ‰yX‰R˜Çf€€(CÕ¸‘õ˜†©…TVä00-W‹D 0b;Ôp!¤iPÝç"NOtiÇ²/ð& ¿y±$v%;Äúd#ž³_Ò€À°':¹rùšðFxàrq€©õ©C4Š0w=¸áÄ,o{ N =¤T¡ 0˜ÃˆaŸ4."ÿCDK òAªD028ÑÁcø!ƒ ‘LYø —Ï³Ö£»"Ìx6 $ÈbÍ\¶½Kßöö¦½¢èXaè’¦.Þ•¿;-Ð‘ ›Û±åÇÐ‰1oVõþñ5ÄãÚµç%Û½±ëm+sÆC8.M˜ÛGygß '¶3ðyE¢K=¾÷w ¥&ÞòVîk‰bÒ‰ðÜ9TÑ{¾dÚù^3Þ‡rw,j·) DI„…ÉëÇV1\+=Ã•íõÝ2”¢mÂfDÈiï–³–·Bü<¥Àw=à¯d^ò¤A>œcŒ„/‘éy€½ !!!!!!! ]]>

<![CDATA[Your probably not bright enough to read & understand the entire post, so this is for the benefit of those who like to be informed. Who turned in “Jihad Jane?” The Jawa Report (Conservative Blog), the counterterrorism blog that has done heroic work unmasking jihadi operatives online and on YouTube, have an exclusive report on the whistleblower who turned in “Jihad Jane.” ---(be sure to send thanks and praise to the vigilant bloggers and watchdogs looking out for us.) Full Report Here -- <a href="http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201487.php" rel="nofollow">http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201487.php</a>]]>

<![CDATA[What have i been saying all along? :) The terrorist will be morphing from brown skin mulsims into white skinned neo nazi republican trash types, and she's not the first one. What do you say, how likely that votenooabama loser ends up on the no-fly list? That's not an american, that's a disrupting fool... not far from a terrorist, just uses noise to stop the process instead of bombs, but give him time. ]]>

<![CDATA[The phrase "under God" in the Plegde of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" on U.S. money do not violate the Constitution's separation of church and state, a federal appeals court panel has ruled in San Francisco. "The Pledge is constitutional," Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the majority in the 2-1 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel. "The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our Republic was founded." The panel ruled, 3-0, on the money motto. Read the complete rulings (pdf). The challenges were filed by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow. He argued that the references to God disrespect his beliefs and are unconstitutional. The same court sided with him in 2002 when it struck down the pledge, which he challenged on behalf of his daughter. Two years later the U.S. Supreme Court overturned that ruling, saying Newdow had no legal standing to challenge the pledge because he did not have legal custody of his daughter. Newdow refiled the challenges on behalf of parents who do have custody of their children. <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/court-under-god-and-in-god-we-trust-are-constitutional-/1" rel="nofollow">http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/court-under-god-and-in-god-we-trust-are-constitutional-/1</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[By Sonia Scherr About six years ago, a man who said he was a dentist established what he claimed to be a church in Jacksonville, Texas, a city of about 14,000 in the rolling hills two hours southeast of Dallas. The church was located in a large building on Main Street that also housed his dental practice. He called this church the House of Israel. Two years after its founding, an enigmatic newcomer to Jacksonville — whose most distinctive feature was his long, unruly beard — moved into the building, bringing with him what he professed was a prison ministry, the Matthew 25 Mission. Robert Fox Fugitive House of Israel leader Robert Fox Only the Matthew 25 Mission (not to be confused with a genuine group of the same name) wasn't really a prison ministry, and the House of Israel wasn't really a church. Instead, it was a crash pad for fugitives from justice and a secretive guild of "sovereign citizens" — part of a movement that remains alive and well despite seeming to fade in the late 1990s. During three raids of the House of Israel building this spring, police found a large stash of drugs and reams of racist, anti-Semitic, neo-Confederate and antigovernment materials. Among them were publications and videotapes extolling Oklahoma City bombers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols as patriots. "I've been into a lot of churches in my life," Jacksonville Police Chief Reece Daniel told the Intelligence Report. "I've never walked into one that was full of alcoholic beverages, full of pornography, and full of hate literature." The House of Israel's troubles with the law began the night of April 7, when a Jacksonville police officer responded to a call about two suspicious men on the street near the church's entrance. One of them ran but was caught later that evening. Both men refused to reveal their names or birth dates. They said they were members of the House of Israel, which afforded them special, above-the-law status. The police disagreed, arresting both men for refusing to identify themselves to a law enforcement officer. After determining that the men were in fact David Baugh and Stephen Jackson, both of Missouri, police learned that Jackson, who'd been staying at the House of Israel, was wanted on federal weapons charges. Jackson, 50, had been indicted January 23 on felony counts of unlawfully transporting firearms and possessing an unregistered silencer. On April 8, the day after his arrest in Jacksonville, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives took Jackson into custody. (Jackson pleaded not guilty to both counts on May 5). Baugh, who was also staying at the House of Israel, was initially released. A short time later, though, police learned that he was wanted for parole violations in Missouri, where he'd served time for several convictions for driving without a license. For more than 15 years, court records show, Baugh had refused to register his vehicles or obtain a driver's license. In lieu of state-issued license plates, he used homemade plates emblazoned with the words "PRIVATE" and "KINGDOM OF YAHWEH." While he was incarcerated in Missouri, Baugh sued police, lawyers and others involved in his convictions for $10 million. According to a federal judge's 2007 order dismissing the case, Baugh claimed he was a "sovereign person" and that Missouri law did not apply to him. In a separate, unsuccessful petition filed in 2005 challenging his conviction, Baugh stated that he had established the "Kingdom of Yahweh, Embassy and Sanctuary" near Sullivan, Mo., and that the state's laws unjustly prevented him from carrying out his work as an evangelist. Three years later in Jacksonville, Baugh's ministerial work was about to be interrupted again. Robert Fox passport During a raid, police found fake identification from the nonexistent country of Oceanus in the name of "Robert James" - a pseudonym for Robert James Fox. Suspicious Links Jacksonville police went looking for Baugh at the House of Israel on May 15. When no one answered their knock, they forced their way inside, where they not only found Baugh, but also thousands of prescription pills, mostly antibiotics and painkillers. The pills had been packaged 10 to 15 apiece in plastic baggies. Some of the bags were labeled "Republic of Texas," the name of an antigovernment separatist group that claims Texas was illegally annexed by the United States in 1845. One of its leaders, Richard McLaren, is serving 111 years in prison for his role in a weeklong 1997 standoff with several hundred Texas Rangers after his followers kidnapped a neighbor couple at gunpoint. "This group [the House of Israel] is the Republic of Texas wrapped in an ancient Hebraic religion of their own making," said Daniel, the police chief. Baugh denied in a letter this spring to KETK News, a Tyler, Texas-based NBC affiliate, that the House of Israel was "an offshoot" of the Republic of Texas. He wrote: "The House of Israel is a Christian ministry devoted to humanitarian service." But the pills weren't the House of Israel's only apparent link to the Republic of Texas. House of Israel member Robert Fox — the man with the Old Testament beard who ran the Matthew 25 Mission — was later found to have passed himself off as a lawyer and worked on a civil lawsuit for a woman whom law enforcement officials believe is treasurer of the Republic of Texas, Jacksonville Police Detective Jason Price said. Furthermore, investigators found that Barry Brooks, the dentist who originally started the House of Israel, had been a member of the Republic of Texas. By the time police raided the House of Israel building, however, Brooks had begun serving an eight-year state prison term. That sentence was imposed in April 2007 after he was convicted of two counts of practicing dentistry without a license. (Brooks contended that his involvement with the House of Israel exempted him from state regulations. According to records of a 2005 federal court hearing, Brooks claimed that "he was working under the ministry of Christ's church and did not need a license from the Texas State Board of Dental Examiners because he was ministering to God's creatures by fixing the temple. The Defendant argued that, according to scripture, the human body is a temple.") Brooks had previously been convicted in 2002 of three counts of failure to file income taxes. In a 2003 petition alleging that his conviction was invalid, Brooks made several nonsensical arguments, all of them commonly used by the "sovereign citizens" who proliferated in the 1990s. Among other things, he claimed that he was a citizen of Texas rather than the United States; that paying taxes would unfairly require him to enter into a contract with the U.S. government; that the United States was insolvent because its currency consisted of paper rather than gold or silver; and that the use of his name amounted to trespassing on private property. A federal judge upheld his conviction. Robert Fox passport The House of Israel was founded in a nondescript building in Jacksonville, Texas, where Robert Fox later also established what he described as a prison ministry. Vexatious Litigation A week after Jacksonville police confiscated the pills, they raided the House of Israel again. This time they arrested Fox, charging him with four misdemeanor counts of possessing dangerous drugs. Fox, who claimed that the drugs were remnants of Brooks' dental practice, bonded out of jail after a friend posted his $60,000 bail. But Fox, who police believe is around 59, wouldn't be a free man for long. As in the first raid, police found signs of illegal activity — this time, documents that made them suspect Fox was receiving payments for providing legal advice, even though he's not licensed to practice law. Citing the ongoing investigation, Detective Price declined to say how much money police believe Fox received from his phony law business. But he said that Fox was representing clients in numerous states, including California, Florida and Pennsylvania. And when Fox — who in 2006 was declared a "vexatious litigant" by a Texas court — came across a prospective client that he found particularly appealing, he'd offer his legal services. For instance, he appears to be the author of an affidavit, addressed to the correct court in Virginia, calling for the release of John Walker Lindh, the American citizen who fought for the Taliban in Afghanistan before his capture by U.S.-allied troops in 2001. He wrote to Mel Gibson, saying he wanted to defend the actor after his anti-Semitic rant during a traffic stop for DUI. Fox also had bigger plans: His Matthew 25 Mission had purchased a building in downtown Jacksonville near the House of Israel headquarters. He planned to open a legal training center there where students could, according to a fundraising letter, learn how to "escape the tentacles of the bar terrorists." Police don't believe that the building was ever occupied. On June 11, police went to the House of Israel a third time. Fox, who was out on bail, came to the door. He was arrested on two misdemeanor counts of practicing law without a license. Fox was released after posting a $30,000 bond. It was mainly during this third raid, however, that police seized thousands of documents — including five filing cabinets, nearly 30 boxes and seven computers — showing that Fox is a prominent figure in the antigovernment "Patriot" movement. He sold videotapes of one-day and two-day seminars he held in California and Las Vegas, respectively. Fox also gave lectures in Texas. For a fee of $175, participants supposedly could learn how to represent themselves in court and how to outwit the legal system. During one seminar, Fox said he had visited Waco, Texas, seven times in an effort to stop the deadly 1993 siege of the Branch Davidians, whom he believed were being persecuted by the U.S. government. A Thin Veil Through Fox's so-called prison ministry — which appeared to do little or no actual ministering — prisoners could order books outlining fringe legal strategies. "The majority of the books on the list did not deal with any kind of spiritual redemption," Detective Price told the Intelligence Report. "It was how to combat the legal process." He was also recruiting prisoners as clients for his fake legal practice. "His prison ministry was a very, very thinly veiled cover for a law practice that Fox was conducting through his prison contacts," Price said. In mid-July, Fox was charged with barratry, or improperly trying to solicit business for his legal practice, a felony under Texas law. By then, however, the man had vanished. Police believe he absconded to the Austin, Texas, area. It wasn't the first time Fox had disappeared. An investigation by the Jacksonville Police Department revealed that Fox — whom Price described as charismatic, intelligent and meticulous — began life in Canada as Robert Nicholas Fotti. When he was 15 or 16, his father killed his mother before committing suicide, according to information Fox later gave the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. He graduated from high school and attended college, where he started a business that provided light and sound systems for events. In the late 1970s, he ran a red light in Manitoba and killed two motorcyclists, a father and son. He was first acquitted of dangerous driving, then found guilty when the case was appealed to a higher court. Facing prison time in Canada, he fled to Dallas, drawn by a Biblical reference to three cities of refuge on each side of the Jordan River. Apparently, he chose Dallas as his city of refuge on the west side of the Mississippi River. Police aren't sure how he supported himself in Dallas. Although Fox initially lived in the United States illegally, he became a legal permanent resident under a 1986 law that granted amnesty to eligible immigrants who had entered the country illegally before 1982. Fox nonetheless chose not to receive a Social Security number or to become a U.S. citizen. Also during the 1980s, Fox changed his name from Robert Nicholas Fotti to Robert James Fox through a court in the Bahamas. Around 2004, he moved to Jacksonville and set up shop in the House of Israel. During the raids, police found tracts with titles such as The White United States of America and The True Confederacy, Daniel said. They also seized fake IDs issued to Fox under the name "Robert James," including a driver's license, birth certificate, passport and license plates. The documents identified him as a citizen of Oceanus, a nonexistent country. As this issue went to press, Fox remained at large. And that's worrisome to Jacksonville police. They say Fox is a dangerous man who has already inspired others to take up his cause, like Baugh and Jackson. "He might not be the lightning," Daniel said, "but he's certainly the lightning rod." ]]>

<![CDATA[ GOP's Whitman disavows 'proud racist' councilman - .SHE IS BENDING OVER FOR HISPANICS SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Republican gubernatorial hopeful Meg Whitman is severing ties with an elected official who described himself as a "proud racist." The Whitman campaign issued a statement Saturday disavowing Santa Clarita Councilman Bob Kellar. The statement comes one day after state Democrats called on the former eBay chief executive to distance herself from Kellar. During a recent Tea Party-style rally in Southern California, Kellar blamed illegal immigrants for harming the economy. His videotaped remarks were posted on YouTube and caused an uproar. Whitman's campaign spokeswoman Sarah Pompei says Kellar's comments are unacceptable. She says Kellar has voluntarily ended his involvement with the campaign. Kellar has said he has no regrets over the remark. ====================================================== WATCH THE YOUTUBE AT: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Take+A+Stand+For+America%21+&search_type=" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Take+A+Stand+For+America%21+&search_type=</a> =============================================== SHE IS BENDING OVER FOR HISPANICS - WE DON'T NEED MORE BULLSHIT IN CALIFORNIA. SOMEONE LIKE HER WITH NO BACKBONE IS NOT WHAT WE NEED.------------------------------ PLEASE VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE, NOT WHITMAN. ]]>

<![CDATA[There has been yet another eruption of violence from what our liberal friends a year or so ago were wont to call the "Angry Left." However, if you read The Washington Post, you might think this recent outburst of violence came from talk radio. The angry leftist behind the violence was John Patrick Bedell, 36, who, on the evening of March 4, walked up to an entrance of the Pentagon; pulled a gun on two Pentagon guards, Jeffrey Amos and Marvin Carraway; and was shot dead. Both guards were wounded. In the aftermath of this attack, it was reported that Bedell was a pot-smoking intellectualoid from California who left word on the Internet that according to his findings, a "coup regime" took over Washington at the time of President John F. Kennedy's assassination and has governed the country "up to the present day." What is more, the "coup regime," according to Bedell, was complicit in 9/11. This judgment might strike you as extreme, but apparently it is not, at least not on the left. You will recall that President Barack Obama's recently resigned environmental czar, Van Jones, signed a petition to this effect before being invited into the administration. In the Post's report on Bedell's assault headlined "Pentagon shooter's erratic journey," a high-school classmate recalled, "I remember (Bedell) being a sweet-natured, funny peacenik." Another acquaintance reported to the Post that Bedell was a heavy marijuana user, and elsewhere one of Bedell's brothers reported that he was a perpetual student who, as far as the brother knew, never held a job while bouncing from campus to campus and developing his esoteric theories. All in all, this glassy-eyed ideologue was surely a man of the left — the infantile left, to be sure, but the left. Nonetheless, in the Post's companion piece analyzing Bedell's assault and appearing on Page One under the headline "The disaffected lashing out at symbols of power," Post reporters wrote of "Bedell's rampage as a distorted manifestation of the anti-Washington view that has driven the rise of right-wing militias." Yes, they said right-wing militias." Then, just a few paragraphs away from the Post's report of Bedell's being a pothead and a "sweet-natured, funny peacenik," the Post's analytical piece gibbered on about "militias and hate groups" that "are interlinked to a much greater degree by the Web and mainstream radio and TV talk shows that echo many of the same viewpoints." So if Post readers think Rush Limbaugh had a hand in the recent assault on the Pentagon, they can be forgiven. Now, I actually listen to talk radio from time to time, and I cannot recall ever hearing one of the conservative talk hosts "echo(ing) many of the same viewpoints" of the wretched Bedell or any other member of the Angry Left. For that matter, I cannot imagine any member of the Angry Left finding himself in accord with conservative talk radio. How does one explain the Post's analysis, which is contradicted so starkly by the Post's news report? Does anyone edit the newspaper today? My explanation is that some journalists are actually very pious people. They have a deep faith in their heroes, and the Angry Left remains revered in these journalists' trusting minds. They see a California pothead who shares Van Jones' suspicion that the Bush administration was complicit in 9/11 attempt to gun down Pentagon guards, and they want to change the subject. They change the topic to "right-wing militias." Unsatisfied with that act of legerdemain, they bring in talk radio and TV talk shows. It all has happened before. On Nov. 22, 1963, an American communist, Lee Harvey Oswald, who admired the Cuban Revolution, gunned down JFK in Dallas, and the same kind of pious journalists caught gibbering in the Post the other day fastened the nation's attention not on left-wing violence, but on right-wing critics of Kennedy living otherwise-peaceful lives in Dallas. The violent potential of militant leftists never was pondered, though America was about to enter into a decade of protest that witnessed leftists burning down university buildings, bombing ROTC facilities and otherwise committing acts of violence on behalf of peace and a better world. Thus, John Patrick Bedell, a lifelong member of the Angry Left, gets himself killed while assaulting the Pentagon, and the pious journalists at The Washington Post lump the poor guy in with right-wing militias. It is shoddy journalism. Much worse, it is a shocking act of disrespect for the dead.]]>

<![CDATA[The most disturbing part of the ObamaCare debate is not about where Republicans and Democrats disagree, but where they agree. Take this issue of those with pre-existing illnesses. Many Republicans actually support government action to prevent insurance companies from refusing to insure them. Ignoring the benefits of cost-lowering free market competition and the role of charity, many Republicans believe it acceptable to force an insurance company — in business to insure against unknown risks — to "insure" someone currently experiencing a known risk. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., supports legislation to "eliminate pre-existing conditions" as a reason for a carrier to deny coverage. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., says government needs "to take care of things like pre-existing conditions so that that doesn't stop (people) from getting insurance." Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, supports prohibiting "insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions or charging higher premiums to people who are sick." But this should not surprise anyone who observes the allegedly "fiscally conservative," "pro-free market," "limited government" party in action. >From the acceptance of the New Deal to government bailouts of private industry, Republicans — sooner or later — go along. Here are just a few recent examples. Republican President George W. Bush, for a time, worked with a Republican House and Senate. Bush promised and delivered a prescription benefits bill for seniors. It expanded Medicare, the popular under-funded entitlement program passed — with Republican support, by the way — in 1965. We like seniors. Seniors vote. So if they struggle with their drugs bills, why, by all means make someone else help pay them. On the 10th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, signed into law by his father, Bush bragged about the law's importance and effectiveness. That such an assault on private employers engenders praise says much about the GOP's acceptance of federal government's command and control. Like Hamlet, Bush agonized over whether to support federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. He never said, "Why are we asking government to spend taxpayer money on research that is — or should be — done by the private sector or nonprofits?" No Child Left Behind ties federal dollars to local schools' performance. Where is the outrage about taxpayers in one state paying for education in another? What gives educrats in Washington, D.C., the skills, wisdom and competence to run schools in all 50 states? More importantly, what clause in the Constitution permits this? Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan campaigned to shut down the Department of Education. Reagan failed. Today any candidate making such promises gets a one-way ticket to ShutterIsland. The entire ObamaCare debate starts off in the wrong place — with Republicans agreeing that "reform" is necessary, health care "costs too much" and that government must "make health care more affordable." But it is because of government — laws, regulations and policies — that users pay more for services and drugs than they otherwise would. Licensing requirements restrict potential caregivers. A non-doctor field medic in Iraq or Afghanistan could not come home, hang up a shingle, and render basic care without facing prosecution. Despite our aging population, trade associations, along with laws and regulations, restrict the number of doctors. Insurance companies enjoy protected markets because laws restrict carriers from competing across state lines. The Food and Drug Administration increases the cost of drugs while delaying or keeping possibly beneficial drugs off the market. Republicans ran for the exits when Bush attempted a partial privatization of Social Security. And they should encourage a full-throated deregulation/privatization of the health care industry. After airline deregulation, fares declined. After telephone deregulation, telecommunications companies started providing a numbing array of services — along with better quality, lower prices and constant innovation. Because government pays for nearly half of medical costs, we have a nation of government-provided-health-care dependents. Understandably, they want what they currently have or expect to have in the near future. But Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are steadily gnawing away at the country's foundation. The bill is coming due. In 1900, government at all levels — federal, state and local — took about 7 percent of America's income. Today it's almost 40 percent. And that doesn't include an estimated 10 percent cost in federal unfunded mandates imposed on states and private business. President Barack Obama and Democrats want to add more than 30 million people — those without health insurance — to the takers, with little or no concern about the effect on the givers. Are Republicans sounding the alarm about government's present intrusion in health care and its counterproductive effect on quality, affordability and accessibility? Government, they should argue and persuade, grows at the expense of the productive. This eventually weakens the country by sapping the incentive of risk takers. This makes it harder — not easier — to help those we claim to care about. A collectivist, whether an active or passive one, is still a collectivist. Having an "R" after the name provides no defense.]]>

<![CDATA[A Marxist group that has demanded the “destruction” of the U.S. and issued a call "to bring this government down" is the recipient of stimulus funds from the Obama American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). This same group, the Brecht Forum, has also called for the complete takeover of insurance companies and farms in America. The controversial stimulus bill, as ARRA is better known, provided funds for the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA), which promptly granted the New York City-based Brecht Forum $5,000 in 2009 and $9,000 in 2010. The NYSCA had previously announced in 2008 that due to state budget cuts it would no longer be able to fund 573 organizations that it had previously funded. One of the groups on the list to be slashed was the Brecht Forum. After NYSCA secured $399,000 in stimulus money, the Brecht Forum once again had funding. The Brecht Forum is host to the New York Marxist School and displays this statement on their website: Can society be changed significantly for the better? What kind of changes would be needed? and, Who could bring about such changes? Questions like these are what motivated Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels to develop a method for studying the dynamics of change in societies. In 1975, a group of civil rights, community, labor, and student activists came together to found The Brecht Forum's New York Marxist School. They saw the study of Marxism as central, not as a dogma but as a living current of thought and as a vital tool for understanding capitalist society. In a September 2009 lecture at the Brecht Forum, Jed Brandt, a longtime communist, political activist and outspoken atheist offered the following instructions: “We have to bring this Government down! We have to help destroy this system and that requires increasing the alienation that working people and oppressed people feel. The way this change is going to happen is the destruction of The United States of America!” Federal stimulus dollars are providing financial support for the Brecht Forum. The grants from NYSCA were ostensibly provided for artistic projects, for example, the NYSCA website shows the following as the description for the Brecht Forum grant: “The Brecht Forum's 09-10 program features workshops in the participatory theater techniques developed by the noted Brazilian director Augusto Boal. The program includes monthly workshops led by members of the Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory and two master workshops led by Augusto Boal.” The website for the Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory describes this form of art in rather revealing political terms, “Augusto Boal has defined Theater of the Oppressed as a rehearsal for revolution.” The website further describes its mission as using “interactive theater as an organizing tool” and works with “educators, human service and healthcare workers, union organizers and community activists” to solve perceived problems.]]>

<![CDATA[New jobless claims dropped an entire 1.2% from last week to this, 6,000 down from 468,000 last week. The new figure is slightly higher than analyst expectations, but either way, it’s basically statistical noise from a relatively constant level of joblessness. How did the AP report it today? Guess: The number of newly laid-off workers requesting unemployment benefits slipped last week, the latest sign the employment picture is slowly brightening. The Labor Department said initial jobless claims fell by 6,000 to a seasonally adjusted 462,000. That’s close to Wall Street analysts’ estimates of 460,000, according to Thomson Reuters, and the second straight drop. The figures come after other mildly positive news on employment. Job openings rose in January to their highest level in almost a year, the department said on Tuesday. And the unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.7 percent in February, the department said last week, better than analysts expected. The jobless rate hasn’t risen since October. Last week’s news wasn’t “mildly positive” at all. It was a continuation of bad news. The reason the overall rate didn’t go upward wasn’t because job losses had stabilized but because of movement of discouraged workers out of the work force. The U-6 category, combining the unemployed with the marginally attached workers and part-time workers who want to work full time, had dropped from 17.4% in October to 16.5% in January. It went back up to 16.8% in February, as did the U-4 number from 10.3% to 10.4%. This report also uses the weather for a reason for the increases in unemployment in February, but fails to explain how that’s still impacting initial jobless claims more than three weeks later. After all, these are people losing their jobs now, not three or four weeks ago. Three months ago, new jobless claims hit their low mark of 434,000, and we’re now up 6.5% over that on a weekly basis. That’s not due to storms or the weather (remember, this data is seasonally adjusted anyway) but to a stagnant economy that’s not producing jobs. Also, February’s weather wouldn’t have impacted the longer-term U6 and U4 numbers. There isn’t much difference between 462,000 and 468,000 in new jobless claims week to week for any rational analysis. While it’s an improvement to the 6,000 who didn’t lose jobs this week, it’s otherwise a status quo. Until that number gets to around 325,000, we will not be experiencing any net job creation, and that’s the only “brightening” for which we’re looking.]]>

<![CDATA[The final details of the financial regulatory reform bill being negotiated by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Bob Corker (R-TN) are still being hammered out, but the underlying contours are clear: more government bureaucracy layered on top of our existing impenetrable and unaccountable financial regulatory system. Specifically, the Dodd/Corker plan reportedly still contains these elements: The Consumer Financial Protection Agency - There is still debate over whether this new entity will be a stand alone agency, housed in the Department of Treasury, or housed in the Federal Reserve. Wherever the new entity ends up, the bottom line will be the same: a massive new bureaucracy afforded ambiguous grants of almost unlimited power. Although intended to help consumers, the net result of such a move would be to stifle the innovations that would bring them improved, lower-cost financial products. Permanent TARP - Details are sketchy here, too, but reports are that federal bureaucrats, possibly the FDIC, will be given new "resolution authority" powers backed by a permanent $50 billion slush "resolution fund." If this new power is given to the FDIC, it would be the first time the FDIC's authority was extended beyond the banks that it directly insures. But more importantly, these provisions would establish a permanent TARP - the radioactively unpopular $700 billion Wall Street bail out slush fund. The Agency for Financial Stability - Sold as purely a monitoring and information gathering entity, without the proper limiting language, a new systemic risk agency could essentially draft any financial firm into the federal financial regulatory system and subject it to a wide variety of restrictions that could include compelling large financial firms to sell off portions of themselves, drop lines of business, break up, or otherwise reduce the "risk" that the regulators believe they may impose on the financial system. Instead of allowing for risky behavior to be properly priced by the marketplace, taken together these new bureaucracies would almost guarantee more big bank bailouts costing taxpayers untold billions of dollars. The new regulators could declare any problem with a major financial institution to be a potential systemic risk and tap into the fund to bail it out. There is a better solution. A better approach to preventing another crisis is to modify U.S. bankruptcy law to accommodate the special problems of resolving huge financial firms and to allow the courts to appoint receivers with the specialized knowledge necessary to best deal with their failure. By creating an open process controlled by an impartial judiciary guided by established statutory rules, financial firms, investors, taxpayers, and others would have the advance knowledge that large financial firms that were once known as "too big to fail" can now be closed if necessary without risking disaster. In addition, requiring all larger financial services firms to hold significant amounts of capital to cover losses would greatly reduce the systemic risk that they could pose to the financial system. Higher capital levels would enable many firms that would fail under today's capital levels to survive a crisis, saving shareholders and bondholders their investments, employees their jobs, and taxpayers billions of dollars in federal bailouts. Congress and the Administration need to learn and heed the lessons of 2008, or a repeat crisis will just be a matter of time.]]>

<![CDATA[Question??? How can Republicans be obstructionists when in the minority? If the president is serious about passing nationalized health care, he ought to be meeting with the Democrats, not the Republicans. Republicans can't stop the Democrats from socializing health care: They are a tiny minority party in both the House and the Senate. (Note to America: You might want to keep this in mind next time you go to the polls.) As the Democratic base has been hysterically pointing out, both the House and the Senate have already passed national health care bills. Either body could vote for the other's bill, and — presto! — Obama would have a national health care bill, replete with death panels, abortion coverage and lots and lots of new government commissions! Sadly, as the president's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has noted, the Democratic base is "@#$%^ retarded." The reason massive Democratic majorities in Congress aren't enough to pass socialist health care is AMERICANS DON'T WANT SOCIALIZED MEDICINE! In fact, you might say that the nation is in a boiling cauldron of rage against it. Consequently, a lot of Democrats are suddenly having second thoughts about vast new government commissions regulating every aspect of Americans' medical care. Obama isn't stupid — he's not seriously trying to get a health care bill passed. The whole purpose of a public "summit" with the minority party is to muddy up the Republicans before the November elections. You know, the elections Democrats are going to lose because of this whole health care thing. Right now, Americans are hopping mad, swinging a stick and hoping to hit anyone who so much as thinks about nationalizing health care. But the Democrats think it's a good strategy to call the Republicans "The Party of No." When it comes to Obamacare, Americans don't want a party of "No," they want a party of "Hell, No!" or, as Rahm Emanuel might say, "*&^%$#@ No!" It's as if the patient has a minor fever and the Democrats (as doctor in this example) want to cut off his arms and legs. The Republicans want to give the patient two aspirin. "Compromise" means the Republicans agree to amputate only one arm and one leg. Complaining that Republicans are "obstructionists" is not a damaging charge when most Americans are dying to obstruct the Democrats with a 2-by-4. In town halls and tea parties across the nation, Obama lost the argument with Americans. So now he wants a debating partner who will be less challenging: elected Republicans. There are other important points Republicans cannot raise often enough — such as putting scuzzy medical malpractice lawyers like John Edwards out of business. OK, that wasn't fair: Even trial lawyers are almost never as scuzzy as John Edwards. We want to put them all out of business.]]>

<![CDATA[I'm not Paul Ireland, as you well know, and I do make typos. I am 6 feet 1 inch tall and 200 lbs, and yes I am fairly thin. I'm not 6 feet 11 inches. If I were, I'd be in the NBA making a lot more money than I do now. I am happy you highlighted my accurate statement. I'll do it again. All but the most deluded and insane people would agree that the UK has a superior health care system than America's Why is this? Because it is an irrefutable, undeniable, and verifiable fact, and only deluded and insane people deny facts.]]>