Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I'm so cynical now, it wouldn't surprise me if both sides got together months ago and planned this "protest" and eventual "fix" just so the markets would continue to go up and have no corrections for the uber-rich this year at all. ANYTHING is possible with that many sociopaths. I can see these guys all acting like they disagree on certain topics, and behind closed doors, they laugh at the American people.
I will agree on the "food" portion of your statement, as well as the reason we have "crisis" care, but that is the reality, and I would bet, for 98% of the population, this will continue, because most people do not have the will or desire to change. Unfortunately, in America, Big Mac and fries rule.
Simply making 50% of the people pay for the 20% will not cure this problem, and it will make crisis care worse and more expensive. It will also break insurance companies, who I have no love for, but have to believe it's better than a federally-run insurance and healthcare program.
If it were ANY good at all, Barry and the sociopaths in Congress would not exempt themselves so readily, now would they?
In 5 years, there will be such a doctor shortage that healthcare in the country, for the 80% who DID have health insurance and great care, will go to TOTAL CRAP, while the 20% that Barry and Congress used as the EXCUSE for this monstrosity -- because THEY (the slime in DC) have wavers to OPT OUT of this total garbage -- will see perhaps a bit more CONVENIENCE by not having to go to the emergency room for everything. BUT, even the 20%'s care will DROP to CRAP as doctors are forced out of this business.
There will still be a group of great doctors and hospitals, unfortunately for 99% of Americans, they will all be located in DC for the ruling elite who convinced the moron sheeple to champion this TOTAL CRAP OF A SYSTEM for HEALTHCARE.
This is as smart as saying the debt ceiling is off the table and must always be raised. It ONLY makes sense to those who don't give a tinker's damn for the people who will inherit what the sociopaths and psychopaths leave behind . . . oh, and MORONS as well, which now make up, based on IQ, about 53% of the population.
In 5 years, there will be such a doctor shortage that healthcare in the country, for the 80% who DID have health insurance and great care, will go to TOTAL CRAP, while the 20% that Barry and Congress used as the EXCUSE for this monstrosity -- because THEY (the slime in DC) have wavers to OPT OUT of this total garbage -- will see perhaps a bit more CONVENIENCE by not having to go to the emergency room for everything. BUT, even the 20%'s care will DROP to CRAP as doctors are forced out of this business.
There will still be a group of great doctors and hospitals, unfortunately for 99% of Americans, they will all be located in DC for the ruling elite who convinced the moron sheeple to champion this TOTAL CRAP OF A SYSTEM for HEALTHCARE.
This is as smart as saying the debt ceiling is off the table and must always be raised. It ONLY makes sense to those who don't give a tinker's damn for the people who will inherit what the sociopaths and psychopaths leave behind . . . oh, and MORONS as well, which now make up, based on IQ, about 53% of the population.
"Big stimulus to the economy?" OMG.
In 5 years, there will be such a doctor shortage that healthcare in the country, for the 80% who DID have health insurance and great care, will go to TOTAL CRAP, while the 20% that Barry and Congress used as the EXCUSE for this monstrosity -- because THEY (the slime in DC) have wavers to OPT OUT of this total garbage -- will see perhaps a bit more CONVENIENCE by not having to go to the emergency room for everything. BUT, even the 20%'s care will DROP to CRAP as doctors are forced out of this business.
There will still be a group of great doctors and hospitals, unfortunately for 99% of Americans, they will all be located in DC for the ruling elite who convinced the moron sheeple to champion this TOTAL CRAP OF A SYSTEM for HEALTHCARE.
This is as smart as saying the debt ceiling is off the table and must always be raised. It ONLY makes sense to those who don't give a tinker's damn for the people who will inherit what the sociopaths and psychopaths leave behind . . . oh, and MORONS as well, which now make up, based on IQ, about 53% of the population.
We can only HOPE that they have the guts to FORCE this out-of-control gov't to actually make a balanced budget. Those who say, "raise the limit," and then "negotiate" next year are FOOLS! This is why we have $17 TRILLION in debt. Put it off forever and wait for the calamity to come. An idea born of psychopaths.
Oh, I have no doubt that nearly enough money could be raised if tax rates rise to 90%, but to live in a country that steals 50-90% of what one earns is called a totalitarian state or a dictatorship, rather than a beautiful, socialistic, everyone loves everyone paradise that you think it would be.
My posts are not full of nonsense, but yours are certainly full of delusion.
I believe that those who are blessed to be able-bodied and work will take care of those TRULY in need (with little necessity for a huge bureaucracy of sociopaths living like billionaires), while you believe that anyone who makes more than the poverty level (hope and change sultans excluded) is an evil, selfish conservative who delights in the suffering of those less fortunate. Statistics prove that religious conservatives are the ones who support charity -- REAL charity -- and liberal atheists are "look out for #1" or "I am entitled" types. Do some research on who created and began most charities in this country. It might surprise you.
PS -- Did you actually read your post? It is written like a 3rd grader, which explains a lot of your thinking.
None of it matters, because thanks to BOTH sociopath parties, the country is doomed to an economic FAILURE! The fact that you actually believe that America can run on monopoly-printed money FOREVER is beyond irresponsible. It's damning future generations to pain and suffering unlike you can imagine, and that's pathetic for BOTH parties and the sheeple who happily ride along taking anything they can get from others.
It's the AMOUNTS, not percentages, that now threaten the country in the future. Regan took it from about $985 BILLION in 1981 to about $2.8 TRILLION in 1987. A $1.8 TRILLION increase. Bush, SR -- $2.8 to $4.1. Clinton -- $4.1 to $5.95. Bush -- $5.95 to $11.3 (INSANE). Now Obama -- $11.3 and knocking on $17-18 TRILLION (Double INSANE with TWO years to go yet!)
Both parties UNWILLING to face ANY pain during their terms. All promises and printed money and to hell with the future generations -- "Let someone else deal with the real fallout!"
Obama Stumbles Despite Friendly Press
This afternoon President Obama gave a brief statement on the government shutdown, said nothing new, and received a warm collective embrace from the press, who made sure not to ask him about the disastrous ObamaCare rollout. And yet, perhaps out of exhaustion or a case of the second-term blues, Obama managed to accidentally say something worth quoting at the tail end of the Q and A.
The president was asked if he had any regrets about his 2011 budget deal with House Speaker John Boehner, and how the present political dynamics would have to change going forward. In his response, Obama actually touched on a popular critique Republicans have deployed recently, which is Obama’s hypocrisy for his past opposition to raising the debt ceiling, a tactic he and his allies now consider arson and hostage-taking when used by Republicans.
After first saying that he learned from the 2011 standoff that the country cannot come that close to “default” again, the president said this:
And by the way, you know, I often hear people say, well, in the past it’s been dealt with all the time. The truth of the matter is, if you look at the history, people posture about the debt ceiling frequently, but the way the debt ceiling often got passed was, you’d stick the debt ceiling onto a budget negotiation once it was completed because people figured, well, I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote; let me do it all at once.
But it wasn’t a situation in which, you know what, if I don’t get what I want, then I’m going to let us default. That’s what’s changed. And that’s what we learned in 2011.
When Obama opposed raising the debt ceiling, he was just posturing the way people do “frequently.” In other words, when Obama makes a speech on policy he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying; he just thinks enough of the voters will like his message. Obama is not, Obama says, to be taken literally. They are just words.
The other interesting nugget in that paragraph was the part where Obama said that in the past the debt ceiling was easier to sneak through without the public noticing until it was decoupled from omnibus spending bills. The thought process of America’s elected politicians, Obama explained approvingly, was: “I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote.”
The Obama campaign seems to have calculated correctly that “Obama: Change we can believe in” would make a snappier bumper sticker slogan than “Obama: I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes.” (The latter would also draw attention to his predilection as senator to vote “present.”)
This exchange took place after CBS’s Mark Knoller asked the president why he doesn’t support passing bills to fund important priorities while these non-negotiations drag on. Aren’t you tempted, Knoller asked Obama, to sign bipartisan bills that fund programs you support? “Of course I’m tempted,” Obama responded, “because you’d like to think that you could solve at least some of the problem if you couldn’t solve all of it.” Well yes, that does seem to be the point. This may seem reasonable, Obama said, but don’t be fooled. It’s a trap:
But here’s the problem. What you’ve seen are bills that come up where wherever Republicans are feeling political pressure, they put a bill forward. And if there’s no political heat, if there’s no television story on it, then nothing happens. And if we do some sort of shotgun approach like that, then you’ll have some programs that are highly visible get funded and reopened, like national monuments, but things that don’t get a lot of attention, like those SBA loans, not being funded.
You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers.
Then the president added, almost as an afterthought: “And you know, we don’t get to select which programs we implement or not.” Since Obama chooses which parts of which laws he wants to implement and enforce at will, as if Congress were a supercommittee brainstorming ideas rather than a coequal branch passing laws, I’m guessing he would explain that he is again being take too literally when he’s obviously just posturing. Now he tells us.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/10/08/obama-stumbles-despite-friendly-press/
IMPORTANT
Read this part again, and ask yourself why you would support a man/party who blatantly thinks it FOOLISH to "engage the public in how to spend their tax money?" It's FOOLISH because they don't look at the money they STEAL from you as YOURS, but it is THEIRS, and you OWE THEM! They are NOT public SERVANTS but rather public dictators and thieves!
"You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers."
Obama Stumbles Despite Friendly Press
This afternoon President Obama gave a brief statement on the government shutdown, said nothing new, and received a warm collective embrace from the press, who made sure not to ask him about the disastrous ObamaCare rollout. And yet, perhaps out of exhaustion or a case of the second-term blues, Obama managed to accidentally say something worth quoting at the tail end of the Q and A.
The president was asked if he had any regrets about his 2011 budget deal with House Speaker John Boehner, and how the present political dynamics would have to change going forward. In his response, Obama actually touched on a popular critique Republicans have deployed recently, which is Obama’s hypocrisy for his past opposition to raising the debt ceiling, a tactic he and his allies now consider arson and hostage-taking when used by Republicans.
After first saying that he learned from the 2011 standoff that the country cannot come that close to “default” again, the president said this:
And by the way, you know, I often hear people say, well, in the past it’s been dealt with all the time. The truth of the matter is, if you look at the history, people posture about the debt ceiling frequently, but the way the debt ceiling often got passed was, you’d stick the debt ceiling onto a budget negotiation once it was completed because people figured, well, I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote; let me do it all at once.
But it wasn’t a situation in which, you know what, if I don’t get what I want, then I’m going to let us default. That’s what’s changed. And that’s what we learned in 2011.
When Obama opposed raising the debt ceiling, he was just posturing the way people do “frequently.” In other words, when Obama makes a speech on policy he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying; he just thinks enough of the voters will like his message. Obama is not, Obama says, to be taken literally. They are just words.
The other interesting nugget in that paragraph was the part where Obama said that in the past the debt ceiling was easier to sneak through without the public noticing until it was decoupled from omnibus spending bills. The thought process of America’s elected politicians, Obama explained approvingly, was: “I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote.”
The Obama campaign seems to have calculated correctly that “Obama: Change we can believe in” would make a snappier bumper sticker slogan than “Obama: I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes.” (The latter would also draw attention to his predilection as senator to vote “present.”)
This exchange took place after CBS’s Mark Knoller asked the president why he doesn’t support passing bills to fund important priorities while these non-negotiations drag on. Aren’t you tempted, Knoller asked Obama, to sign bipartisan bills that fund programs you support? “Of course I’m tempted,” Obama responded, “because you’d like to think that you could solve at least some of the problem if you couldn’t solve all of it.” Well yes, that does seem to be the point. This may seem reasonable, Obama said, but don’t be fooled. It’s a trap:
But here’s the problem. What you’ve seen are bills that come up where wherever Republicans are feeling political pressure, they put a bill forward. And if there’s no political heat, if there’s no television story on it, then nothing happens. And if we do some sort of shotgun approach like that, then you’ll have some programs that are highly visible get funded and reopened, like national monuments, but things that don’t get a lot of attention, like those SBA loans, not being funded.
You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers.
Then the president added, almost as an afterthought: “And you know, we don’t get to select which programs we implement or not.” Since Obama chooses which parts of which laws he wants to implement and enforce at will, as if Congress were a supercommittee brainstorming ideas rather than a coequal branch passing laws, I’m guessing he would explain that he is again being take too literally when he’s obviously just posturing. Now he tells us.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/10/08/obama-stumbles-despite-friendly-press/
IMPORTANT
Read this part again, and ask yourself why you would support a man/party who blatantly thinks it FOOLISH to "engage the public in how to spend their tax money?" It's FOOLISH because they don't look at the money they STEAL from you as YOURS, but it is THEIRS, and you OWE THEM! They are NOT public SERVANTS but rather public dictators and thieves!
"You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers."
Obama Stumbles Despite Friendly Press
This afternoon President Obama gave a brief statement on the government shutdown, said nothing new, and received a warm collective embrace from the press, who made sure not to ask him about the disastrous ObamaCare rollout. And yet, perhaps out of exhaustion or a case of the second-term blues, Obama managed to accidentally say something worth quoting at the tail end of the Q and A.
The president was asked if he had any regrets about his 2011 budget deal with House Speaker John Boehner, and how the present political dynamics would have to change going forward. In his response, Obama actually touched on a popular critique Republicans have deployed recently, which is Obama’s hypocrisy for his past opposition to raising the debt ceiling, a tactic he and his allies now consider arson and hostage-taking when used by Republicans.
After first saying that he learned from the 2011 standoff that the country cannot come that close to “default” again, the president said this:
And by the way, you know, I often hear people say, well, in the past it’s been dealt with all the time. The truth of the matter is, if you look at the history, people posture about the debt ceiling frequently, but the way the debt ceiling often got passed was, you’d stick the debt ceiling onto a budget negotiation once it was completed because people figured, well, I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote; let me do it all at once.
But it wasn’t a situation in which, you know what, if I don’t get what I want, then I’m going to let us default. That’s what’s changed. And that’s what we learned in 2011.
When Obama opposed raising the debt ceiling, he was just posturing the way people do “frequently.” In other words, when Obama makes a speech on policy he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying; he just thinks enough of the voters will like his message. Obama is not, Obama says, to be taken literally. They are just words.
The other interesting nugget in that paragraph was the part where Obama said that in the past the debt ceiling was easier to sneak through without the public noticing until it was decoupled from omnibus spending bills. The thought process of America’s elected politicians, Obama explained approvingly, was: “I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes to cut programs or raise taxes and then also have to take a debt ceiling vote.”
The Obama campaign seems to have calculated correctly that “Obama: Change we can believe in” would make a snappier bumper sticker slogan than “Obama: I don’t want to take a bunch of tough votes.” (The latter would also draw attention to his predilection as senator to vote “present.”)
This exchange took place after CBS’s Mark Knoller asked the president why he doesn’t support passing bills to fund important priorities while these non-negotiations drag on. Aren’t you tempted, Knoller asked Obama, to sign bipartisan bills that fund programs you support? “Of course I’m tempted,” Obama responded, “because you’d like to think that you could solve at least some of the problem if you couldn’t solve all of it.” Well yes, that does seem to be the point. This may seem reasonable, Obama said, but don’t be fooled. It’s a trap:
But here’s the problem. What you’ve seen are bills that come up where wherever Republicans are feeling political pressure, they put a bill forward. And if there’s no political heat, if there’s no television story on it, then nothing happens. And if we do some sort of shotgun approach like that, then you’ll have some programs that are highly visible get funded and reopened, like national monuments, but things that don’t get a lot of attention, like those SBA loans, not being funded.
You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers.
Then the president added, almost as an afterthought: “And you know, we don’t get to select which programs we implement or not.” Since Obama chooses which parts of which laws he wants to implement and enforce at will, as if Congress were a supercommittee brainstorming ideas rather than a coequal branch passing laws, I’m guessing he would explain that he is again being take too literally when he’s obviously just posturing. Now he tells us.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/10/08/obama-stumbles-despite-friendly-press/
IMPORTANT
Read this part again, and ask yourself why you would support a man/party who blatantly thinks it FOOLISH to "engage the public in how to spend their tax money?" It's FOOLISH because they don't look at the money they STEAL from you as YOURS, but it is THEIRS, and you OWE THEM! They are NOT public SERVANTS but rather public dictators and thieves!
"You see, by funding uncontroversial and broadly popular programs while not automatically funding everything else, the Republicans are trying to trick the government into setting priorities, building bipartisan coalitions, and engaging the public in how to spend their tax money. Obama seemed to think this was self-evidently foolish, which tells you much about what the president thinks of the taxpayers."
Come on, Sox. Squirm a way out of this for Barry and company (proving your complete mind control from the liberal side), or man-up and finally admit that there is no difference in the two sociopath parties in DC! They ALL are scum and should be tossed out.
Media Give Obama a Pass on Debt Ceiling Hypocrisy
President Obama has taken an admirable stand for fiscal austerity, and blasted attempts to yet again raise the debt ceiling, which currently stands at $14.3 trillion (with a T) - or roughly the GDP of the United States. Said the president:
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
Just kidding. That was Senator Obama in 2006, when debt was apparently a far larger problem - even though the ceiling was only(!) $9 trillion at the time.
After an attempt at ObamaCare repeal, the first major legislative battle of the 112th Congress, sworn in Wednesday, will likely take place over the debt ceiling, which was last raised in February 2010. The Treasury Department expects the national debt to meet its current limit some time in the first half of 2011.
Asked about the massive disconnect between Obama's passionate 2006 statement and his impending support for raising the debt limit this year, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday that Obama only voted against the measure in 2006 because he knew his vote wouldn't count (the final tally was 52-48 for the measure).
MSNBC talking heads have been parroting that line as well. Subbing for Rachel Maddow on Monday, Nation editor Chris Hayes told David Frum, who brought up Obama's 2006 position, that Obama's vote "was essentially…meaningless," according to a Nexis transcript.
In the very next segment, another MSNBC host, Lawrence O'Donnell, repeated the canard: "Obama cast one of those convenient votes against it in the Senate because he knew it was going to pass," O'Donnell told Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Tex., when he brought up the president's 2006 position.
But remember, MSNBC is not a mouthpiece for this administration.
While MSNBC defended Obama's about-face on the issue, the networks avoided it completely. The only time Obama's 2006 vote came up in the past week, according to a Nexis search, was on ABC, when Sen.-elect Rand Paul mentioned it.
Neither did the networks mention Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid's 2006 statement that legislators "should explain why they think more debt is good for the economy." With a Republican in the White House, here's what Reid had to say:
How can the Republican majority in this Congress explain to their constituents that trillions of dollars in new debt is good for our economy? How can they explain that they think it’s fair to force our children, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes. That’s what it will have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation’s dependence on foreign creditors?
They should explain this. Maybe they can convince the public they’re right. I doubt it. Because most Americans know that increasing debt is the last thing we should be doing. After all, I repeat, the Baby Boomers are about to retire. Under the circumstances, any credible economist would tell you we should be reducing debt, not increasing it.Democrats won’t be making argument to supper this legalization, which will weaken our country. Weaken our county.
Sadly, we've come to expect hypocrisy from our politicians. With the party in the White Hosue switched, expect roles in Congress to be completely reversed. Indeed, in 2006, no Senate Democrats voted to raise the debt limit, and only two sitting Republicans voted against it.
But shouldn't the media at least be discussing the massive double standard at work here? And when Senate Republicans start invoking the "symbolic vote" line, will the media treat it with the same kid gloves (where it's addressed at all) that they're giving Obama's about-face? I'm not holding my breath.
*****UPDATE: Here's then-Senator Joe Biden speaking on the issue in 2006 (h/t Erick Erickson):
But as the rest of the world copes with the waves of U.S. debt, we are now all in the same leaky boat. There is just so much of our debt other nations want to hold. The more of it they accumulate, the closer we are to the day when they will not want any more. When that happens, slowly or rapidly, our interest rates will go up, the value of their U.S. bonds will drop, and we will all have big problems. We need both more awareness, and more understanding, of this fundamental threat to our economic well being and the global economy. … The President’s budget plans will bring that number to $11.8 trillion at the end of the next 5 years. This is a record of utter disregard for our Nation’s financial future. It is a record of indifference to the price our children and grandchildren will pay to redeem our debt when it comes due. History will not judge this record kindly. My vote against the debt limit increase cannot change the fact that we have incurred this debt already, and will no doubt incur more. It is a statement that I refuse to be associated with the policies that brought us to this point.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2011/01/06/media-give-obama-pass-debt-ceiling-hypocrisy
On the floor of the Senate in 2006, then-Sen. Barrack Obama said, "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies. ... Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
Since President Obama has taken office, the national debt has risen from about $11 trillion to $17 trillion and counting, and he is currently looking to raise the debt ceiling once again during his administration. Is it a failure of leadership, are we borrowing from other countries to finance our reckless fiscal policies, are our children and grandchildren much more in debt than they were five years ago? Absolutely. Yet the president apparently has a very short memory from what he said as a senator speaking about the Bush administration, and what he is saying today on his own. I wasn't any happier during the Bush administration about the burgeoning debt and the burden on our children.
His stand and threats toward Congress is the height of hypocrisy. He is unwilling to either negotiate nor look at where the government can cut its outrageous spending. He and his family live like the royal family, at taxpayers' expense. He and his administration behave like a dictators and thugs. The country is no better off than it was five years ago; in fact, I would dare say we are much worse off both in national and international arenas. Do I feel safer than I did five years ago? Absolutely not.
Does he not remember what he said seven years ago, or does he just assume that we don't remember his stand on so many issues that as president he has changed time after time?
I would also like to ask, why isn't "Obamacare" (the Affordable Care Act) good enough for Obama and his family, for Congress and their families and staff, for big business, labor unions and other friends of Obama, but it is good enough for the rest of us? Hypocritical? You bet!
http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20131005-OPINION-310050309
Check out who commits most RACIAL crimes, and I think you will find those you defend are, indeed, the largest "racists" in the country per capita.
Liberal humor is not very funny. They run the gov't in the same fashion. Pathetically.
Just one question, if you dare answer. Do you think the country could possibly go broke and have a cataclysmic failure in the future if this group in DC continues to spend hundreds of billions more than they take in?
REPUBLIC REPUBLIC REPUBLIC. Get that word through the liberal thick skull.
Like I said, let them bring on who is trampling the Constitution MORE. My vote goes to Barry and his wannabe police state.
Pro -- how's that 13th Amendment working out for liberals?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2473993/posts
You certainly don't want to get in a pissing contest to see which TWO guys in the HOUSE (Hint - shrub and Barry) have trashed the Constitution the most. Just admit that they are at least equals in this despicable behavior. Can ONE liberal even admit that? I think not. Hope and change is a powerful mind control.
That argument works BOTH ways. It's just that liberal kool-aid drinkers refuse to see that. The Democrats in Congress ALSO suck MILLIONS from taxpayers to make their life one of luxury, but a good liberal has no problem with that. It's only the "rich" Republicans that abuse their power and throw temper tantrums, right?
Open your eyes, and grow up. Stop being so manipulated by EITHER side of this sociopath group.
Here it is again, for those not familiar with the robbery. You think these sociopaths only receive a taxpayer-provided salary of $174,000 (more for "leaders")???? Nooooo. EACH one sucks another $1.2 MILLION to $4.6 MILLION from taxpayers EACH! Let that sink in! EACH! Do the math on how much money you would have to have in a bank, at current, guaranteed interest rates of .01-.05% to RECEIVE this much in SPENDING money. Hint -- they live like BILLIONAIRES on the backs of the taxpayers. They think themselves so far above the sheeple, it's not even funny. 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the country are in DC! Now you know why. Congress is made up of sultans and sheiks living like they have BILLIONS in the bank . . . and THEY DO, but it's YOUR money! These clowns truly believe, like Rush Limbaugh, that they have "talent on loan from God," and it's disgusting.
In the House of Representatives, each person receives a Members' Representational Allowance (MRA).
In 2012, individual representatives received MRA allowances ranging from $1,270,129 to $1,564,613, with an average of $1,353,205.13.
Most of each member's annual MRA allowance is used to pay their office personnel. In 2012, for example, the office personnel allowance for each member was $944,671.
Each member is allowed to use their MRA to employ up to18 full time, permanent employees and up to four part time or temporary employees. The annual salary of any employee of a member of the House of Representatives is currently limited to $168,411 (in 2013).
The Senate is EVEN WORSE. They call their slush fund the Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA).
In the fiscal year 2013 legislative branch appropriations bill, the size of the average Senate SOPOEA allowance is $3,209,103, with individual accounts ranging from $2,960,716 to $4,685,632, depending on the population of the senators' states.
Here it is again, for those not familiar with the robbery. You think these sociopaths only receive a taxpayer-provided salary of $174,000 (more for "leaders")???? Nooooo. EACH one sucks another $1.2 MILLION to $4.6 MILLION from taxpayers EACH! Let that sink in! EACH! Do the math on how much money you would have to have in a bank, at current, guaranteed interest rates of .01-.05% to RECEIVE this much in SPENDING money. Hint -- they live like BILLIONAIRES on the backs of the taxpayers. They think themselves so far above the sheeple, it's not even funny. 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the country are in DC! Now you know why. Congress is made up of sultans and sheiks living like they have BILLIONS in the bank . . . and THEY DO, but it's YOUR money! These clowns truly believe, like Rush Limbaugh, that they have "talent on loan from God," and it's disgusting.
In the House of Representatives, each person receives a Members' Representational Allowance (MRA).
In 2012, individual representatives received MRA allowances ranging from $1,270,129 to $1,564,613, with an average of $1,353,205.13.
Most of each member's annual MRA allowance is used to pay their office personnel. In 2012, for example, the office personnel allowance for each member was $944,671.
Each member is allowed to use their MRA to employ up to18 full time, permanent employees and up to four part time or temporary employees. The annual salary of any employee of a member of the House of Representatives is currently limited to $168,411 (in 2013).
The Senate is EVEN WORSE. They call their slush fund the Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA).
In the fiscal year 2013 legislative branch appropriations bill, the size of the average Senate SOPOEA allowance is $3,209,103, with individual accounts ranging from $2,960,716 to $4,685,632, depending on the population of the senators' states.
Here it is again, for those not familiar with the robbery. You think these sociopaths only receive a taxpayer-provided salary of $174,000 (more for "leaders")???? Nooooo. EACH one sucks another $1.2 MILLION to $4.6 MILLION from taxpayers EACH! Let that sink in! EACH! Do the math on how much money you would have to have in a bank, at current, guaranteed interest rates of .01-.05% to RECEIVE this much in SPENDING money. Hint -- they live like BILLIONAIRES on the backs of the taxpayers. They think themselves so far above the sheeple, it's not even funny. 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the country are in DC! Now you know why. Congress is made up of sultans and sheiks living like they have BILLIONS in the bank . . . and THEY DO, but it's YOUR money! These clowns truly believe, like Rush Limbaugh, that they have "talent on loan from God," and it's disgusting.
In the House of Representatives, each person receives a Members' Representational Allowance (MRA).
In 2012, individual representatives received MRA allowances ranging from $1,270,129 to $1,564,613, with an average of $1,353,205.13.
Most of each member's annual MRA allowance is used to pay their office personnel. In 2012, for example, the office personnel allowance for each member was $944,671.
Each member is allowed to use their MRA to employ up to18 full time, permanent employees and up to four part time or temporary employees. The annual salary of any employee of a member of the House of Representatives is currently limited to $168,411 (in 2013).
The Senate is EVEN WORSE. They call their slush fund the Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA).
In the fiscal year 2013 legislative branch appropriations bill, the size of the average Senate SOPOEA allowance is $3,209,103, with individual accounts ranging from $2,960,716 to $4,685,632, depending on the population of the senators' states.
Either Snopes continues to cover for this guy (the liberals who run Snopes DO twist words many times to do that . . . that IS true), but there are, as we know, tons of made up crap on the internet as well:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/executiveorders.asp
Just like its MASTER, only 1% substance and 99% pure, fabricated BS!
No, they need to cut them AT THE SAME TIME. Let's see these nut jobs in DC agree to unilaterally cut 50% from defense AND social programs. Never happen because both sides get their you know whats stroked by different folks, and all it costs are higher taxes and uncle Ben running the monopoly machine at the Fed.
I'm sure the Romans in charge thought their empire would never fall and never affect them either. But when things crumble, everyone will suffer, even those in DC hiding in their billion dollar bunkers paid for with taxpayer money. They have to open the hatch eventually, right?
Oh, but the sociopaths screaming "YES, YES, YES" to their taxpayer paid interns under the desks might have to cut back on social programs and wars, and that would be unthinkable to a psychopath.
A lot of things are "life-changing" for that 15% who live on the BACKS of the American taxpayers, are they not?
Crap, the Obamaphone was probably "life-changing" for thousands -- lol.
Problem is, as it ALWAYS is . . . WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT, and WHERE is the monopoly money going to come from?
Looks like Barry might get his way and totally destroy the economic system so that America can be brought to her knees financially. That is the goal of any REPUBLIC/Constitution-hating person, is it not?
You know why they pass so many spending bills in Congress? Because all the Congressmen have interns under the desks, paid for by the taxpayers, and all they can say is "YES, YES, YES!"
The answer is, with all the corruption in DC, and all the debt that will eventually collapse the country, they should NOT pass any more bills until they cut 50% out of the federal budget.
I don't know what you do for the federal gov't, and perhaps your position is one that is truly necessary and beneficial, but most Americans KNOW that about 50% -- at least -- of federal workers, SHOULD BE CUT LOOSE FOR GOOD!
The Federal Gov't is a bloated pig, sucking the life blood out of the working taxpayers, and if it takes a default to correct this march toward a totalitarian state, then bring it on!
Did you know that each Congress person receives about $1.2 MILLION dollars of taxpayer money, in addition to their salary, just to HELP them do their job? Think drivers, cooks, personal trainers, first class travel, $1,000 dinners, and interns under the desks. DO YOU THINK THIS IS RIGHT?
You are so very wrong. Even though BOTH sides are 100% corrupt, greedy, and almost always think ONLY of themselves, in this instance, we can only hope the Republicans, for WHATEVER reason, even if plain stubbornness, will stand their ground as firmly as Barry is insisting everything be his way, and LET THE DEFAULT COME!
Something needs to stand in the way of this INSANE living on debt (while continuing to come up with new ways to spend evermore money on things the country cannot afford -- Obamacare and wars) until an implosion that brings the country to its knees and is not recoverable. No one knows if it's 18 trillion, or 25 trillion, or 30 trillion, but there is a number where they will not be able to hold everything together in any orderly manner, and inflation will not be kept in check (if one can call the loss of buying power that has occurred over the past 50 years "in check"), and there will be total catastrophe.
STAND YOUR GROUND REPUBLICANS ON THIS ONE ISSUE, or risk total annihilation in the future.
You, sir, represent the unknowing sheeple who listen to the talking MSM heads, who are nothing but a lying mouthpiece for the DC corruption, and you are WRONG on this issue!
THE TRUTH -- WHY DON'T AMERICANS ELECT ALL NEW CONGRESS?
Toss out EVERY incumbent!
http://www.gazettenet.com/home/4466081-95/545-column-president-reese
Current Internet version, which adds additional truth, although not all Reese's words:
Be sure to read the Tax List at the end.
This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!
545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.)
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. [The House has passed a budget but the Senate has not approved a budget in over three years. The President's proposed budgets have gotten almost unanimous rejections in the Senate in that time. ]
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you .
This might be funny if it weren't so true .
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!
GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN!!!
THE TRUTH -- WHY DON'T AMERICANS ELECT ALL NEW CONGRESS?
Toss out EVERY incumbent!
http://www.gazettenet.com/home/4466081-95/545-column-president-reese
Current Internet version, which adds additional truth, although not all Reese's words:
Be sure to read the Tax List at the end.
This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!
545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.)
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. [The House has passed a budget but the Senate has not approved a budget in over three years. The President's proposed budgets have gotten almost unanimous rejections in the Senate in that time. ]
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you .
This might be funny if it weren't so true .
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!
GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN!!!
THE TRUTH -- WHY DON'T AMERICANS ELECT ALL NEW CONGRESS?
Toss out EVERY incumbent!
http://www.gazettenet.com/home/4466081-95/545-column-president-reese
Current Internet version, which adds additional truth, although not all Reese's words:
Be sure to read the Tax List at the end.
This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day. It's a short but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!
545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. ( The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.)
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House?( John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. ) If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to. [The House has passed a budget but the Senate has not approved a budget in over three years. The President's proposed budgets have gotten almost unanimous rejections in the Senate in that time. ]
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you .
This might be funny if it weren't so true .
Be sure to read all the way to the end:
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!
GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN!!!
There is one part of that that is well-written, and it is 100% true. The problem is, it is ABSOLUTELY true for ALL of Congress, not just one side. Liberals have such blinders on because they THINK that a massive federal gov't, run by only liberal-thinking sociopaths would actually be a good thing. HINT -- a massive federal gov't run by sociopaths, no matter if "liberal" or "conservative" or something in between is still massively bad for the people. Once liberals figure this ONE thing out, they will understand just how badly BOTH sides of the American people have been screwed and will be screwed ever-worse in years to come as this bureaucracy keeps growing. Remember, EVERY member of Congress, on BOTH sides, take their salary, AND they TAKE about $1.2 MILLION in taxpayer money EACH to hire a "staff to look after" their "every wish." The reality is, these sociopaths live like someone worth hundreds of millions EACH (and some actually have tens of millions more personally), but it is courtesy of the taxpayers, and it is CRIMINAL. Why do the people allow this OLIGARCHY to exist?
"Fear of what? Fear of not being a Congressperson. Fear of losing your job. Fear of not having a staff to look after your every wish. Fear of not being cheered at the next town meeting composed of people you're already afraid of. Most of all, fear of returning to everyday life back home. But, of course, there is always the lucrative alternative of lobbying, where you can stay in Washington, go to all the parties and fundraisers, write the checks instead of taking the checks, and hobnob with all those other former members of Congress who, like you, decided not to go home."
BS BS BS. Just because the creation story is in religious texts, does not invalidate it from being taught as a THEORY in ALL WAYS EQUAL to the THEORY of evolution. BOTH cannot be proven AT ALL, so the liberal stance of only wanting to present one, is simply their hatred of anything "religious," and that is a disservice to the children.
Personally, it very well might stop someone from having a chance at a peaceful eternity, and it certainly might stop someone from choosing to live a moral life rather than one that is all about "ME."
Typical liberal. They refuse to answer questions they CAN'T answer, and they interrupt and act like mindless babies when they are cornered. This is how they will ALL act if the question is put to them over and over about WHY DO THEY EXEMPT THE PRESIDENT AND THEMSELVES IF OBAMACARE IS SO GREAT?
Typical liberal. They refuse to answer questions they CAN'T answer, and they interrupt and act like mindless babies when they are cornered. This is how they will ALL act if the question is put to them over and over about WHY DO THEY EXEMPT THE PRESIDENT AND THEMSELVES IF OBAMACARE IS SO GREAT?