COMMON SENSE; Revisited
-
Powder Kagan
May 13, 2010 at 03:21 pm by Wayne KlingerArticle under:Powder Kagan
The left turns just keep on coming with the Left-Socialist-Progressive agenda Obama has put forth since day one (with constant denial by him and his cronies) and with this newest and latest Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan.
Surprisingly, both sides of the aisle are stirring on this decision for the obvious reason Kagan has no experience. She has as much experience as Obama does as a Senator to be quite frank. When you eventually peel away the layers, this pick for Supreme Court is pretty much just a female clone version of Obama and his radical agenda let alone her biased self-views on certain subjects negating calling anything from the Constitution or the bench itself. The liberal and progressive thought-process is pretty much in the same vein.
Kagan is most noted for her famous attachment to the banning of military recruitment officers on the campus of Harvard due to the Pentagon's banning of gays in the miltary and that whole "don't ask don't tell" scenario. I guarantee you she won't be scrutinized half as much as when Bush appointed Harriet Meyers; we all know how that all went down. Just another rhetoric whim of the left and the double-standard they live by. As soon as it was known Kagan was nominated, Patrick Leahy, D-VT wasted no time and made a retort of the Republicans looking for any excuse to oppose an Obama nominee. "The Presdient could of nominated Moses the Lawgiver and critics would have said, "Where's the birth certificate? He then quipped, "She will be confirmed."
Jeff Sessions, R-AL and Mitch McConnell, R-KY both mentioned of Kagan and her background being "thin" for this position. McConnell continued to say "It strikes me that if a nominee does not have judicial experience, they should have substantial litigation experience. Ms. Kagan has neither. A lifetime position on the Supreme Court does not lend itself to on-the-job-training."
It's been almost 40 years since an appointee has been nominated and has never served as a lower-court judge. Then again, the Dems are quick to the trigger about Rehnquist despite he had alot of experience as a trial lawyer compared to Kagan.
Even if the GOP tries their hand at a filibuster and needing the magic "41" votes to block Kagan, RINO's Olympia Snowe, R-ME and Orrin Hatch, R-UT are the usual turncoats on any vote of this nature. Rahm Emanuel wasted no time in talking to Snowe on May 10th once Kagan was nominated as reported by USA Today. I'm sure there's a deal or a talk session going on to make sure they have her "yes" vote.
"Elections have consequences." Yes, so true and yet another chapter in the oblivious world of the snub-nosed arrogant left. As long as these prophets of the "regime" have power, they will continue to push bills, hire czars with no experience in that particular field (let alone never voted in...just appointed)and continue with their absurd limitations to people's liberties and freedoms while they criticize everyone else of the same things they are enjoying. This is why your vote is so important if you want to stop this constant chaos. Otherwise, the liberals, democrats, progressives, whatever you want to call them will continue to live under their set of rules and so-called "free speech", which is only free to them because if they disagree with you, they try to silence you or take your speech away. Obama already admitted there's "too much information out there" that we have access to. If they had their way, they would suppress that too and it would be just like Germany and how Hitler forced the news and media propaganda on it's people.
The USA Today section of "Our View" was a joke in itself with their take of "early critiques of Kagan fall short of substance." Excuse me? Are you referring to her being a dean and having all that great schooling under her belt and not looking at the overall picture of experience on this high level? Your the media, of course you're going to side with her and Obama's pick, other wise, boo-hoo, wah-wah, I might be called a racist if I don't agree with her views because she was picked by a Black man. Get off this damn appeasement trip and stop smelling the ink presses already. Kagan doesn't call it from a Constitutional standpoint; the military ordeal with Harvard is proof enough of her views and in her own words, "a moral injustice of the first order."
Conservatives just flat-out are opposed of Kagan's inexperience and have recently requested papers and documents when she served as adviser to Bill Clinton from 1997-1999. The GOP is focused on any discrepancies or anything that can be deemed as controversial in the way she handles things and in what situations she was under that will evidentally pertain to what qualifications she really has. I see this ending up at a brick wall because it seems every time a GOP member wants papers or some sort of facts, they never get them. You know, stuff like Obama's real birth certificate, why his Columbia papers are never to be released and half of his czars don't even have experience in the field they were assigned to let alone they were never voted in just appointed by Obama himself. I know Presidents do that but Obama has like an army of them now...I lost count.
As far as the "critiques" the USA Today failed to spin on a reader such as me, the obvious pundits who they did have reply are the usual "guilt by association" leftist organizations and women's rights groups....that's like having a Jeopardy panel with Alice Cooper, Derek Jeter and Andre Agassi and asking all heavy metal questions. The people of mention are Ed Whelan (Ethics and Public Policy Center), sounds like another ACLU branch, Debra Ness, President of National Partnership for Women and Families (sounds like Code Pink and NAG meets Family Planning)and one of our favorite chuckleheads, Patrick Leahy, D-VT. They all are behind Kagan, so there's no real need to repeat the soothing remarks they had.
On a bit of a surprise, Carrie Severino's comments were pretty heady against Kagan and USA Today actually printed it...mark that on my calendar! Carrie is the chief counsel and policy director to the conservative Judicial Crisis Network and she pretty much says in a nutshell that Obama is just packing his court with reliable liberal votes to rubber-stamp an agenda that he knows the American people would not accept and what better way than to appoint a loyalist from your own Department of Justice? Severino also mentioned of how Kagan bent over backwards to avoid taking public positions of hot-button topics until something she personally couldn't help, the "don't ask, don't tell" episode.
Once all this smoke clears as far as Kagan being confirmed, the next court term starts in October and Kagan may have to sit out on alot of the cases due to "conflicting interest" due to the nomination. The calendar has been filling up to and a couple notable cases are coming up that people are keeping an eye on like the "Schwarzenegger vs. Video Software Dealers Association" in which there's a law wanted in California to prohibit sales and rentals of violent video games to minors. The other is "Snyder vs. Phelps", one people will watch carefully because this is the radical preacher Fred Phelps from Kansas that has his cronies interfere with military funerals while spewing their anti-gay slurs during a time people are trying to lay someone to rest and grieve in peace (if people would let them). Snyder is the dad of the deceased soldier that won a $5 million verdict due to the stress it caused. Phelps is appealing due to he thinks his freedom of speech was violated.
As you can tell in the last few months and even recently, there's just a ton of stuff on the plate that's going on. Wall Street, the oil spill, another Cap and Trade bill introduced, the problems in Greece and what that bailout will do, Gordon Brown stepping down and in the next few weeks we have a bunch of Primaries to get through (oh yeah, the "anti-incumbent" spin the media is saying is just too good with Utah and West Virginia ousting their incumbents..anything to disregard the Tea Party, right?). I'm just wondering what other garbage this "regime" is going to jam down our throats. We're just sitting ducks right now in a shallow pond and the liberals have the shotguns and several boxes of shells, just adding more insult to injury to the minority in the House and Senate, the Constitution and even worse, the American people. No matter the anger level we have and they know we have, this Administration just keeps showing us they just don't care---they have an agenda, it needs to be put in place; quickly, swiftly and rapidly. Can we stop it before it's too late? Or is this our version of a bomb-filled SUV? -
Entitled to White Guilt
May 13, 2010 at 03:19 pm by Wayne KlingerArticle under:Entitled to White Guilt
Once again we enter the realm of political correctness and so-called "entitled" rights that somehow exist in this make-believe Constitution people think we should have ("living document" as they would call it). I'm talking about the latest bold step real Americans have stood up for in Arizona, the immigration bill that has caused a firestorm in the media, through pundits on the left and the right and many interest groups abroad. Anytime a state or persons step up to the plate, people find some means to find it "unconstitutional" and like these rights are just to appear out of thin air because we haven't done anything as far as laws or borders for ages. So of course, the mentality is "Why start now?". The pure drive and thinking of just because I stepped foot on American soil, I'm obligated on the whole smorgasboard of healthcare, handouts, housing, etc that goes along with it and not think twice that the American "legal" taxpayer has to suck up the tab.
What kills me on this whole thing is how the media and special interest groups are mainly focused on the "illegal" part of it and not the 64% of Arizonians that support and over 60% of Americans who do not live in Arizona. What is focused on is the media reporting on truckers will boycott, but in fact they fail to mention these are LATINO truckers and not your average American load-hauler that are the main protesters. Boycotts from California to stymie business and contracts in Arizona that include computer maufacturers, janitorial supplies, a publishing house, fertilizer makers and human resources companies just to name a few let alone the tourism industry, which trickles down to car rental companies, hotels and restaurants. Even more idiotic is the boycott on "Arizona" Tea. It's just the name stupid!! The actual tea is made in New York!
Keeping up with the Jones' is the usual suspects of Sharpton, Frankin, the ACLU, La Raza, MALD (Mexican American Legal Defense) and even Eric Holder, the U.S. Attorney General mentioning the federal government may challenge the bill. A referendum was filed on April 28th and Arizona has until July 1st to get 76,000 signatures to get this on the ballot to be voted on in November. If the state fails or the referendum people try to stall things somehow, the bill would have to wait until 2012 and you know damn well, everyone and anyone will be trying to do whatever it takes to stall it. Phoenix, Tucson and Flagstaff leaders are also against the measure and have also filed against the law. On the flipside, you have politicians running for governor in Minnesota, Colorado and Texas that support the measure and would as much as incorporate the law into their own states.
With all that said, the focus again, not on the Americans who support it, but the sob stories we hear of like "Julio", who is 33 and has a wife and kid back in Mexico and needs to support them....he's been illegal for the last 10 years. First off "Julio", keep the damn thing in your pants and use your other head and get into the U.S. legally, then worry about the wife and kid. Is that so hard? Then we have other illegals who have actual illegals in the school system. They work, DON'T PAY TAXES of any kind but yet, we pay for their kid to go to school while the money they make goes back to Mexico. Another woman's comment, "Mexico doesn't have a lot of opportunities," she says. "Here, we work honestly, and we have a better life." Work honestly? What's honest about sneaking into the country?? Please tell me, what point am I missing here that you can't do this LEGALLY?
What really gets the goat of politicians and illegals is this simple phrase in the bill: "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state...where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person." Boy, that sounds so harsh doesn't it? I don't see this quite mounting up to the status of water-boarding do you? They, of course, want you to feel that way however....that's where the "White guilt" comes in. We had this problem when Obama was running for office, now it's the Latinos' turn. Again, who has the stones to step up to the plate?
Atlanta's Neal Boortz pretty much hits on the head to but again, people don't see it for what it is. Neal's comment: "Oh .. message for Congressman Luis Guitierrez, the HMWIC of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. They're not the "undocumented community." Cut the PC crap. They're the invaders; the illegal community. They're criminals. They broke the law coming into this country. They break the law staying in this country. They break the law working in this country. Get it? They're criminals!" I think I don't need to give kudos or explain this one, he's right on the money.
A study of immigrants in Arizona published in 2008 found that non-citizens, mostly in the country illegally, held an estimated 280,000 full-time jobs. The study by researcher Judith Gans at the University of Arizona examined 2004 data, finding that they contributed about 8 percent of the state's economic output, or $29 billion.
Losing hundreds of thousands of unskilled laborers wouldn't hurt the state's economy in the short term, but it could limit the economy's ability to grow once it recovers, says Marshall Vest, director of the Economic and Business Research Center at the University of Arizona's Eller College of Management. Legal workers who are willing to take any available job now will become more choosy if the unemployment rate falls back to low levels seen before the recession hit.
"That's really the question, as to whether the existing population is willing to work those (low-level) jobs," Vest says. "I think economics provides the answer. If job openings have no applicants, then businesses need to address that by raising the offered wage." Vest makes a good point here since we always hear about the "jobs Americans won't do". I somewhat agree with that since there's an embarassment for some if they have to be a janitor or flip burgers all day; the class envy card which works against us just like political correctness and that "even playing field" the marxists, socialists and progressives want so no one is better than the other. Again, I never got a job from a poor person, have you?
There is a positive side to all of this however, which you won't hear from the media but supporters of the law hope it creates jobs for thousands of Americans. It's been an arguement for years of the cheap labor practices by industries and shutting the door on Americans due to the Latino community will work for much less an hour."We want to drive day labor away," says Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's sponsors which makes the arguement that it would benefit the actual citizens of Arizona. The emphasis is not on these things however. There's way too many illegals in the country, too many groups made up of lawyers, pundits and associations that Arizona will have it's hands full.
I do have this to say however. If Arizona can keep up the momentum and have the balls not to cave in to the demands of the special interest groups, lawyers and other states, this law will pass and be on the books and will give hope to states like Minnesota, Colorado and Texas of governing in the same way and implementing the same type of law in their own states. Just takes one small voice to get people motivated. Again, this is not a racial thing like they are spinning it to be. It will also help in aiding people with bogus licenses, ID's and even possible terrorists that are roaming in the state and they are all of different races themselves if you haven't noticed lately. So stop the nonsense and "White guilt" of profiling people. It will be these people's fault for being of the "entitlement" mentality that's going to get us killed some day. -
if VAT, Ditch the Income Tax
April 21, 2010 at 07:27 pm by Wayne KlingerArticle under:www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/...come_tax_105213.html
April 18, 2010
If VAT, Ditch the Income Tax
By George Will
WASHINGTON -- When liberals advocate a value-added tax, conservatives should respond: Taxing consumption has merits, so we will consider it -- after the 16th Amendment is repealed.
A VAT will be rationalized as necessary to restore fiscal equilibrium. But without ending the income tax, a VAT would be just a gargantuan instrument for further subjugating Americans to government.
Believing that a crisis is a useful thing to create, the Obama administration -- which understands that, for liberalism, worse is better -- has deliberately aggravated the fiscal shambles that the Great Recession accelerated. During the downturn, federal revenues plunged and spending soared. And, as will happen for two decades, every day 10,000 more baby boomers are joining the ranks of recipients of Medicare and Social Security, two programs with unfunded liabilities of nearly $107 trillion.
In the context of this concatenation of troubles, the administration's highest priority was to put an enormous new health care entitlement on the welfare state's rickety scaffolding. Why? Because the liberals' lunge to maximize government's growth depends on quickly creating a crisis that can be called a threat to the entitlement menu, and to the currency as a store of value. Then the public can be panicked into accepting the addition of a VAT to the existing menu of taxes.
A VAT is collected on value added at stages during the process of production, but most of its burden is borne by consumers. They file no VAT returns, so its stealthiness delights the political class, which can increase it in small, barely noticed increments, with every percentage point yielding another $100 billion.
Although the nation's welfare often varies inversely with that of the political class, a VAT would ameliorate a real problem: Americans consume too much and save too little. Furthermore, today's baroque tax code drives economic distortions and enables corruptions.
Corporations do not pay taxes, they collect them, passing the burden to consumers as a cost of production. And corporate taxation is a feast of rent-seeking -- a cornucopia of credits, exemptions and other subsidies conferred by the political class on favored, and grateful, corporations. Because the income tax is not broadly based, it radiates moral hazard: Its incentives are for perverse behavior. The top 1 percent of earners provide 40 percent of that tax's receipts; the top 5 percent provide 61 percent; the bottom 50 percent provide 3 percent. So the tax makes a substantial majority complacent about government's growth.
Increasingly, the income tax is codified envy. A VAT is the political class' recourse when the resources of the minority that is targeted by the envious are insufficient to finance ravenous government.
Because a VAT would shred Barack Obama's promise not to increase any tax on households with incomes less than $250,000, he must hope the deficit reduction commission he created will provide cover for his apostasy. But 14 of the commission's 18 members must endorse any recommendation. Good luck finding two votes for a VAT among the six Republican members -- Sens. Judd Gregg, Tom Coburn and Michael Crapo, and Reps. Paul Ryan, Dave Camp and Jeb Hensarling.
And wait until the political class' most imperious masters, the elderly, are heard from. When they worked they paid taxes on their incomes; retired, they will resent -- they are virtuosos of resentment -- being taxed when they spend their savings.
Because a VAT potentially taxes everything, it would be riddled with exemptions. This is because it maximizes the political class' opportunities for showing favoritism -- by, for example, exempting certain "green" goods. It also widens that class' scope for the pleasure of being bossy. For example, it could reduce a VAT's regressiveness -- like rain, a VAT falls equally on the rich and the poor, but the poor devote a larger portion of their income to consumption -- by exempting most foods but not those that the nanny state disapproves: "Put down that sugary soda and step away from the vending machine!"
Money is time made tangible -- the time invested in the earning of it. Taxation is the confiscation of the earner's time. Although some taxation is necessary, all taxation diminishes freedom. Adding a VAT without subtracting the income tax would constrict Americans' freedom much more than the health care legislation does. Because the 16th Amendment will not be repealed, adoption of a VAT would proclaim the impossibility of serious spending reductions, and hence would be the obituary for the Founders' vision of limited government.
Copyright 2010, Washington Post Writers Group -
-
-
Life Liberty and Proper Tea
September 15, 2009 at 06:27 pm by Bernie LeeOrganization under:I am an Englishman who lives in England, which is a distinct country being eroded by the UK and the EU. There is a growing freedom movement here that I wish to encourage, inspire and work with.
My blog offers links to the best educational material I can find on economics, history, politics and the freedom movement. It should become more biased to my part of the world but currently features mostly American sourced material.
I want to join up with like minded people and especially creative types to create multimedia materials to get the word out.
Drop by for a smoke and a cup of tea.
-
Why You Can't Save
September 15, 2009 at 05:52 pm by Richard WalbaumArticle under:Explains the simple mechanics of our theft-based monetary system, why usury creates universal poverty.
(2 pages)
-
Rich Country - Poor Country
September 15, 2009 at 05:48 pm by Richard WalbaumArticle under:Our monetary system promotes universal struggle, poverty, and creates unpayable compounding astronomical debt that causes rising prices. By confusing the nature of money, predators have taken control of our monetary system, dominating society and deforming humanity in the process. Learn the principles of monetary system design, so that when the opportunity comes for change you will recognize it either as the answer and promote it, or as a falsehood.
Money is a creature of law; usury is the problem, gold is not the solution.
(27 pages)
-
Alex Jones
September 15, 2009 at 05:29 pm by Gary BinkleyOrganization under:Alex Jones movies are world renowned for factual content on such subjects as 9/11, swine flue, the corporate take over of the economy, the FED and the New World Order. This site is a must for those who need good documented resources for the peaceful battle to take our Republic back.
-
Money As Debt
September 01, 2009 at 02:12 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedE-video under:A great video on how all of our money is based on debt.
