Plans are already underway to duplicate the remarkable success next year.
Operation Clean Sweep 2010 is in production.
"Buckle up, Buttercup." ;)
|1) Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR). Limit federal spending growth to the percentage in population growth plus the rate of inflation; provide taxpayers the option of filing a post-card sized return using a low, flat tax rate of 15%|
2) End Tax-funded abortions. Stop federal payments to Planned Parenthood and prohibit any taxpayer-subsidized health insurance plan from covering abortion
3) Defend American Borders. Complete America's border-protection initiatives using remaining funds from the so-called stimulus bill
4) King Dollar. Preserve a strong dollar so that Americans' savings aren't wiped out by inflation and the U.S. dollar remains the world's reserve currency
5) Empower American Business. Immediately slash corporate tax rates to 15% and scrap the capital-gains tax altogether
6) Defend America. Strengthen America to defend our homeland and fully fund an operational, layered missile-defense system
7) Statism Exit Plan. De-fund czars; immediately cease bailout payments to failed companies; ban future bailouts
8) End Generational Theft. As few believe America's entitlement programs will be able to pay benefits to future generations, provide younger workers the choice of diverting payroll/Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts
9) Restore America's System of Justice. Introduce penalties for frivolous lawsuits, where those who launch unsuccessful lawsuits are liable for the defendants' legal bills
10) American Energy Independence. All-of-the-Above strategy that embraces alternatives, expands and accelerates exploration and production of oil and natural gas, and jumpstarts dramatic increases in nuclear power
|- Tom Price (R-Ga.), chairman of the Republican Study Committee|
- Michael Williams, Texas Railroad Commissioner & Republican candidate for Senate
- Rep. Jep Hensarling (R-Texas), member of the Republican Study Committee
- Rick Crawford, Republican congressional candidate, Arkansas first district
- Marco Rubio, Florida Republican senatorial candidate
- Michelle Malkin, author of "Culture of Corruption"
- Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-TX), member of the Republican Study Committee
- Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), member of the Republican Study Committee
ColdWarrior has a project. Do you want to influence politics? Do you want to have a say in the platform? Do you want to help choose the candidates? ColdWarrior will tell you how to do it.
How about this?
“It’s the Constitution, Liberals!” (except I would have called on Congress as a whole.)
The Republican Party offers to the American people the enforcement of the original “Contract with the American People” — the Contract that starts with the three words, “We the People” — the Constitution.
Specifically, my suggestion is that we get the Republican Party candidates to pledge to vigorously fight on behalf of the American people to ensure that the Congress of the United States will stay within the strictures of the few limited, enumerated powers outlined in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution:
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
Go read the rest and remember that he is supported by reader donations.
The Major and I were driving in Camp Bastion around midday when it was very hot. A British soldier ran by wearing a rucksack. He was drenched in sweat under the blazing, dusty desert. I smiled because it’s great to see so many soldiers who work and train hard. Yet the Major cut fun at the soldier, saying he was dumb to be running in that heat. I nearly growled at the Major, but instead asked if he ever goes into combat. The answer was no. And, in fact, the Major does not leave the safety of Camp Bastion.
That a military officer would share a foul word about a combat soldier who was prepping for battle was offensive. Especially an officer who lives in an air-conditioned tent with a refrigerator stocked with chilled soft drinks. Just outside his tent are nice hot and cold showers. Five minutes away is a little Pizza Hut trailer, a coffee shop, stores, and a cookhouse.
This very Major had earned a foul reputation among his own kind for spending too much time on his Facebook page. I personally saw him being gratuitously rude to correspondents. Some correspondents—all were British—complained to me that when they wanted to interview senior British officers, they were told by this Major to submit written questions. The Major said they would receive videotaped answers that they could edit as if they were talking with the interviewee. (Presumably, senior British officers are avoiding the tough questions, such as, “So, when do you plan to send enough helicopters?”)
When I asked a different Media Ops officer about meeting with a senior British General in Afghanistan, I was told that submitting a CV (curriculum vitae) would be helpful, to which I laughed. A CV? How about this:
Name: Michael Yon
Notes: I will be in and affecting your battle space for years to come. (By the way, you are losing the war. Hiding from correspondents does not change that fact.)
This war is moving fast and there is no time for games. If a general does not want to tell his story, someone will tell it for him. He will have failed by losing another winnable media battle.
"They used to be legal firearms, but now they're either unregistered or outright banned, and they're wanted by police before there's a chance burglars put them in Toronto's underground and underworld markets."Of course, being registered magically protected the weapons from theft. And now, the law abiding citizens of Toronto that just lost their firearms are defenseless against those "extremely dangerous"
"What we believe is that legal handgun owners are not dangerous individuals, but we know from experience that their firearms can become extremely dangerous when they get into the hands of criminals," Blair said.
About 1.2 million loans out there are in limbo: The borrower is in serious default yet the bank has not started the foreclosure process. Another 1.5 million are in early stages of the foreclosure process but the bank hasn't yet taken possession of the home. Counting these and loans that are highly likely to end up in default, one analyst estimates three million to four million foreclosed homes will come on the market over the next few years.Between ACORN (ie, the government) pressuring banks to give out bad loans, bank bailouts reducing the risk of the banks, and Barney Frank and co. wanting to reignite the
...state mortgage-mediation schemes as well as the Obama Administration's Home Affordable Modification Program, which at last count had managed to prevent 235,247 homes from coming onto the market...
A comment from the post:God forbid that any possible Democrat voters have pain. We must
The FHA is writing about a third of all purchase mortgages, most of them with no money down (after the 8% tax credit). Believe it or not, USDA mortgages are gaining market share too. Yeah, USDA. And the mortgages the private sector writes, it quickly turns around and sells. The biggest buyer is, you guessed it, the government.
Imagine you are a climate researcher who has been assembling the data that is used to support claims of global warming. Or imagine you are Phil Jones from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. Or imagine you are a scientific fraud. Did I write “or”? I meant “and.”
...the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.”
“I truly do not understand the skepticism about this request,” Snowe said. “This is about doing our job. If it takes two more weeks, it takes two more weeks. We’re talking about trillions of dollars in the final analysis.”
“Is there something happening in two weeks that we cannot wait?” she continued. “Is it the Columbus Day recess? What is it? Because I don’t get it.”
If Senator Snowe can figure that out, why can't the rest? What's the urgency? Even though Senator Snowe votes with the liberals on many occasions, health care is one of her pet projects. On this, she is serious as a heart attack. And she does NOT like having a public option or having any reforms cost MORE money.
President Obama's "safe schools czar" is a former schoolteacher who has advocated promoting homosexuality in schools, written about his past drug abuse, expressed his contempt for religion and detailed an incident in which he did not report an underage student who told him he was having sex with older men.Gateway Pundit has the story and the link to Fox News.
Tax: A Required Contribution or Fee Levied by a Government
George Stephanopoulos, former senior advisor to Bill Clinton, on ABC's "This Week" grilled the President on how his health care overhaul would raise taxes on the middle class. The President tried to dance around the issue-- just as he has done on numerous occasions regarding abortion funding in the health care bill.
However, he can't dance away from this fact, either. Politico reports today that page 29 of the bill introduced Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont), says: "The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax." President Obama has developed a serious credibility problem as Factcheck.org, Politifact.com, and now Politico have reported on the President's misleading statements on his health care bill.
However, the American people can't be misled so easily. They instinctively know that imposing new taxes or involuntary payments (mandates) combined with massive
spending will only further burden families and the next generation of Americans.
Memo to President Barack Obama: It's a tax.
Obama insisted on national television during the weekend that requiring people to carry health insurance and fining them if they don't isn't the same thing as a tax increase. But the language of Democratic bills to revamp the nation's healthcare system doesn't quibble. Both the House bill and the Senate Finance Committee proposal clearly state that the fines would be a tax.
And the reason the fines are in the legislation is to enforce the coverage requirement.
"If you put something in the Internal Revenue Code, and you tell the IRS to collect it, I think that's a tax," said Clint Stretch, head of the tax policy group for Deloitte, a major accounting firm. "If you don't pay, the person who's going to come and get it is going to be from the IRS."
Democrats aren't the first to propose that individuals be required to carry health insurance and fined if they refuse. The conservative Heritage Foundation called for such a mandate in the healthcare debate during the 1990s, although its proposal differed from the ones pending in Congress. Heritage has since dropped the idea and now favors using tax credits to encourage people to buy coverage carrots and not sticks.
During the 2008 political campaign, Obama opposed making coverage mandatory because of the costs. His position has shifted now that it's becoming clear that such a requirement will be part of any legislation Congress sends him. Conservative activists are calling it a violation of his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class.
"This is exactly what George Bush Sr. did when he said he wouldn't raise taxes, and it cost him the next election," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. "Obama is doing the same thing, but he's insulting people by telling them that if you don't call it a big purple banana, somehow it wouldn't be a tax."
Some liberals acknowledge that Obama might be vulnerable on the insurance requirement. But they contend that most people will understand as long as the legislation provides enough of a subsidy to make the coverage affordable. That's a central issue this week as the Senate Finance Committee starts voting on legislation.
"I think it's a metaphysical question as to whether it's a tax or not," said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "The real question that will determine whether people are upset is whether the insurance is affordable."
During an interview that aired on ABC's "This Week" Sunday, Obama insisted that the insurance requirement is not a tax.
"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is . . . that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore.
"Right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance," Obama said. "Nobody considers that a tax increase.
"You just can't make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase," he said. But a Democratic staff description of Sen. Max Baucus' bill calls the proposed fines an "excise tax." Penalties of up to $950 for individuals and $3,800 for families would be imposed on those who don't get coverage.
The House bill uses a complex formula to calculate the penalties, calling them a "tax on individuals without acceptable healthcare coverage."
Obama argues at another part of the interview that, "right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase." But there are many reasons why this is a flawed analogy. Most importantly, car insurance mandates, which apply at the state level, only apply to people who drive a car on public roads. If I don't drive, I don't have to purchase car insurance. By contrast, the health insurance mandate would apply, with few exceptions, to everybody in the United States. Also, people aren't forced to report car insurance in their federal tax returns, and fines are not assessed through the federal tax code. And if car insurance mandates are the model, then they certainly aren't effective, with an estimated 13.8 percent of drivers going without coverage in 2007, according to the Insurance Research Council.
All summer we have been experiencing a very large number of incoming medevacs, particularly from Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, the past several weeks have been even worse. We are in urgent need of the following items. Please help if you can. Please also pray for our patients and staff during this very difficult time.
- Sweatpants and Zippered Hoodie Sweatjackets (M, L, XL - Gray, Black, Dark Blue)
- Blankets of Hope
- Lounge/sleep pants/pj bottoms (M, L, XL)
2ND MOST NEEDED:
- Undershirts and plain T-shirts (M, L, XL)
- Shorts, baggy basketball-type (M, L, XL)
3RD MOST NEEDED:
- Men's Boxerbriefs (M, L, XL) 2nd choice boxers. Please do not send "tightie whities"
COMPLETE LIST OF ALL NEEDED ITEMS CLICK HERE
- Please do not send clothing sizes Small, 2X, or 3X.
- Please do not send books or magazines.
Please send items to:
Attn: Soldiers' Angels
APO AE 09180
- Please email me mphillips AT soldiersangels DOT org when items are shipped.
- Include a note with your name, Email address, and brief description of items sent in your packages. Without this information, we will be unable to confirm their receipt.
- Please allow 6 - 8 weeks for receipt confirmation.
Labels: Soldiers' Angels
The fate of Israel is humanity’s fate, not merely Jewish fate. Israel’s destiny represents the destiny of Western civilization and that of civilized humanity everywhere. What happens to Israel will determine whether civilized humanity will—or will not–prevail over the forces of Evil.
We pray that God remember and watch over us. May God show compassion and mercy to all Israel and all civilians. We humbly pray that our good deeds, and those of our ancestors diminish, even cancel out what the scoundrels amongst us have done this past year: foul and mercenary deeds which have endangered us and for which we have all been held liable—not only by Jew-haters but also by God.
Labels: The Constituion
So, Obama called them up like a unfaithful girlfriend and said, "Honey, I think we should start seeing other people. Its not you. Its me....."
Premier Jan Fischer told reporters that Obama phoned him overnight to say that "his government is pulling out of plans to build a missile defense radar on Czech territory."
"The same happened with Poland. Poland was informed in the same way about this intention," Fischer said.
Under the plan, which had been proposed by the Bush administration to defend the United States and its European allies against a possible missile attack from Iran or elsewhere in the Middle East, 10 interceptor rockets were to have been stationed in Poland and a radar system based in the Czech Republic.
But what happens to her reputation? Lets see:
Alexei Arbatov, head of the Russian Academy of Science's Center for International Security, told a Moscow radio station Thursday that the U.S. was giving in on missile defense to get more cooperation from Russia on .
"The United States is reckoning that by rejecting the missile-defense system or putting it off to the far future, Russia will be inclined together with the United States to take a harder line on," he said.
The decision to scrap the plan will have future consequences for U.S. relations with eastern Europe.
"If the administration approaches us in the future with any request, I would be strongly against it," said Jan Vidim, a lawmaker with Czech Republic's conservative Civic Democratic Party, which supported the missile defense plan.
Former Polish President and Nobel Peace Prize winner, Lech Wałesa, has spoken out about media reports that the US has scrapped plans to install a missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic.
“Americans have always cared only about their interests, and all other [countries] have been used for their purposes. This is another example,” Mr Wałęsa told TVN24. “[Poles] need to review our view of America, we must first of all take care of our business,” he added.
“I could tell from what I saw, what kind of policies President Obama cultivates,” the former president added. “I simply don't like this policy, not because this shield was required [in Poland], but [because of] the way we were treated,” he concluded.
“if enacted, this would represent a huge turnaround in American strategic thinking on a global missile defence system, and a massive betrayal of two key US allies in eastern and central Europe. Such a move would significantly weaken America’s ability to combat the growing threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and would hand a major propaganda victory to the Russians.”
This is bad news for all who care about the US commitment to the transatlantic alliance and the defence of Europe as well as the United States. It represents the appalling appeasement of Russian aggression and a willingness to sacrifice American allies on the altar of political expediency. A deal with the Russians to cancel missile defence installations sends a clear message that even Washington can be intimidated by the Russian bear.
The rest can be found here: Shoot or Don't Shoot
The study involved a pool of more than 800 incidents from which researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers/drug traffickers) and 50 police officers.
What researchers found was that handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally. None of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. None of the offenders pick a particular type of gun to use because he/she felt it would do the most damage.
In conclusion, none of the criminals studied was hindered by any law, federal, state or local, established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws. Police officers faced with an armed criminal who hesitates while he/she decides to shoot or don’t shoot will likely find himself/herself a potentially deadly split second or more behind the criminal who has no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger.
The key point, though, is that these treatments didn't just come out out of the blue. They were developed by drug companies and device makers who thought they had a good market for things that would make people feel better.
But under a national healthcare plan, the "market" will consist of whatever the bureaucrats are willing to buy. That means treatment for politically stylish diseases will get some money, but otherwise the main concern will be cost-control. More treatments, to bureaucrats, mean more costs.
Ten days ago President Obama signed the Execute Order for Nabhan, who since 2006 was on the FBI's list of most wanted terrorists. He was also wanted for the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Kenya in 1998.h/t Riehl World View
Do you really think that, under a Progressive government, who you know and what you say won’t be held against you? Who invented anti-2nd Amendment political correctness? Who invented the idea of hate crimes and hate speech? And, of course, we always hear that “right wing” talk is “hate speech,” thereby making conservative talk, or thought, a crime, if taken seriously.
Now, picture these same tyrants in charge of your health care……
Who did you vote for? Are you a union member? Do you support the unions? Are you a member of the right ethnic group? Which candidate did you send money to? Have you sent your donation to the DNC?
These questions, or similar ones, could appear on your standard medical questionnaire.
Tell me that’s not a possibility with what you’ve seen this administration do. Tell me that, with what you’ve seen appear on the census, this couldn’t happen. Tell me, with the incorporation of ACORN, etc, into the government, that this wouldn’t matter.
Let’s hope that you are right.
But it would be safer if we just don’t have government run health care.
That said, take a look at what the “health care” plans would do. Even if the following ideas were not implemented, since unions are exempted from the public plan, citizens would unionize just to get good health insurance….
h/t Flopping Aces
Read the Union Health-Care Label
Get ready for Detroit-style labor relations in our hospitals.
By Mark Mix
Wall Street Journal
SEPTEMBER 10, 2009
In the heated debates on health-care reform, not enough attention is being paid to the huge financial windfalls ObamaCare will dole out to unions—or to the provisions in the various bills in Congress that will help bring about the forced unionization of the health-care industry.
Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.
The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.
The current House version of ObamaCare (H.R. 3200) goes much further. Section 225(A) grants Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius tremendous discretionary authority to regulate health-care workers “under the public health insurance option.” Monopoly bargaining and compulsory union dues may quickly become a required standard resulting in potentially hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses across the country being forced into unions.
Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.
The House bill has a $10 billion provision to bail out insolvent union health-care plans. It also creates a lucrative professional-development grant program for health-care workers that effectively blackballs nonunion medical facilities from participation. The training funds in this program must be administered jointly with a labor organization—a scenario not unlike the U.S. Department of Labor’s grants for construction apprenticeship programs, which have turned into a cash cow for construction industry union officials on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
There’s more. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has suggested that the federal government could pay for health-care reform by taxing American workers’ existing health-care benefits—but he would exempt union-negotiated health-care plans. Under Mr. Baucus’s scheme, the government could impose costs of up to $20,000 per employee on nonunion businesses already struggling to afford health care plans.
Mr. Baucus’s proposal would give union officials another tool to pressure employers into turning over their employees to Big Labor. Rather than provide the lavish benefits required by Obamacare, employers could allow a union to come in and negotiate less costly benefits than would otherwise be required. Such plans could be continuously exempted.
Americans are unlikely to support granting unions more power than they already have in the health-care field. History shows union bosses could abuse their power to shut down medical facilities with sick-outs and strikes; force doctors, nurses and in-home care providers to abandon their patients; dictate terms and conditions of employment; and impose a failed, Detroit-style management model on the entire health-care field.
ObamaCare is a Trojan Horse for more forced unionization.
Mr. Mix is president of the National Right to Work Committee.
But let's get back to my original point, which is that liberals speak a different language when they talk about healthcare. Here's what the Brookings Institution recommends for resolving the problem:
• Link "meaningful use" health IT [Information Technology] bonuses to achieving better results as part of systems of quality measurement, quality improvement, and care coordination.
• Create interoperability and provider communications standards, with a focus on filing priority gaps in standards for practical exchange.
• Fund technical support programs to ensure providers adopting health IT have access to comprehensive support for overcoming implementation challenges.
• Create an entity [that means a federal government panel] to allocate CER [Comparative Effectiveness Research] based on the expected value of the evidence to be developed, including the national burden of disease and the likelihood that the research will lead to real improvements in care.
• Emphasize areas of medical uncertainty, public health interventions, and broad provider practice patterns and the policies that influenced them.
I don't know about you but most of these sentences sound like the kind you compose with refrigerator magnets. What in god's name are they talking about?
Now I know what the answer will be. "You don't have the expertise to know what they're talking about." I'm sure that's true. There must be a level of non-profit, policymaker executive authority at which this all jargon makes sense.
But that's the whole point. None of this is supposed to be comprehensible to ordinary individuals. It's not written for people who take part in the system. It's written for people who see the major players as chess pieces to be moved around the board.
Obama wants us all to have choice. Apparently, through ERISA, unions, large corporations, and the self insured, perhaps 90% of the insured, already have choice. Governments don't like that.
Cross posted at RedState
Since January, his successor has used the economic slump as a pretext to "reform" health care. Most voters don't buy it: They see it as Obama's "war of choice," and the more frantically he talks about it as a matter of urgency the weirder it seems. If he's having difficulty selling it, that's because it's not about "health." As I've written before, the appeal of this issue to him and to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank et al is that governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture — one in which elections are always fought on the Left's issues and on the Left's terms, and in which "conservative" parties no longer talk about small government and individual liberty but find themselves retreating to one last pitiful rationale: that they can run the left-wing state more effectively than the Left can. Listen to your average British Tory or French Gaullist on the campaign trail, pledging to "deliver" government services more "efficiently."
US Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon) introduced H.R. 3311 earlier this year to appropriate $154,500,000 for research and study into the transition to a per-mile vehicle tax system. The “Road User Fee Pilot Project” would be administered by the US Treasury Department. This agency in turn would issue millions in taxpayer-backed grants to well-connected commercial manufacturers of tolling equipment to help develop the required technology. Within eighteen months of the measure’s passage, the department would file an initial report outlining the best methods for adopting the new federal transportation tax.Of course, this would be on top of the gas tax. And the technology used to track which roads and bridges are most used, wouldn't EVER be used by law enforcement, oh no.... Or be used by insurance companies to track individual driving habits.
“Oregon has successfully tested a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) fee, and it is time to expand and test the VMT program across the country,” Blumenauer said in a statement on the bill’s introduction. “A VMT system can better assess fees based on use of our roads and bridges, as well as during times of peak congestion, than a fee based on fuel consumption. It is time to get creative and find smart ways to rebuild and renew America’s deteriorating infrastructure.”
Obama wants to “fix” our ENTIRE system. Yet, he won’t touch Medicare, unless its to gut it of money to pay for HIS plan. He wants to hand over hour health system to the same idiots that do piecemeal planning like this in order to “save money”. They want to overhaul the private system but won’t fix what THEY broke….
Although the government regularly pays $100,000 or more for kidney transplants, it stops paying for anti-rejection drugs after only 36 months.The health care bill moving through the House of Representatives includes a little-noticed provision that would reverse the policy, but it is not clear whether the Senate will follow suit.
Bills have been introduced in Congress since 2000 to lift the 36-month limit and extend coverage of immunosuppressant drugs indefinitely. They have never made it to a vote, largely because of the projected upfront cost; the Congressional Budget Office estimates that unlimited coverage would add $100 million a year to the $23 billion Medicare kidney program.
The administration's plans were outlined in an Aug. 11 White House-sponsored teleconference call run by Obama ally Lennox Yearwood, president of the Hip Hop Caucus, and Liv Havstad, the group's senior vice president of strategic partnerships and programs.
Yearwood, who uses the honorific "Reverend" before his name, has been in the news in recent years, usually for getting arrested. After Democrats took back Congress, the rowdy activist was handcuffed outside a congressional hearing in September 2007 when Gen. David Petraeus was to testify. Yearwood told the "Democracy Now" radio program that he wanted to attend the hearing to hear Petraeus give his report. "I knew that when officers lie, soldiers die," he said.
On the Aug. 11 call, Yearwood and other leaders kept saying repeatedly that they wanted 9/11 to be used for something "positive," "forward-leaning," and "productive," said a source with knowledge of the teleconference.
The plan is to turn a "day of fear" that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left. In other words, nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.
"They think it needs to be taken back from the right," said the source. "They're taking that day and they're breaking it because it gives Republicans an advantage. To them, that day is a fearful day."
A coalition including the unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change and about 60 far-left, environmentalist, labor, and corporate shakedown groups participated in the call. Groups on the call included: ACORN, AFL-CIO, Apollo Alliance, Community Action Partnership, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, 80 Million Strong for Young American Jobs, Friends of the Earth, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Mobilize.org, National Black Police Association, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Negro Women, National Wildlife Federation, RainbowPUSH Coalition, Urban League, and Young Democrats of America.
He wants to rebrand 9/11 into a day that helps the Left by changing the meaning of the day. His ilk believe that remembering the attack and honoring the victims "helps" the Republicans. They can't believe that Americans look upon this day with respect and wish to only honor the dead and remember why we are at war. They don't seem to understand that it IS a day honoring service. Those who served, saved others, and DIED. Not a day of "service" where one volunteers to "green" a community. THIS IS ABOUT THE START OF A WAR!
Why does the State Department have such a focus on "outreach" to Muslims at all - especially on 9-11?
Why does Obama have the same focus? Did the ummah (the worldwide Muslim community) ever apologize for 911? Did the ummah apologize for the Madrid train bombings, the London bombings, the Mumbai bombings, the Bali bombings, the many homicide bombings in Israel, the jihad in Thailand, the slow Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon, the Darfur genocide, the Beslan massacre, or for any other jihad activity?
For his part, Obama said at his White House Ramadan dinner: "Islam, as we know, is part of America. Together we have a responsibility to foster engagement grounded in mutual interest and mutual respect." He said that this was one of his "fundamental commitments as president both at home and abroad. That is central to the new beginning that I've sought between the United States and Muslims around the world and that is a commitment that we can renew once again during this holy season.""Islam is part of America"? In what way? If the immigrants to our shore respect our culture and follow our laws, then yes, MUSLIMS are part of America.
Every aspect of Islam is organized to wage war, convert, subjugate or kill. The mosque is the command post, the imam the field commander, the ayatollah the general, and every Muslim a potential foot soldier in Islam's global campaign.Not to mention the different muslim against muslim conflicts around the world. Wahhabis murder girls that flee a burning building with the "proper coverings". Sunnis fight Shia and they both kill Sufis. Madrassas are established with oil money to spread Wahhabiism, teaching innocents that anyone, not exactly like them, is the enemy. Madrassas that teach children to read. But they read only the Koran. No science. No arts. Nothing that does not pertain to religion.
They abide by no civilized rules of engagement, wear no uniforms, and respect no borders, intentionally slaughtering civilians, raping, brutalizing, and intimidating, in addition to using guns, suicide bombers, and airliners to kill. 9/11 was no "terrorist attack", but an Islamic blitzkrieg against America's economic, political and military centers. It was an attempt to collapse the free world in three strokes of the sword of Allah.
We must also face the fact that the Islamic diaspora (the ummah) is engaged in a "HOT" war, killing and advancing their agenda around the planet:
- Islam against the Hindus in India
- Islam against the Catholics in the Philippines
- Islam against the Buddhists in Thailand
- Islam against the Jews in Israel, Yemen, Iran and even S. America (wherever Jews exist)
- Islam against the Coptic Christians in Egypt
- Islam against the Christians and animists in the Sudan
- Islam against the Christians in N. Nigeria
- Islam against the Chaldean Christians in Iraq
- Islam against the Zoroastrians In Iran
- Islam against the athiests in formerly Christian Europe
- Rising Islamist movement in "secular" Turkey
- Rising Islamist movement "democratic" nuclear armed Pakistan
- Rising Islamist movement in "modern, moderate" Malaysia
- Rising Islamist movement in Algeria
- Islam against the Christians in Indonesia
- Islam against infidel schoolchildren in Beslan, Russia
- Islam against infidel Australian tourists in Hindu Bali
- Islamic religious apartheid in Saudi Arabia
- Islam against the train commuters in Spain
- Islam against tube riders in London
- Islam against the "infidel" U.S. Embassies in Kenya & Tanzania
- Islam against office workers in New York
- Islam against freedom of speech at the U.N.
- Islam against schoolgirls in Afghanistan
- Islam against Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia (ambushed and decapitated)
- Islam against homosexuals in Iran, Iraq and everywhere they exist
- Islam against women
- Islam against Polish & Korean engineers (beheaded)
- Islam against authors (Salman Rushdie & his death fatwa)
- Islam against movie producers (Theo van Gogh brutally slaughtered)
- Islam against parked cars in Paris
- Islam against everything we stand for