Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The Joke that is Pelosi

The Joke that is Pelosi

Love this joke:

The Pope & Pelosi are on stage in front of a huge crowd.

The Pope says to Pelosi, "Do you know that with 1 wave of my hand I can make everyone here go wild with joy? For the rest of their lives, when they speak of this day they will rejoice!"

Pelosi replied, "I seriously doubt that with one little wave of your hand you can do that. Show me."

So the Pope slapped her.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Is aviation security mostly for show? By Bruce Schneier

Bruce Schneier pens a brilliant piece on the issues with our approach to Airplane and air port security. I highly recommend you read it.

Once a society starts circumventing its own laws, the risks to its future stability are much greater than terrorism.

Despite fearful rhetoric to the contrary, terrorism is not a transcendent threat. A terrorist attack cannot possibly destroy a country's way of life; it's only our reaction to that attack that can do that kind of damage. The more we undermine our own laws, the more we convert our buildings into fortresses, the more we reduce the freedoms and liberties at the foundation of our societies, the more we're doing the terrorists' job for them.

Today, we can project indomitability by rolling back all the fear-based post-9/11 security measures. Our leaders have lost credibility; getting it back requires a decrease in hyperbole. Ditch the invasive mass surveillance systems and new police state-like powers. Return airport security to pre-9/11 levels. Remove swagger from our foreign policies. Show the world that our legal system is up to the challenge of terrorism. Stop telling people to report all suspicious activity; it does little but make us suspicious of each other, increasing both fear and helplessness."


Sunday, December 27, 2009

Health Plan? Naw, just more stroking off by Congress rather than a real fix.

How about a system that pushes for individual responsibility, doesn't subsidize mediocrity nor create an ineffective and bloated bureaucracy, and actually solves problems? I've yet to see that one on the table.

The "Uh, lets create some offices, raise some taxes, and work in some rewards for our buddies" answer is what got the US where it's at now, in deep ****.

Current plan:
- Everyone must BUY a policy.
- If you make under X, we will give you free cash to do so.
- If you make more than Y, or have a health plan that really works, you will pay extra to cover the poor people.
- If you do not buy a plan or otherwise prove you have a plan, you will pay a fine and face jail time.
- We get lots of free money tacked on in exchange for our votes.

That's the current plan in a nut shell.

Here's a real plan
- If you make less than X, you get free care
- From X to Y you get graduated care
- Over Y you're on your own.
- 1-2% tax increase on everyone making more than X to cover costs.
- drugs and tests and hospital bills carefully controled.
- doctors allowed to opt out of program.

There's a plan. Not as sexy, wouldn't take 6,000 pages, and not much room for self rewarding pork.

But, it would actually provide care, and not a feel good. That's the problem, we stopped living in the United States, and all somehow moved to the United Strokes. I for one am tired of being stroked off by the government.

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Congress's Powers?

Congress's Powers?
"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." - Thomas Jefferson, 1798

Matt BrownThere are only 18 enumerated powers allowed to The federal government under article 1 section 8. "General Welfare" does not mean "Welfare social programs" Nor does article 1 section 8 allow the federal government to regulate intRAstate commerce or do half the things it is unconstitutionally doing. If a power is not found in Article 1 section 8, Then under the 10th amendment, that power belongs to the people and the states. Our federal government has Morphed into a tyranical and unconstitutional acting entity

Friday, December 25, 2009

Military to cut budget.....

Military to cut budget.....
Planned cuts to the US Military results in an influx of highly trained, soldier hamsters. The US nut industry faces ruin as the tiny invaders shock and awe with a combination of cuteness and modern firepower.

Constitutionality of Federal Health Plan in Doubt

Despite the Democrats ignorance of the Constitution, and refusal to answer questions concerning their invasive pork and graft filled "Health" plan's Constitutionality and even legality, others are questioning it and some are preparing to take this matter to court and fight it.

Constitutionality of Federal Health Plan.
When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans To Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: 'Are You Serious?'
Friday, October 23, 2009

Rep. Hoyer Says Constitution’s ‘General Welfare’ Clause Empowers Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance
Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Senate Judiciary Chairman Unable to Say Where Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans to Buy Health Insurance
Thursday, October 22, 2009

Sen. Akaka Says ‘I’m Not Aware’ of Constitution Giving Congress Authority to Make Individuals Buy Health Insurance
Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sen. Landrieu Declines to Say Where Constitution Authorizes Congress to Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance, Saying She'll Let 'Constitutional Lawyers on Our Staff' Handle That
Friday, December 11, 2009

Democrats’ Health Care Plan Will ‘Shred Constitution,’ Hoekstra Says
Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Sen. Burris Cites Unwritten Constitutional 'Health' Provision to Justify Forcing Americans to Buy Health Insurance
Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sen. Mark Warner: ‘No Place In Constitution That Says Health Care’
Friday, September 04, 2009

Sen. Merkley: Authority to Force People to Buy Health Insurance is Part of Congress's 'Very First Enumerated Power'
Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sen. Hatch Questions Constitutionality of Obamacare: If Feds Can Force Us to Buy Health Insurance ‘Then There’s Literally Nothing the Federal Government Can’t Force Us to Do’
Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sen. Lincoln: Congress Can Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance Because Constitution ‘Charges Congress With the Health’ of the People
Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Sen. Ben Nelson: ‘I’m Not Going to Be Able to Answer That Question’ of Where Constitution Authorizes Congress to Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance
Wednesday, November 11, 2009

McCain Says Health Care Bill Would Face Constitutional Challenge
Friday, November 06, 2009

Sen. Reed: Forcing People to Buy Health Insurance is Constitutionally Justified Because It’s Like Making People ‘Sign Up for the Draft’
Thursday, November 26, 2009

Sen. Warner: 'No Place in Constitution Says Health Care'
Friday, September 04, 2009 EST

Thursday, December 24, 2009

'I don't need the federal law'

'I don't need the federal law'
'I don't need the federal law' 1:27
A sheriff in Surprise, Arizona caused controversy when he arrested alleged illegal immigrants without federal authority.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

"Common Good"? Hogwash.

"Common Good"? Hogwash.
Believing the propaganda about "The Greater Good" and "Your Responsibility for taking Care of the Less Fortunate" is crazy. Buy into this, and enjoy a life of mediocrity, frustration and unrealized dreams. Take care of yourself first. Everything else will follow.
Living in poverty, mooching off of others, suffering, none of those serve God. God provides a universe full of bounty, love, wealth and abundance, if only people would open themselves to it. I don't believe that God wants any of us dependent on others, and that by not serving ourselves first, we fall into the original definition of Sin, or "Miss the Mark". Put another way, we weren't put here to sit on our butts and collect a welfare check that someone else worked to fund, but to work for our own rewards, and enjoy them fully.

"People who spend their existence worrying
solely about the needs of others and not themselves are not nobles,
benevolent, and spiritual. They are crazy. "- Randy Gage
The Purpose That Drives Your Life

Fire away.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Who's Poor?

Who's Poor?
So, a discussion I had got me thinking. I, and all of us are rich.

I just came back from a Walmart that is the size of a 70's era mall. It had the -best- selection of videos, tvs, groceries and more than I've seen in ages.

I'm seeing new construction all around me.

I'm surrounded by an over abundance of stuff, food, clothes, toys, stuff I need and stuff I don't. Surrounded!

We (my wife and I) own over 1,000 dvd's. Have 5 working computers in my house, have high speed internet, 6 phones, a car, dvd players, tvs, vcrs, several printers, scanners and terrabytes of storage. We dine out regularly, eat shrimp, crab and lobster regularly. We do not lack for good nourishing healthy food. We care for our cats and lizard.

By comparison, my grandfather wore hand me downs, ate lard sandwiches, had no tv, no phone, and scraped by as a kid. 20 years ago a treat for the family was to buy a pizza.

Today we enjoy that a few times a month.

Shrimp was rare, and lobster was reserved for New Years, every other year.

Shrimp's a staple in my household.

No, I don't currently own a house, no I don't own either a mansion or a yacht, and no I don't jet set around the world.

But I can usually come and go as I please, can travel as needed, and know I'll be eating dinner tomorrow.

Compared to so many, in so many places, I am wealthy beyond their dreams.

Too often we get hung up on all stuff we don't have, that we forget how truly blessed we are, and how fortunate we are to live in a time and a place where we are surrounded by so much, and have so many choices.

Monday, December 21, 2009

Fat Tax

Fat Tax.
We keep hearing how it's ok to take money from people who worked for it and earned it and give it to people who didn't and who can't manage to work for a living.

It's ok to further tax them on having health insurance to pay for those who don't.

I say, since the US is the fattest nation on the planet, we need to put in a fat tax.

Here's how it would work.

April 15th, you would attach form 1040-FAT which would be a certified copy of your most recent physical, which should be no more than 6 months old (we can pass a law or tack this onto something else to make it required). You would then look up your weight, compare it to the Federal Accepted Weight Level (or FAWL). For each pound you are over the FAWL you receive a tax credit. For each pound you are under it, you would then pay a penalty. Yes, under this system if you take care of your self, watch what you eat, exercise and manage to stay in shape you will be required to pay for the guy who has 22 twinkies for breakfast, and that woman with the 5 quad whopper lunch. As they are unfortunately unable to do so, it is your American Duty to do it for them.

I can see this being tacked on as a rider this November, along with $100,000 to study the mating habits of the narcaleptic Oswegan Lemming.

This way, the few of us who take care of themselves, who plan ahead, who produce and who succeed can be the FAWL guys for us all.

Thank God I'm a certified member of Team Fat Guy. LOL!


What would a Real Universal Health Plan look like?

What would a Real Universal Health Plan look like?
11-08-2009, 05:13 PM

The current plans being tossed around fall far short of what would really help America. It creates a huge bloated bureaucracy and does little to solve the real problems with health care in America today.

Here are my thoughts on what a real system might look like.

First, it would cover all American's, not just some.

Costs would be done through a separate tax.
Those under 18, and those earning less than $15,000 would pay nothing.
Those who choose to have private insurance receive a fair tax credit.
Cost is deducted via payroll tax like FICA/SSI/etc.
FICA taxes are collected at a rate of 7.65% on gross earnings - earnings before any deductions. The breakdown of FICA is 6.2% for Social Security (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance or OASDI) and 1.45% for Medicare. There are upper limits to what is taxed. This system can be used here.
Using a 2% rate, someone grossing $20k would pay about $34/month in costs.

The plan would cover:
1 eye exam and 1 pair of glasses every 2 years.
Basic Dental Care
Basic Drug Care
Recommended Primary visits
Basic tests
Emergency Services.

Depending on your plan level, a copay may apply.

Some drugs, treatments and services may not be covered.
Cosmetic treatments, as well as vanity services would not be covered.

This is much like any other policy.

Doctors may choose to opt-out of accepting the insurance.

Your Social Security number could (though shouldn't be) all you need to access for treatment. As long as you file a tax return, you are covered.

I still dispute the constitutionality of a forced health plan, and I dispute the constitutionality of a forced retirement plan, however, if we are to be forced to have something, this seems at the moment the less intrusive manner. It retains choice, it allows for the purchasing of superior coverage through a private firm, and it allows for the ones most in need to get the basics needed.


Sunday, December 20, 2009

Government, It's All B.S. and It's Bad For Ya

Government, It's All B.S. and It's Bad For Ya
George Carlin

Warning - Language

Part 1

Part 2

There are not anymore Civil Rights!

Changing Directions...

Changing directions here....random posts on politics, some serious, some educational, some humorous, some annoying. It's all good. Join the Revolution or go back to sleep.

Friday, May 15, 2009

Pastor Tazed in US "Constitution Free Zone"

Pastor Tazed in US "Constitution Free Zone"

According to this pastor, the State Security Apparatus decided to break his car windows, taze him repeatedly, and then stomp on his head because he refused to consent to a warrantless search and seizure in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights.
So, tell me again why US Border Patrol is manning road blocks outside Phoenix AZ? Isn't the border, quite a bit south of there?

I know, I know, shut up and do what they say, or else Osama will win.

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Man Arrested For Taking Photo of Open ATM

Man Arrested For Taking Photo of Open ATM on Tuesday May 12, @07:38PM

Posted by kdawson on Tuesday May 12, @07:38PM
from the i-will-tackle-you dept.
net_shaman writes in with word of a Seattle man who was arrested for taking a photo of an ATM being serviced. "Today I was shopping at the downtown Seattle REI. I was about to buy a Thule hitch mount bike rack. They were out of the piece that locks the bike rack into the hitch. So I was in the customer service line to special order one. It was a long line and while I was waiting, I saw two of guys (employees of Loomis, as I later learned) refilling the ATM. I walked over and took a picture with my iPhone of them and more interestingly of the open ATM. I took the picture because I'm fascinated by the insides of things that we don't normally get to see. ... That was when Officer GE Abed (#6270) spun me around and put handcuffs on me."


What a load of BS. Nice to see the rent-a-cops pushing people around, and the Seattle PD apparently in the business of bullying someone.

If the story is as was written, the guy didn't do anything illegal, and the fake-cops and the real ones are in the wrong.

I agree with Bert here:
Remember, you can take photos of pretty much any damned thing you want in public (military and national security areas are the exception), including children, buildings, airports, and police officers. Private properties can set their own rules about what kind of photography is allowed, but can't confiscate your film without a court order. If they try to or threaten you with arrest, they're more likely to be breaking the law than you are.

Bert Krages, an attorney who wrote a concise summary of rights called The Photographer's Rights (from which we pulled out the info in the above paragraph), points out that most public photo altercations are started by security officers or employees who don't know the law and who just assume that taking photos is somehow illegal. He suggests if a rent-a-cop becomes "pushy, combative, or unreasonably hostile," call the police. But who do you call when the police are also dumb and easily frightened, and more likely to protect private businesses instead of private citizens?

Texas and Montana to Uncle Sam : "Keep your nose off our guns"

Short blurbs from the NRA.

Lawmaker aims at making Texas made and owned firearms exempt from federal regulation

A Texas lawmaker wants to further push state sovereignty from the federal government. Rep. Leo Berman, a former Arlington mayor pro tem, has filed a bill to make guns, ammunition and gun parts that are made, sold and kept in Texas free from federal regulation.

Posted: 5/4/2009 9:33:20 AM

Montana: State exempts guns from federal regulations

The state of Montana has drawn a line in the sand, challenging the federal government to decide whether to follow the U.S. Constitution with a new gun law that exempts from federal regulations any gun, gun accessory or ammunition made in the state and intended for use there.

Read About It: WorldNetDaily

Posted: 5/7/2009 9:11:04 AM


Montana's is now law, passed by both parts of it's government and signed by it's Gov. Texas's bill is pending, as is a similar one in Alaska. All eyes are on Montana however, with the Feds not expected to honor it, and force legal action.

Monday, May 11, 2009

Daniel Miller's Short Take On Texas Secession

Daniel Miller's Short Take On Texas Secession

Although I could talk about governmental theory and the social contract, I want to start by giving you an analogy. Imagine for a moment that you are married. Not a stretch for some of you since you are married or have been in the past. Now imagine that your spouse had done the following:
- Taken your paycheck and spent it on drugs to the point of running you into serious debt
- Rendered you and your children financially strapped to the point of financial ruin
- Taken your money and given it to your neighbor so that "we can be friends"
- Actively worked to turn your kids into "abusive" clones and against you
- Ran up gambling debts that you and your children had to pay
- Repeatedly cheated on you but promised that the next time would be different
- Made decisions for you that were detrimental without your agreement
- Put a second, third or fourth mortgage on your home without your consent
- Promised that they were placing money into your retirement but they were really spending it on frivolous items which would render you destitute at retirement
- Refused to put locks on the door even when your house has been broken into, your property stolen and you have been raped repeatedly
- Failed to come to your aid when you were injured or sick
- Became domineering and controlling to the point of obsession
- Refused to let you speak your mind about these problems and when you did labeled you as "unstable" and "fringe"
- Threatened to beat or kill you if you ever leave
What would you want to do in this situation? If you said anything short of "divorce" please call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233).
But did you catch that? D-I-V-O-R-C-E! Divorce and secession are the exact same thing.
A very interesting read.

Why is the economy a mess and businesses going under? A reason. by Bob Hubbard

Why is the economy a mess and businesses going under? A reason.
by Bob Hubbard

I recently got married. As part of that life's journey, one contacts a number of businesses and key people to make the day run smoothly. We contacted several facilities, visited 3. We received no call backs or follow ups from any of the places, other than the 1 we ultimately chose. We contacted several photographers, and were waiting on a promised call back from one when another contacted us out of the blue. We went with her and its a good thing we did as we still haven't heard from the one who promised to call us. We left messages with several dj's, tux rental places, and 2 hotels. Not a single call back. Are you seeing a trend here? All over the place people are crying "business is down", "I'm not sure if I'll make it" and similar. Yet we had a hard time finding anyone to take our money.

We stopped at a local fast food chain the other day. Place was empty. We waited 5 minutes before walking out, as no one felt like taking our order. Cleaning the back counter was more important, as obviously was the smoke break. A few days earlier, another chain store, we got indifferent service, mediocre "food", and a shrug when I complained about it.

Last year I made several calls to the management of a local mall, looking for information about possibly renting space there. Despite calling every day for 2 weeks, I never managed to reach the one single person there who could talk to me about anything rental related. He was always "just stepped out" or "gone for the day". I finally asked if he ever comes in, and when the person expressed surprise, I said I'd been calling all week, leaving messages and hadnt heard back. They said that was common. The mall has quite a few vacancies. I wonder why. Another local mall has a waiting list as it's full. They answered their phone and were available to talk. Big difference.

A couple months ago a family member had a plumbing emergency. We called at least a dozen plumbers (with the 24 hr service ads) before reaching a live person. We left messages at the earlier ones, and not a single one ever called back.

The economy may be shaky, a few large companies may be facing ugly restructuring, but the core of the economy has always been the small businesses. Maybe the reason why the core is seems to be rotting lies with the core it self. Maybe, it's shooting itself in the foot by failing to follow up, provide quality service and a quality product, and failing to follow through. Maybe, the solution to the economic mess isn't trillions in bailouts to a few big names, but for consumers to find and reward those companies that do go the extra mile, that do care about their product, that deserve to survive.

Maybe then the slackers, drifters, and such will wake up and step up, or die out like they deserve to make way for the real economic stimulus.

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Maine Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

Maine Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

Same-sex marriage became legal in Maine on Wednesday as Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill less than an hour after the state legislature approved it.

"I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," said Baldacci, a Democrat.

But he raised the possibility that the residents of the state would overturn the law.

[Read Full Story]

About time. Maine joins Vermont, Connecticut and Massachusetts, as well as Iowa in allowing same-sex marriages. California s still thinking on the matter, and New Hampshire, Rhode Island and New York are considering the matter.

Federal Government to Steal land for Flight 93 memorial

Federal Government to Steal land for Flight 93 memorial

I'm sure the people on Flight 93 would be proud of their government.

Feds to condemn land for Flight 93 memorial
Thursday, May 07, 2009

The government will begin taking land from seven Somerset County property owners so that the Flight 93 memorial can be built in time for the 10th anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attacks, the National Park Service said.
"We always prefer to get that land from a willing seller. And sometimes you can just not come to an agreement on certain things," park service spokesman Phil Sheridan said.

See also

Personally, I think this is a disgusting abuse of government.

Friday, May 8, 2009

545 PEOPLE By Charlie Reese

545 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; 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? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She 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.

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.... it's because they want them in ....IRAQ....

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.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

US States to Fed: Our Guns are None of your Business.

At least 3 US State have passed or introduced bills telling Uncle Sam to go and get stuffed over guns.So, what will the Fed withhold from Montana to force compliance? Highway money, education money, health care and drug funding for seniors?

In a bill passed by the Legislature earlier this month, the state is asserting that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background check and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.

A bill by state Rep. Leo Berman exempting Texas-made firearms, gun accessories and ammunition sold within the state from federal regulation and law -- including registration -- was heard in a House committee on Monday.

"With the appointment of Eric Holder as U.S. attorney general, we have the most anti-Second Amendment attorney general in the history of the nation," Berman said. "What we're saying with this is there are some guns not subject to federal regulation. We have guns and gun accessories and ammunition here that are not subject to their regulation."

Prime sponsor Mike Kelly, R-Fairbanks, attracted 10 co-sponsors and said the bill is both a measure to allow manufacture of guns and a statement that Alaska intends to reclaim some of its rights. Alaska has seen rights eroded in the oversight of navigable waters, fish and game, and access to natural resources, Kelly said, but can reclaim rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
"We will handle the regulation of it," he said.
Kelly said the federal government has regulated firearms in part though the oversight of interstate commerce. The bill addresses that by exempting firearms, ammunition and firearm accessories that are manufactured and retained in the state. Guns and ammo that fit that criteria should be exempt from federal regulation, including registration, he said.

Michael Badnarik Quote

People are usually surprised to discover that I hate the phrase "constitutional rights." I hate the phrase because it is terribly misleading. Most of the people who say it or hear it have the impression that the Constitution "grants" them their rights. Nothing could be further from the truth. Strictly speaking it is the Bill of Rights that enumerates our rights, but none of our founding documents bestow anything on you at all [...] The government can burn the Constitution and shred the Bill of Rights, but those actions wouldn't have the slightest effect on the rights you've always had.
  • Source: Good to be King (2004)

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Spain investigates what America should

Spain investigates what America should

"A Spanish court has initiated criminal proceedings against six former officials of the Bush administration. John Yoo, Jay Bybee, David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, William Haynes and Douglas Feith may face charges in Spain for authorizing torture at Guantánamo Bay."

Interesting reading. If found guilty, they can be arrested if they set foot in any country that is a party to European extradition convention.

Want to Retake Your Government? Learn to Work Together.

Want to Retake Your Government? Learn to Work Together.

Every election, half the people complain that the wrong guy won. Democrat or Republican, odds are, the winner will be one of them. But why? Year after year, people complain yet you never see any other parties getting in, even in the small elections, odds are good that despite our rich number of parties, it's a Democrat or Republican in there.

Behind the "Big Two", the most popular parties are the Libertarian, Green and Constitution parties. Despite years of work though, none have gotten close to winning any major elections. Why is this? Some will point at ballot access issues, road blocks, legal challenges, and a deck stacked against any 3rd party. There is that, but none of that is in fact, insurmountable.

Maybe it's time for these 3rd parties to take some pages out of history and change tactics. They are out numbered, out gunned and out funded by their entrenched opponents, yet stupidly continue to attack head on, and lose.

In the 2008 US Presidential election, Barack Obama changed the rules. He set records doing so. The avalanche he set off is still moving, months after his election. The third parties need to study this, learn from it, and adopt it to their messages.

Something else they must do. Learn to work together.

Barack Obama raised $533 Million, and won 69.5 Million votes. John McCain raised $379 Million, and won 60 Million votes. Third party candidates Ralph Nader (I), Bob Barr (L), Chuck Baldwin (C) and Cynthia McKinney (G) combined raised less than $7 Million and only won 1.7 Million votes combined.

Now, because they are locked out of the debates, because the media only mentions them as an after thought, rarely do they get to present their positions next to the Big Two. But, what if they pooled their war chests. Now, they could take out bigger ads, buy longer spots, and make their voices carry that little bit farther.

Of course, they would also have to start compromising on various points. Everytime a third party starts to gain some headway, it seems it fractures and creates spin offs. I've lost track of how many Libertarian spin off parties there are.

If the thirds want to win, they need to stop taking their balls home and nitpicking. Win some elections, then you can change the world. Until you win, it doesn't matter how right your cause is, especially if only 20 people can hear you speak.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

The Rush Towards Socialism – and How To Stop It by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The Rush Towards Socialism – and How To Stop It
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

It only took the Obama administration a couple of weeks to prove that the national leadership of the Democratic Party is guided by totalitarian-minded socialists who seek to create an omnipotent government. The U.S. government is now controlled by people who have been dreaming of living out their utopian socialist fantasies ever since the fantasies were brought to their attention in college decades ago by their Mao/Castro/Che Guevara poster-hanging, capitalism-hating, communistic professors.

The administration’s main agenda is an explosion of federal spending and debt so large and outrageous that America will soon exceed Sweden in the proportion of the economy that is controlled by government – if it hasn’t already. That’s just for starters. They also want to sharply increase taxes on the most productive and hardest-working people in society; increase the capital gains tax to deter private investment; expand the welfare state; spend trillions on pure, pork barrel spending in a massive vote-buying spree; set all corporate compensation levels by governmental fiat; tax away the wealth of unpopular business people (only starting with those AIG executives); regulate and control all risk taking by private entrepreneurs; enforce a civilian draft to create a modern-day, American version of the Hitler Youth (See Rahm Emanuel’s creepy, Stalinist-sounding book entitled The Plan); nationalize entire industries, starting with the capital markets (they understand that there can be no capitalism without private capital markets); and double, triple, and quadruple the number of "regulators" who already regulate all aspects of human life in America.

At the recent G-20 meeting Obama even signed off on the creation of an international regulatory "authority" that could set compensation policies in American corporations. On top of this, there is a never-ending drumbeat of anti-capitalist propaganda coming from the administration and its worshipful mouthpieces in the "mainstream media."

What can be done? How can this rush toward totalitarian socialism be stopped? Will the Republicans find another old, angry geezer to appeal to the angry white male vote? How about another mumbling and incompetent Bush family heir? Will there be another Reagan who will talk libertarian while governing more like a European Social Democrat? Will they trot out another old "war hero" who will plunge us into war with Iran, North Korea, China, or whomever, to divert our attention away from the economic mess government has placed us in? These are the likely alternatives if we cling to the fantasy that "throwing the bums out" at election time leads to something other than another group of slightly different bums.

The fact is that the American people have been servants or slaves to their government for generations. It wasn’t always that way. When the Adams administration enforced the Sedition Act that made criticism of the federal government illegal, Jefferson and Madison responded with the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves of 1798 that clearly stated that the people did not intend to allow the enforcement of this unconstitutional law within those two states. Section One of Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolve stated, for example, that "the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principles of unlimited submission to their General Government . . ." Other states supported Jefferson and Madison in their defense of free speech.

When President Thomas Jefferson imposed a national trade embargo and consummated the Louisiana Purchase, New Englanders, led by George Washington’s Secretary of State, Timothy Pickering, loudly threatened to secede. They decided against it (for practical economic and political reasons) at the Hartford Secession Convention of 1814, but their actions sent a clear message to national politicians.

Outraged by the embargo, the Massachusetts legislature used the language of Jefferson’s own Kentucky Resolve to proclaim that the embargo "was not legally binding on the citizens of the state" while denouncing the federal law as "unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional" and reminding President Jefferson that "this state maintains its sovereignty and independence . . ." All the New England states, plus Delaware, did the exact same thing and nullified the embargo.

When Alexander Hamilton’s Bank of the United States, a precursor to the Fed, created 72 percent inflation in the first five years of its existence and corrupted politics with its politicized spending policies, citizens all over the country assisted President Andrew Jackson in eventually destroying the institution. The heroic Ohio legislature slapped a $50,000/year tax on each branch of the BUS, attempting to drive it out of business. "The states have an equal right to interpret the Constitution for themselves," announced the Ohio legislature, and it decided that the BUS was not constitutional. Kentucky, Tennessee, Connecticut, South Carolina, New York, and New Hampshire followed suit.

When the War of 1812 broke out the New England states effectively seceded from the union by refusing to participate. A proclamation by the Connecticut legislature was representative of the opinions of New Englanders: "[i]t must not be forgotten that the state of Connecticut is a FREE SOVEREIGN and INDEPENDENT State; that the United States are a confederated and not a consolidated Republic," and that it was refusing to support the war.

When the 1828 "Tariff of Abominations" created an average tariff rate of 45%, applying mostly to Northern manufactured goods, South Carolinians clearly understood that this was a pure act of political plunder at their expense. They convened a political convention to utilize the Jeffersonian idea of nullification and refused to collect the tariff. They even got the South Carolina legislature to allocate $160,000 for the purchase of firearms with which to fend off any would-be federal tax collectors. The result was that they forced the federal government to lower the tariff rate.

During the 1850s the "middle states" of New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and New Jersey developed a very active secession movement that sought to either join a Southern confederacy, form a middle-states confederacy, or support Southern secession. (See The Secession Movement in the Middle States by William C. Wright). Their overriding desire was to separate themselves from the imperious New England Yankees.

When the Southern states seceded in 1860–61, Abraham Lincoln pledged his everlasting support for Southern slavery in his first inaugural address, an address in which he endorsed a constitutional amendment (the "Corwin Amendment") that would have forbidden the federal government from ever interfering with slavery. In the same speech he promised a military invasion and "bloodshed" in any Southern state that ceased paying his beloved tariff on imports which, at the time, accounted for more than 90% of federal tax revenue. The average tariff rate had just been doubled by the Republican-controlled Congress.

The Southern states, along with most people in the North, still held the Jeffersonian belief that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and when that consent is withdrawn the citizens have a duty to abolish the existing government and form a new one. Jefferson never wrote in the Declaration of Independence that the citizens have a duty to abolish the government and form a new one "as long as the other states all agree that you may do so." If the right of secession depends on someone else’s permission, then one does not have a right of secession. That was a fantasy invented by Lincoln, which he used to "justify" waging total war on his own country, murdering some 350,000 American citizens, including some 50,000 civilians. From that time on, government in America was no longer "for the people, by the people, of the people," as Chief Justice John Marshal once said in a phrase that was later plagiarized by Lincoln. From that time on the purpose of government has been for those who run it to plunder those who do not. Nullification and secession were no longer tools with which the citizens could control their own government.

The final nails in the coffin of government by consent were pounded in during the year 1913 with the advent of the federal income tax, the creation of the Fed, and the Seventeenth Amendment calling for the direct election of U.S. senators. The income tax and the Fed gave the federal government the ability to do whatever it wanted to do regardless of the Constitution – even to wage "undeclared" wars. These vast "riches" were used to make millions of Americans totally subservient to the state lest they lose their tiny government subsidies, and to bribe or threaten state governments to do whatever our masters in Washington, D.C. decree, lest they lose their cherished federal highway grants. The ability of the citizens to oppose the federal Leviathan by organizing political communities at the state and local levels was finally destroyed and the centralized, monopolistic bureaucracy that rules America and much of the rest of the world today was created.

The direct election of U.S. senators, as opposed to the original system of having them appointed by state legislature, ended popular control of the federal government. Today, candidates for the senate go to New York, California, China, or wherever the big money is that can be raised as "campaign contributions" to finance their political careers. The interests of such "contributors" are not necessarily congruent with those of the folks back home.

If American citizens are to resist the rush to Obammunism they must first give up on the fantasy that the Republican Party is anything but another cabal of crooks, conmen and clowns, just like the Democratic Party. The only realistic route to freedom, including a restoration of genuine free enterprise, is through the devolution of power away from Washington, D.C. via peaceful secession and nullification, the original American ideals.

Thomas Jefferson understood that democracy could never work in a country as large as the U.S., let alone one with more than 300 million people. In a January 29, 1804 letter to Dr. Joseph Priestly he wrote: "Whether we remain one confederacy, or form into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I believe not very important to the happiness of either part. Those of the western confederacy will be as much our children & descendants as those of the eastern." On the topic of secession, Jefferson continued: "[D]id I now foresee a separation at some future day, yet I should feel the duty & the desire to promote the western interests as zealously as the eastern, doing all the good for both portions of our future family which should fall within my power." When the New England Federalists were threatening secession, Jefferson wrote to his friend John C. Breckinridge on August 12, 1803 that if New England seceded and created a second confederacy, "God bless them both if it be for their good, but separate them, if it is better."

Unlike Lincoln, Jefferson did not believe in threatening "bloodshed" in the case of a "separation" or secession. He understood that such behavior would be a moral abomination and an unimaginable act of barbarianism. A civilized society does not wage total war on "our children," as Jefferson described the future citizens of a new state formed by an act of secession. Yet it is Lincoln, not Jefferson, who is portrayed by American court historians as a kindly, benevolent, and charitable angel.

The Constitution long ago ceased placing any meaningful limits on governmental power. This social contract between the American people and their government was destroyed long ago by Hamiltonian nationalists. Americans now live under a series of dictators (called "presidents") who all believe that they are essentially dictators of the world, capable of ordering the bombing of any place on earth without anyone’s approval. (Within weeks, Obama dipped his hands in blood by ordering a few bombs to be dropped in Pakistan).

As of this writing, several dozen states have reportedly issued resolutions in support of the Jeffersonian principle of nullification. These will all be completely meaningless unless the American public has the fortitude to actually enforce the resolutions and begin ignoring any and all federal government actions that they interpret as unconstitutional and illegitimate. In addition, citizens of every state should learn about the Second Vermont Republic which, for several years now, has been laying the groundwork for Vermont to secede and once again become an free and independent republic, just as all the states thought of themselves as being prior to 1865.

April 14, 2009
Copyright © 2009 by Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Counting Mexico's Guns

Obama says 90% are from the US, Fox says 17%, so, who's right?

From FactCheck:
(click for full article and stats)
Counting Mexico's Guns
April 17, 2009
Updated: April 22, 2009

President Obama says 90 percent of Mexico's recovered crime guns come from the U.S. That's not what the statistics show.

There's no dispute that thousands of handguns, military-style rifles and other firearms are purchased in the U.S. and end up in the hands of Mexican criminals each year. It's relatively easy to buy such guns legally in Texas and other border states and to smuggle them across.

But is it true, as President Obama said, that "[m]ore than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States?" Government statistics don’t actually support that claim.

The figure represents only the percentage of crime guns that have been submitted by Mexican officials and traced by U.S. officials. We can find no hard data on the total number of guns actually "recovered in Mexico," but U.S. and Mexican officials both say that Mexico recovers more guns than it submits for tracing. Therefore, the percentage of guns "recovered" that are traced to U.S. sources necessarily is less than 90 percent. Where do the others come from? U.S. officials can’t say.

Fox News has put the percentage of guns that have been traced to U.S. sources at only 17 percent, but we find that to be based on a mistaken assumption that throws its figure way off. We can't offer a precise calculation because we know of no hard information on the total number of guns Mexican officials have recovered. But if a rough figure given by Mexico's attorney general is accurate, then the actual percentage of all Mexican crime guns that have been traced to U.S. sources is more than double what Fox News has reported.

Is Congress creating a mandatory public service system?

Is Congress creating a mandatory public service system?

See here:

Michael Badnarik Quote

The Patriot Act [...] makes a mockery of the Sixth Amendment, which protects your right to a speedy and public trial, and your right to the assistance of counsel for your defense.
  • Source: Good to be King (2004)

Sunday, April 26, 2009

The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act

The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act

OpenCongress Summary:
The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act (formally the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act) authorizes a dramatic funding increase for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, and the creation of new programs for seniors and veterans. It establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer volunteer program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.
President Barack Obama signed the legislation on April 21, 2009. While it authorizes $5.7 billion over six years, Congress must still approve the funding as part of the budget.
  • Official: To reauthorize and reform the national service laws. as introduced.
  • Short: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act as introduced.
  • Popular: GIVE Act as introduced.
  • Short: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act as introduced.
Bill Status

Introduced March 09, 2009
Voted on by House March 18, 2009
Voted on by Senate March 26, 2009
Considered By President April 21, 2009
This Bill Has Become Law April 21, 2009

Service as Part of the Curriculum

1000-year Obambination? Will Your Tax Dollars Make 8 Million Goons ...

Barack Obama School-aged Indoctrination and Sedition Act of 2009 ...


A comment made at "Service.." wrote:

You're right that we should read the small print. According to Alan Solomont, chairman of the Corporation for National and Community Service, this program can eventually "involve" as many as 8 or 9 million people.
So with that in mind, consider this bit of small print:
"those in an 'approved national service position' may not try to influence legislation, engage in protests or petitions, take positions on union organizing, engage in partisan political activities, or, among other issues, be 'engaging in religious instruction, conducting worship services, providing instruction as part of a program that includes mandatory religious instruction or worship, constructing or operating facilities devoted to religious instruction or worship, maintaining facilities primarily or inherently devoted to religious instruction or worship, or engaging in any form of proselytization.'"
Isn't that scarey? Everyone involved in this program is forbidden to express their opinion on legislation? forbidden to petition or protest? forbidden to "engage in partisan political activities," to boycott or support a strike? forbidden to go to Sunday school or build a church?
During the campaign, Obama said he wanted to establish "a 'Civilian National Security Force' as big and as well-funded as the U.S. military. Melody Barnes, director of the White House domestic policy council, confirmed that this is it.
A lot of the small print seems unconstitutional to me. People should consult their representatives.
Also note, participation in this program is MANDATORY for anyone receiving school loans.
While I support the idea of some form of mandatory community service, I find the obvious rights violations, concerning.

I wonder.....did Congress read this?

Re: "Redistribute the Wealth"

Re: "Redistribute the Wealth"

How many Americans here have friends and associates who's deepest concern is who won what game or who's topic of conversation is always "man I got so wasted last night"?
But that's ok. Those of us who work hard, educate ourselves, start businesses, or work 2-3 jobs while putting ourselves through higher education....we can pay more taxes so that lazybones and slacker can have government subsidized health care (while we pay top dollar for ours), government subsidized heating and electric (while we pay for ours), and even free money to spend on lotto and lobster (while we watch our money and live frugally). It's ok. It's our "Civic Duty" to help those "unfortunates".

On education: I read several hundred books every year, own a thousand+, read 4 newspapers (onliine) daily (SF CA, Austin TX (2), Buffalo NY), plus dozens of discussions like this one every day. I've taken extra training classes, community ed courses, online training, and am at Borders/Barnes & Nobel or my local ibraries weekly. I also run history chanel, food network, HGTV, DIY and Discovery as background. If our "unfortunates" did 10% of that, they'd be miles ahead.

Schools today in the US are woefully behind the technical requirements. Teaching methods in many cases are outdated, classes are over crowded, and teachers are still using maps that show the Soviet Union, and still using text books that list Sadamn as the head of Iraq. Unfortunately, even if they were up to date, balanced, and truely designed to learn, even the best teacher can't teach when the student isn't open to learn, or isn't there in the first place. Kids don't want to learn because they know they can grow up, go on welfare and have the government pay for everything. They have no idea of the value of a dollar, not because it's arbitrary imaginary money, but because they aren't required to know how to manage it.

We argue people go bankrupt because of medical bills. Those lotto winners went bankrupt because they were incapable of handling money.

Before you redistribute the wealth, maybe you need to revamp your education system so that people will be able to handle that which you give them.

Then again, maybe it's time that kids learn that they aren't entitled to anything, anything! that they didn't earn themselves.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters

How to exercise your constitutional rights during encounters with police.

Michael Badnarik Quote

Marriage partners, not government, should define the terms and spiritual orientation of their union in accordance with our nation's guarantee of religious freedom.

Redistribute the Wealth - Socialism is Fun, Not By Lance Winslow

Redistribute the Wealth - Socialism is Fun, Not
By Lance Winslow

The citizens of the United States of America are being tested. When Obama made a comment to Joe the Plumber that we should distribute the wealth; many Americans failed to see the significance of his statement. You see, "redistribute the wealth" is a buzz phrase of socialists. Many younger voters have no clue as to how damaging socialism is to our standard of living. Of course, you cannot blame them, how would they know?

The real issue is that when a candidate promises everything to everyone, and then tells you that the rich will pay for it, well this is quite alluring for the masses, and the candidate becomes a modern day Robin Hood. "He He He, Let's Redistribute the Wealth; Socialism is Fun!" Actually, socialism is a disaster and it is insane to think otherwise. The United States thru capitalism has become the world's largest super power and it works because capitalism works.

If we take and turn our nation into a socialist state, we will slide into a nation run by government and thus, not run very well. There will be fewer choices and mandatory participation, and your freedoms will be less, as everything will be high-regulated, every single thing you do. Your pay will be determined by the government too and your taxes will be unbearable as the government grows larger and larger.

If you complain, you will be denied services and silenced. It is everything that Americans are against. Right now the government will soon own your mortgage if you complain your house will be confiscated, and that folks, is where we are headed. Socialism will be the death of American strength and economic power.

While socialists tell us the economic crisis is due to capitalism, well that is not exactly so. You see, the banking/mortgage crisis occurred because of socialistic ideals pushed onto free-enterprise, when the government and courts forced banks to make loans for homes from people who not only could not afford to pay for them, but were not even credit worthy in the first place.

So, socialism is already ruining your life as an American, but if you are not educated or smart enough to see it, I guess that is why you are voting for Obama and all his false promises. Of course, this is how all great civilizations are brought down; by the mob. The mindless masses, in this case with their vote, which is better than by revolution, but once it happens only a revolution can bring it back. Be careful what you wish for; death is in the wind.

The death of freedom, liberty and choice, and the pursuit of happiness, unless you like happiness with nothing but Big Brother telling you how to think, act, live and what to eat and of course what you can say. Think on this, as you vote for your new favorite socialist.
Lance Winslow - Lance Winslow's Bio. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance;

Friday, April 24, 2009

Samuel Adams Quote

If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.

We're the Government -- and You're Not

What if the U.S. government released an "educational video" to teach today's Americans how to be good citizens?

Words of Wisdom from the late Harry Browne

Words of Wisdom from the late Harry Browne

Harry Browne - Big Government

Former Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne explains the dynamics of big government

Harry Browne: The Great Libertarian Offer

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Michael Badnarik Quote

The Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal, and in 1776, that's exactly what they meant. Women could not vote, women could not own property, and blacks were considered property. After 200 years of enlightenment, we have realized that gender and race are inappropriate distinctions for determining who has individual rights. Anytime Gov gives you permission they let you know that you have permission by giving you a permit or a license. If you have a marriage license, what permission do you have to do now that you did not have permission to do before, who gave you that permission, and who gave them the authority to give you that permission in the first place?
  • Source: Libertarian Party National Convention (2004)

HJ Res 5 - Repeal 22nd Amendment.

HJ Res 5 - Repeal 22nd Amendment.

H. J. Res. 5:
111th Congress

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second Amendment.

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

This is a joint resolutions (H.J.Res. or S.J.Res.) in the U.S. Congress. Joint resolutions serve two purposes. First, they are used exactly as bills to enact law, generally for limited matters. Used this way, they must be passed by both the House and Senate and must be signed by the President before becoming law. Joint resolutions are also used to propose amendments to the Constitution. Used this way, they must be passed by both the House and Senate and be ratified by three-quarters of the states, but do not require the signature of the President, to become a part of the Constitution.

HR 17 Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009

HR 17 Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009

H.R. 17:
111th Congress
House of Representatives ("H.R.").

Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2009

To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right.

HR 833 - Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act

HR 833 - Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act

H.R. 833:
111th Congress
House of Representatives ("H.R.")

Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act

To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

RON PAUL - Audit the Federal Reserve!!! - HR 1207

Encourage your representitive to support HR 1207 - the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. The Fed is a private institution and is therefore not subject to normal Governmental Freedom of Information requests, as Bloomberg recently found out.

HR 1207 will help to reveal where the Fed is funnelling trillions of dollars of taxpayer's money.

"Redistribute the Wealth"

In this video clip Democrat Congressman Jim Moran expresses his disdain for people who want to keep what they have earned.

"...because we've been guided by a Republican administration who believes in this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it...."

Considering that over 70% of lottery winners end up broke, bankrupt, divorced, etc within a few years of getting their winnings, maybe the reason alot of people are broke isn't because Bill Gates wasn't forced to hand over 85% of his money to people who didn't earn it, but because alot of people are really bad at managing what they have in the first place.

Our Troubling Tax System

Last September I played with the numbers, and switching to a flat 15% Federal sales tax would generate over $300 Billion more for the government. But of course, most people don't get it. They don't understand they won't have to take time to file, won't have it withheld, won't have to pay someone to fill out forms, to get it back.
Copyright © 2009 Bob Hubbard. All rights reserved.