Disgrunted Gruntings

Dem Health Plan Proposal has some Issues....

Lets see, some problems....

# Riddled with Taxes: This legislation is riddled with tax hikes. They start by taxing those earning over $10,831 year who don’t buy health insurance $750—a tax that escalates to $3,800 as income rises. Health insurance, health care devices and drugs are also taxed, adding to the cost of health care, and decreasing the competitiveness of these businesses.

# Medicare Cuts: The bill cuts $500 billion in Medicare spending, including over $130 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage and nearly $120 billion in Medicare cuts for hospitals that care for seniors. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says they “expected the Medicare Advantage plans to lose 2.7 million enrollees over the next decade” as a result.... See More

# Raises Insurance Prices: CBO also finds “premiums in the new insurance exchanges would tend to be higher than the average premiums in the current-law individual market…”

# Force, Not Choice: This legislation includes an “individual mandate” forcing all Americans to purchase health insurance, like the Massachusetts law. Taxpayer subsidies will be given to those earning up to three times the federal poverty level. Those not qualifying for subsides will be taxed up to $3,800 if they do not buy insurance, and the Joint Tax Committee has confirmed failure to pay your fine could result in jail time. The experience in Massachusetts has left those caught in between unable to afford insurance and having to pay the tax.

# Big Insurance Boondoggle: Forcing all the uninsured into insurance could bring as much as $200 billion a year in new premiums to insurance companies, including $465 billion in subsidies over 10 years.

# Privacy Violation: This legislation would allow law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and the Department of Justice unprecedented unfettered access to medical records.

Could a Liberal who supports this Bill please refute these talking points?

If this goes through:
- Your taxes WILL go up.
- Your insurance premiums WILL go up.
- The Deficit WILL go up.
- Small Businesses WILL close.

With more people impoverished, more people unemployed, and more people dependent on the Government for their existence....how is this an improvement?

More at http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=85339

You're not allowed to pay us back in clunkers!

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-li...-open/1178451/

SNL hits a bullseye on things.

Random Quotes on Taxation

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents... -- James Madison

When there's a single thief, it's robbery. When there are a thousand thieves, it's taxation. -- Vanya Cohen

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -- G. Gordon Liddy

America is a land of taxation that was founded to avoid taxation. -- Dr. Laurence J. Peter

Worried about an IRS audit? Avoid what's called a red flag. That's something the IRS always looks for. For example, say you have some money left in your bank account after paying taxes. That's a red flag. -- Jay Leno

We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. - Ronald Reagan

Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a refund from the IRS, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with. ~Author unknown, from a Washington Post word contest

You don't pay taxes - they take taxes. ~Chris Rock, Bigger and Blacker

The federal government was NEVER supposed to provide all the social services that have essentially bankrupted the nation. Just ask James Madison. - Bob Hubbard

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;... Read More
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America."

by:

James Madison
(1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President
Source:

referring to a bill to subsidize cod fisherman introduced in the first year of the new Congress

The politicians say "we" can't afford a tax cut. Maybe we can't afford the politicians. ~Steve Forbes

Question: " I understand that Congress is considering a so-called 'flat' tax system. How would this work?"

Answer: "If Congress were to pass a 'flat' tax, you'd simply pay a fixed percentage of your income, and you wouldn't have to fill out any complicated forms, and there would be no loopholes for politically connected groups, and normal people would actually understand the tax laws, and giant talking broccoli stalks would come around and mow your lawn for free, because Congress is NOT going to pass a flat tax, you pathetic fool." ~Dave Barry

The flat tax would be so simple, you could fill it out on a post card. A post card that would say, in effect, having a wonderful time; glad most of my money is here. ~Steve Forbes

U.S. Internal Revenue Service: an agency modeled after the revenue raising concepts of the 19th century economist, Jesse James. ~Robert Brault,

The government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. ~Ronald Reagan

To force a man to pay for the violation of his own liberty is indeed an addition of insult to injury. ~Benjamin Tucker, Instead of a Book

Of course the truth is that the congresspersons are too busy raising campaign money to read the laws they pass. The laws are written by staff tax nerds who can put pretty much any wording they want in there. I bet that if you actually read the entire vastness of the U.S. Tax Code, you'd find at least one sex scene ("'Yes, yes, YES!' moaned Vanessa as Lance, his taut body moist with moisture, again and again depreciated her adjusted gross rate of annualized fiscal debenture"). ~Dave Barry

What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue. ~Thomas Paine

America is a land of taxation that was founded to avoid taxation. ~Laurence J. Peter

That which we obtain too easily, we esteem too lightly. Thomas Paine

Obama Tax Jokes

"Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit Obama's national debt." -- Tip o'the hat to Herbert Hoover

Based on his performance in office so far, President Obama should do just fine on his future tax returns. After all, he will be able to write off his second term.

It's too bad that we can't buy stock in the federal tax system. With Obama as president that will be only thing sure to go up.

President Obama is angrily calling for more federal tax increases. He just heard from his advisors that some American taxpayers weren't completely broke yet.

The best things in life are free but President Obama's tax advisors are working hard trying to solve that problem.

Barack Obama isn't planning on buying TurboTax®. Obama can turbocharge our taxes all by himself.

President Obama's tax return should list Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright as dependents.

President Obama plans to start printing income tax forms on Kleenex, so it will be easier for us to pay through the nose.

President Obama has just announced that he has a new plan to simplify the tax code. From now on only the Republicans will have to have to pay any taxes.

Q. Who should be listed as the most expensive dependent on your tax return?
A. President Obama.

President Obama will make it a lot easier for most people to do their income taxes next year. No jobs, no income.

Under Obama everyone in America will be working for the government. Democrats will be on the payrolls and Republicans will be on the tax rolls.

In the interest of full disclosure, President Obama's should declare all of the fawning media coverage he's received so far as a gift on his tax return.

Despite what some people are claiming, this country is just as free under the Obama presidency as it ever was . . . unless you happen to be a taxpayer.

If President Obama listed free enterprise on his tax return, it would have to be listed as a liability. That's because he just writes it off.

Today the IRS released new guidelines on how to avoid audits while Obama is the president. Number one - Don't list excessive deductions. Number two - File your return on time. Number three - Register to vote as a Democrat.

Judging by his wild spending so far, President Obama has apparently decided that it is easier to trim the taxpayers than to trim federal spending.

Don't think of it as paying more taxes. Think of it as giving Obama a big tip.

Thanks to President Obama we will become a more honest people. Once we're all jobless there won't be any point in lying on our tax returns.

Next year's "stimulus" tax return will fit on a postcard.

* How much money did you make?
* Mail it in.

President Obama intends to reward ambition. With higher taxes.

Now that Obama is the President you can still get ahead if you get up early in the morning, work late every day and hit the lottery.

Congress's Powers?

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

Quote:

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

__________________

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.

'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.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...weep.ktvk.html

Pastor Tazed in US "Constitution Free Zone"

http://immigration.change.org/blog/v...antless_search

Quote:

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?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...red.pastor.cnn

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

Federal Government to Steal land for Flight 93 memorial

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

Quote:

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.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09127/968459-455.stm

See also http://www.witchvox.com/wren/wn_detail.html?id=20613

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

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?

Montana:

Quote:

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.

FULL ARTICLE

Texas:

Quote:

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."

LINK

Alaska:

Quote:

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.

LINK

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

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln; Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe and How Capitalism Saved America. His latest book is Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means for America Today.

===

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.

Summary
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.
=====

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)

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

Concerns:
-
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 ...

clifylq: OBAMA WANTS A HITLER STYLE (STURMATEILUNG - SA) OR BROWN ...

A comment made at "Service.." wrote:

Quote:

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?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA

How to exercise your constitutional rights during encounters with police.

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)

I am a very peaceful man. I love people and am known for my gregarious personality. However, if you try to confiscate my guns, I will feel compelled to give them to you, one bullet at a time.

Source: Good to be King (2004)

Don't these guys know, we can't be trusted with weapons? That only special people, with special permission, and nice pressed uniforms, or dirty stained flannel shirts should have them? Sheesh.

=====

If I were to select a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick BATF [the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms].
-- U.S. Representative John Dingell, 1980

.. a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen...
-- Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner.
-- Report of the Subcommittee On The Constitution of the Committee On
The Judiciary, United States Senate, 97th Congress, second session
(February, 1982), SuDoc# Y4.J 89/2: Ar 5/5

In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 states such a thesis.
-- Stephen P. Halbrook, "That Every Man Be Armed", 1984

To make inexpensive guns impossible to get is to say that you're putting a money test on getting a gun. It's racism in its worst form.
-- Roy Innis, president of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), 1988

I don't like the idea that the police department seems bent on kepping a pool of unarmed victims available for the predations of the criminal class.
-- David Mohler, 1989, on being denied a carry permit in NYC

Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992

You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one.
-- Rush Limbaugh, in a moment of unaccustomed profundity 17 Aug 1993

Texas continues to hint Secession.

Recently martial arts expert and actor Chuck Norris said in a few interviews that he's willing to take up the mantle as President of the Republic of Texas, should Texas decide it's had enough of Washington's continued defecating on the US Constitution and leave.

On April 15th, Texas Gov. Rick Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union.

"There's a lot of different scenarios," Perry said. "We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."

When Texas entered the union in 1845 there was an understanding it could pull out at a later time if it decided to. However when it did secede in 1861, is was forced back into the Union by force of arms. Currently, according to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Texas negotiated the power to divide into four additional states at some point if it wanted to but not the right to secede.

The debate over the legality of secession has been ongoing as nothing within the US Constitution specifically states that a member State can not do this, indicating it is a valid option.

Texas has a history of being a very independent and freedom loving place. Concerns over the US Economy, the continued mortgaging of our future to bail out failing businesses and saddling taxpayers with mounting debt, as well as serious concern over Federal abuse of the Second Amendment and rumors of mandatory gun registration and confiscation, are pushing the people of Texas towards a hard choice.

If it happens, I doubt it will be a peaceful exit.

The Sham that is Airport Security.
(Originally Posted at MartialTalk)10-17-2008

Quote:

Airport security in America is a sham—“security theater” designed to make travelers feel better and catch stupid terrorists. Smart ones can get through security with fake boarding passes and all manner of prohibited items—as our correspondent did with ease.
by Jeffrey Goldberg

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/airport-security

Reporter repeatedly manages to transport banned items, terrorist related goods, etc through the nations airports.

Doesn't seem like we're any safer now than 2 years ago.
"Screeners at Newark Liberty International Airport, one of the starting points for the Sept. 11 hijackers, failed 20 of 22 security tests conducted by undercover U.S. agents last week, missing concealed bombs and guns at checkpoints throughout the major air hub's three terminals."
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...screene_1.html

Or any more secure than we were in 2002
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/...t-security.htm

So, today we have huge lines, long delays, must show up hours earlier than we used to have to remove our shoes, aren't allowed to carry a great many common items, can't take snapshots in the terminal, are at risk of losing our phones, pdas and laptops, all in the name of "security".

And someone wearing a McD uniform can walk in the employee entrance, catch a bag-o-bombs tossed ver the fence and blow the snot outta the place.

A search on Google for airport security failures generates over 400,000 hits.

Someone explain to me how we're so much safer than we were at 6am on 9/11/2001.

AddThis

AddThis

About Bob

Important Resources

Followers

US Political Parties

Subscribe to Disgruntled Gruntings

Blog Archive

Blogs of Note

America

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Friday, March 5, 2010

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Friday, January 15, 2010

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Friday, December 25, 2009

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Friday, May 15, 2009

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Monday, April 27, 2009

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Friday, April 24, 2009

Monday, April 20, 2009

Friday, April 17, 2009

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Constitution Class taught by Michael Badnarik (2003)