Latest News!Written By Comment Count Comment Last Three March 28, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered,if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits? Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does. One hundred senators, 435 Congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly,legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one thing. These 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 and 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 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 these 545 people in Congress. 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. These 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! Below are taxes that did not existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and families could live on one parent's income. What in the hell happened? Can you spell 'politicians?' And I still have to 'press 1' for English!? Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL license Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Excise Taxes Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon) Gross Receipts Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Taxes Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Personal Property Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service Charge T ax Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax Sales Tax Recreational Vehicle Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax AND NOW Health Care GO AHEAD - - - BE AN AMERICAN ---- VOTE THESE BUMS OUT OF OFFICE.... -
0
March 28, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Below is an article by George Will concerning the birth rights of babies born to illegals. The US Congress must stop this crazy idea that babies of illegals are US citizens. This illegal right brings millions of illegals to the US and this must stop. Our elected politicians are not doing their job of protecting American citizens and protecting our Constitution.
An argument to be made about immigrant babies and citizenship By George F. Will Sunday, March 28, 2010; A15 Washington Post A simple reform would drain some scalding steam from immigration arguments that may soon again be at a roiling boil. It would bring the interpretation of the 14th Amendment into conformity with what the authors of its text intended, and with common sense, thereby removing an incentive for illegal immigration. To end the practice of "birthright citizenship," all that is required is to correct the misinterpretation of that amendment's first sentence: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." From these words has flowed the practice of conferring citizenship on children born here to illegal immigrants. A parent from a poor country, writes professor Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school, "can hardly do more for a child than make him or her an American citizen, entitled to all the advantages of the American welfare state." Therefore, "It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry." Writing in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Graglia says this irrationality is rooted in a misunderstanding of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." What was this intended or understood to mean by those who wrote it in 1866 and ratified it in 1868? The authors and ratifiers could not have intended birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants because in 1868 there were and never had been any illegal immigrants because no law ever had restricted immigration. If those who wrote and ratified the 14th Amendment had imagined laws restricting immigration -- and had anticipated huge waves of illegal immigration -- is it reasonable to presume they would have wanted to provide the reward of citizenship to the children of the violators of those laws? Surely not. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 begins with language from which the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause is derived: "All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." (Emphasis added.) The explicit exclusion of Indians from birthright citizenship was not repeated in the 14th Amendment because it was considered unnecessary. Although Indians were at least partially subject to U.S. jurisdiction, they owed allegiance to their tribes, not the United States. This reasoning -- divided allegiance -- applies equally to exclude the children of resident aliens, legal as well as illegal, from birthright citizenship. Indeed, today's regulations issued by the departments of Homeland Security and Justice stipulate: "A person born in the United States to a foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States, as a matter of international law, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That person is not a United States citizen under the 14th Amendment." Sen. Lyman Trumbull of Illinois was, Graglia writes, one of two "principal authors of the citizenship clauses in 1866 act and the 14th Amendment." He said that "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" meant subject to its "complete" jurisdiction, meaning "not owing allegiance to anybody else." Hence children whose Indian parents had tribal allegiances were excluded from birthright citizenship. Appropriately, in 1884 the Supreme Court held that children born to Indian parents were not born "subject to" U.S. jurisdiction because, among other reasons, the person so born could not change his status by his "own will without the action or assent of the United States." And "no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent." Graglia says this decision "seemed to establish" that U.S. citizenship is "a consensual relation, requiring the consent of the United States." So: "This would clearly settle the question of birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens. There cannot be a more total or forceful denial of consent to a person's citizenship than to make the source of that person's presence in the nation illegal." Congress has heard testimony estimating that more than two-thirds of all births in Los Angeles public hospitals, and more than half of all births in that city, and nearly 10 percent of all births in the nation in recent years, have been to mothers who are here illegally. Graglia seems to establish that there is no constitutional impediment to Congress ending the granting of birthright citizenship to those whose presence here is "not only without the government's consent but in violation of its law." -
0
March 27, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Due to the lack of security on our southern border, we are experiencing increased drug and gang violence across our country. This is totally due to the administration not securing our borders. When will the elected leaders of our nation start securing our borders with our military? It will take military force on both sides of the border to stop the drugs and violence.
Mexican drug cartels formed new alliances in 2009 with violent American street and prison gangs that helped tighten their stranglehold on the lucrative U.S. narcotics market, but competition among Mexican smugglers remains fierce and threatens more bloodshed in the United States, according to a Justice Department report. The 2010 Drug Threat Assessment, released Thursday, also says Mexican drug cartels control most of the illicit cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine trade into the U.S., along with much of the marijuana distribution. The cartels' tentacles reach every state, including some unexpected rural areas of the U.S. "The growing strength and organization of criminal gangs, including their growing alliances with large Mexican [drug trafficking organiza[JUMP]tions], has changed the nature of midlevel and retail drug distribution in many local drug markets, even in suburban and rural areas," says the National Drug Intelligence Center report. "As a result, disrupting illicit drug availability and distribution will become increasingly difficult for state and local law enforcement agencies." According to the report, the Mexican connection benefits U.S. street gangs, as they are able to buy drugs directly from the cartels, which enables the gangs to flood the streets with less expensive drugs by cutting out midlevel wholesale dealers. As an example, according to the report, members of the Chicago-based Latin Kings gang in Midland, Texas, now purchase cocaine directly from Mexican traffickers for $16,000 to $18,000 a kilogram. Those drugs then can be shipped directly to Chicago, where it would have cost the gang nearly $30,000 more to purchase a kilogram of cocaine from a midlevel wholesaler. "With this savings," the report says, "the gang undersells other local dealers who do not have the capacity to buy large wholesale quantities directly from Mexican [drug trafficking organizations] in Mexico or along the Southwest border." The street gangs also prove useful to the cartels. The report says drug traffickers use gang members in Mexico and, to a lesser extent, in the U.S., especially in Texas and California, to protect smuggling routes, collect debts and kill rival traffickers. "Gang members who are U.S. citizens are a particularly valuable asset to Mexican [drug trafficking organizations] because they can normally cross the U.S.-Mexico border with less law enforcement scrutiny and therefore are less likely to have illicit drug loads interdicted," the report says. Despite the worries of U.S. law enforcement, a vast majority of the violence still occurs on the Mexican side of the border. In 2009, according to unofficial estimates, as many as 8,000 people in Mexico, including 800 police and military officers, were killed as the cartels fought over smuggling corridors and responded to increased attention from authorities. Mr. President---Stop supporting the illegals and the criminals---start enforcing the law and securing our nation. Your number one job is to protect American citizens. -
0
March 27, 2010
Chuck Floyd
The CBO's projections for the Health Care Bill is totally wrong. The Obama administration gave them only what they wanted to score so the numbers were prearranged. The true cost of Obamacare will bankrupt our nation since it adds $2.6 trillion.
Now the CBO is projecting President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday. In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president's budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade. "An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference," said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying." The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates. That figure would equal 90 percent of the estimated gross domestic product in 2020, up from 40 percent at the end of fiscal 2008. By comparison, America's debt-to-GDP ratio peaked at 109 percent at the end of World War II, while the ratio for economically troubled Greece hit 115 percent last year. For countries with debt-to-GDP ratios "above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by 1 percent, and average growth falls considerably more," according to a recent research paper by economists Kenneth S. Rogoff of Harvard and Carmen M. Reinhart of the University of Maryland. "The biggest part of the deficit difference is lower tax revenue due to the different economic assumptions," said James R. Horney, a federal-budget analyst at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "The administration assumes GDP and incomes will be higher, and that translates into higher revenues than CBO expects. Relatively small differences in economic assumptions can add up to big differences over 10 years." The president has established a fiscal commission to propose actions to reach his goal of balancing the budget by 2015, except for net interest payments, which CBO projects to total $520 billion that year. The president's budget, however, will generate a $793 billion deficit in 2015, according to CBO. "The proposed budget is woefully insufficient to achieve the president's goal or the important fiscal goal of stabilizing the debt at a reasonable level in the medium and long term," Ms. MacGuineas said. The U.S. Congress and the President are NOT fiscally responsible and are just pushing debt into the future so they can spend and reward their supporters like ACORN and the unions. We must cut spending, reduce our debt, secure our borders, and stop the socialist agenda. -
0
March 21, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Tens of thousands of legal US citizens across America and in Washington, DC this weekend want the health care bill to be killed. We loyal tax-paying citizens do not want Obamacare and the liberals or federal government to control our health care. We must take back our country from the far-left and socialists elected officials in this country. This is a fight like the founding fathers had to fight for freedom against the British.
A "Kill-the-Bill" message rang out from a giant crowd of 50,000 Tea Party activists who gathered in Washington, D.C. on Saturday for a last-minute protest against Congress's efforts to pass the Obama-Pelosi-Reid government-run healthcare plan. There are millions of people in the US that could not come to Washington, but they want the federal government out of their lives. There are many pictures from the massive gathering in Washington yesterday, but will the liberal media show them to you?. Realize that this rally was literally put together in 2-days time by a coalition of dozens upon dozens of local and national Tea Party organizations including the Tea Party Express. Does Pelosi, Reed, or Obama think that the members of the Tea Party are just far-right people who do not represent real Americans? No, they just do not want to listen to the American people and are focused on passing this bill as any cost. We're going to watch and see what Congress does. They've heard from the American people who believe in individual freedom and our Constitution. The polls (60%) show the public opposes this attempt to have the government take over our nation's healthcare system. The phones have been tied up with people calling in to oppose the bill. Emails and letters and FAXes opposing the bill number well into the millions. If the members of Congress defy the American people, defy our Constitution, and push this bill through, then we will make sure they lose their seats in Congress. That is exactly what the "Tea Party Express is all about. We want elected officials who support what is in our national interests, not what a certain group or Party wants to jam down our throats. Members of Congress: Should you choose to defy your boss - which is "We The People" - then expect that as a consequence you will be fired. -
0
March 19, 2010
Chuck Floyd
What is the strategy of going after Israel for building houses, yet not going after Russia for helping Iran build nuclear reactors? What is the Obama strategy for dealing with critical issues facing the security of our nation? Why didn't Secretary Clinton walk out of her talks with Russia when they announced that they will help Iran with its nuclear reactor program?
Russia said Thursday that it will start up a nuclear reactor it is building at Iran's Bushehr plant in the summer. It is clear that Moscow will not support new U.N. sanctions on Tehran and support the U.S. position of a non-nuclear Iran. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin announced the Russian decision just hours after Mrs. Clinton arrived in Moscow. "The first reactor at Iran's nuclear power plant in Bushehr is to be launched already in the summer," Mr. Putin was reported as saying by Russian news agencies during a visit to the southern city of Volgodonsk. Mrs. Clinton, who is scheduled to meet with both Mr. Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev on Friday, said their plan was not a good idea and urged them to further postpone the reactor's launch. "Iran is entitled to civil nuclear power. It is a nuclear weapons program that it is not entitled to. And if it reassures the world, or if its behavior is changed because of international sanctions, then they can pursue peaceful, civil nuclear power," she said at a press conference with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Last week Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. visited Israel to encourage renewed negotiations between the Israeli government and the Palestinians. With an announcement that Israel was proceeding with the construction of a small number of residential units - 1,600 in a section of Jerusalem with more than 400,000 inhabitants, roughly 181,500 Jewish and 229,000 Muslim - was interpreted as a slap in the face to the United States. VP Biden walks out on them and chills our relationship with Israel. As Biden was leaving Israel, the vice president made his displeasure clear. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had apologized after insisting that the announcement had been made at a low level in his government and was not meant as a provocation. Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned Mr. Netanyahu and raised hell for 43 minutes. Whatever she said, tensions between the United States and Israel, according to Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, reached an intensity not experienced in more than three decades. Within days of her phone call, young Palestinians were emboldened to violence throughout Jerusalem - again, tension not experienced in years, and in this case, quite bloody tension. Next week when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addresses the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on Monday, what will she say and what will be the new U.S. foreign policy? -
0
March 16, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Well it's obvious what we as a nation are doing wrong. We need to stop electing those corrupt shiny teethed @#&$%$#@$ into political offices & get the Walmart personell managers to hire our Congresses for us! These guys need to run for office and put fiscal sanctity back into our system.
Walmart Versus the Moron s in Congress.... 1. Americans spend $36,000,000 at Wal-Mart Every hour of every day. 2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute! 3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March 17th) than Target sells all year. 4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target + Sears + Costco + K-Mart combined. 5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people and is the largest private Employer, and most speak English. 6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the World. 7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger & Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in only 15 years. 8. During this same period, 31 supermarket chains sought bankruptcy. 9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world. 10. Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it had 5 Years ago. 11. This year 7.2 billion different purchasing experiences will occur At a Wal-Mart store. (Earth's population is approximately 6.5 Billion.) 12. 90% of all Americans live within 15 miles of a Wal-Mart. You may think that I am complaining, but I am really laying the ground work for suggesting that MAYBE we should hire the guys who run Wal-Mart to Fix the economy. This should be read and understood by all Americans Democrats, Republicans, EVERYONE!! To President Obama and all 535 voting members of the Legislature, It is now official you are ALL corrupt morons: The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is BROKE. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is BROKE. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is BROKE. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $ trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are BROKE. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is BROKE. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal FAILURE. You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars. AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM?? -
0
March 16, 2010
Chuck Floyd
John G. Is 63 years old and owns a small business.
He's a life-long Republican and sees his dream of retiring next year has all but evaporated. With the stock market crashing and new taxes coming his way, John assumes now that he will work to his dying day. John has a granddaughter. Ashley is a recent college grad. She drives a flashy hybrid car, wears all the latest fashions, and loves to go out to nightclubs and restaurants. Ashley campaigned hard for Barack Obama. After the election she made sure her grandfather (and all other Republican family members) received a big I told-you-so earful on how the world is going to be a much better place now that her party is taking over. Having lost both roommates, Ashley recently ran short of cash and cannot pay the rent (again) on her 3 bedroom townhouse. Like she has done many times in the past, she e-mailed her grandfather asking for some financial help. Here is his reply: Sweetheart, I received your request for assistance. Ashley, you know I love you dearly and I 'm sympathetic to your financial plight. Unfortunately, times have changed. With the election of President Obama, your grandmother and I have had to set forth a bold new economic plan of our own..."The Ashley Economic Empowerment Plan." Let me explain. Your grandmother and I are life-long, wage-earning tax payers. We have lived a comfortable life, as you know, but we have never had the fancier things like European vacations, luxury cars, etc.. We have worked hard and were looking forward to retiring soon. But the plan has changed. Your president is raising our personal and business taxes significantly. He says it is so he can give our hard earned money to other people. Do you know what this means, Ashley? It means less for us, and we must cut back on many business and personal expenses.. You know the wonderful receptionist who worked in my office for more than 23 years? The one who always gave you candy when you came over to visit? I had to let her go last week. I can't afford to pay her salary and all of the government mandated taxes that go with having employees. Your grandmother will now work 4 days a week to answer phones, take orders and handle the books. We will be closed on Fridays and will lose even more income to the Wal-Mart. I'm also very sorry to report that your cousin Frank will no longer be working summers in the warehouse. I called him at school this morning. He already knows about it and he's upset because he will have to give up skydiving and his yearly trip to Greenland to survey the polar bears. That's just the business side of things. Some personal economic effects of Obama's new taxation policies include none other than you. You know very well that over the years your grandmother and I have given you thousands of dollars in cash, tuition assistance, food, housing, clothing, gifts, etc., etc. But by your vote, you have chosen to help others -- not at your expense -- but at our expense. If you need money now sweetheart, I recommend you call 202-456-1111. That is the direct phone number for the White House.. You can also contact the White House here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/ ... You yourself told me how foolish it is to vote Republican. You said Mr. Obama is going to be the People's President, and is going to help every American live a better life. Based on everything you've told me, along with all the promises we heard during the campaign, I'm sure Mr. Obama will be happy to transfer some stimulus money into your bank account. Have him call me for the account number which I memorized years ago. Perhaps you can now understand what I've been saying all my life: those who vote for a president should consider the impact on the nation as a whole, and not be just concerned with what they can get for themselves. What Obama supporters don't seem to realize is all of the money he is redistributing to illegal aliens and non-taxpaying Americans (the so-called "less fortunate") comes from tax-paying families. Remember how you told me, "Only the richest of the rich will be affected"? Well guess what, honey? Because we own a business, your grandmother and I are now considered to be the richest of the rich. On paper, it might look that way, but in the real world, we are far from it. As you said while campaigning for Obama, some people will have to carry more of the burden so all of America can prosper.. You understand what that means, right? It means that raising taxes on productive people results in them having less money; less money for everything, including granddaughters. I'm sorry, Ashley, but the well has run dry.. The free lunches are over.. I have no money to give you now. So, congratulations on your choice for "change." For future reference, I encourage you to try and add up the total value of the gifts and cash you have received from us, just since you went off to college, and compare it to what you expect to get from Mr. Obama over the next 4 (or 8) years. I have not kept track of it, Ashley. It has all truly been the gift of our hearts. Remember, we love you dearly....but from now on you'll need to call the number mentioned above. Your "Savior" has the money we would have given to you. Just try and get it from him. Good luck, sweetheart. Love, Grandpa -
0
March 14, 2010
Chuck Floyd
The Washington Post thinks that Fox News is unfair, unbalanced and unchecked. Really? What do you think is the attitude of the Washington Post, NBC, CBS, ABC, and PBS? These news organizations are really the mouth-piece for all liberals.
Howard Raines wants to blame Fox News for Obama's sinking poll ratings and Americans being against the Obama health care bill. Does he ever think that it is Obama's socialist and far-left views? Fox News informs the American public on the critical issues of the health care debate and all of the socialist issues being pushed on us. The liberal media will not report the details of this bill or others that are being pushed through Congress and the White Hosue. Americans do not want to be like Europe. We thank God for Fox News since the liberal media will not report the news correctly since they want liberal agendas. We also appreciate Democrats who are standing up against this out-of-control health care bill that is being forced down the throats of the American public. When liberals complain about something, it means that it is effective. We want Fox News to keep up its fair and balanced news coverage since the traditional medial outlets do not. -
0
March 13, 2010
Chuck Floyd
The Obama administration is giving a know terrorist who killed American citizens more rights than our brave members of the Navy Seals. That's right---the Obama liberal justice system is going after five Navy Seals who captured a known and targeted terrorist. What is wrong with this radical attack on our troops who have been given the mission of killing terrorists? These five brave men captured this terrorist and hit him so they are now the bad guys? They should have killed him.
The terrorist who was captured by the American Seal team killed Americans through an ambush in Fallujah , Iraq. Their bodies were dragged around in the streets of the city, then burned and hung from the upper trusses of a bridge. The murderers gathered to celebrate and have their photos taken with the trophy. A Navy Seal team was formed to go after this terrorist and now are facing criminal charges because, somewhere along the timeline of his capture, the terrorist murderer suffered a school-yard fat lip, his captors are now being charged with nothing short of war crimes and facing discharge and imprisonment. So, instead of celebration of justice served and heroes honored, these men are facing trial and prison because they hit a terrorist. The mother of slain Blackwater guard Jerry Zovko drove from Ohio to give each of the accused SEALs a blessed rosary and lend them her support. "These young SEALs are in this situation because they caught the mastermind behind the death of my son (and others), and not only my son and his co-workers but also the marines who went into Fallujah after their death," said Donna Zovko. "I am very proud of these young SEALs and thankful to them. They did not do anything wrong." I perceive more symptoms of a sickness, a corruption of the nation's heart and soul. I am tempted to label it 'liberalism' or 'progressivism', but those too are just symptoms of the infection. But this is nothing new, I recognized these symptoms four decades ago in the shameful treatment of our warriors returning from Vietnam, in the acceptance of Marines bombed in Beirut, in the ho-hum yawn of media coverage of Mogadishu (Black Hawk Down), in the return to mental numbness after 9/11, prosecution of the Marines of Haditha, assault of recruiters across the country, anti-war protesters at the gates of Walter Reed Army Hospital... Our nation must stand up and support our Navy Seals and demand that the Obama liberal justice system be stopped. Our military must be supported in time of war or bring them home. Better yet, we need to throw out this anti-American administration and put a real President in the White House who supports the values of our military and society. -
0
March 13, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Can you guess which one sports organization has the most criminals?
Even if you aren't a sports fan this is very interesting! Over the last couple of years... 36 have been accused of spousal abuse 7 have been arrested for fraud 19 have been accused of writing bad checks 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses 3 have done time for assault 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges 8 have been arrested for shoplifting 21 currently are defendants in lawsuits 84 have been arrested for drunk driving Can you guess which organization this is? Is it the NBA Or NFL? Give up yet? Neither, it's the 535 members of the United States Congress The same group of Idiots that crank out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line. -
0
March 06, 2010
Chuck Floyd
Not only are the Democrats trying to destroy our health care system, but they are trying to institute new policies that will kill Americans. Liberal members of Congress must stay out of the health care policy decision-making process and let doctors and medical professionals control the medical policies. Our blood supply and donation system will be unsafe and in crisis if Senator Kerry and others allow gay men to donate blood into the system.
They are pushing legislation to eliminate the lifetime ban on blood donations from gay and bisexual men. This group is the most dangerous due to the high infection rate for AIDS and HIV. "Healthy blood donors are turned away every day due to an antiquated policy," Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said in a letter to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. "We live in a very different country than we did in 1983,when gay and bisexual men were permanently "deferred" from giving blood, due to the HIV/AIDS crisis." The letter asked the FDA to consider using the same deferral policies with men who have sex with men (MSM) that apply to heterosexuals who engage in high-risk behavior - usually a 12-month deferral. This would mean that a gay or bisexual man could donate blood if he had not had sex with a man in the past 12 months. Oh really--so a gay man will count the months he has not had sex so he can donate blood? The senators' letter to the FDA comes a week after the Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) released a report on why the lifetime ban on MSM blood donations is punitive, unfair and unnecessary. "We don't want to increase the risk to the nation's blood supply," said Joseph Wardenski, lead author of the GMHC report and a former associate at Davis Polk & Wardwell law firm. "We would like to reduce discrimination, and we would like a blood-donor pool that's large enough to ensure that there's a safe and sufficient blood supply, particularly in times of emergency," he said. Senators are more interested in a policy rather than the safety of all Americans who need blood transfusions. When it comes to pathogens transmitted in the blood supply, "100 percent of the risk is borne by the recipient" and none is borne by the donor, said Mark Skinner, president of the World Federation of Hemophilia. Blood-donor rules are discriminatory by design, Mr. Skinner said. But the rules are grounded in science and intended to protect the end users, not target a group, he said, noting that hemophiliacs like himself can never give blood. "It really isn't even a gay issue because lesbians are not excluded unless they fall into other risk categories," Mr. Skinner said. The lifetime ban on MSM donations was established because in the early stages of the AIDS epidemic a major share of cases involved transmission via blood transfusion. However, transmissions with HIV-infected blood still occur, and the number of "bad units" would increase if the MSM deferral was changed, Dr. Andrew I. Dayton told an FDA workshop in March 2006. His computer models found that if MSM were deferred for five years, about 1,430 HIV-infected units would enter the blood supply in the first year of the new policy; with a one-year deferral, the number of infected units would "about double," to 2,780, Dr. Dayton said. This "small but definite increased risk" is part of the reason the FDA has upheld the MSM ban several times, most recently in 2006. MSM have an HIV prevalence "60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first-time blood donors, and 8,000 times higher than repeat blood donors," the agency added. Other countries that currently ban MSM from blood donations are Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland and the Netherlands. Hong Kong also bans them. Still, gay rights groups have long been fighting to change blood-donor rules, and several countries have relaxed their policies. On March 1, Sweden began allowing MSM to give blood if they have not had sex with a man in the past 12 months. So what is more important to the liberal members of Congress---safety of our blood supply or promoting more homosexual policies? -
0
|
