Obama To Now Take Over Charities

Obamas new plan will limit what people making over $250,000 can deduct from their taxes, when giving to charity. It looks like what Obama will do is limit the amount people can give, so that the Government will be the one keeping "certain" charities afloat.

Which charities? More likely left wing so called charities like Acorn. How else do you help people who helped you get elected?

I have also heard that he plans to limit what the Government will give to Churches. Churches that take a hard stance on abortion will not get much funding.

This is all socialism. This is Obamas way to take over everything. Limit what the people can do and you control their lives.

When does the next American Revolution begin?

Obama's Cap And Trade = High Taxes And Less Work For All

This Eco nut job Cap and Trade system that Obama wants to install is like a HUGE tax increase for everyone. Cap and Trade will cause every form of manufacturing, oil producing, and energy producing companies to jack up their prices, way up. How you ask? When the government taxes a company they don't pay it, they pass it down to the end user. That is us.

Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts.

And as far as middle-class tax cuts are concerned, Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers. Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.

The tax hikes will generate lower growth and fewer revenues.

That $13 or $9 or what ever it ended up being, is in your check, you will turn around and send double to the government. Are you ready for this people? Do you regret voting him in yet? I know a lot of Democrats that are.

On the job front, if you think that high taxes in an industry is going to help keep and produce jobs, I have a bridge I am selling.

The bad thing is that stupid people still think this is all because of Bush, but if all of this continues, I see huge loses for the Democrats in '10.

Obama To Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

Looks like Obama lied when he said that he supported the Second Amendment. Surprised? I'm not. Here comes the so called Assault Weapons Ban.

Last time they tried cramming this ban down the American peoples throats it had just about every shotgun and rifle that people use for hunting. The funny thing is that the media and Liberals have done a good job making people think that so called Assault Weapons are automatics. Automatics have been illegal for a long time.

So called Assault Weapons are semi automatic. They are not more dangerous then any other gun. Most criminals DO NOT use them since they are too large. The last Assault Weapon ban DID NOT curb crime.

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

Criminals will always be able to get these rifles. The only thing the ban will do is make it so that normal law abiding citizens can not.

Interviews With Obama Voters, How Uninformed They Were

This is seriously scary. It shows how slanted the media really was.

Bailout Prize Patrol

Obama Distorts Reality

Looks like Obama has brought his campaign stumps to the White House. He can talk but he lies a lot.

Fact Check from Fox News.

OBAMA: "We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It's a plan that won't help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining home values."

THE FACTS: If the administration has come up with a way to ensure money only goes to those who got in honest trouble, it hasn't said so.

Defending the program Tuesday at a Senate hearing, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said it's important to save those who made bad calls, for the greater good. He likened it to calling the fire department to put out a blaze caused by someone smoking in bed.

"I think the smart way to deal with a situation like that is to put out the fire, save him from his own consequences of his own action but then, going forward, enact penalties and set tougher rules about smoking in bed."

Similarly, the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. suggested this month it's not likely aid will be denied to all homeowners who overstated their income or assets to get a mortgage they couldn't afford.

"I think it's just simply impractical to try to do a forensic analysis of each and every one of these delinquent loans," Sheila Bair told National Public Radio.

------

OBAMA: "And I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it."

THE FACTS: Depends what your definition of automobiles, is. According to the Library of Congress, the inventor of the first true automobile was probably Germany's Karl Benz, who created the first auto powered by an internal combustion gasoline engine, in 1885 or 1886. In the U.S., Charles Duryea tested what library researchers called the first successful gas-powered car in 1893. Nobody disputes that Henry Ford created the first assembly line that made cars affordable.

------

OBAMA: "We have known for decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy. Yet we import more oil today than ever before."

THE FACTS: Oil imports peaked in 2005 at just over 5 billion barrels, and have been declining slightly since. The figure in 2007 was 4.9 billion barrels, or about 58 percent of total consumption. The nation is on pace this year to import 4.7 billion barrels, and government projections are for imports to hold steady or decrease a bit over the next two decades.

------

OBAMA: "We have already identified $2 trillion in savings over the next decade."

THE FACTS: Although 10-year projections are common in government, they don't mean much. And at times, they are a way for a president to pass on the most painful steps to his successor, by putting off big tax increases or spending cuts until someone else is in the White House.

Obama only has a real say on spending during the four years of his term. He may not be president after that and he certainly won't be 10 years from now.

------

OBAMA: "Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn't afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day."

THE FACTS: This may be so, but it isn't only Republicans who pushed for deregulation of the financial industries. The Clinton administration championed an easing of banking regulations, including legislation that ended the barrier between regular banks and Wall Street banks. That led to a deregulation that kept regular banks under tight federal regulation but extended lax regulation of Wall Street banks. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, later an economic adviser to candidate Obama, was in the forefront in pushing for this deregulation.

------

OBAMA: "In this budget, we will end education programs that don't work and end direct payments to large agribusinesses that don't need them. We'll eliminate the no-bid contracts that have wasted billions in Iraq, and reform our defense budget so that we're not paying for Cold War-era weapons systems we don't use. We will root out the waste, fraud and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn't make our seniors any healthier, and we will restore a sense of fairness and balance to our tax code by finally ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas."

THE FACTS: First, his budget does not accomplish any of that. It only proposes those steps. That's all a president can do, because control over spending rests with Congress. Obama's proposals here are a wish list and some items, including corporate tax increases and cuts in agricultural aid, will be a tough sale in Congress.

Second, waste, fraud and abuse are routinely targeted by presidents who later find that the savings realized seldom amount to significant sums. Programs that a president might consider wasteful have staunch defenders in Congress who have fought off similar efforts in the past.

------

OBAMA: "Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double this nation's supply of renewable energy in the next three years."

THE FACTS: While the president's stimulus package includes billions in aid for renewable energy and conservation, his goal is unlikely to be achieved through the recovery plan alone.

In 2007, the U.S. produced 8.4 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, including hydroelectric dams, solar panels and windmills. Under the status quo, the Energy Department says, it will take more than two decades to boost that figure to 12.5 percent.

If Obama is to achieve his much more ambitious goal, Congress would need to mandate it. That is the thrust of an energy bill that is expected to be introduced in coming weeks.

------

OBAMA: "Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs."

THE FACTS: This is a recurrent Obama formulation. But job creation projections are uncertain even in stable times, and some of the economists relied on by Obama in making his forecast acknowledge a great deal of uncertainty in their numbers.

The president's own economists, in a report prepared last month, stated, "It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error."

Beyond that, it's unlikely the nation will ever know how many jobs are saved as a result of the stimulus. While it's clear when jobs are abolished, there's no economic gauge that tracks job preservation. The estimates are based on economic assumptions of how many jobs would be lost without the stimulus.

House Democrats Propose $410B Spending Bill

After spending $787 Billion on pork laden stimulus bill, the Democrats want to spend $410 Billion on a pork laden spending bill. The Democrats are out of control and need to be stopped, but who can stop them?

House Democrats unveiled a $410 billion spending bill on Monday to keep the government running through the end of the fiscal year, setting up the second political struggle over federal funds in less than a month with Republicans.

The measure includes thousands of earmarks, the pet projects favored by lawmakers but often criticized by the public in opinion polls. There was no official total of the bill's earmarks, which accounted for at least $3.8 billion.

The legislation, which includes an increase of roughly 8 percent over spending in the last fiscal year, is expected to clear the House later in the week.

What we need is cuts in Government not more spending. With the Democrats throwing money at every pet project they have ever wanted, this country will fall. After all of this they still plan on Universal Healthcare, which will destroy our healthcare as we know it and raise taxes to an astonishing level.

Obama has a plan though. Tax the Rich. What people forget is the Rich are the people who produce jobs. If you tax the Rich 5 percent more, then they will cut expenses by 5 percent. What expenses normally get cut in a company? Payroll.

Apart from spending, the legislation provides Democrats in Congress and Obama an opportunity to reverse Bush-era policy on selected issues.

It loosens restrictions on travel to Cuba, as well as the sale of food and medicine to the communist island-nation.

In another change, the legislation bans Mexican-licensed trucks from operating outside commercial zones along the border with the United States. The Teamsters Union, which supported Obama's election last year, hailed the move.

The legislation covers programs for numerous Cabinet-level and other agencies, and takes the place of regular annual spending bills that did not pass last year as a result of a deadlock between the Bush administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Congressional expenses are included. The bill provides $500,000 for what is described as a Senate "pilot program" that will defray the cost of mass mail postcards to households notifying them of a nearby town meeting to be attended by any senator.

What does Cuba and trucks from Mexico have to do with a spending bill? Its pork and pandering to special interest groups. That's what the Democrats do best, buy votes.

Michigan Tobacco Tax Going Up

When you cant figure out what to do to balance a budget, just tax something. That's Jennifer Granholms plan and why I am happy we have term limits. This lady has been a disgrace. Tax, Tax, Tax, that is all she knows how to do.

She has called for doubling the state tax on loose tobacco, cigars and snuff to help balance next year's state budget. That's on top of whopping increases in federal tobacco taxes -- including those for manufactured cigarettes -- that take effect April 1 to pay for expanding health insurance for low-income children, known as SCHIP.

The biggest federal tax increase hits roll-your-own tobacco, rising from $1.10 per pound to $24.78 per pound. Store-bought cigarette taxes are headed from 39 cents per pack to $1.01 per pack.

If approved by the Legislature, state taxes on non-cigarette tobacco items would jump from 32% of wholesale price to 64% next year. Combined with the new federal tax, the average price of a one-pound bag of popular Gambler tobacco would skyrocket from $19 to $70 in Michigan.

You can not depend on smokers. This will only kill the little tobacco shops. More and more people will be heading online to purchase their product which will make only large companies succeed. Good job Granholm! You are sending even more people out of Michigan.

The Chicago Tea Party?

I looked at a poll on CNBC this morning and it actually blew my mind.

Would you want to join Rick Santelli's "Chicago Tea Party?" * 193,643 responses

Yes 93%

No 5%

Not Sure 1.5%

This is the best quote on the site.

Here is the message Obama and Congress are sending: Work hard, pay your bills on time, and you will be penalized by having your hard-earned money reward those who wallow in irresponsibility and have a total disdain for those who play by the rules. — Kathy

Information On Michigan Open Carry Firearm Law

I found this on opencarry.org


YOU CAN OPENLY CARRY A HANDGUN IN MICHIGAN*

1) Any law abiding citizen of the State of Michigan who owns a safety inspected handgun may openly carry (in a holster) said firearm in all places not explicitly exempt by law with or without a CPL. Private property rules over-ride state law in regards to firearm possession.

MSP Legal Update Newsletter: April 2007: Did You Know: …It is not illegal under Michigan law to openly carry a pistol…...

PLACES off limits to firearms without a CPL: Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following: a) A Bank. b) A church. c) A court. d) A theatre. e) A sports arena. f) A day care center. g) A hospital. h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act (BAR). (2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
b) A peace officer.
c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.
d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.

2) If you don’t have a CPL, you must transport your handgun as prescribe by law.

Michigan State Police Web Site. Transporting a pistol in a motor vehicle?

Answer A person is now permitted to transport a pistol for a lawful purpose if the owner or occupant of the vehicle is the registered owner of the firearm and the pistol is unloaded and in a closed case in the trunk of the vehicle. If the vehicle does not have a trunk, the pistol may be in the passenger compartment of the vehicle unloaded and inaccessible to the occupants of the vehicle. The law defines ‘lawful purpose’ as: 1) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. 2) While transporting a pistol to or from home or place of business and a place of repair. 3) While moving goods from one place of residence or business to another place of residence or business. 4) While transporting a licensed pistol to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed (registering the pistol) or to have a law enforcement official take possession of the pistol. 5) While en route to or from home or place of business to a gun show or place of purchase or sale. 6) While en route to or from home to a public shooting facility or land where the discharge of firearms is permitted. 7) While en route to or from home to private property where the pistol is to be used as permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance.

3) No local ordinance concerning firearm possession is enforceable due to Michigan’s preemption law.

In 1990, the Michigan legislature enacted MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.

THE MICHIGAN COURT of APPEALS CONCLUDED: April 29, 2003 9:10 am. v No. 242237 In sum, we conclude that § 1102 is a statute that specifically imposes a prohibition on local units of government from enacting and enforcing any ordinances or regulations pertaining to the transportation and possession of firearms, and thus preempts any ordinance or regulation of a local unit of government concerning these areas.

Further, we conclude that the specific language of the 2000 amendments to MCL 28.421 et seq., particularly §§ 5c and 5o, which were adopted more than a decade after the enactment of § 1102, do not repeal § 1102 or otherwise reopen this area to local regulation of the carrying of firearms.17 Accordingly, we hold that the Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse.

MCRGO v. Ferndale: The Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession.



4) Brandishing and disturbing the peace are not an offense while lawfully openly carrying a firearm.

ADVISORY NOTE: Though this section on disturbing the peace does not deal with firearms, due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. Since a person who is not licensed to carry concealed MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition.

BRANDISHING Opinion No. 7101 February 6, 2002: …In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions…..the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions…the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner." Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code. It is my opinion, therefore, that…by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public.

5) A person openly carrying a firearm on foot in a legal manner when approached by a police officer and questioned where the only reason for the questioning is because of the openly carried firearm need not give that officer their name and address. No license or ID is required to openly carry a firearm. It is your option to provide ID/CPL.

ADVISORY NOTE: Each situation is different. We recommend you cooperate with all lawful questions and requests. Ask the officer if the reason you are being detained is for the legal open carry of a firearm. After giving your name and address, ask if you are free to go, ask if you are being detained. If they continue to ask questions about ID and why you are carrying a gun, repeat the question, am I free to go? Am I being detained? If the situation escalates ask for a supervisor. Remember the officer can arrest you for anything, don’t resist the arrest. After an illegal arrest you may have legal options you can employ.

6) An AG opinion, the MSP and Senator Prusi stated that a person with a CPL can carry a firearm openly in the exempted areas listed in MCL 750.234d. For example, with permission from the owner you can openly carry a handgun in a bar, sports arena, etc.

Opinion No. 7097 January 11, 2002… A person licensed by this state… to carry a concealed weapon….By its express terms, section 234d prohibits certain persons from carrying a firearm in the enumerated places but explicitly exempts from its prohibition “[a] person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.” Thus, any person licensed to carry a concealed pistol, including a private investigator, is exempt from the gun-free zone restrictions imposed by section 234d of the Penal Code and may therefore possess firearms while on the types of premises listed in that statute.

“Your analysis is correct. Non-CPL pistol free zones do not apply to CPL holders. The CPL pistol free zones only apply to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. Therefore, a CPL holder may openly carry a pistol in Michigan's pistol free zones.”
Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, Michigan State Police Executive Resource Section, (517) 336-6441

“…My office has contacted the Michigan State Police legislative liaison and has received some answers to share with you. According to the liaison, it is legal to openly carry a firearm in a "Pistol Free Zone" if you are a licensed CPL holder. I was advised that your information was correct that MCL 28.425o and MCL 750-234d permit this activity. I was informed that there was no other additional relevant laws regarding this matter…” Michael A Prusi, State Senator 38th District"

ADVISORY NOTE: Before carrying a handgun we recommend that you become familiar with all state and federal laws in regards to firearm laws and the use of deadly force. Taking a self defense/firearm course is recommended. Michigan has a self defense act PA No. 309 July 18, 2006 that states you do not have to retreat from a threat, but you must meet the legal requirements before you engage in the use of deadly force.

FOR MORE INFO SEE WWW.OPENCARRY.ORG and click on forums, then click on MICHIGAN.

*The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research on the subject of open carry in Michigan. You are responsible in determining the accuracy of any information listed above. If you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

Democrats To Back Door Fairness Doctrine

Looks like the Dems will try to slip this by the American people. I have talked about this before. Look at Venezuela, Russia and China. They all control their media and there is no opposition. This is exactly what the Democrats are trying to do. Destroy the voice of the opposition and the people will never know anything other then what the controlling party wants them to know. We are not Communists / Socialists.

From Bret Baier on Fox:

FCC officials met last week with advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways to enact a form of the Fairness Doctrine without calling it that. The American Spectator reports Waxman is also interested in policies allowing similar oversight of the Internet.

The Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to present both sides of controversial issues. It was repealed in 1987.

One Democratic committee member who chose to remain anonymous says, "We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to make sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online."

A Rasmussen Reports poll shows 47 percent of respondents oppose a new Fairness Doctrine. Thirty-eight percent think bringing it back is a good idea.

"We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to make sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online." What? You already control the Main Stream media. How much more do you want? Also the Internet? Looks like free speech is going out the door.

Not One Member Of Congress Has Read The Stimulus Bill

Not one member voted for this spending bill and not one Republican voted for it, even 7 Democrats voted against it. So if no one has read it, why has anyone voted for it? That would be because it is a HUGE spending bill. The dreams of all the Democrats in congress are about to come true. All of their pet projects are about to be signed in to law under what some think is job growth.

Inconvenient Debt: What Happens When You Keep Printing Money

Democrats Delay Stimulus Bill To Hide Details

Looks like the Democrats are scared that the voters will search for the full stimulus bill. Why else would they spend hours converting it from a searchable regular Internet document to a pdf file that is unsearchable by key words. They are trying to bamboozle the voters and the sad thing is they are succeeding.

Democratic staffers released the final version of the stimulus bill at about 11 pm last night after delaying the release for hours to put it into a format which people cannot “search” on their home computers.

Instead of publishing the bill as a regular internet document -- which people can search by “key words” and otherwise, the Dems took hours to convert the final bill from the regular searchable format into “pdf” files, which can be read but not searched.

Three of the four .pdf files had no text embedded, just images of the text, which did not permit text searches of the bill. That move to conceal the bill’s provisions had not been remedied this morning at the time of publication of this article. (You can find the entire bill on the House Appropriations [http://appropriations.house.gov] website.)

One part of this bill will force the Governor of the state to use the funds. What if the funds are not needed?

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR -- Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: 1) the State request and use funds provided by this Act , and; 2) funds be used to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE -- If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State.

This provision --– apparently aimed at conservative governors such as South Carolina’s Mark Sanford who does not want the federal money -- would overturn state laws and constitutions, intervening directly in the state’s government to give the legislature the power to overturn a government’s decision.

This is the Democrats cramming their socialistic programs down the throats of Conservative states.

Senator Judd Gregg WIthdraws

Good for you Senator Gregg. Obamas plans are socialistic in nature and should not even be considered. You don't need yo bend your will to this man. In the beginning I thought maybe Obama would reach across the aisle, but everything he has done has been in show.

Senator Gregg Statement on His Withdrawal for Consideration of U.S. Commerce Secretary

Sen. Gregg stated, “I want to thank the President for nominating me to serve in his Cabinet as Secretary of Commerce. This was a great honor, and I had felt that I could bring some views and ideas that would assist him in governing during this difficult time. I especially admire his willingness to reach across the aisle.

“However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me. Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.

“Obviously the President requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives.

“I greatly admire President Obama and know our country will benefit from his leadership, but at this time I must withdraw my name from consideration for this position.

“As we move forward, I expect there will be many issues and initiatives where I can and will work to assure the success of the President’s proposals. This will certainly be a goal of mine.

“Kathy and I also want to specifically thank Governor Lynch and Bonnie Newman for their friendship and assistance during this period. In addition we wish to thank all the people, especially in New Hampshire, who have been so kind and generous in their supportive comments.

“As a further matter of clarification, nothing about the vetting process played any role in this decision. I will continue to represent the people of New Hampshire in the United States Senate.”

Second Amendment March On Washington

This is great. Looks like there may be a March. The mad man Ted Nugent is even backing it. Check this site out. http://secondamendmentmarch.com/


Their Mission:

The mission of the Second Amendment March is to galvanize the courage and resolve of American gun owners; to petition our elected officials against establishing anti-gun legislation; and to remind America that the Second Amendment is necessary to maintain our right to self defense.

It is the one right that protects all others.

We will accomplish our mission by a centralized, peaceful march on the United States Capitol, supported by satellite marches to State Capitols and smaller cities all across America.

Sen. Tom Harkin: We Need To Censor Our Opposition

Harkins never says we need to censor the Conservatives but that is what this is. Liberal radio does not work. They are not being pushed out because of Conservatives. They are being pushed out because Liberals do now listen. Why should the Government force a business, Radio Companies, to have to play a certain side of an issue. This is Democrats trying to censor their opposition.

Like I said before, Welcome to Socialism/Communism. Venezuela, Russia and China all control their radio.

BILL PRESS: And, thanks for your leadership, thanks for your good work, it's great to have you there Senator. And, great to have you on the show. Appreciate it.

SENATOR TOM HARKIN (D-IA): Well, anytime – just let me know Bill. I love being with you, and thanks again for all you do to get the truth and the facts out there. By the way, I read your Op-Ed in the Washington Post the other day. I ripped it out, I took it into my office and said 'there you go, we gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back in law again.'

BILL PRESS: Alright, well good for you. You know, we gotta work on that, because they are just shutting down progressive talk from one city after another. All we want is, you know, some balance on the airwaves, that's all. You know, we're not going to take any of the conservative voices off the airwaves, but just make sure that there are a few progressives and liberals out there, right?

SENATOR TOM HARKIN (D-IA): Exactly, and that's why we need the fair -- that's why we need the Fairness Doctrine back.

BILL PRESS: We'll work on that together. Hey, thanks, Senator! Always good to talk to you.

SENATOR TOM HARKIN (D-IA): Thanks Bill, see you, bye.

Its funny that this is the second time that Bill Press has complained about this with a Senator. Sounds like Bill, who is a Liberal radio host, is mad that Rush, Sean and Glenn get better ratings then him. So how do you "fix" it, you censor it.

Stimulus Bill Will Ruin Health Care

I can not believe this and I can't write it any better.

On Bloomberg by Betsy McCaughey

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey

Commentary by Betsy McCaughey



Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

(Betsy McCaughey is former lieutenant governor of New York and is an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. The opinions expressed are her own.)

Senators Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe And Arlen Specter

Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine, and Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania caved in. They have put their support behind the stimulus package. What they have done is made it so that the Democrats can now say this is bipartisan, even though it really is not.

This spending bill is a joke and does nothing but give money to Obama and the Democrats special interest groups. How is giving money to STD prevention going to stimulate the economy? If you really want to stimulate it give people money back in a debit card. That way they cant pay their credit cards off and will be forced to go out and purchase something.

These three Senators need to be ran out of town. They are a disgrace to Conservatives, I guess that would be because they are not.

My question to them is what did the Democrats promise you for your support?

Debbie Stabenow Wants The So Called Fairness Doctrine

She keeps talking about accountability on radio stations. Who are you to tell people what they HAVE to listen too? Debbie Stabenow is trying to kill the opposition. She does not like hearing people talk bad about the Democrats. Liberal radio does not work, it never has. This is absolute bull.

Hmm, Government controlling business, healthcare and soon to be the radio stations? Sounds like Venezuela(Socialism).

March To Socialism

I love Glenn Beck. He says it like it is.

Check this out.