Benafiting from Hard Work...

Who wants to work hard to earn a living and build up wealth in today's work of government taxing the rich more heavily, and giving bailouts to anyone who fails or can't make it on their own?

---

Maybe instead we should force people into our way of thinking with ideas of extremists:



Or just rush head on into socialism and let the government do everything for us and to us:

My Extremist Demands

Just as Glenn Beck did last week, I too am going to make a list of my "extremist" demands:

1. Pass a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced Budget, except in times of war.
   Then give Congress some incentives to follow it, since they seem to have such a hard time with current constitutional law.
   
2. Revoke legal tender laws so that the treasury can once again coin real money, and give the Federal reserve the competition and incentive they need to control inflation.
   
3. READ THE BILLS
   And give the rest of us some time to do it as well, and give you some feedback on our opinions. After all we are the real employees of our representatives.
   
4. Stop trying to push socialized medicine down our throats - we cannot afford it, and don't want the government having that much control over our lives.
   Do we really want to reform Health Care, or is really about Insurance (or worse, is it really about control and power)?
   What we really need is for the Government to get out it's already heavy involvement in Health Insurance that artificially raises prices. Creating more government regulations will only make things worse.
5. Term limits and no more lifetime benefits for career politicians.
   Of course for this to truly work, you also have to revoke the 17th amendment, and then pass true campaign/party finance reform (not this McCain/Feingold crap that just makes it harder for everyone else to get involved).
   By real, I mean, you cannot allow California, New York and other "rich" states to influence the elections of other states, otherwise it doesn't matter who's elected because they will just continue the national parties objectives and continue to ignore what real people want.
   The only real reason for a National party is for the presidential election, so how about we disallow national parties from being affiliated with State parties, so states can actually elect people that represent the State; not the national party.
   
6. No New taxes! - this includes anything that will cause our energy, food, or other goods to go up in price (i.e. "Cap-and-Trade" and the hidden tax of inflation).
7. Return to the principles embedded by our "radical, extremist" Founding Fathers!
   Yes I do believe founding our government on the constitution is still a good idea, that is vital to the continued survival of our nation as we know it; but some people are more concerned about "Hope" and "Change". The only Hope I have is that enough people will wake up and realize that all the political change we've put our country threw of the last hundered years or so is going to destory this contry as we know it. It's way past due time to reverse course.
   
8. Stop the hand outs. If you work hard you should get reward for it, but if you're stupid with your reward, you deserve to fail and be poor so that you can benefit from learning from your own mistakes. The sooner we learn from our mistakes the sooner we can truly be prosperous once again.
   
9. Poor people deserves to survive on basic necessities threw real charity (not social programs forced on us by taxes) from their local neighbors and communities, but to truly thrive one must do something for one's self. After all is it really charity if it's forced upon you?
   
10. If someone does something criminal and destructive to society, they are NOT a good American, they are a criminal, and deserve to be treated as such.
    Why aren't they the one's rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure to "pay their debt to society"?

When will reality return to our nation, and allow realism to replace socialized fantasies of political correctness?

Who's the Real Extreamist?

I talked to an ex-marine about the recent Fort Hood tragedy, and we both agree that Major Nadal Malik Hasan would have been court-marshaled 10 years ago for some of the comments he made while in uniform and never would have had the chance to go on his killing spree; however, today, we are too politically correct to take care of these kinds of people before it get's to this point...



"I've heard him referred to as a "shooter" and a "gunman." He's been called "troubled" and "harassed." We know he didn't want to be deployed and his cousin called him a "good American." But extremist?

"No, we can't say that; we wouldn't want to offend anyone.

"Are we that politically correct? I guess so. But there is no hesitation by Barack Obama's political arm, Organizing for America, to send out an e-mail calling tea party goers extremists:

""Across the country, members of Congress who support reform are being shouted down, physically assaulted, hung in effigy, and receiving death threats. We can't let extremists hijack this debate, or confuse Congress about where the people stand."

"So, that's extremism, but killing 13 people isn't? . . .

"Did the guy snap? I don't know and I don't care. He murdered Americans in cold blood in an act of bald-faced, extremist terrorism. Maybe he acted alone, then again, maybe he didn't. What do you say we nurse him back to health, question him, have a non-government investigator look into this? Find out what happened. If he's guilty, execute him and move on America; one less dirtbag to deal with.

. . .

"Look at what they're doing to us. Look at how far the discussion has shifted . . .

"When did words and ideas replace fists and bullets as tools of violence? Read a little George Washington, it's called the battlefield of ideas: If you don't fight it there, it will be fought with guns. Don't you see what they are creating? They are leading us to a cemetery. Society cannot survive like this.

No one at the White House or The New York Times has referred to the beat downs issued by SEIU members recently as violent or extreme.

The SEIU thugs caught on video beating down the African-American tea-party goer haven't yet been charged . . .

"Let me be clear: The terrorist Muslim extremist murderer accused of shooting the Army recruiter dead in Arkansas last summer wasn't even discussed in the media, let alone called an extremist . . ."

- Glen Beck

Who's really behind the Transformation of America?

Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - Glenn Beck: Why Obama's Speech Doesn't Matter



As Glenn has pointed out many times, it's not the specifics that matter, it's the structure that's being created threw government bailouts, health care reform, and other backdoor amendments to bills.

Is Obama behind it all, with his "Transformation of America"? He couldn't be, as much of it started with President Bush. Obama inherited the TART bailout, for those of you who have forgotten. Automakers were already asking for handouts under Bush, and then Obama came along and wanted a "bailout" for the people; or so it seemed.

Although Bush did go along with a lot of these things, it should also be noted that it was the Democrats that had the majority in congress for the last two years of his tenure.

So who's really behind this if Obama is just another Pawn in the game? We'll, I wouldn't say Pawn -- Bush was more likely a Pawn -- but maybe a Knight, or a Bishop, or maybe even pawn who has been promoted to a Queen. It does beg the question, however, who is the King? Who is the one person who would be behind all of this? Who would want to control our lives, to make us live a certain way, buy certain kinds of cars, get only the health care that is cost effective, eat less meat, give up our sovereignty for a new world government, want us to be a part of a well funded civil army, etc.?

Could it be billionaire George Soros? I've heard a lot about him over the last few years, but could he be behind a fundamental change in America? The only reason Soros has power, is because his money is considered desirable by so many.

On the other hand, being a believer in God and Satan, I must point out that Satan's original plan was to take control and power and force us all to be saved; taking away our free agency. Perhaps he still wants to, and has been putting such desires into the hearts of powerful men since the beginnings of this mortal world. Perhaps he is the one who is truly behind all of this. Perhaps he is the real "Anti-Christ" spoken of in Revelations that so many Evangelicals fear.

If we only had more people in office who cared about who they represent, more then they care about were their next campaign funds are coming from. If only we had more Americans seeking out such people to vote for them regardless of political affiliation. If only...

The Good news about ObamaCare

First the Problem:


What's the solution?



Governor Rick Perry of Texas ( and hopefully others) are fighting to gain back State's Rights under the 10th amendment.



"Blue Dog" democrats don't like some provisions in the bill, causing slowdowns.

We've been called to create a 10 Million Watchdog pack. - Glenn Beck has the solution to our blotted government problems.

Obama's approval ratings and polls on the health care plan are showing a downward trend.

If all else fails, there's always the option of another revolution.

Glenn Beck: The Letter

Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - Glenn Beck: The Letter:

Basically the Letter writer says:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders.
Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it.
Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over.
Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision.
Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored.
Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no . . . what do you have against shareholders making a profit?
Nine, charitable contributions. . . Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.

Shared via AddThis

Senator? Liz? Who?

Where's the Stimulus going?

Glenn Beck: Eye on the Stimulus - light sensors:

". . . when the government says they spent $24 million on an apartment building greening, they really only spent $59,000 and another $23,941,000 were left over. Nobody knows where that went . . . $109 million for one veterans home . . . In actually St. Albans is slated to receive only $3 million for the new light bulbs and light sensors. The government was only off this time by $106 million . . ."

LA Times: Some projects raise question: Where's the stimulus?:

". . . Aging bridges and roads are being repaired, providing needed jobs for construction workers. Money is going back to working-class Americans in the form of a tax cut . . . new renewable energy sources feeding into "smart" grids that reduce utility costs. . ." [I personally am now paying an extra few dollars a month for my "smart" meter that was forced upon me and likes to shutoff my power in the middle of the hot humid summer] . . .

". . . Minneapolis . . . to spend $2 million . . . on a vacant 99-year-old theater that developers want to convert into a center for dance. . . [but only] $300,000 to a company that wants to open a solar-energy-panel manufacturing plant that would create 360 jobs by 2011. . . Federal guidelines say that stimulus money may not go toward "recreational facilities that serve a predominantly higher-income clientele."

INDYSTAR: Where's the stimulus money going?:


L.A. Now: Where's that stimulus money going?:

". . . the "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" wants to pursue securing $150 million for [expantion projects] . . . Other big projects . . . include the carpool lane[s] . . . and a plan to rebuild subway . . . $5.3 million for preliminary work on developing a positive train control system for Metrolink."

Sound Politics: Where's that federal "stimulus" money going?:

". . . ($180) million is going toward 5 Nickel and TPA projects that are already funded with the two gas tax increases approved in 2003 and 2005 . . . 30 on the state list are small repaving, rumble strips and guard rail projects . . . may result in a net increase of jobs but there won't be very many, they will be temporary. . ."

Glen Beck: Eye on the Stimulus - Turtle Tunnel:

"$3.4 million to tackling roadkill on U.S. Highway 27 near Lake Jackson . . . the government solution to the problem is to build a 13 foot tunnel under the highway to accommodate the more than 60 species of animals . . . Turtles are the most frequent victims on this road."

And did we all forget about the 2008 "Stimulous" checks we all got? Were's all that money now? I think mine now belogs to Visa. I think what we have now is a 1.1 Trillion Dollar Mess of unfairness and future obligations on our children (don't forget to account for decades of interest on all tha money too).

$2.8 million on New Mexico forest toilets.

Are you an extreamist, or are they?

Obama's Economy

Thanks to Glen for posting this, it reminded me of the old 80's sitcom:



Is Obama really responsible for the current state of the economy. I'd have to say no, but he certainly hasn't helped the stock market or anyone with any kind of investments. so it must be Bush's fault then right? I'd say wrong again. Bush may not have been the best president for the economy of the U.S. but it wasn't until congress had a Democratic majority that the economy started going down hill and gas prices were rocketing upwards.

So who's fault is it really. I'd suggest you may even want to look back as far as Clinton.

Just the other Day Obama was claiming the economy was fundamentally sound. Has he been in as president long enough to make it that way? I don't think so.