Now that our feds have once again cut the rate by a disporportional percentage, I had to do a bit of research. This emergency 3/4 of a point cut, a couple of weeks ago and now this regularly scheduled 1/2 point cut amounts to economic shock treatments. I'm sure most people caught the headlines that December was not a good economic month for retail sales. When December retail lags in a materialistic economy through the biggest commercialized holiday of the year, something is more than just a little bit WRONG!
I've done a bit of checking and I stumbled across some very interesting information. It seems that after the Great Depression, Congress passed a law mandating that Investment Banking and Commercial Banking remain separate. It appears to have been a good plan. In 1999, Congress repealed that law and allowed the merger of Investment Banking and Commercial Banking. This brought about an interesting safety net for both. Commercial banking became a financial middle man between the average depositor and Wall Street. Investment banking, in turn became the actual provider for commercial banking. No longer did commercial banking have to rely on depositor's interest to operate, and investment banking could better structure the give and take to keep the economy balanced in
a positive momentum, at least positive for the bottom line of investment capital. The small town, local banks no longer had to operate on a contained budget. They could invest in themselves, so to speak, with new buildings, lower interest rates, and riskier loans. Investment banking could then make the excitement of Wall Street available to everyone. The real kicker here, is the safety net provided by the merger of these very separate banking institutions. In the case of a default loan in commercial banking, the liability could simply be passed on to the larger market, through investment banking. And in the case of shakey investments by investment banking, the bottom line instability could simply be padded by increased credit interest rates. Ultimately, if nobody could afford to save, the saving interest was of little consequence and when savings interest plummetted, Investment banking made it possible for investors to purchase as little as ten stocks, rather than the former blocks of 100.
Absolutely none of this made for a stronger economy, it made for enough variables to never know where the hot potato would land. The problem that Congress didn't consider, and the problem that our nation's banks have overlooked in this merry merger is, once the people on the commercial end of banking are tapped out, foreclosed upon, and only paying interest, investment banking will have difficulty keeping investors in the game and commercial banks with enough carrots to dangle before the check writing public that is
drowning in credit card interest. So ultimately, there is nothing left to stand on.
I read the overview of how this drastic drop of the interest rate will help. It may be good, if . . .
If you purchased a home in the past few years with an arm and are looking at an increase in your mortgage payment, the lower interest rate may be offered, if you can refinance . . .
If you purchased a vehicle, the rate is locked in at the contract, so no help there.
If you are looking to buy a home, the real estate market is depressed and homes may be cheaper, but lender rules have become stricter, so financing will be more difficult . . . if
Your credit card interest may be reduced, but they don't have to follow the fed's guidelines, so they may not be reduced . . . if
If you are saving and seeking a good rate of interest, the news is simply BAD.
Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches . . . New Testament
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
More of My Theory
Well, Bill Clinton is certainly discovering who his friends really are. Or is it, that in the recent racial issues, his true colors are starting show? I'm still of a mind, and call me cynical if you will, but I still think Bill Clinton is a Republican in sheep's clothing and this latest stunt doesn't change my view. Consider this, for just a moment. Bill Clinton is a highly paid, articulate speaker. His speeches are like choreographed dances. They have perfect rhythm, perfect flow, and tediously politically correct content. The fact that we aren't sure if we should believe a word of it, is irrelevant to his talent and ability.
I was suddenly reminded this morning of his traits and abilities when he was the president and what he's done since.
It was Bill Clinton that put NAFTA in the face of the unions. NAFTA was the vision of Bush 41 and Bill Clinton implemented that before he was re-elected in 1996. I still don't have any idea why the unions backed him after that, except for the fact he is quite the persuasive speaker. Now, we also know his little tryst in the oval office did more for the Republican party than 8 years of the Eisenhower administration. Between the church ladies with their panties in a bunch over Monica and the gridlock between the executive and legislative branches of our government, change was imminent. He gave the religious right so much to hate and abhor
and as we know from Scripture, when the morality monitors unite with a vengeance, things
happen, and when religion and politics unite on a plan, there is no talking them out of it.
And so, after 2000, we find Bill Clinton not so much in Harlem or joining former President
Carter building homes for Habitat for Humanity, but we see him jetting about the world
raising funds with Bush 41. And the two of them seem quit amiable. Considering Bill Clinton's ability and ease to be the "adopted" one, be it family, race or party, it just began to be very obvious that Bill was a special member of yet another unexpected group. He appeared to find much favor with the Republicans and certainly has helped to make very rich men of the conservative pundits. It's as if his presence just manages to congeal joined opposition or unite totally unrealistic acceptance.
Now on to this latest Hillary situation. I believe the true powers that be, and that is neither Republicans nor Democrats, but whomever wants a very divided party amidst the Democrats, and Bill is their chosen mouthpiece. Hillary has no business being president if she can't discern the obvious any more than she's demonstrated. Doesn't she remember that just 10 years ago she couldn't trust Bill? So why is she trusting so much of this campaign to him now? He's already proven unfaithful to her, in the simplest sense of the word. I mean forgiveness is fine, but reality is also very necessary for a presidential hopeful. She can't trust him to do anything but call attention to himself and humiliate her. The rest of us can see it. Is love truly that blind?
But the bigger mission has been accomplished. This split the Democratic party wide open. There are people now, that have openly stated if Hillary gets the nomination, they'll vote Republican. Others are making comments that even though they disagree with the Republicans, they at least are saying something, where as Obama has yet to describe this vague magic word of his that is "change." This is America, we can change everything from diapers to tires to our minds, on a daily basis. Now that the Democratic nomination is truly as superficial as skin tone, I think Bill Clinton has simply revealed once again, just who he is. His support is like the kiss of death to a candidate or a party.
He winketh with his eyes, he speaketh with his feet, he teacheth with his fingers; Frowardness is in his heart, he deviseth mischief continually; he soweth discord. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
I was suddenly reminded this morning of his traits and abilities when he was the president and what he's done since.
It was Bill Clinton that put NAFTA in the face of the unions. NAFTA was the vision of Bush 41 and Bill Clinton implemented that before he was re-elected in 1996. I still don't have any idea why the unions backed him after that, except for the fact he is quite the persuasive speaker. Now, we also know his little tryst in the oval office did more for the Republican party than 8 years of the Eisenhower administration. Between the church ladies with their panties in a bunch over Monica and the gridlock between the executive and legislative branches of our government, change was imminent. He gave the religious right so much to hate and abhor
and as we know from Scripture, when the morality monitors unite with a vengeance, things
happen, and when religion and politics unite on a plan, there is no talking them out of it.
And so, after 2000, we find Bill Clinton not so much in Harlem or joining former President
Carter building homes for Habitat for Humanity, but we see him jetting about the world
raising funds with Bush 41. And the two of them seem quit amiable. Considering Bill Clinton's ability and ease to be the "adopted" one, be it family, race or party, it just began to be very obvious that Bill was a special member of yet another unexpected group. He appeared to find much favor with the Republicans and certainly has helped to make very rich men of the conservative pundits. It's as if his presence just manages to congeal joined opposition or unite totally unrealistic acceptance.
Now on to this latest Hillary situation. I believe the true powers that be, and that is neither Republicans nor Democrats, but whomever wants a very divided party amidst the Democrats, and Bill is their chosen mouthpiece. Hillary has no business being president if she can't discern the obvious any more than she's demonstrated. Doesn't she remember that just 10 years ago she couldn't trust Bill? So why is she trusting so much of this campaign to him now? He's already proven unfaithful to her, in the simplest sense of the word. I mean forgiveness is fine, but reality is also very necessary for a presidential hopeful. She can't trust him to do anything but call attention to himself and humiliate her. The rest of us can see it. Is love truly that blind?
But the bigger mission has been accomplished. This split the Democratic party wide open. There are people now, that have openly stated if Hillary gets the nomination, they'll vote Republican. Others are making comments that even though they disagree with the Republicans, they at least are saying something, where as Obama has yet to describe this vague magic word of his that is "change." This is America, we can change everything from diapers to tires to our minds, on a daily basis. Now that the Democratic nomination is truly as superficial as skin tone, I think Bill Clinton has simply revealed once again, just who he is. His support is like the kiss of death to a candidate or a party.
He winketh with his eyes, he speaketh with his feet, he teacheth with his fingers; Frowardness is in his heart, he deviseth mischief continually; he soweth discord. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
How Times Have Changed or Simply Reversed
Can you believe just 7 short years ago, President Clinton's office was no longer in the White House, but he'd moved to Harlem. Toni Morrison referred to him as "the first black president." He was called "brother" by many blacks and now . . . he's a racist? I've included the link for the article, entitled "Clinton Honored As 'First Black President' at Black Caucus Dinner"
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200110/NAT20011001e.html.
As a brown person who has heard a few racial slurs headed my way on occasion, I have perhaps a different perspective through this latest turn of events.
When I was a kid and a disparaging remark was made, my mom told me to just tell them "I was a little bit of everything." And that's how I learned about the "1 drop rule." Now, every time I have an opinion or I'm involved in something religious or political she always tells me "well you're not . . ." whatever the current issue is. So, as a person who is just enough of everything to be nothing, let me tell you the way I see it.
This entire conversation and assessment of Bill Clinton has always been racist. Couldn't he have just been popular amongst the black community and maintain his own identity? Why was his "whiteness" disregarded? And why were all the stereotypical correlations made by the black community, when stereotyping is always a basis for some sort of prejudice? Why couldn't Bill Clinton have been recognized as a "color blind" leader that made no differentiation when it came to race? Why couldn't the award have gone to a white man that retained "permission" to accept the award as a white guy?
Why were there so many color coded compliments given, to begin with? He's a democrat! Didn't that make him popular amidst much of the Jewish population and union workers? Well, I haven't read any mention about him being called Jewish. And I've yet to read that he's ever had to worry about working for a living, lay-offs, or strikes . . . So, if he could be a man that could identify with Jewish concerns, and endorsed by the unions claiming to relate, why did he have to be referred to as black, by blacks? And why should the reference to being called "black" be considered a compliment? It certainly wouldn't be a compliment, nor would it be appropriate or true to refer to Condoleezza Rice, favorably and tell her that makes her white. That would be utter nonsense, politically incorrect, offensive, and racist. Her accomplishements have nothing to do with the color of her skin, and everything to do with her hard work and self-discipline. So, why was it a compliment, when it was reverse racism? Bill Clinton appeared to be speaking as he always has, like he's a member of every group he's addressing, but Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, have declared otherwise. Funny how these two men have managed to make a career fighting racism with racism. Now it would appear that Bill Clinton was just a 'brother,' until the 'real deal' came along.
And a mixed multitude went up also with them . . . Torah of Holy Scripture
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200110/NAT20011001e.html.
As a brown person who has heard a few racial slurs headed my way on occasion, I have perhaps a different perspective through this latest turn of events.
When I was a kid and a disparaging remark was made, my mom told me to just tell them "I was a little bit of everything." And that's how I learned about the "1 drop rule." Now, every time I have an opinion or I'm involved in something religious or political she always tells me "well you're not . . ." whatever the current issue is. So, as a person who is just enough of everything to be nothing, let me tell you the way I see it.
This entire conversation and assessment of Bill Clinton has always been racist. Couldn't he have just been popular amongst the black community and maintain his own identity? Why was his "whiteness" disregarded? And why were all the stereotypical correlations made by the black community, when stereotyping is always a basis for some sort of prejudice? Why couldn't Bill Clinton have been recognized as a "color blind" leader that made no differentiation when it came to race? Why couldn't the award have gone to a white man that retained "permission" to accept the award as a white guy?
Why were there so many color coded compliments given, to begin with? He's a democrat! Didn't that make him popular amidst much of the Jewish population and union workers? Well, I haven't read any mention about him being called Jewish. And I've yet to read that he's ever had to worry about working for a living, lay-offs, or strikes . . . So, if he could be a man that could identify with Jewish concerns, and endorsed by the unions claiming to relate, why did he have to be referred to as black, by blacks? And why should the reference to being called "black" be considered a compliment? It certainly wouldn't be a compliment, nor would it be appropriate or true to refer to Condoleezza Rice, favorably and tell her that makes her white. That would be utter nonsense, politically incorrect, offensive, and racist. Her accomplishements have nothing to do with the color of her skin, and everything to do with her hard work and self-discipline. So, why was it a compliment, when it was reverse racism? Bill Clinton appeared to be speaking as he always has, like he's a member of every group he's addressing, but Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, have declared otherwise. Funny how these two men have managed to make a career fighting racism with racism. Now it would appear that Bill Clinton was just a 'brother,' until the 'real deal' came along.
And a mixed multitude went up also with them . . . Torah of Holy Scripture
Monday, January 28, 2008
It's About The Money
There are two things in the news that are bugging the daylights out of me, and so I shall address them, so I can simply move on and know I've vented. I'm not expecting specific results, and certainly no straight answers from our leaders, but I'm going to voice my questions and concerns.
First, I heard and have already commented on the fact that Matt Blunt will not be running for re-election of Governor of Missouri. I wish him well, but I don't understand and I would like to know when it is said he had several million dollars available in his campaign fund and ads already been running, what happens to those several million dollars? I don't really know who to ask, I'm sure there is some sort of plan in place for these types of events, but . . . I was speaking with a staunch Republican last night and she thought it would probably just go to the party. If I had donated to a particular candidate's campaign, I wouldn't just want "it" to go to the party. There are already ways to contribute directly to the party, if that's what a person chooses to do. I think the constituents deserve to know what happens. I didn't vote for him and I didn't contribute, but I am curious. I like to stay abreast of the political workings of our government.
The next issue is this economic stimulus package. I read that Senate is wanting to hold things up because a rebate won't give money to the Seniors. That's right, Senate, a rebate means you have to pay before you receive. Our government has already made it very clear that those that don't earn enough, that's right, they work and taxes are withheld, but they come in under the line of owing taxes, will only be receiving a token. And those that do not earn, do not receive the rebate. Seniors already have more accommodations than the rest of us can afford. Can't we just give them a free prescription or something? Why in the world should the millions of people that are already receiving something for nothing, receive even more? Although, this "hold up" in Senate does prove once and for all, those on Social Security that have always spouted "they paid into it" are now saying, "they just deserve to have it" and openly admitting, they simply expect something for nothing.
What profit hath he that worketh in that wherein he laboureth? Ecclesiastes of Holy Scripture
First, I heard and have already commented on the fact that Matt Blunt will not be running for re-election of Governor of Missouri. I wish him well, but I don't understand and I would like to know when it is said he had several million dollars available in his campaign fund and ads already been running, what happens to those several million dollars? I don't really know who to ask, I'm sure there is some sort of plan in place for these types of events, but . . . I was speaking with a staunch Republican last night and she thought it would probably just go to the party. If I had donated to a particular candidate's campaign, I wouldn't just want "it" to go to the party. There are already ways to contribute directly to the party, if that's what a person chooses to do. I think the constituents deserve to know what happens. I didn't vote for him and I didn't contribute, but I am curious. I like to stay abreast of the political workings of our government.
The next issue is this economic stimulus package. I read that Senate is wanting to hold things up because a rebate won't give money to the Seniors. That's right, Senate, a rebate means you have to pay before you receive. Our government has already made it very clear that those that don't earn enough, that's right, they work and taxes are withheld, but they come in under the line of owing taxes, will only be receiving a token. And those that do not earn, do not receive the rebate. Seniors already have more accommodations than the rest of us can afford. Can't we just give them a free prescription or something? Why in the world should the millions of people that are already receiving something for nothing, receive even more? Although, this "hold up" in Senate does prove once and for all, those on Social Security that have always spouted "they paid into it" are now saying, "they just deserve to have it" and openly admitting, they simply expect something for nothing.
What profit hath he that worketh in that wherein he laboureth? Ecclesiastes of Holy Scripture
Friday, January 25, 2008
Candidates Update
In giving my attention to the Republican Party Census Document, I realized I really haven't given much attention to the actual candidates. I happen to live in the state that has a young Republican governor, who built up a campaign "war chest" as they are now called, and has now announced that he won't be seeking re-election because he's accomplished all he set out to do. I have so many issues with that statement. Anyone that is under 40 and feels there is no more to do is either delusional or despondent. I guess, either way, it is time to take a break. I don't know what happens to the campaign funds. Actually his announcement just fuels my theory even more. Jeb Bush is laying low, politically, Matt Blunt is stepping down with no GOP candidate declared, and his Democrat opponent is already campaigning. Rudy, who has been at the top of the national polls for months is dropping dramatically and there is still no clear front runner in the Presidential race. My theory is still holding on through the headlines. The GOP wants to throw 2008 to the Democrats and let them self-destruct. I really believe this and it bothers me. It is clear when listening to Hillary or Obama, that neither of them care a thing about "we the people." They just want the power and prestige. Edwards would be good in many areas, but the other two have upstaged him. The GOP appears to be treating this entire election year like some sort of strategy in a chess game. When it was assumed that Hillary would have the Democratic nomination, Rudy was at the top of the polls and McCain was out of money, but as Obama has moved up, Rudy has declined and suddenly McCain is back in play. Something just doesn't wash in this deal. And what is Rudy's strategy? After he was in Missouri, he just dropped out of sight. Of course, Missouri is also where Gov. Blunt is and the state that elected a dead man for the Senate, making John Ashcroft available for Attorney General in President Bush's first term. Are all these things related? I don't know. Am I suggesting a conspiracy? Hardly, I always associate conspiracy with some sort of cover up, rather than just a method to gain control. Even if all these things are connected, it's simply political strategy. I truly believe the leading candidates have underestimated the intelligence of Americans, at least I hope they don't think we're all dumb. Obama speaks well, but says nothing. Hillary claims experience and to that I would say, if she's claiming White House experience, she's already had two terms. We remember 2000, McCain should also. Romney has been as much a flip-flopper as his own party accused John Kerry of being.
Back to Rudy, now. I truly think this Florida strategy was a bad one from the beginning. It made it very clear that numbers counted more than people. I mean he's not running for President of Florida. The fact that the other states did not have the high number of delegates and they were not winner take all, made me think he just really didn't care about the little guy, just the big numbers. Not a good way to win friends and influence people, when the rest of the candidates are out shaking hands, kissing babies, and slinging mud at each other. I've seen too much aim for big control and not enough "in touch with the people."
The heart of him that hath understanding seeketh knowledge: a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Back to Rudy, now. I truly think this Florida strategy was a bad one from the beginning. It made it very clear that numbers counted more than people. I mean he's not running for President of Florida. The fact that the other states did not have the high number of delegates and they were not winner take all, made me think he just really didn't care about the little guy, just the big numbers. Not a good way to win friends and influence people, when the rest of the candidates are out shaking hands, kissing babies, and slinging mud at each other. I've seen too much aim for big control and not enough "in touch with the people."
The heart of him that hath understanding seeketh knowledge: a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Thursday, January 24, 2008
A Few Questions
As I perused the headlines today while I worked, I ran across a few items that have been issues of question or controversy. Suddenly, the "answers" are here, but it seems even less clear. My comments are in burgundy.
After hearing something about a possible UFO siting, early in January, it hasn't really been in the forefront of my mind, what with world war and economic collapse, but I do find the explanation highly suspect, now that we hear this 2 1/2 weeks later, and the tag line on FOXNews begins with the word, truth.
Truth Is Out There: UFOs Over Texas ID'd by Air Force; one click later, I see the headline:
Mystery May Be Solved for Texas Town Abuzz Over UFO Sightings
This article explained that after the Air Force had denied any activity in the area, they are now telling us they had several planes in the area that night. . . They didn't know that the next day? Maybe they are going to tell us the exercise was Top Secret. Yeah . . . That would explain it.
and the last line of the article was:
"What we want is the government to admit there are UFOs and what they know about them," Cherry said.
I don't doubt the possibility of UFOs, nor have I seen one, but somehow after these past several years, if the government says it ISN'T, I'm guessing it IS.
HUCKABEE LEARNED POLITICS IN CHURCH
"There's a political savvy that Baptist preachers who made it big in the Southern Baptist Convention learned from their mother's womb," said Bill Leonard, a former Southern Baptist seminary professor and dean of Wake Forest University Divinity School in North Carolina. "It's an instinct to know how to read populist moments and movements."
Is this the Southern Baptist interpretation of the passage, Jeremiah 1:5?
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."
Calif. Court: Medical Pot Not OK at Work
SAN FRANCISCO — Employers can fire workers found to have used medical marijuana even if it was legally prescribed, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The high court upheld a small Sacramento telecommunications company's firing of a man who flunked a company-ordered drug test. Gary Ross held a medical marijuana card authorizing him to use the drug to treat a back injury sustained while serving in the Air Force.
The company, Ragingwire Inc., argued that it rightfully fired Ross because all marijuana use is illegal under federal law, which does not recognize the medical marijuana laws in California and 11 other states.
The justices upheld that argument in a 5-2 decision.
"No state law could completely legalize marijuana for medical purposes because the drug remains illegal under federal law," Justice Kathryn Werdegar wrote for the majority.
The U.S. Supreme Court declared in 2005 . . .
The American Medical Association advocates keeping marijuana classified as a tightly controlled and dangerous drug that should not be legalized until more research is done.
Marijuana has been researched for years and years and years, G~D made, it by the way. Why was our government not so diligent regarding the research of ASPARTAME?
And this I read in the Washington Post
Obama's Farrakhan Test
Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.
Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For most Americans, though, Farrakhan epitomizes racism,
How does this resolve the question of Barack Obama's beliefs or the teachings of the church in which he as been a member for 20 years? How does this separate him from the Muslim issue?
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. the Gospel according to John
After hearing something about a possible UFO siting, early in January, it hasn't really been in the forefront of my mind, what with world war and economic collapse, but I do find the explanation highly suspect, now that we hear this 2 1/2 weeks later, and the tag line on FOXNews begins with the word, truth.
Truth Is Out There: UFOs Over Texas ID'd by Air Force; one click later, I see the headline:
Mystery May Be Solved for Texas Town Abuzz Over UFO Sightings
This article explained that after the Air Force had denied any activity in the area, they are now telling us they had several planes in the area that night. . . They didn't know that the next day? Maybe they are going to tell us the exercise was Top Secret. Yeah . . . That would explain it.
and the last line of the article was:
"What we want is the government to admit there are UFOs and what they know about them," Cherry said.
I don't doubt the possibility of UFOs, nor have I seen one, but somehow after these past several years, if the government says it ISN'T, I'm guessing it IS.
HUCKABEE LEARNED POLITICS IN CHURCH
"There's a political savvy that Baptist preachers who made it big in the Southern Baptist Convention learned from their mother's womb," said Bill Leonard, a former Southern Baptist seminary professor and dean of Wake Forest University Divinity School in North Carolina. "It's an instinct to know how to read populist moments and movements."
Is this the Southern Baptist interpretation of the passage, Jeremiah 1:5?
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."
Calif. Court: Medical Pot Not OK at Work
SAN FRANCISCO — Employers can fire workers found to have used medical marijuana even if it was legally prescribed, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The high court upheld a small Sacramento telecommunications company's firing of a man who flunked a company-ordered drug test. Gary Ross held a medical marijuana card authorizing him to use the drug to treat a back injury sustained while serving in the Air Force.
The company, Ragingwire Inc., argued that it rightfully fired Ross because all marijuana use is illegal under federal law, which does not recognize the medical marijuana laws in California and 11 other states.
The justices upheld that argument in a 5-2 decision.
"No state law could completely legalize marijuana for medical purposes because the drug remains illegal under federal law," Justice Kathryn Werdegar wrote for the majority.
The U.S. Supreme Court declared in 2005 . . .
The American Medical Association advocates keeping marijuana classified as a tightly controlled and dangerous drug that should not be legalized until more research is done.
Marijuana has been researched for years and years and years, G~D made, it by the way. Why was our government not so diligent regarding the research of ASPARTAME?
And this I read in the Washington Post
Obama's Farrakhan Test
Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.
Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For most Americans, though, Farrakhan epitomizes racism,
How does this resolve the question of Barack Obama's beliefs or the teachings of the church in which he as been a member for 20 years? How does this separate him from the Muslim issue?
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. the Gospel according to John
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Fast Cash is No Quick Fix
So, our Federal Government chose to attempt to satisfy Wall Street, but so far it appears to have the same impact as when they threw several billion at the lending banks a few months ago . . . Maybe the oil companies could donate a little to the cause, as they have shown unbelievable profits in the past several quarters. I don't understand how anyone thinks this economic stimulus package is even supposed to work. Wall Street is still wavering, the banks haven't really recovered from the last low interest rates of just a few years ago, and now "they" are talking about $150 billion in tax rebates. Well, this part I do have figured out. First, do you remember how the banks rebuilt themselves when the interest rates were low? New bank buildings went up everywhere and our CDs were paying about 2%. I'm guessing the banks are mortgaged at that great rate they got a few years ago, but that also means, they aren't really solvent. If banks borrowed money, even their depositor's money for a return, that really isn't what good banking is built upon. Good banking invests the depositors funds in other building projects, not a fancier one to use the drive up window to make more deposits. And now, we the tax payers or should I say our grandchildren are going to have this debt on them, just like we boomers have the debt of Social Security and Medicare. President Bush has already stated that he isn't figuring in a change in the budget with this new proposal, so it will simply get added to the deficit. The reduction of the interest rate to satisfy the global market really isn't fair to the middle class Americans that have worked hard for their money and attempted to build a little nest egg. And I just can't help but be cynical considering this is the first year, the Baby Boomers can begin to retire. See how I know my grandchildren and great grandchildren will pay for this mess. I'm a boomer and I'm still paying for the young adults of the Great Depression.
It's easy to see the correlation between the subprime mortgages and the slowed spending. Once the Americans with excessive spending habits, which translates to poor credit ratings, became eligible for mortgages through subprime lenders, two things happened. The instant spending had to stop to make the mortgage payment and there was far less expendable cash in the economy. Our economy truly is based upon the perpetual motion of purchasing instant gratification and unnecessary trinkets. A perpetual motion economy has no standard, therefore; is not founded upon solid investments. Unfortunately, the subprime lenders didn't realize or didn't care that there was a very real reason, these people were coming to them for loans, in the first place. Subprime lenders amounted to little more than real estate pawn brokers. Their clients maintained their same money management skills.
Now, let's address this interesting promise of a tax rebate. First, a rebate, by definition means a sum is paid, then a portion of that sum is returned. A rebate is a refund, usually partial. I checked some interesting facts that Rush Limbaugh has mentioned and posted and I have no reason to argue them, so . . . We've been told for quite some time now, that nearly 50% of Americans don't pay income taxes. On the page I read, it was stated that 96.4% of our nation's taxes are paid by the top 50% wage earners. So that means nearly 50% of Americans are not figured into this rebate plan, to begin with. To break it down even further, I'll use more of Mr. Limbaugh's figures. I don't know if there is a difference between wage earners in this information and those with investment and inheritance, but if so I believe they are all figured into this next bit of information.
I read that 82.9% of income tax is paid by the holders of the top 25% of this nation's wealth.
So, if we do the math, and maintain consistent variables, in just whose hands will be found, the primary portion of the $150 billion?
He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
It's easy to see the correlation between the subprime mortgages and the slowed spending. Once the Americans with excessive spending habits, which translates to poor credit ratings, became eligible for mortgages through subprime lenders, two things happened. The instant spending had to stop to make the mortgage payment and there was far less expendable cash in the economy. Our economy truly is based upon the perpetual motion of purchasing instant gratification and unnecessary trinkets. A perpetual motion economy has no standard, therefore; is not founded upon solid investments. Unfortunately, the subprime lenders didn't realize or didn't care that there was a very real reason, these people were coming to them for loans, in the first place. Subprime lenders amounted to little more than real estate pawn brokers. Their clients maintained their same money management skills.
Now, let's address this interesting promise of a tax rebate. First, a rebate, by definition means a sum is paid, then a portion of that sum is returned. A rebate is a refund, usually partial. I checked some interesting facts that Rush Limbaugh has mentioned and posted and I have no reason to argue them, so . . . We've been told for quite some time now, that nearly 50% of Americans don't pay income taxes. On the page I read, it was stated that 96.4% of our nation's taxes are paid by the top 50% wage earners. So that means nearly 50% of Americans are not figured into this rebate plan, to begin with. To break it down even further, I'll use more of Mr. Limbaugh's figures. I don't know if there is a difference between wage earners in this information and those with investment and inheritance, but if so I believe they are all figured into this next bit of information.
I read that 82.9% of income tax is paid by the holders of the top 25% of this nation's wealth.
So, if we do the math, and maintain consistent variables, in just whose hands will be found, the primary portion of the $150 billion?
He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
More Pressing Issues
I'll get back to the Republican Party Census Document, but today there are just more important matters to address, like the economy, incarceration, and debates.
I read the reports on last night's Democratic debate. I wouldn't vote for either of the front runners. I am absolutely disgusted that race and gender are "issues" when there are so many real issues for this nation and the next leader. Since I am not basing my opinion on pigment or parts, if Edwards would just tone down on his managed health care, he'd be the man. He's still the favored, considering the choices we have. His comment today was just as insightful as the commentary he gave last night, while Hillary and Barack made spectacles of themselves.
>>>Asked about the back and forth, Edwards on Tuesday took the position he held during the debate.
“You know, between all the allegations of Hillary serving on the Wal-Mart board and Senator Obama working for a slumlord, I was proud to represent the grown-up wing of the Democratic Party last night,” he said.<<<
Don't let the GOP kid anyone on issues either. There are none of them that have done anything to downsize government. Romney gave Massachusetts a similar health plan, as governor; and Huckabee has less in common with the Republican party than Bill Clinton . . .
I read that Jose Padilla has been sentenced, but the actual crime seems a bit vague. When he was first arrested or apprehended in 2002 and "held," it was something about conspiring over a "dirty bomb" and then when he was about to take his 3 1/2 years of being held without actual charges before the Supreme Court in 2005, those charges were dropped, something changed and now here we are 2008 and the FOX headline reads Accused AlQaida Operative . . . http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,324605,00.html
The caption on the picture is "American Terrorist Avoids Life in Prison." I'm not saying he's a great guy, but what concerns me is this. He is a US citizen and there is not one shred of evidence of any actual crime that was committed that is attributed to him. Without an actual tangible crime, there is not even any circumstantial evidence. According to what I read, he's going to prison for another 17 years for conversations on the phone or attending an AlQaida meeting in 2000. Again, I'm not saying he should have gone, but do we know if maybe he left because AlQaida was too militant or agressive? The FBI does tout the records saying he left the year before 9/11, and since our leaders were trying to keep tabs on Bin Laden months before 9/11, but had no idea about the impending attack, I can't imagine Padilla did either . . . but that's just my thinking.
Now, on to this nutzo American economy. Last week, we were told they wanted consumer spending up, now the headlined articles are talking about tightening our belts and because the rest of the world is shaky about our economy, our Feds are going to hit Americans with a drop in any financial investment power at all. As people were seeing the handwriting on the wall with stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, the simple interest was moving up. We all know the sudden drop in interest rates aren't going to affect the subprime disaster, but rather the last few Americans that have more saved than they owe. And President Bush is wanting 150 billion dollars to put in the hands of the people. Any idea where that is going to come from and who is going to pay that back? I had just mentioned to my husband yesterday, that since we were hearing so much about the plans to drop the rate by .5% the end of January, I wondered what our leaders were really planning . . . I certainly didn't have to wait long for that answer.
For G~d shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. Holy Scripture
I read the reports on last night's Democratic debate. I wouldn't vote for either of the front runners. I am absolutely disgusted that race and gender are "issues" when there are so many real issues for this nation and the next leader. Since I am not basing my opinion on pigment or parts, if Edwards would just tone down on his managed health care, he'd be the man. He's still the favored, considering the choices we have. His comment today was just as insightful as the commentary he gave last night, while Hillary and Barack made spectacles of themselves.
>>>Asked about the back and forth, Edwards on Tuesday took the position he held during the debate.
“You know, between all the allegations of Hillary serving on the Wal-Mart board and Senator Obama working for a slumlord, I was proud to represent the grown-up wing of the Democratic Party last night,” he said.<<<
Don't let the GOP kid anyone on issues either. There are none of them that have done anything to downsize government. Romney gave Massachusetts a similar health plan, as governor; and Huckabee has less in common with the Republican party than Bill Clinton . . .
I read that Jose Padilla has been sentenced, but the actual crime seems a bit vague. When he was first arrested or apprehended in 2002 and "held," it was something about conspiring over a "dirty bomb" and then when he was about to take his 3 1/2 years of being held without actual charges before the Supreme Court in 2005, those charges were dropped, something changed and now here we are 2008 and the FOX headline reads Accused AlQaida Operative . . . http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,324605,00.html
The caption on the picture is "American Terrorist Avoids Life in Prison." I'm not saying he's a great guy, but what concerns me is this. He is a US citizen and there is not one shred of evidence of any actual crime that was committed that is attributed to him. Without an actual tangible crime, there is not even any circumstantial evidence. According to what I read, he's going to prison for another 17 years for conversations on the phone or attending an AlQaida meeting in 2000. Again, I'm not saying he should have gone, but do we know if maybe he left because AlQaida was too militant or agressive? The FBI does tout the records saying he left the year before 9/11, and since our leaders were trying to keep tabs on Bin Laden months before 9/11, but had no idea about the impending attack, I can't imagine Padilla did either . . . but that's just my thinking.
Now, on to this nutzo American economy. Last week, we were told they wanted consumer spending up, now the headlined articles are talking about tightening our belts and because the rest of the world is shaky about our economy, our Feds are going to hit Americans with a drop in any financial investment power at all. As people were seeing the handwriting on the wall with stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, the simple interest was moving up. We all know the sudden drop in interest rates aren't going to affect the subprime disaster, but rather the last few Americans that have more saved than they owe. And President Bush is wanting 150 billion dollars to put in the hands of the people. Any idea where that is going to come from and who is going to pay that back? I had just mentioned to my husband yesterday, that since we were hearing so much about the plans to drop the rate by .5% the end of January, I wondered what our leaders were really planning . . . I certainly didn't have to wait long for that answer.
For G~d shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. Holy Scripture
Monday, January 21, 2008
Entertainment at the Republican's Expense
I'm working very hard on my next book, and I feel terrible about the fact that I am delighting in making fun of the Census Document Questionnaire, using their own information, but we all need an outlet, and for now, this is mine.
Today we are addressing Social Issues.
1. Do you think Congress should pass the Federal Marriage Amendment, protecting marriage as a union between one man and one woman?
*Answer: I think politicians need to know the definition of amendment. If this amendment were added, what portion of the Constitution would it even be addressing? I realize civics class was a few years ago for me, but I don't remember anything in the Constitution about marriage. As a matter of fact, marriage is a Biblical matter, and I do know Congress is not supposed to make any law about religion. I would think the Republican Party would have enough evangelicals to know marriage is a religious matter.
2. Do you want Republicans to defend the recently-passed partial birth abortion ban from attacks by the Democrat majority?
*Answer: I think the terminology is horrific. I also think this is the most disgusting worn out, publicity stunt, the American people have had to endure. Republicans had total power of all 3 branches of the government for 6 years, and this is still an issue??? If you Republicans were serious about doing something about this, you would have done so, by now.
3. Do you support President Bush's initiatives to allow private religious and charitable groups to do more to help those in need?
*Answer: Great wording! Do I think the government needs to subsidize religion? No, because once the government is involved, these religious organizations will just be one more arm of an invasive, controlling government. The book of Job says, "The LORD giveth and the LORD taketh away, blessed be the Name of the LORD.
I just don't think the LORD needs to be replaced with the government.
Today we are addressing Social Issues.
1. Do you think Congress should pass the Federal Marriage Amendment, protecting marriage as a union between one man and one woman?
*Answer: I think politicians need to know the definition of amendment. If this amendment were added, what portion of the Constitution would it even be addressing? I realize civics class was a few years ago for me, but I don't remember anything in the Constitution about marriage. As a matter of fact, marriage is a Biblical matter, and I do know Congress is not supposed to make any law about religion. I would think the Republican Party would have enough evangelicals to know marriage is a religious matter.
2. Do you want Republicans to defend the recently-passed partial birth abortion ban from attacks by the Democrat majority?
*Answer: I think the terminology is horrific. I also think this is the most disgusting worn out, publicity stunt, the American people have had to endure. Republicans had total power of all 3 branches of the government for 6 years, and this is still an issue??? If you Republicans were serious about doing something about this, you would have done so, by now.
3. Do you support President Bush's initiatives to allow private religious and charitable groups to do more to help those in need?
*Answer: Great wording! Do I think the government needs to subsidize religion? No, because once the government is involved, these religious organizations will just be one more arm of an invasive, controlling government. The book of Job says, "The LORD giveth and the LORD taketh away, blessed be the Name of the LORD.
I just don't think the LORD needs to be replaced with the government.
Friday, January 18, 2008
And Today Our Questions Address Domestic Issues
As you know, I'm not a Republican, but the people that mail the Republican Party Census Document don't seem to be aware of that, so I would like to express my appreciation for their oversight and thank them for this wonderful opportunity to have been given this insight into the programming of their partisan constituents.
Today, we will address matters on the home front, which of course, differs from the first section pertaining to Homeland Security.
1. Do you agree that we must stop illegal immigration?
*Answer: I thought the agreement our President made with the leaders of Canada and Mexico, back in March of 2005 brought three countries into a North American Union or Community. Since we're all just a part of the same big continent, didn't that stop the need to address immigration?
2. Should Republicans oppose Senator Clinton's one size fits all, government-run health care?
*Answer: Hillary's health care plan didn't happen, remember? Isn't it already assumed that the Republicans will protect and preserve the government-run health care for the elderly, rather than the children?
3. Should we continue working for serious tort reform to protect individuals and small businesses from predatory lawsuits?
*Answer: By the terms "individuals and small businesses" you are referring to doctors and clinics . . . would that be correct? Perhaps the real focus should be the protection of patients' rights, although I do think it was helpful for health care to have some of the doctors leave their practices to enter politics.
4. Should we make sure President Bush's judicial nominees receive fair hearings and up or down votes in the Senate even when Democrats threaten a filibuster?
*Answer: Is this question about judicial nominees or controlling the "other party"? President Bush will only be in office one more year . . . Will this question read the same if it pertains to a Democrat President and a Republican filibuster threat?
5. Should Republicans in Congress protect our private property rights from eminent domain?
*Answer: If the President won't and the Republican appointed Supreme Court Justices won't, then it would be nice if someone in Congress would protect the people's rights.
. . . every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Holy Scripture
Today, we will address matters on the home front, which of course, differs from the first section pertaining to Homeland Security.
1. Do you agree that we must stop illegal immigration?
*Answer: I thought the agreement our President made with the leaders of Canada and Mexico, back in March of 2005 brought three countries into a North American Union or Community. Since we're all just a part of the same big continent, didn't that stop the need to address immigration?
2. Should Republicans oppose Senator Clinton's one size fits all, government-run health care?
*Answer: Hillary's health care plan didn't happen, remember? Isn't it already assumed that the Republicans will protect and preserve the government-run health care for the elderly, rather than the children?
3. Should we continue working for serious tort reform to protect individuals and small businesses from predatory lawsuits?
*Answer: By the terms "individuals and small businesses" you are referring to doctors and clinics . . . would that be correct? Perhaps the real focus should be the protection of patients' rights, although I do think it was helpful for health care to have some of the doctors leave their practices to enter politics.
4. Should we make sure President Bush's judicial nominees receive fair hearings and up or down votes in the Senate even when Democrats threaten a filibuster?
*Answer: Is this question about judicial nominees or controlling the "other party"? President Bush will only be in office one more year . . . Will this question read the same if it pertains to a Democrat President and a Republican filibuster threat?
5. Should Republicans in Congress protect our private property rights from eminent domain?
*Answer: If the President won't and the Republican appointed Supreme Court Justices won't, then it would be nice if someone in Congress would protect the people's rights.
. . . every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Holy Scripture
Thursday, January 17, 2008
The Perfect Day to Give My Thoughts Regarding the Economy
I'd like to dedicate this to all the Capitalists and the officials of the Federal Reserve that are calling the shots while wringing their hands. Thank you for this monumental opportunity. Remember, this is year 7 of a Republican administration and only the first year of a Democratic Congress after 12 years of Republicans. And the questions are . . .
1. Should we make our fight against the Democrat's massive tax hikes a central part of the 2008 campaign?
*Answer: What massive tax hikes? The Democrats have not had executive power for 7 years and have blustered and caved to White House pressure or had bills vetoed, all year since they gained majority in the House. What power have the Democrats had for any massive anything?
2. Should we continue working to permanently repeal the Death Tax?
*Answer: Only the very rich even have this tax to contend with. Most middle class and lower class Americans don't have anything to inherit. With the extended life expectancy of the aged, I just don't see this as an issue.
3. President Bush's successful income and capital gains tax cuts are set to expire -- should they be made permanent?
*Answer: I'm not sure that prolonging a recession and dumping a financial depression upon the shoulder's of the next resident of the White House should be classified as "successful."
4. Should Republicans renew the fight for a Balanced Budge Amendment?
*Answer: And just how would Republicans finance the wars?
5. Should Republicans unite to keep our pro-growth achievements from the past seven years intact by blocking new federal government bureaucracy and red tape?
*Answer: I thought all this surveillance bureaucracy was considered "pro-growth achievements" by this administration. How many angry unemployed bureaucrats can this nation deal with or support through unemployment benefits?
6. Should Republicans in Congress oppose the new, wasteful government spending programs proposed by the Democrats and their leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?
*Answer: Frankly, I'm sick to death of Nancy and Harry's bluster about timelines or no money, when the reality is, President Bush always gets his billions for the war. I wish someone from either side of the aisle would cut the government spending.
Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded . . . New Testament
1. Should we make our fight against the Democrat's massive tax hikes a central part of the 2008 campaign?
*Answer: What massive tax hikes? The Democrats have not had executive power for 7 years and have blustered and caved to White House pressure or had bills vetoed, all year since they gained majority in the House. What power have the Democrats had for any massive anything?
2. Should we continue working to permanently repeal the Death Tax?
*Answer: Only the very rich even have this tax to contend with. Most middle class and lower class Americans don't have anything to inherit. With the extended life expectancy of the aged, I just don't see this as an issue.
3. President Bush's successful income and capital gains tax cuts are set to expire -- should they be made permanent?
*Answer: I'm not sure that prolonging a recession and dumping a financial depression upon the shoulder's of the next resident of the White House should be classified as "successful."
4. Should Republicans renew the fight for a Balanced Budge Amendment?
*Answer: And just how would Republicans finance the wars?
5. Should Republicans unite to keep our pro-growth achievements from the past seven years intact by blocking new federal government bureaucracy and red tape?
*Answer: I thought all this surveillance bureaucracy was considered "pro-growth achievements" by this administration. How many angry unemployed bureaucrats can this nation deal with or support through unemployment benefits?
6. Should Republicans in Congress oppose the new, wasteful government spending programs proposed by the Democrats and their leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?
*Answer: Frankly, I'm sick to death of Nancy and Harry's bluster about timelines or no money, when the reality is, President Bush always gets his billions for the war. I wish someone from either side of the aisle would cut the government spending.
Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded . . . New Testament
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Giving the Credit, Where Credit is Due
I got to thinking about this last night. The last thing I want to do is cause some sort of copyright issue with the Republicans, so I will give full credit to the Republican Party Census Document, as I attempt to answer as honestly as I can. There are only 3 options with the questions, and in review of last night's post, I would think someone could evaluate the responses in much less time than the 2 minutes and 15 seconds it took me to read the questions. The three choices are Yes, No, and Undecided. At the cost of $11.00 to process 25 questions + the request for donations, I'll address the cost of their survey in tomorrow's blog when I answer the portion entitled "Economic Issues."
First and foremost of course is the Section entitled "Homeland Security Issues." And there are four questions, three of which contain a reference to the Democrats, with one using the adjective, liberal. Since I find politics of both parties rather slanted, I will italicize the survey questions.
1. Should Republicans do everything they can to prevent Liberal Democrats from repealing the USA Patriot Act and other important laws that help our intelligence agencies protect Americans?
*Answer: The Republicans should do everything they can to understand that Democrats are not the enemy and the USA Patriot Act has only served to eliminate the rights of Americans under the guise of protection. The Intelligence Agencies have done nothing but produce conflicting information, since the enactment of the USA Patriot Act.
2. Should Republicans stop the Democrats from cutting funding for our intelligence agencies or bringing back Clinton-era restrictions on inter-agency communications?
* Answer: Since the communications corporations are now asking for immunity from law suits regarding invasion of privacy and civil rights issues, perhaps a kinder gentler intelligence is warranted. Again, to note, there has been very little evidence of intelligence brought forth by the intelligence agencies. "We the people" do need some sort of representation.
3. Do you support the use of air strikes against any country that offers safe harbor or aid to individuals or organizations committed to further attacks on America?
* Answer: With 15 Saudi Passports accounted for on 9/11, wouldn't this policy hinder our oil supply and further reduce our world wide "popularity and respect"? And what would we do with Hezbollah on Lebanon's Parliament and Hamas in Gaza? We can't possibly back all the bluster with air strikes!
4. Should we do everything we can to stop Democrats from repealing critical border and port security legislation?
* Answer: The Democrats were not in power when the United Arab Emirates were given control of the ports! I read that McCain and Feingold were in agreement regarding illegal immigration and I thought Bush and Kennedy had proposed some sort of plan to handle the illegals that are already here . . . I though the border issue was between citizens and illegals, not Republicans and Democrats.
A man of twisted purposes is a cause of fighting everywhere . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
First and foremost of course is the Section entitled "Homeland Security Issues." And there are four questions, three of which contain a reference to the Democrats, with one using the adjective, liberal. Since I find politics of both parties rather slanted, I will italicize the survey questions.
1. Should Republicans do everything they can to prevent Liberal Democrats from repealing the USA Patriot Act and other important laws that help our intelligence agencies protect Americans?
*Answer: The Republicans should do everything they can to understand that Democrats are not the enemy and the USA Patriot Act has only served to eliminate the rights of Americans under the guise of protection. The Intelligence Agencies have done nothing but produce conflicting information, since the enactment of the USA Patriot Act.
2. Should Republicans stop the Democrats from cutting funding for our intelligence agencies or bringing back Clinton-era restrictions on inter-agency communications?
* Answer: Since the communications corporations are now asking for immunity from law suits regarding invasion of privacy and civil rights issues, perhaps a kinder gentler intelligence is warranted. Again, to note, there has been very little evidence of intelligence brought forth by the intelligence agencies. "We the people" do need some sort of representation.
3. Do you support the use of air strikes against any country that offers safe harbor or aid to individuals or organizations committed to further attacks on America?
* Answer: With 15 Saudi Passports accounted for on 9/11, wouldn't this policy hinder our oil supply and further reduce our world wide "popularity and respect"? And what would we do with Hezbollah on Lebanon's Parliament and Hamas in Gaza? We can't possibly back all the bluster with air strikes!
4. Should we do everything we can to stop Democrats from repealing critical border and port security legislation?
* Answer: The Democrats were not in power when the United Arab Emirates were given control of the ports! I read that McCain and Feingold were in agreement regarding illegal immigration and I thought Bush and Kennedy had proposed some sort of plan to handle the illegals that are already here . . . I though the border issue was between citizens and illegals, not Republicans and Democrats.
A man of twisted purposes is a cause of fighting everywhere . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
You'll Never Believe What Came in the Mail . . .
I don't know who should receive credit for this. I just don't know how it came about, as I have never been a registered republican, and I have yet to become a registered voter at my new address. So if it's the work of Homeland Security, have they got a bug or two to tweak out of their system . . .
I still don't understand why the republicans continue to whine and complain about the decisions of the Supreme Court and voice concern regarding conservative justices. Seven out of nine of the justices were appointed by republicans. As I read this "great concern" addressing eminent domain, I of course, thought of Justice Souter, who was the deciding vote. Justice Souter was appointed by Bush 41. I just don't buy all this "concern" voiced by the republican national committee. But, then again, they are concerned about what I think, as I am representing many of the republicans in my region of the nation!
As I read through the letter, I came across the usual programming regarding the revered Ronald Reagan.
To which I simply must reply according to Scripture. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Exodus 20: 3. I just don't bow down to the Ronald Reaganomics or the "doctrine" of Sean Hannity.
Tomorrow, I will begin to share the fullness of the census questionnaire. The questionnaire that contains 25 questions at the expense to the RNC of $11.00 to process ???
I just keep wondering if the same "intelligence" that brought us the reports of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and nukes in Iran, has sent this questionnaire to me.
For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. a Psalm of Holy Scripture
I received, in the mail today, a Republican Party Census Document.
, with the letterhead below.
, with the letterhead below.Since the correspondence stated it would cost $11.00 to process my response, I thought I would simply share my answers here and save the Republican Party $264.00, as it took a total of 2 minutes and 15 seconds to read all the questions. So, if they are paying by the hour, that is my estimated evaluation. Do you suppose that sum would hold up for a tax deductible donation? There are only 3 options in the answers, so I would think it would take even less time to evaluate, but, as a mathematician, I will attempt to keep the variables at a minimum. As a writer, however; I have chosen to express my views beyond the three options, here at the blog.
I'd like to address the ongoing "concern" regarding the Supreme Court, since that was a paragraph in the correspondence I received today.
I still don't understand why the republicans continue to whine and complain about the decisions of the Supreme Court and voice concern regarding conservative justices. Seven out of nine of the justices were appointed by republicans. As I read this "great concern" addressing eminent domain, I of course, thought of Justice Souter, who was the deciding vote. Justice Souter was appointed by Bush 41. I just don't buy all this "concern" voiced by the republican national committee. But, then again, they are concerned about what I think, as I am representing many of the republicans in my region of the nation!
As I read through the letter, I came across the usual programming regarding the revered Ronald Reagan.
To which I simply must reply according to Scripture. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Exodus 20: 3. I just don't bow down to the Ronald Reaganomics or the "doctrine" of Sean Hannity.
Tomorrow, I will begin to share the fullness of the census questionnaire. The questionnaire that contains 25 questions at the expense to the RNC of $11.00 to process ???
I just keep wondering if the same "intelligence" that brought us the reports of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and nukes in Iran, has sent this questionnaire to me.
For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. a Psalm of Holy Scripture
Monday, January 14, 2008
This Just Isn't Making Sense
I just can't use one of my usual glib or slightly disrespectful titles today, because this blog addresses information that is just too sad and too serious. Our President, the President of the "United" States of America has gone to the Middle East to promote animosity and aggression against Iran, under the auspice of peace in Israel. I'm no great fan of Ahmadinejad, but we just cannot stir up another war on this planet, right now, especially with the US doing the instigation; thereof. Besides our latest "intelligence" said Iran had stopped their nukes, four years ago. This latest attempt to start war again, just makes our intelligence look dumb! Our military is not exactly in a good place right now to expand or expound on the strategic plan of democracy by force.
I'm not certain of the exact number of troops we have everywhere, because every time I hear President Bush address the troops, he's in yet another country. I do know we have created an unresolved mess in Iraq, and the President's resolution appears to be to start another war and leave the problem of Iraq to the next person in the Oval Office. It is my firm belief, if the coming President really gets to know what the last one did, there is somewhere, a pre-9/11 Iraqi war plan with no exit strategy.
Our military needs help. Every day there is some soldier up on charges or being sought over something. Doesn't anyone have to pass some sort of evaluation before being accepted into the service, or are we that desperate? I'm beginning to wonder if those that are enlisting are desperate, themselves. The latest tragedy about the young woman that was missing but found dead is just heart breaking. Right before her body was found, her mother had said something about her being bi-polar and a chronic liar??? What was that all about and why was she in the marines with that kind of problem? And now she's dead, and according to the news, at the hand of another marine, who is considered dangerous. Really? I remember an incident some years back in which a young man had just gotten home from Iraq and threatened to kill himself. Ultimately he was killed in the police stand off, but in the after math, I was merely making an observation as to how unstable he had returned, and I was told, the gossip was, he was unstable before he went. That was 2003, and there have been many incidents between. Right after the war started, a young soldier threw a grenade into a tent full of soldiers, killing I don't know how many. I really would question the stability of anyone that enlisted in the service right now, considering the lack of direction of the warmongering.
We keep hearing that those of us who are opposed to the war are causing a decline in the military morale. What does it do for the morale, when these young people have to question how many in their company have some sort of problem or death wish, or have no problem killing anyone? We can't send unstable individuals into harm's way and we certainly cannot send stable soldiers with this sort of thing to have to worry about. I would say war is enough to deal with. You shouldn't have to worry about friendly fire in the camp.
I read today that our President has worked out some sort of multi-billion dollar arms deal with Saudi. Why? I keep saying this like a broken record. Fifteen of the nineteen passports of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi. How do we figure them to be full fledged allies? And what is this statement from Musharraf about the US not being welcome in Pakistan to find bin Laden? Pakistan is another of our staunch allies . . . if there is a bin Laden. This so called trip to Israel has certainly been of benefit to many of our "allies" that do not even diplomatically consider Israel . . .
We are arming Saudi and they have 1/3 of OPEC Oil, translating to $3.07 a gallon, here. Are we just nuts or what?
Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? a Proverb of Holy Scripture
I'm not certain of the exact number of troops we have everywhere, because every time I hear President Bush address the troops, he's in yet another country. I do know we have created an unresolved mess in Iraq, and the President's resolution appears to be to start another war and leave the problem of Iraq to the next person in the Oval Office. It is my firm belief, if the coming President really gets to know what the last one did, there is somewhere, a pre-9/11 Iraqi war plan with no exit strategy.
Our military needs help. Every day there is some soldier up on charges or being sought over something. Doesn't anyone have to pass some sort of evaluation before being accepted into the service, or are we that desperate? I'm beginning to wonder if those that are enlisting are desperate, themselves. The latest tragedy about the young woman that was missing but found dead is just heart breaking. Right before her body was found, her mother had said something about her being bi-polar and a chronic liar??? What was that all about and why was she in the marines with that kind of problem? And now she's dead, and according to the news, at the hand of another marine, who is considered dangerous. Really? I remember an incident some years back in which a young man had just gotten home from Iraq and threatened to kill himself. Ultimately he was killed in the police stand off, but in the after math, I was merely making an observation as to how unstable he had returned, and I was told, the gossip was, he was unstable before he went. That was 2003, and there have been many incidents between. Right after the war started, a young soldier threw a grenade into a tent full of soldiers, killing I don't know how many. I really would question the stability of anyone that enlisted in the service right now, considering the lack of direction of the warmongering.
We keep hearing that those of us who are opposed to the war are causing a decline in the military morale. What does it do for the morale, when these young people have to question how many in their company have some sort of problem or death wish, or have no problem killing anyone? We can't send unstable individuals into harm's way and we certainly cannot send stable soldiers with this sort of thing to have to worry about. I would say war is enough to deal with. You shouldn't have to worry about friendly fire in the camp.
I read today that our President has worked out some sort of multi-billion dollar arms deal with Saudi. Why? I keep saying this like a broken record. Fifteen of the nineteen passports of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi. How do we figure them to be full fledged allies? And what is this statement from Musharraf about the US not being welcome in Pakistan to find bin Laden? Pakistan is another of our staunch allies . . . if there is a bin Laden. This so called trip to Israel has certainly been of benefit to many of our "allies" that do not even diplomatically consider Israel . . .
We are arming Saudi and they have 1/3 of OPEC Oil, translating to $3.07 a gallon, here. Are we just nuts or what?
Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Friday, January 11, 2008
REAL ID, for Homeland Security
I "prophesied" over 10 years ago that our devotion to the beastly government mentioned in the Revelation would not be introduced as the ultimate choice between life and martyrdom, but rather be offered and received for safety and convenience. So, it's come as no surprise that our very own government is going to use our driver's license to enact the beginning of the this New World Order right here at home. 9/11 certainly changed our lives, but we use the term terrorist like some elusive nemesis that is beyond our grasp of understanding. Another oppressive fear came upon us as a result of 9/11 and that is the Department of Homeland Security. Our government now has one more cabinet post as a result of this decision, and this particular department has orchestrated a great deal of captivity in the name of safety, and all for we the people, not the terrorists. I have actually enquired on occasion when I am put through some ridiculous invasion of privacy in a bank, "Have you caught one terrorist with this practice?" Of course, the answer is always, "We just have to do this, it's policy." I also asked that at the feed store when they need to know my address and phone number to buy a bag of oats, "because of the Patriot Act." They just chuckle and say "Not around here," or something equally reassuring and enlightening.
But this morning when I heard of the latest of Michael Chertoff's plans, an interesting thought came through my mind.
I can honestly say that I have disagreed with nearly everything that the late Jerry Falwell espoused and proclaimed, but something he said came to mind this morning through the 6 am News. I believe it was in 1991 that Dr. Falwell said he believed the anti-Christ would be a Jewish man. The late Dr. said many boisterously outrageous things, that were easily argued, but since the inception of the Department of Homeland Security and the appointment of the current Secretary, I just can't help but wonder if the late Dr. got something right . . .
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them . . . New Testament
But this morning when I heard of the latest of Michael Chertoff's plans, an interesting thought came through my mind.
I can honestly say that I have disagreed with nearly everything that the late Jerry Falwell espoused and proclaimed, but something he said came to mind this morning through the 6 am News. I believe it was in 1991 that Dr. Falwell said he believed the anti-Christ would be a Jewish man. The late Dr. said many boisterously outrageous things, that were easily argued, but since the inception of the Department of Homeland Security and the appointment of the current Secretary, I just can't help but wonder if the late Dr. got something right . . .
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them . . . New Testament
Thursday, January 10, 2008
If Only Edwards Had Been the Top of the Ticket in '04
I was simply disgusted this morning when I read the headline about John Kerry's endorsement. Actually it has nothing to do with the candidate he endorsed, but rather my disgust was with John Kerry, himself. This morning, he gave confirmation that he is not a leader. He's been watching which way the wind was going to blow, politically and then stepped forth with his "endorsement" against his choice of Vice President in '04. So, if Kerry had won in 2004, would he be changing his choice of Vice President, this election? Certainly looks like it . . . I didn't vote for George W. Bush in 2000 or in 2004, but I am certainly glad I didn't vote for John Kerry, either. The 2004 election, I went and voted for a candidate in every office, except president. I have simply run out of names to write in and I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils and in 2004, I couldn't even figure out which one that would have been, anyway.
I think Mr. Kerry's announcement just indicates he needed someone to carry him in the south in 2004. I like John Edwards. I don't agree with his health care plan and I'm sorry he got so cranky in these past few weeks, but I have always admired the fact that, as a trial lawyer, he held doctors accountable.
I really felt that the Bush campaign got rather ugly with Mr. Kerry in 2004, but this morning Mr. Kerry made this non-republican very thankful that although I don't care for the direction this country has been lead, at least it has had consistent direction. I don't like where we stand right now and I don't know how we will ever be united again, but I can't imagine where the US would be right now, had such indecisive, disloyal leadership been elected.
The integrity of the upright shall guide them . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
I think Mr. Kerry's announcement just indicates he needed someone to carry him in the south in 2004. I like John Edwards. I don't agree with his health care plan and I'm sorry he got so cranky in these past few weeks, but I have always admired the fact that, as a trial lawyer, he held doctors accountable.
I really felt that the Bush campaign got rather ugly with Mr. Kerry in 2004, but this morning Mr. Kerry made this non-republican very thankful that although I don't care for the direction this country has been lead, at least it has had consistent direction. I don't like where we stand right now and I don't know how we will ever be united again, but I can't imagine where the US would be right now, had such indecisive, disloyal leadership been elected.
The integrity of the upright shall guide them . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Programming the State of the Union
I have two topics that simply must be addressed today.
My husband got a call this morning from a gentleman claiming to represent the Navy in some way and asking for a donation. I don't want to get on a no call list. We don't have a TV and these telemarketers are our entertainment. Anyway, this man wanted a donation for the troops. My husband told him we were tax payers and the latest figures show about half a trillion already invested in Iraq. So just why does the Navy need donations? Well he then made a reference to "play stations." To that my husband said, "What?" I thought, well of course, they need play stations for the troops, the recruiting offices are right next door to the arcades and game exchanges. Well, the converstaion went on for about 15 minutes until I asked my husband who this person was, so I could dedicate the blog. When he mentioned Navy, we simply offered the information that we would be happy to donate money for tickets home, that our President announced the mission was accomplished on the USS Abraham Lincoln, surely the Navy had heard of that. They discussed the fact that Iraq was not the country involved in 9/11 and we are just mortified that our leaders have taken our military into a war that must be funded by donations and charities. The caller was unresponsive.
The New Hampshire primary was ridiculous, and yet it displayed exactly what I've been thinking for years. Talk radio and so called "news broadcasting" are programming the people. I've made a point in listening to some of the conservative pundits and then read the polls. It's like their faithful listeners are just running back and forth trying to stand in the light of "reported" favor. The pundits have learned, they can manipulate the minds of their listeners. New Hampshire proved that yesterday. The conservative pundits do not want to have to "deal against" Obama, once the party nominees have been declared. Obama is a non political target on many counts. The only thing the pundits can dare address is his lack of experience. If any of the pundits listened to anyone but the sound of their own voice, they would know Obama was already put in place in 2004. When was the last time the party against the incumbant had an unheard of keynote speaker for the National Conference? Barack Obama had not even been elected to the Senate yet, he was only a state legislator at the time. Obama is off limits in so many areas. The conservatives can talk about women and Hillary crying or being harsh, she can't win favorable commentary, either way, but Obama has no public record, to speak of, he's black, he's hiding behind Oprah, and he's ahead of every one of the other candidates. The Clintons are part of the big Washington Machine that spins out the divisions for the rest of the country to disagree about, but Obama isn't . . . at least not yet. The pundits already know they have the mind control of their faithful followers when it comes to Hillary, but Obama is uncharted territory. So, NH was orchestrated by every talking head on radio, while they trashed the "liberal media." It's just so clear. Anytime, either side starts on a particular topic and aiming at the other side, the groundwork is being laid and the minds are being manipulated. Besides, starting everything this early, they have to keep the momentum and the hateful hoop-ti-la going another 10 months to keep their job security. We all know many of the pundits have already said they won't run for office, they wouldn't want the cut in pay. Hillary in the White House is talk radio job security!
The simple believeth every word . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
My husband got a call this morning from a gentleman claiming to represent the Navy in some way and asking for a donation. I don't want to get on a no call list. We don't have a TV and these telemarketers are our entertainment. Anyway, this man wanted a donation for the troops. My husband told him we were tax payers and the latest figures show about half a trillion already invested in Iraq. So just why does the Navy need donations? Well he then made a reference to "play stations." To that my husband said, "What?" I thought, well of course, they need play stations for the troops, the recruiting offices are right next door to the arcades and game exchanges. Well, the converstaion went on for about 15 minutes until I asked my husband who this person was, so I could dedicate the blog. When he mentioned Navy, we simply offered the information that we would be happy to donate money for tickets home, that our President announced the mission was accomplished on the USS Abraham Lincoln, surely the Navy had heard of that. They discussed the fact that Iraq was not the country involved in 9/11 and we are just mortified that our leaders have taken our military into a war that must be funded by donations and charities. The caller was unresponsive.
The New Hampshire primary was ridiculous, and yet it displayed exactly what I've been thinking for years. Talk radio and so called "news broadcasting" are programming the people. I've made a point in listening to some of the conservative pundits and then read the polls. It's like their faithful listeners are just running back and forth trying to stand in the light of "reported" favor. The pundits have learned, they can manipulate the minds of their listeners. New Hampshire proved that yesterday. The conservative pundits do not want to have to "deal against" Obama, once the party nominees have been declared. Obama is a non political target on many counts. The only thing the pundits can dare address is his lack of experience. If any of the pundits listened to anyone but the sound of their own voice, they would know Obama was already put in place in 2004. When was the last time the party against the incumbant had an unheard of keynote speaker for the National Conference? Barack Obama had not even been elected to the Senate yet, he was only a state legislator at the time. Obama is off limits in so many areas. The conservatives can talk about women and Hillary crying or being harsh, she can't win favorable commentary, either way, but Obama has no public record, to speak of, he's black, he's hiding behind Oprah, and he's ahead of every one of the other candidates. The Clintons are part of the big Washington Machine that spins out the divisions for the rest of the country to disagree about, but Obama isn't . . . at least not yet. The pundits already know they have the mind control of their faithful followers when it comes to Hillary, but Obama is uncharted territory. So, NH was orchestrated by every talking head on radio, while they trashed the "liberal media." It's just so clear. Anytime, either side starts on a particular topic and aiming at the other side, the groundwork is being laid and the minds are being manipulated. Besides, starting everything this early, they have to keep the momentum and the hateful hoop-ti-la going another 10 months to keep their job security. We all know many of the pundits have already said they won't run for office, they wouldn't want the cut in pay. Hillary in the White House is talk radio job security!
The simple believeth every word . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
American Economics 101
I read the other day that our unemployment rate is 5%. I also remember when President Reagan changed the employment stats with the destruction of the union and the addition of the military. Oh, by the way, on a side note here, I actually heard Sean Hannity say several times in 20 minutes, because that's all I listened . . . "What Would Reagan Do?" Can you believe someone would redirect the little saying from the Savior to the President? Well, I could elaborate, but that's not our blog topic today.
We are going to address this unemployment rate. I have heard one pundit offer the ideology that if 5% is unemployed, then that means 95% is employed and to that I would simply offer this information.
I know statisticians tend to prefer to not corrupt the expected outcome by variables, and unfortunately, most conservatives tend to not want to confuse their ideology with facts, but none the less here they are.
When we hear that the unemployment rate is at 5%, but it's not that bad; here are the rest of the figures.
12% of the American population is over the age of 65 with Social Security and Medicare
available.
18% of the American population has some degree of disability and has applied for
benefits, removing them the statistics of employable, at least temporarily if not permanently.
I personally know of situations in which the health issue has greatly improved, once the
disability was declared permanent, but those are statistics for yet another blog.
Nearly 1% of the American population is incarcerated.
24.6% of the American population is under the age of 18.
That brings us to the interesting figure of 55.6% of the American population that isn't even considered in the employment stats to begin with.
So, out of 44.4% of the American population that is considered members of the work force, 5% of them do not have a job.
So when we hear the unemployment rate is 5%, that means 39.4% of Americans are gainfully employed.
Sadly this does not reflect any information regarding those that have simply collected past the point of unemployment benefits, but have still not found employment. It certainly doesn't reflect any facts pertaining to those that have had to accept a much lower paying job to be employed, and it doesn't have any information about young mothers on welfare or the group of individuals between the ages of 18-25, whose parents do not consider them to be adults yet are are still subsidized students. According to some information, this groups is considered in the "slow lane to adulthood." Ah, the rights of adulthood, with the responsibility of childhood . . . Students are not considered in the employment statistics.
So, with 5% unemployment and war looming on the horizon for the military inclusion of our stats, the American employment rate is just under 40%.
A wise man will hear, and will increase learning . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
We are going to address this unemployment rate. I have heard one pundit offer the ideology that if 5% is unemployed, then that means 95% is employed and to that I would simply offer this information.
I know statisticians tend to prefer to not corrupt the expected outcome by variables, and unfortunately, most conservatives tend to not want to confuse their ideology with facts, but none the less here they are.
When we hear that the unemployment rate is at 5%, but it's not that bad; here are the rest of the figures.
12% of the American population is over the age of 65 with Social Security and Medicare
available.
18% of the American population has some degree of disability and has applied for
benefits, removing them the statistics of employable, at least temporarily if not permanently.
I personally know of situations in which the health issue has greatly improved, once the
disability was declared permanent, but those are statistics for yet another blog.
Nearly 1% of the American population is incarcerated.
24.6% of the American population is under the age of 18.
That brings us to the interesting figure of 55.6% of the American population that isn't even considered in the employment stats to begin with.
So, out of 44.4% of the American population that is considered members of the work force, 5% of them do not have a job.
So when we hear the unemployment rate is 5%, that means 39.4% of Americans are gainfully employed.
Sadly this does not reflect any information regarding those that have simply collected past the point of unemployment benefits, but have still not found employment. It certainly doesn't reflect any facts pertaining to those that have had to accept a much lower paying job to be employed, and it doesn't have any information about young mothers on welfare or the group of individuals between the ages of 18-25, whose parents do not consider them to be adults yet are are still subsidized students. According to some information, this groups is considered in the "slow lane to adulthood." Ah, the rights of adulthood, with the responsibility of childhood . . . Students are not considered in the employment statistics.
So, with 5% unemployment and war looming on the horizon for the military inclusion of our stats, the American employment rate is just under 40%.
A wise man will hear, and will increase learning . . . a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Sunday, January 06, 2008
The Supreme Court Discusses Capital Punishment
The way I read this, the Supreme Court is not hearing or discussing the merits of Capital Punishment, but rather the method. Doesn't it just warm your heart to know a civilized society has taken a completely barbaric concept and is now striving to ensure it's legal protection? I realize the Bible states certain crimes are punishable by death, but the Instruction is included in a portion of the Bible that the majority of our population has declared obsolete. McCain said this is a Christian nation and Christians do not believe they are commanded to live by the Law of G~D. The Constitution does not make any specific religious references to our nation's legislation. The Bill of Rights clearly states that Congress shall not pass any laws regarding religion. So, technically if capital punishment is perceived to be Biblical, it cannot be legislated by the government of the United States. Another major concern I have about capital punishment is the fact that the only reference to it in the New Testament was done by Rome and the most famous execution carried out by Rome was the execution of a man that was not guilty . . .
I don't understand why a nation that considers itself conservatively Christian could promote capital punishment. Messiah was obviously opposed to it. He demonstrated that on more than one occasion.
And what about this lethal injection matter? A doctor came up with this method. What happened to the Hippocratic oath? Did you know doctors could participate in something that results in intentional human death?
This is leading somewhere else, I just know it. When our country can talk about the "inappropriate" execution methods of other nations, while legislating our own "civilized" methods, we have a problem. And the Supreme Court can't possible get to the heart of that problem. In the last interview I read about the creator of lethal injection, he mentioned the efficiency of the guillotine!
If we, as a nation, can stand before G~D with a clear conscience regarding the use of capital punishment, then we, as a nation, would have to be living by His Law, and we are so far from that. Without adherence to the Law of G~D, all taking of human life is defined as killing. Even if we were observant of G~D's Law, there would absolutely be no death penalty based on circumstantial evidence! What would that do with the population on death row?
I read another bit of interesting news, at least I found it to be interesting. The state of Texas has executed more inmates than any other state, by a large percentage, and yet that same state has had to released more falsely imprisoned people due to DNA evidence. What evidence was used to originally convict them, when DNA evidence places someone else at the scene of the crime? This information, not only has not dissuaded the officials regarding the death penalty, the majority of the residents of Texas are still pro capital punishment. I guess they are banking on technological advances to keep them from being falsely accused or imprisoned.
I think if one did a bit of research, China, the Arab nations, some African countries and the US use capital punishment, and the rest of the world, be it by religious standard or conscience have found it to be unacceptable, uncivilized, and down right barbaric.
Thou shalt not kill. Torah of Holy Scripture
I don't understand why a nation that considers itself conservatively Christian could promote capital punishment. Messiah was obviously opposed to it. He demonstrated that on more than one occasion.
And what about this lethal injection matter? A doctor came up with this method. What happened to the Hippocratic oath? Did you know doctors could participate in something that results in intentional human death?
This is leading somewhere else, I just know it. When our country can talk about the "inappropriate" execution methods of other nations, while legislating our own "civilized" methods, we have a problem. And the Supreme Court can't possible get to the heart of that problem. In the last interview I read about the creator of lethal injection, he mentioned the efficiency of the guillotine!
If we, as a nation, can stand before G~D with a clear conscience regarding the use of capital punishment, then we, as a nation, would have to be living by His Law, and we are so far from that. Without adherence to the Law of G~D, all taking of human life is defined as killing. Even if we were observant of G~D's Law, there would absolutely be no death penalty based on circumstantial evidence! What would that do with the population on death row?
I read another bit of interesting news, at least I found it to be interesting. The state of Texas has executed more inmates than any other state, by a large percentage, and yet that same state has had to released more falsely imprisoned people due to DNA evidence. What evidence was used to originally convict them, when DNA evidence places someone else at the scene of the crime? This information, not only has not dissuaded the officials regarding the death penalty, the majority of the residents of Texas are still pro capital punishment. I guess they are banking on technological advances to keep them from being falsely accused or imprisoned.
I think if one did a bit of research, China, the Arab nations, some African countries and the US use capital punishment, and the rest of the world, be it by religious standard or conscience have found it to be unacceptable, uncivilized, and down right barbaric.
Thou shalt not kill. Torah of Holy Scripture
Friday, January 04, 2008
Congratulations, Huckabee!
I'm going through some sort of bizarre transformation here, in my life. Although, I still don't picture myself ever voting republican, I did find a great deal of joy in the fact that Huckabee won the Iowa caucus. I truly think Huckabee is more of an independent than a strongly backed member of the GOP, but that hasn't inspired me to declare myself a republican in the primaries, and it probably won't. If he ever went independent, he just might find himself with more backing than his own party has provided thus far. Dr. Bill was asking for Huckabee supporters to call in this morning and I thought, why should they . . . There is no reason in the world for people to set themselves up to be overtalked and cut off about something they feel strongly about. I, personally, make it a hard and fast rule to have only a one liner ready when I call into the talk radio shows. Then, if the host chooses to spend his time dissecting my statement, that's his prerogative, but I still made my simple statement without interruption. Now, back to Huckabee and the next round. I think Romney is chosen to come in second for many times in the running. Just look at how much private money has been dumped into the sluggish economy, specifically the "abhorrent liberal media" with Romney's campaign. He doesn't really have the GOP backing, either, but they do like his money. I think he'll fair well in Michigan, and he's certainly got the funding to go the distance. I'm guessing New Hampshire may go to McCain, since that's what the pundits are promoting, and South Carolina maybe to Fred, unless he and the GOP tire of this exhaustive 'pace.' I look for Rudy to take a big state or two, then drop out like in his 2000 Senatorial race. ABC has already eliminated more candidates than have announced their decision to drop out of the race, so that will probably have things streamlined by the New Hampshire primary.
I don't think Obama or Clinton can unite our country and I did like the fact that Edwards held doctors accountable, but now his health care plan is to make everyone go to a doctor, so he's out on that deal for me. Hillary cannot garner the black vote from Obama, she's no Bill and her 'experience' by being Mrs. Bill Clinton just really doesn't ring of the feminist statement, "I am woman." And I've been skeptical about Obama since he was the 2004 keynote speaker before he was ever elected to a national office. I just don't buy into his "sudden rise" in politics and I think his popularity has been orchestrated early on, and is now due to Oprah, not his substance or core values. So, I've had enough of the dems, all the way around.
I didn't mention Ron Paul because I just don't see him as a viable candidate. He's a doctor/politician and a libertarian/republican. Too much paradox for me to sort out.
Can Huckabee unite this country? Look at AIPAC and the Religious Right. This country refuses to be united by the Bible! I don't think any human is going to fare any better, but Huckabee is conservative in some key areas and relates to the common person in other areas, so who knows . . . What I do know, is, he's restored my enthusiasm in the concept that the White House isn't for sale and some politicians aren't owned by "The Political Machine."
Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted: James, brother of Messiah
I don't think Obama or Clinton can unite our country and I did like the fact that Edwards held doctors accountable, but now his health care plan is to make everyone go to a doctor, so he's out on that deal for me. Hillary cannot garner the black vote from Obama, she's no Bill and her 'experience' by being Mrs. Bill Clinton just really doesn't ring of the feminist statement, "I am woman." And I've been skeptical about Obama since he was the 2004 keynote speaker before he was ever elected to a national office. I just don't buy into his "sudden rise" in politics and I think his popularity has been orchestrated early on, and is now due to Oprah, not his substance or core values. So, I've had enough of the dems, all the way around.
I didn't mention Ron Paul because I just don't see him as a viable candidate. He's a doctor/politician and a libertarian/republican. Too much paradox for me to sort out.
Can Huckabee unite this country? Look at AIPAC and the Religious Right. This country refuses to be united by the Bible! I don't think any human is going to fare any better, but Huckabee is conservative in some key areas and relates to the common person in other areas, so who knows . . . What I do know, is, he's restored my enthusiasm in the concept that the White House isn't for sale and some politicians aren't owned by "The Political Machine."
Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted: James, brother of Messiah
Thursday, January 03, 2008
What I've Learned from Dr. Bill
I feel like a school kid writing an essay. I've been listening to Dr. Bill Bennett for an hour in the morning for about a year now. I find him to be a valuable source of information regarding the desired direction for our country by the powers that be. It would only make sense to have a teacher, former Secretary of Education, at that; mold the minds of the listeners. And I just love Seth, which makes me feel that I am in a 6am class and he's the assistant or the pet, depending upon one's level of enthusiasm for that time of day. I didn't get into Dr. Bennett's Morning in America when it started for one simple reason. I thought it was a Bush reelection ploy and that was enough to keep me from being interested. I still think that, but I've learned through the last four years, some of us better be hearing what the programming is; for those that are willing to walk in lock step with nothing to hide! Dr. Bill was the perfect pundit for the second campaign of Bush 43. The GOP already knew that Rush Limbaugh had failed to convince the Perot faithful that they should want Bush again. Time for new blood and a new voice. He was the Teacher Supreme in the Reagan administration and the Drug Czar for Bush 41. The perfect person to teach a nation of listeners subliminally, you know, while we get ready for work and school and just in that hazy auto pilot function of early morning . . . and it apparently worked. It apparently worked so well, he's still molding and shaping minds in preparation of the next election. And oh, by the way, for those that were wondering why his book(s) was/were Volumes 1 and 2, something about getting this valuable and accurate account of history into the schools! It would appear that the GOP has discovered what the United Negro College Fund has been saying for years about educating children . . . a mind is a terrible thing to waste.
The one thing that is still eluding me regarding this election, and maybe I would have greater insight if I listened for the full 3 hours, but it's only broadcast in our area for 1 hour, and that is the stand of the GOP. I just can't figure out if the GOP is trying to throw the election or simply doesn't want Huckabee because he's "beholdin' to no one." Huckabee doesn't have the big GOP machine behind him at all. I firmly believe the GOP is trying to throw the election. They know there's more power outside the White House than in it, just look at Rush and Dr. Bill. There was no clear GOP candidate that could beat Hillary, but then Hillary began to slide at the same time Huckabee began to climb. The GOP [powers that be] were pretty sure Mitt Romney wouldn't overcome the Mormon issue with the evangelicals and that's a large part of their base. Giuliani is too socially liberal for most of the conservative base. Fred Thompson has come in and stood there, without gathering the fanfare that was "expected." I think without gathering fanfare was the plan. McCain is gaining ground, but is he really, or is this latest poll, just because the GOP already knows the constituency base spoke in 2000 and McCain is not their choice? Clearly Dr. Bill is speaking against Mike Huckabee at every opportunity. I've never voted republican, and it's been years since I voted democrat in the presidential race, but I'm thinking Huckabee is defying the rules of the powers behind the GOP and Dr. Bill is patiently explaining that while professing to ignore it. I believe Dr. Bill has taught us that word this week also. PARALIPSIS
These are the things that ye shall do; Speak ye every man the truth . . . a Prophet of Holy Scripture
The one thing that is still eluding me regarding this election, and maybe I would have greater insight if I listened for the full 3 hours, but it's only broadcast in our area for 1 hour, and that is the stand of the GOP. I just can't figure out if the GOP is trying to throw the election or simply doesn't want Huckabee because he's "beholdin' to no one." Huckabee doesn't have the big GOP machine behind him at all. I firmly believe the GOP is trying to throw the election. They know there's more power outside the White House than in it, just look at Rush and Dr. Bill. There was no clear GOP candidate that could beat Hillary, but then Hillary began to slide at the same time Huckabee began to climb. The GOP [powers that be] were pretty sure Mitt Romney wouldn't overcome the Mormon issue with the evangelicals and that's a large part of their base. Giuliani is too socially liberal for most of the conservative base. Fred Thompson has come in and stood there, without gathering the fanfare that was "expected." I think without gathering fanfare was the plan. McCain is gaining ground, but is he really, or is this latest poll, just because the GOP already knows the constituency base spoke in 2000 and McCain is not their choice? Clearly Dr. Bill is speaking against Mike Huckabee at every opportunity. I've never voted republican, and it's been years since I voted democrat in the presidential race, but I'm thinking Huckabee is defying the rules of the powers behind the GOP and Dr. Bill is patiently explaining that while professing to ignore it. I believe Dr. Bill has taught us that word this week also. PARALIPSIS
These are the things that ye shall do; Speak ye every man the truth . . . a Prophet of Holy Scripture
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Power of the People
As we sit here on the eve of the Iowa caucus, I just can't help but think about a real election with a real choice . . . and the fact that we don't have that here in America. I feel as I get older, I get great ideas, just too late! I would love to have a Party of the People. It would make the perfect third party. Here's how we'd do it. First, we'd use the internet, not TV. Wouldn't it be wonderful to reintroduce to our young people that ANYBODY can, in fact, be president of the United States. The White House is not for sale and votes do not have to be purchased with expensive advertising. A campaign could truly run on convictions. I can see it, now! I e-mail 10 people, they each e-mail 10 people. It could happen! Then when we started gaining momentum, the pundits could trash our candidate just like they've done for Mike Huckabee as he's risen from nowhere. And that would be more publicity for name and party recognition. I read the headlines every day and many stories, but I have gotten most of my information about Mike Huckabee from hearing Bill Bennett lambasting his ads. I've learned more about what I don't like about Rudy G. from Dennis Miller's promotion and support of him. I actually laughed out loud this morning as I heard Dr. Bill tell us that Mike Huckabee is going on the Leno show and it's a bad idea, when Fred Thompson, whom Dr. Bill likes, chose to be absent from a republican debate the same evening he announced his candidacy on the Leno show. The double standards of the pundits could definitely benefit the Party of the People! And I realize there is a strategy that is obviously over my head in all this pundit propaganda and media mind control called talk radio, but it could be used for the people, rather than their own arrogance, if we just got this grass roots idea going. Dr. Bill mentioned the young ages of Gen. George Washington and many of the soldiers/leaders of the revolution. Wouldn't it be nice if this country got back to listening and supporting the youth instead of catering to the old money and old complainers? The boomers tried, but we gave up. But somehow as I am looking at 50 this year, I'm reinvigorated and believe it's not too late. With our old people too afraid to die, 50 is younger than it used to be. It's time for a grass roots move of the People. Dr. Ron Paul is not that person. He's as mainline traditional as it gets. Make any promise that will get a vote in any party that will nominate him. If I were to represent the Party of the People, I would begin the platform with one plank of a simple promise. If elected I promise to return the country back to the people. There will be accountability and there will be a reduction in spending. And Congress has made enough crazy laws. We have more laws than we can keep track of, now. More laws for those that are already breaking the ones we have, is not the opposite of anarchy. Without new laws, there will be no need of the lobby! And without perks from the lobbyists, that will take care of career politicians. The legislative branch of the government will be combined with the new mutant "fourth branch" of government known as bureaucracy. Thanks for that term, Mark Levin. And all government officials will live by the same regulations, taxes, and pensions that they provide for their constituents. How's that for a beginning to return the country to the people and accountability of the Party of the People?
The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: but the wicked regardeth not to know it. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: but the wicked regardeth not to know it. a Proverb of Holy Scripture
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
2008
I have little idea what this year will bring, but I've been thinking about a few things I would like to see happen. I hope some of them are still legal in this country.
I'd like to see no more wars started, and I would love to know a way to end the war we shouldn't have started in Iraq.
I would like to see the law regarding incandescent light bulbs be repealed before 2012. With the price of lamp oil and the health hazard of mercury, I'm going to miss the simple invention by Thomas Alva Edison!
I'd like to have just a bit of my privacy returned before I simply give up my phone and driver's license. I really don't like the idea that our government thinks they've fooled us on the National ID card, and I am so sick of hearing "this call is recorded or may be monitored." It's so simple and so irritating. If I take all my paperwork in and pay my $20.00, I'm choosing to receive this stupid National ID card. If I follow the prompts until I hear the recording of being recorded, and I stay on the phone, I'm choosing to put up with the garbage and that just makes me mad. So, ultimately I've chosen to give up my privacy for privilege and convenience . . . here in the land of the free and the home of the brave . . .
I would like to think our government thinks we are a people of some intelligence. But, on the other hand, our officials are elected by the people, so perhaps the assessment of the intelligence of the majority is accurate.
I think sports figures and entertainers should either live closer to the reality of the rest of us, or quit taking it upon themselves to set the standard for the rest of us!
I think disability income should be monitored. Wouldn't it be great if you could call some sort of hotline, and report a violation of disability, like a social MOOCH Alert, and get a reward? You know, like capturing on video of someone that is cutting timber or whatever, while they collect for a bad back. Then we could have all the moochers on disability trying to catch each other for the reward. What a checks and balance system. And the people that really need it, no problem, they wouldn't be out taking advantage of the system!
I think Social Security income should be an actual mathematical equation that balances. I believe everyone that believes "they paid it in" should collect exactly what they paid in!
I would love to see a bright and strong political party rise up in America. I think it should be one that doesn't belong to big corporations, lobbyists, or charities.
I would love to see a party of the people. What a concept?
I, personally, would love to see the Second Coming take place, before we humans make any more mess, but I'm thinking 2008 will bring more than we can even imagine. And I'm really thinking a lot of the mess will be below the groundwork, as in one more layer of foundation for the bigger plan, from George H.W. Bush's New World Order to Al Gore's Global Warming.
I guess what I would really like to see in 2008 is enough individuals with the courage to stand up and say, "Enough! No More!"
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! a Prophet of Holy Scripture
I'd like to see no more wars started, and I would love to know a way to end the war we shouldn't have started in Iraq.
I would like to see the law regarding incandescent light bulbs be repealed before 2012. With the price of lamp oil and the health hazard of mercury, I'm going to miss the simple invention by Thomas Alva Edison!
I'd like to have just a bit of my privacy returned before I simply give up my phone and driver's license. I really don't like the idea that our government thinks they've fooled us on the National ID card, and I am so sick of hearing "this call is recorded or may be monitored." It's so simple and so irritating. If I take all my paperwork in and pay my $20.00, I'm choosing to receive this stupid National ID card. If I follow the prompts until I hear the recording of being recorded, and I stay on the phone, I'm choosing to put up with the garbage and that just makes me mad. So, ultimately I've chosen to give up my privacy for privilege and convenience . . . here in the land of the free and the home of the brave . . .
I would like to think our government thinks we are a people of some intelligence. But, on the other hand, our officials are elected by the people, so perhaps the assessment of the intelligence of the majority is accurate.
I think sports figures and entertainers should either live closer to the reality of the rest of us, or quit taking it upon themselves to set the standard for the rest of us!
I think disability income should be monitored. Wouldn't it be great if you could call some sort of hotline, and report a violation of disability, like a social MOOCH Alert, and get a reward? You know, like capturing on video of someone that is cutting timber or whatever, while they collect for a bad back. Then we could have all the moochers on disability trying to catch each other for the reward. What a checks and balance system. And the people that really need it, no problem, they wouldn't be out taking advantage of the system!
I think Social Security income should be an actual mathematical equation that balances. I believe everyone that believes "they paid it in" should collect exactly what they paid in!
I would love to see a bright and strong political party rise up in America. I think it should be one that doesn't belong to big corporations, lobbyists, or charities.
I would love to see a party of the people. What a concept?
I, personally, would love to see the Second Coming take place, before we humans make any more mess, but I'm thinking 2008 will bring more than we can even imagine. And I'm really thinking a lot of the mess will be below the groundwork, as in one more layer of foundation for the bigger plan, from George H.W. Bush's New World Order to Al Gore's Global Warming.
I guess what I would really like to see in 2008 is enough individuals with the courage to stand up and say, "Enough! No More!"
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! a Prophet of Holy Scripture
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)