 |
| Adoption Law | Child Custody | Child Support | Divorce Law | Family Law | Marriage Law |
Federal Financial ParticipationThe portion of a State’s child support expenditures that are paid by a Federal Government match. Most child support costs are matched two to one. In other words, the Federal share of most child support costs is 66 percent. Question: I just got my financial aid reinstated for the quarter I am in andsuspended for will I stll get my pell grant? For the the quarter that I am in which is spring 2010 Under the stipulations that I.
1.Successfully complete all coursework during SPRING 2010 term.
2. Achieve a GPA of 2.000 or higher during SPRING 2010 term.
3. Maintain a cumulative GPA of 2.000 by the end of the SPRING 2010 term.
4. Achieve a completion percentage 67% as of the end of the SPRING 2010 term.
me in
Federal student aid will be awarded for the enrollment period: SPRING 2010 to assist me in meeting the above criteria.The terms of the waiver are subject to review at the end of each term of the waiver granted. If I fail to complete any of the above criteria , my participation in the federal student aid program will be terminated.
If I do when.
Can anybody just answer the question yes or no?
Question: What Are Your Views on Title 9? The law states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..."
Tex A- earned my on an academic scholarship.
What is it? ha ha
Question: Is this one for the history books? Aug. 25 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve must for the first time identify the companies in its emergency lending programs after losing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
Manhattan Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska ruled against the central bank yesterday, rejecting the argument that loan records aren’t covered by the law because their disclosure would harm borrowers’ competitive positions.
The Fed has refused to name the financial firms it lent to or disclose the amounts or the assets put up as collateral under 11 programs, most put in place during the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression, saying that doing so might set off a run by depositors and unsettle shareholders. Bloomberg LP, the New York-based company majority-owned by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sued on Nov. 7 on behalf of its Bloomberg News unit.
“The Federal Reserve has to be accountable for the decisions that it makes,” said U.S. Representative Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, after Preska’s ruling. “It’s one thing to say that the Federal Reserve is an independent institution. It’s another thing to say that it can keep us all in the dark.”
‘Inadequate Search’
The judge said the central bank “improperly withheld agency records” by “conducting an inadequate search” after Bloomberg News reporters filed a request under the information act. She gave the Fed five days to turn over documents it told the reporters it located, including 231 pages of reports, and said it must look for more at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which runs most of the loan programs.
The central bank “essentially speculates on how a borrower might enter a downward spiral of financial instability if its participation in the Federal Reserve lending programs were to be disclosed,” Preska wrote. “Conjecture, without evidence of imminent harm, simply fails to meet the Board’s burden” of proof.
David Skidmore, a Fed spokesman who said the board’s staff was reviewing the 47-page ruling, declined to comment on whether the central bank would appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, who led the biggest expansion of the central bank’s power in its 95-year history, was nominated to a second term today by President Barack Obama.
Banks Worried
Obama promised a new era of government openness when he took office in January, issuing a statement telling agencies “to adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure” in responding to requests under FOIA.
Banks are worried that the disclosure of borrowers’ identities by the Fed, the lender of last resort, would cause customers to empty their bank accounts in a run on the bank, said Scott Talbott, vice president of governmental affairs at the Washington-based Financial Services Roundtable, a lobbying group.
“This issue is: ‘This bank borrowed X billion from the Fed, therefore they must be in trouble, therefore I’m going to pull my money out,” said Talbott. “That’s the type of danger that we’re worried about. That’s the risk.”
Bloomberg LP said in the suit that U.S. taxpayers need to know the terms of Fed lending because the public became an “involuntary investor” in the nation’s banks as the financial crisis deepened and the government began shoring up companies with capital injections and loans. Citigroup Inc. and American International Group Inc. are among those who have said they accepted Fed loans.
‘Unprecedented Ways’
“When an unprecedented amount of taxpayer dollars were lent to financial institutions in unprecedented ways and the Federal Reserve refused to make public any of the details of its extraordinary lending, Bloomberg News asked the court why U.S. citizens don’t have the right to know,” said Matthew Winkler, the editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News. “We’re gratified the court is defending the public’s right to know what is being done in the public interest.”
The Fed’s balance sheet about doubled after lending standards were relaxed in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. on Sept. 15, 2008. For the week ended Aug. 19, Fed assets rose 2.3 percent to $2.06 trillion as it continued to buy mortgage-backed securities under a program allowing the central bank to purchase non-government securities for the first time.
Fed Audits
The U.S. House may vote as soon as next month on a bill to require the Fed to submit to audits by the Government Accountability Office, said Representative Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican on the Financial Services Committee.
The judge’s ruling “is strikingly good news,” Garrett said. “This is what the American people have been asking for.”
continues.....
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a7CC61ZsieV4
**********************************************************
On a side note...I thought the line about Obama and "openness" was bogus. Is'nt it his people that have been fighting thi
Is'nt it his people that have been fighting this?
@ "Audit the fed" > Well once Bloomberg prints that list, it could light a fire under the audit movement?!?
Question: If race/gender diversity on the SCOTUS is not important, why did gender discrimination cases, pre-1972? never rule in favor of Women?
Title IX, passed in 1972 - "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."
This was only a few years after the first African American supreme court justice was seated (Thurgood Marshall, 1967).
"Justice is to be blind but thanks for using the race and gender card to make a point."
Apparently justice wasn't blind when dealing with gender/racial rights before Thurgood Marshal was on the court.
Prove me wrong by finding a ruling in favor of womens' rights before he was on the bench.
Question: High School Softball and Title IX? Title IX states that, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." I am a 15 year old guy who wants to play on my high schools girls softball team. Can i use title IX to help me be allowed to get on the team?
I am worried that my school will say we have boys BASEball , which is the same as softball. Well i disagree, i have been around softaball since i was about 7 when my older sister started playing and i fell in love with it. i tried baseball when i was about 11 or 12 and it diidnt really like it.
How could i show that baseball and softball are different?(reasons that school officials would deem important and substantial)
THNX. o and i like in virginia if that helps, and my sisters ex-boyfriend use Title IX to get on his high schools girls field hockey team so i have heard of it working.
Question: How the hell would govt. force people to "buy" healthcare insurance? If this Obamanation passes...
Would you pay it with your tax return every year? A deduction from your paycheck like FICA? And what if you're living in a cardboard box, then what? Or unemployed, they swipe it from your unemployment check? Or a poor college student on a Pell grant, where would you get the bucks for it? And if you refuse to pay... how will a penalty be enforced? Especially if financial reasons dictated your non-participation? Worst case scenario, I don't pay the "ticket" either: Do they send local cops to collect me or Federal ones? If I wind up in prison, won't my stay cost them MORE from their coffers than just ignoring me altogether? If I'm in a cell doing time: Do I get HBO for free OR will there be a mandatory subscription fee... which I also may refuse to pay?
I am trying to workout any logic in how this could even work. For that matter, how have we survived this long as a species anyway? Never mind healthcare, I'm amazed we're not in the streets yet beating each other! It must be all those cellphones, iPods or Craigslist hookers which keep us distracted from the societal insanity. The cardboard box community is looking more attractive everyday!
This brings me to my next Q: You remember that story in the Bible about this guy John who lived in the wilderness, living on honeycomb and grasshoppers? The baptist guy who dunked Jesus! Do you think they had a similar plan back then and he was just out there trying to avoid the government insanity of his day?
Question: What is UR opinion on Proposed bill could reward Hall County for immigration enforcement? state senator wants to reward law enforcement agencies like the Hall County Sheriff’s Office with financial incentives for helping enforce federal immigration law.
Only four local law enforcement agencies in Georgia — those in Hall, Cobb, Gwinnett and Whitfield counties — participate in the 287(g) program, which is a partnership with the federal Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency that allows sheriffs and police to process for deportation those arrested who are in the country illegally. Only 67 law enforcement agencies nationwide have 287(g) agreements with ICE.
State Sen. John Wiles, R-Kennesaw, said he would like to see more agencies using the program, and this week proposed creating incentives for participation.
“There is a growing concern that many criminal illegal aliens are not being identified because local governments do not participate in these important programs,” Wiles said.
Wiles’ proposal would tie the incentives to the issue of state prisoners in county jails.
Currently, when a person in a county jail is sentenced to state time, the Georgia Department of Corrections has 15 days to pick up the inmate for transfer to the prison system. Starting on the 16th day, the state must pay county jails a per diem for holding the state prisoner in a county facility.
Wiles’ office said that amount per day is $23; Hall County Sheriff Steve Cronic said the per diem is $20.
Wiles’ bill would pay any sheriff’s office that participates in the federal immigration enforcement program an additional 20 percent of the per diem for state inmates, or another $4 per inmate, per day.
In the Hall County Jail Tuesday, there were 61 state-sentenced inmates awaiting transfer to prison. The state was paying Hall County $1,220 a day to hold them. Under Wiles’ proposal, because the Hall County’s Sheriff’s Office is a 287(g) agency, the state would pay the county $1,464 a day for the same number of inmates.
Cronic said the per diem of $20 is less than it costs Hall County to hold state prisoners.
He said he was in favor of anything that could help sheriffs recover the expense of holding state-sentenced inmates.
“We always thought the per diem could be higher,” he said.
But Cronic pointed out that many other law enforcement agencies have wanted to participate in 287(g) but couldn’t because of a lack of funding on the federal end. Training and equipment for the immigration enforcement program is provided by the federal Department of Homeland Security.
“I think there are a large number of sheriff’s offices that have expressed interest, but at this point, funding has been an issue,” Cronic said.
ICE spokesman Ivan Ortiz did not return an e-mail and phone message seeking comment Tuesday.
D.A. King, an illegal immigration activist, called Wiles’ proposed bill “a wonderful idea.”
“It’s simply a carrot; there is no stick,” King said. “If you want to use these federal tools, you will get more money to protect the community.”
King said 287(g) is “proven to reduce crime and get people who are in the community illegally and committing additional crimes reported to immigration enforcement on the federal level. I’m grateful to Sen. Wiles for the initiative he’s taken to see if Georgia can’t be among the leaders in the country in its use.”
Jerry Gonzalez, the executive director of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials and an opponent of 287(g), said Wiles’ proposal was “wrongheaded, fiscally irresponsible as well as morally reprehensible.”
“How does this create jobs and how does this address the serious revenue challenges that the state is facing?” Gonzalez said. “The state doesn’t have the money for this, and the program as implemented has created an anti-immigrant sentiment that makes the environment less friendly to foreign investments
http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/article/29344/
Question: What do you think of this political platform, what would you add? NATIONAL UNITY
1. Establish English as national language via Constitutional Amendment.
ESTABLISHMENT OF JUSTICE
1. Clarify Federal abortion stance and establish such in US Code.
- Legal up to the 15th week, after which the fetus will be granted status as an individual with all associated rights.
- Allow stem cell research using any legally obtained fetus.
2. Case law will be revamped to represent the opinion, interpretation, and reference it is. As such it may be used to justify revamping actual US Code to clarify intent or close loopholes.
PROVIDING FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE
1. End cold war posturing
- Close all US bases on foreign soil.
- Reduce overall nuclear arsenal to 3500 warheads.
2. Revamp National Guard / Air Guard / Coast Guard into purely defensive force in alignment with its militia heritage.
- Mandatory two year service to be completed between 18th and 30th birthday. Voting privileges connected to service completion.
3. Revamp Army / Navy / Air Force into a retaliatory strike force.
- Reduce Navy to eight carrier battle groups.
- Restructure Army & Marines into Rapid Strike Force.
- Establish nuclear arsenal as front line deterrent to attack.
4. End entangling alliances such as the UN, NATO, etc.
5. Initiate comprehensive individual treaties with any and all nations and establish non-interventionist policy.
6. Establish Barbary Pirates policy as the official means of dealing with piracy and terrorism, extending Congressional power to prosecute offenders here and abroad.
7. Streamline both the immigration process, but also the work visa process to allow easier access to legal immigration.
8. Prosecute illegal immigration:
- Transporting illegal aliens into the country, knowingly hiring illegal aliens, knowingly providing shelter or housing to illegal aliens will be classified as a Class C felony.
- Illegal aliens will not be eligible for any public support.
- Medical professionals and organizations will be restricted from treating illegal aliens except in life or death situations. Any illegal aliens seeking treatment are to be turned over to the authorities.
- A constitutional amendment that establishes that a child born in the US, but lacking at least one parent with legal status, will not be granted automatic citizenship.
PROMOTING THE GENERAL WELFARE
1. Establish voluntary participation National Health Insurance Program.
- Promote State level financial aid program with coverage up to a family of four.
- Government regulated, non-profit managed.
- Built in standards to promote competition.
- Pricing on a per person basis.
- Not employer specific.
- Medical professionals are not required to care for those not demonstrating an ability to pay.
2. Transition Unemployment Assistance program to State level.
3. Transition Disability Assistance program to State level.
4. Establish comprehensive educational program.
- Constitutional amendment granting Congress authority to establish minimum educational criteria, leaving management in the hands of the States.
- Schools will be ranked at county, state, and Federal levels.
- Funding follows students.
- Parents can opt for either public or private schools.
5. Establish Federal educational program for military service members.
6. Push for State programs to assist the poorest citizens in acquiring a higher education.
7. Eliminate all other Federal charity programs.
- States are advised to initiate charity programs as they deem appropriate and as their Constitutions allow.
MAINTAINING LIBERTY
1. Legalize unions between consenting adults, including same sex and polygamy. Religious institutions will not be required to conduct services or even recognize unions counter to their system of belief.
2. Constitutional amendment to clarify separation of church and state / metaphysical neutrality in government affairs.
3. Enforce Bill of Rights and eliminate unconstitutional prior restraint laws.
- Establish strict penalties when abuse of rights infringes on others.
4. Legalize the use of any chemical substance by an adult.
- Establish severe punishments when the abuse of chemical substances places the health and/or lives of others in danger.
5. Minimize regulations on business / commerce.
6. Promote balanced free trade.
- Restrictions will be matched to counter actions taken by partner nation as may unfairly affect trade, such as artificially controlling currency values or tariffs.
TAXES:
1. Establish Flat Federal Income Tax
- Offer one standard deduction equal to minimum wage x 2080.
- Offer retirement investment deduction.
- Offer small business expense deduction (limited use).
- Eliminate all other deductions.
2. Promote simplified State Tax Program:
- Flat Income Tax (similar to Federal Income Tax)
- Simplified property tax based on flat value assigned per square foot of land area occupied.
- Licensing / Permit fees used to charge only those using the services in question.
3. Eliminate all ot
What would you change?
NOTE: This is of course a bullet list as YA won't allow a 15 page document to be uploaded :)
Erick: What points do you disagree with? Why?
Princess K: As far as the mandatory service goes, that is really based on whether or not you want the privilege of voting. Note this service is in the defensive national guard, not the regular military. Our Founders said defense of this country is the duty of every citizen and if you were unwilling to do so, we neither want nor ask for your council.
Istainjaa: You pay for the voluntary health care. The program is based on using the buying power of an entire state to create a lower price structure, much like a larger company can get lower rates than my little business with 10 employees.
Currently the Federal government supports unemployment. Federal charity is unconsititutional.
Malcolm Equis: I've sent you an email to help clarify since my response is to long winded for an "edit".
Erick: It is a Federal insurance program you pay into. Actually our proposal uses non-profit insurance providers that bid for States. So technically the federal government only outlines the minimum program requirements and monitors performance - the providers do the rest.
Federal charity is unconstitutional, so any assistance programs would have to exist at the State level.
Pampoulmouse: The 15th week was selected based on the development cycle of a fetus. During the 15th - 18th weeks the fetus develops a cerebral cortex, which allows an individual consciousness to form and therefore the possiblity of emotional harm develops. Prior to that it is little more than a growth.
James L: I do not support isolationism. I do support non-interventionism. The internal affairs of another nation are not our concern, and we should respect their national sovereignty if we expect them to respect ours. Trade is the key to diplomacy. Most of our current issues on the world stage evolved from interference and maintaining a cold war military structure. Bad ideas.
My attitude is we will leave you alone until you give us a valid reason not to. Then we should punish you for it.
Spock for Prez:
1. Why the need to add the bit about transfer of custody? We already have systems in place to allow adoption of a foreign child. My neighbors just adopted a Russian baby.
2. How does your marriage amendment protect liberty?
3. Interesting thoughts on the religion issue.
Wyomugs:
1. Yes. Yes I expect that if you are going to log into Yahoo Answers, at whatever time you choose to do so, that you will be able to comprehend the questions posted there - regardless of their depth. Considering I posted this closer to 1am in my time zone, at 11:50 you should be rested and ready to go.
2. Yes. Yes I know the agenda set forth here is hard. Does the fact that something is hard make it less worthwhile to do? Where would we be if our Founders had said, "Revolution is hard, we probably shouldn't."? How many doctors would we have if they said,"Meical school is hard, I think I'll quite before I start."? Those who focus on the obstacles never see the goal.
3. No. I am not a Libertarian, but I am an individualist. I'm certainly not a Democrat or Republican. I support the Constitution and the political ideals of our Founding Fathers, but I'm not a Constitutionalist - to much church and state.
4. Are you saying I'm right-wing or you are?
Question: Gov Questions.10 points? Having a policy implies a(n) ________.
presidential seal of approval.
goal.
concern for the people.
election.
outlook
What are services which are shared by everyone and cannot be denied to anyone called?
Policymaking institutions.
Public goods.
A democracy.
Public policies.
A national defense
The theory which claims that many outside groups are so strong that the government is unable to act is called ________.
republicanism.
hyperpluralism.
the traditional democratic theory.
the pluralist theory.
the elite and class theory
In 1996, the voter turnout for the presidential election fell below the 50 percent rate for the first time since the early 1920s when women had only just been given the vote.
True
False
Which of these is not part of an ideal democratic process?
A strong presidency.
Inclusion.
Citizen control of the agenda.
Equality in voting.
A free press and free speech
Many people judge the health of a government by how widespread political participation is.
True
False
The total value of all goods and services produced annually in the United States is called ______________.
the gross domestic product.
the pluralist theory.
the policymaking system.
our national government.
the federal budget.
Which of these is not an argument for staying informed about public affairs?
Political knowledge helps citizens to identify policies which would truly benefit them.
Political knowledge promotes active participation in politics.
Political knowledge fosters civic virtues.
Political knowledge makes voter turnout unnecessary.
Political knowledge can be incorporated into voting behavior.
Which of these is an example of a Presidential action?
The federal budget.
The Supreme Court ruling that school segregation is unconstitutional.
The Social Security Act.
The invasion of Iraq.
The approval of a new drug by the Food and Drug Administration.
Which of these is an example of the substance of politics?
The media.
Interest groups.
Medical care for the elderly.
The courts.
Elections.
The political agenda responds:
more to elections than to financial interests.
specifically to the Constitution.
more to societal failures than successes.
more to the press than the peoples' wishes.
Question: Do you agree with the following article quote? if not why? "For scores of years, applications for restoring voting rights have languished without official action. For that neglect, fourteen States disenfranchise ex-offenders who have fully served their sentences, regardless of the nature or seriousness of the offense. In eight States, a pardon or order from the Governor is required for an ex-offender to regain the right to vote. In two States, ex-offenders must obtain action by the parole or pardon board to regain that right. In at least 16 States, Federal ex-offenders cannot use the State procedure for restoring their voting rights. The only method provided by Federal law for restoring voting rights to ex-felony offenders is a Presidential pardon. Persons who seek to have their voting rights restored are many times indigenous and do not have the financial and political resources needed to succeed. Thirteen percent of the African-American adult male population, or 1,400,000 African-American men, are disenfranchised. Given current rates of incarceration, 3 in 10 African-American men in the next generation will be disenfranchised at some point during their lifetimes. Hispanic citizens are also disproportionately disenfranchised, since those citizens are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. Given current rates of incarceration, the Sentencing Project estimates that up to 40 percent of African American men may permanently lose their right to vote.
It should not be construed a mere coincidence that felony disfranchisement laws are progressively severe in Southern States, who have the un-precedented “150 year, post-Civil War history of crafting laws to prevent the descendants of former slaves from voting – including poll taxes, literacy tests and a host of other barriers which disparately impacted the poor and the under-educated.” Recently, In Johnson v. Bush which was brought before the 11th Circuit in Florida, where currently, state law supports disenfranchisement for ex-felons permanently unless the Governor approves their restoration of voting rights. In both Maine and Vermont, eligibility to vote for felons goes un-revoked. Certainly, there must be some standardization for our federal government elections.
If the strength of a democracy depends on voluntary participation of its citizens, how can we deny the basic Constitutional right to vote of those citizens that have successfully completed their debt to society? If a judge hands down a sufficient and appropriate sentence and that sentence is then carried out entirely, fundamental fairness dictates that we allow these voices to participate in all political practices. Congress has ultimate supervisory power over Federal elections, an authority that has repeatedly been upheld by the Supreme Court; Although; State laws determine the qualifications for voting in Federal elections. We must as a society restore the fairness in the Federal election process by ensuring that ex-offenders who have fully served their sentences are not denied the right to vote"
http://www.etiglobal.org/opinions/the-civil-death.html
I suppose I should add:
Revolutionary Father Thomas Paine said: “The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by which all other rights are protected. To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery, for slavery consists in being subject to the will of another.”
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment reads in pertinent part: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Question: Put these fact together and tell me what you get because I see the death rattle of the US sounding? The estimated population of the United States is 307,348,183
so each citizen's share of this debt is $39,096.15.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
National SNAP/Food Stamp Record: In December 2008, SNAP/Food Stamp participation was 31,784,453 people, the highest participation level on record, and an increase of nearly 700,000 individuals from November 2008.
http://pachurchesadvocacy.org/weblog/?p=365
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
Notice the debt durring Bush's term and the wars
Posted: January 25, 2009 - 2:00 AM
WASHINGTON — The government said Thursday that it has distributed an additional $1.5 billion to 39 banks nationwide as part of the $700 billion financial rescue program.
The latest capital infusions, which were made Jan. 16, bring the total amount used to buy bank stock to $193.8 billion. Nearly 300 banks in 43 states and Puerto Rico have received support through the program.
The outgoing Bush administration also spent an additional $20 billion last week to provide support to Bank of America Corp. and $1.5 billion to bolster Chrysler's auto financing arm.
Those payments brought the Bush administration's total bailout program spending to $299.6 billion.
http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090125/BIZ/901250322/-1/BIZ16
If Congress approves the supplemental funding request submitted this week by the Obama administration, the cost of the war will rise by $87 billion for 2009, including a previous supplement approved during the Bush administration.
Added to the amount spent through 2008, it would mean the Iraq war will have cost taxpayers a total of about $694 billion. By comparison, the Vietnam War cost $686 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars and World War II cost $4.1 trillion, according to a Congressional Research Service study completed last year.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/11/nation/na-iraq-vietnam11
* President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.
* President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.
* President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new government health care fund.
* President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. President Obama would double it.
* President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already increased this spending by 20 percent.
* President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.
* President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
Although accurate numbers are impossible to come by -- no one keeps national records on homeless veterans -- the VA estimates that 131,000 veterans are homeless on any given night.
http://www.nchv.org/background.cfm
Russian subs patrol off the Atlantic and the Pacific
China ties the hands of the US at the UN using its veto to make sure NO FORCE can be used to inspect N Korean ships - N Korea has openly threatened to wipe the US off the map
Russians have a new map of the US drawn
http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/panarin-us-break.jpg Their view of how the US will be partitioned
---------------
Again I see the last strains for breath --- the death rattle of an Empire spent on military aggression
--- How else can these things be seen?
Question: Why was this racist bank denying illegals aliens an opportunity for better life they found & lived? Media-Newswire.com) - SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - Four women and one man were arrested on Wednesday in the municipalities of Carolina, Canovanas and Ponce, Puerto Rico, for their alleged participation in a conspiracy to commit bank fraud and aggravated identity theft, following an investigation by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) Office of Homeland Security Investigations ( HSI ) and the Puerto Rico Police Department ( PRPD ) Band Robbery Division.
On Tuesday, a federal grand jury in the District of Puerto Rico returned a 16-count indictment, charging former Doral Bank employee Bethzaida Sánchez Crespo, her consensual partner Abigail Y. Ramos Clemente, Darling M. Rosario Sánchez, Leonardo Sánchez Crespo and Carmen A. Clemente Rosado of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and aggravated identity theft. Bethzaida Sánchez Crespo was also charged with the intent to injure and defraud Doral Bank of approximately $192,000.
The indictment alleges that from approximately Dec.14, 2009 through April 2010, the defendants conspired to obtain access to three of Doral Bank's high-balance customers' accounts, change the mailing addresses on those accounts and request the issuance of Visa debit cards, and use those Visa debit cards to withdraw large amounts of cash and make large purchases of expensive luxury items, all with the intent to illegally defraud the federally insured financial institution of its assets.
"The identification and arrest of those who try to circumvent our laws, putting at risk public safety, is one of ICE's priorities," said Roberto Escobar Vargas, special agent in charge of ICE HSI in San Juan. "ICE will continue using all its resources to investigate these crimes as well as working with our federal, state and local partners to bring to justice those who think that their illegal actions can go undetected."
"The defendants used the victims' monies to pay for their car loans, residential electricity bill and cable television bill. Others bought furniture or just withdrew money from ATMs. It is not acceptable what these individuals were doing," said U.S. Attorney Rosa Emilia Rodríguez-Vélez. "These defendants affected not just financial institutions but ordinary citizens who trusted their savings at a bank, while one irresponsible employee was stealing and using the victims' monies. I want to assure the public that we will not rest until the tide of financial criminal activity is turned."
If convicted, the defendants face a maximum term of up to 30 years in prison for counts one and two, fines of up to $1 million, and an additional mandatory term of up to six years in prison for the aggravated identity theft counts.
http://media-newswire.com/release_1133429.html
Question: Who really caused the sub-prime crises Democrats? The Subprime Debacle
by Dr. Kuni Michael Beasley
30 Years in Gestation
The Democrats are doing a lot to try to pin the subprime debacle on the Republicans and the Bush administration. However, there is a long tail to this problem that just happened to pop at this time.
Now, for the rest of the story. Definitions first.
Fannie Mae is the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA), founded in 1938 as a publically traded government sponsored enterprise (GSE) that is stockholder owned that makes loans and issue loan guarantees.
Its cousin is Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC), founded in 1970 as another GSE created to expand the secondary market for mortgages. Freddie Mac buys individual mortgages on the secondary market, pooled them into packages, and sold them to investors on the open market.
The secondary market packaged mortgages as collateral and issues securities called collateralized mortgage obligations (CMO) and collateralized debt obligations (CDO), to reduce the risk of individual loans. CMOs are a separate entity that is the actual legal owner of the mortgages it has in a "pool." CMOs sell bonds to investors based on the value of the mortgages. Investors receive payments based on the increased value of the loans in the pool. The collateral for the bonds are the actual mortgages.
CDOs are a separate entity like CMOs, but are more focused on fixed income assets such as, but not limited to mortgages (and can include commercial mortgages and corporate loans). The focus is cash flow and slices (tranches) of these cash flows are sold to investors.
The subprime mortgage crisis surfaced first in 2007, but it had been incubating for years, indeed, decades. Though roots can be traced back to the New Deal legislation in the 1930's, the current crisis actually draws its source from the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) [1977] during the Carter administration that forced banks to lend money to less credit worthy clients. Lending institutions were evaluated to determine if it met the "credit needs of the community" and this was factored into regulatory decisions of the federal government such as applications for facilities, mergers, and acquisitions.
Interest in the CRA resurfaced in the Clinton administration when regulations in the CRA (which could be manipulated without any participation of congress) essentially forced institutions to offer loans to higher risk individuals and businesses. The term "Ninja" loans emerged describing high risk loans made to people with No Income, No Job, and no Assets, but completed a particular bank's portfolio sufficient to keep federal regulators off their backs.
As access to easy money for high risk borrowers increased, certain institutions began to take advantage of these new opportunities to score fed points and make easy money. Name dropping here: Countrywide began to process, package, and offer investment instruments (CMOs) based on these loans. Revisions to the CRA by the Clinton administration allowed mortgage companies to offer loans without the relative reserve of deposits normally required of banks and other financial institutions.
In addition, this allowed for securitization of sub prime mortgages based on the pooling and packaging of cash-flow producing assets into securities that could be sold to investors - with the asset value not tagged to actual value of the property, but to the value of the cash flow produced by the asset held (sounds weird). The first public securitization of CRA loans was started in 1997 by (familiar name) Bear Stearns!
Now, let's understand sub-prime loans for a moment. A sub-prime loan is a mortgage offered at a deep discount on interest the first year or two so the borrower could qualify for a larger loan and more expensive house, betting that their economic profile would get better and they could afford large payments later. Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) are a form of this where the entry rate is low and rises based on certain criteria such as the rates for government securities.
Simply put, lenders (not necessarily banks, but more often mortgage
companies) offered low cost, low entry rate mortgages to people who would not normally qualify for that amount of debt.
These loans were "warehoused" by financial institutions, where a financial institution like Merrill Lynch would set up a separate, but wholly owned mortgage company (First Franklin) to attract loans.
Merrill Lynch would retain control of the loans as a "trustee" or "servicer," and derive benefits from fees for "managing" the loans and increase assets by keeping escrow deposits. In turn, these loans would be sold to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (who were assumed to guarantee the loans), who, in turn, repackaged them for the secondary market.
In 2003 the Bush administration tried to head-off what they saw as a potential crisis by moving the supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency
Question: Are Republicans a bunch of Whining cry Babies ? Did you see those Republican who are afraid of losing their seat in the house and senate crying but was at the same time asking thier fellow Republicans to vote yes?
Was this speech by Pelosi enough for the Republicans to put this country economy at risk.
Here is the text of Nancy Pelosi's speech as prepared for delivery.
"Madam Speaker, when was the last time someone asked you for $700 billion?
"It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush Administration's failed economic policies--policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system.
"Democrats believe in the free market, which can and does create jobs, wealth, and capital, but left to its own devices it has created chaos.
"That chaos is the dismal picture painted by Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke a week and a half ago in the Capitol. As they pointed out, we confront a crisis of historic magnitude that has the ability to do serious injury not simply to our economy, but to the American people: not just to Wall Street, but to everyday Americans on Main Street.
"It is our responsibility today, to help avert that catastrophic outcome.
"Let us be clear: This is a crisis caused on Wall Street. But it is a crisis that reaches to Main Street in every city and town of the United States.
"It is a crisis that freezes credit, causes families to lose their homes, cripples small businesses, and makes it harder to find jobs.
"It is a crisis that never had to happen. It is now the duty of every Member of this body to recognize that the failure to act responsibly, with full protections for the American taxpayer, would compound the damage already done to the financial security of millions of American families.
"Over the past several days, we have worked with our Republican colleagues to fashion an alternative to the original plan of the Bush Administration.
"I must recognize the outstanding leadership provided by Chairman Barney Frank, whose enormous intellectual and strategic abilities have never before been so urgently needed, or so widely admired.
"I also want to recognize Rahm Emanuel, who combined his deep knowledge of financial institutions with his pragmatic policy experience, to resolve key disagreements.
"Secretary Paulson deserves credit for working day and night to help reach an agreement and for his flexibility in negotiating changes to his original proposal.
"Democrats insisted that legislation responding to this crisis must protect the American people and Main Street from the meltdown on Wall Street.
"The American people did not decide to dangerously weaken our regulatory and oversight policies. They did not make unwise and risky financial deals. They did not jeopardize the economic security of the nation. And they must not pay the cost of this emergency recovery and stabilization bill.
"So we insisted that this bill contain several key provisions:
"This legislation must contain independent and ongoing oversight to ensure that the recovery program is managed with full transparency and strict accountability.
"The legislation must do everything possible to allow as many people to stay in their homes rather than face foreclosure.
"The corporate CEOs whose companies will benefit from the public's participation in this recovery must not benefit by exorbitant salaries and golden parachute retirement bonuses.
"Our message to Wall Street is this: the party is over. The era of golden parachutes for high-flying Wall Street operators is over. No longer will the U.S. taxpayer bailout the recklessness of Wall Street.
"The taxpayers who bear the risk in this recovery must share in the upside as the economy recovers.
"And should this program not pay for itself, the financial institutions that benefited, not the taxpayers, must bear responsibility for making up the difference.
"These were the Democratic demands to safeguard the American taxpayer, to help the economy recover, and to impose tough accountability as a central component of this recovery effort.
"This legislation is not the end of congressional activity on this crisis. Over the course of the next few weeks, we will continue to hold investigative and oversight hearings to find out how the crisis developed, where mistakes were made, and how the recovery must be managed to protect the middle class and the American taxpayer.
"With passage of this legislation today, we can begin the difficult job of turning our economy around, of helping those who depend on a growing economy and stable financial institutions for a secure retirement, for the education of their children, for jobs and small business credit.
"Today we must act for those Americans, for Main Street, and we must act now, with the bipartisan spirit of cooperation which allowed us to fashion this legislation.
"This not enough. We
Question: Should executive orders be abolished? Executive Orders Issued by President George W. Bush
Date Executive Order
2008
Nov. 18 Executive Order: Transformation of the National Air Transportation System
Nov. 18 Executive Order: Amendments to Executive Order 9397 Relating to Federal Agency Use of Social Security Numbers
Oct. 31 Executive Order: Settlement of Claims Against Libya
Oct. 9 Executive Order: Facilitation of a Presidential Transition
Oct. 7 Executive Order: Further Amendments to Executive Orders 12139 and 12949 in Light of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008
Sept. 26 Executive Order: To Authorize Certain Noncompetitive Appointments in the Civil Service for Spouses of Certain Members of the Armed Forces
Sept. 26 Executive Order: Amendments to Executive Order 12962
Sept. 11 Executive Order: Executive Branch Responsibilities with Respect to Orders of Succession
Aug. 28 Executive Order: Further Amendments to Executive Order 13285, President's Council on Service and Civic Participation
Jul. 25 Executive Order: Blocking Property of Additional Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe
Jul. 24 Executive Order: 2008 Amendments to the Manual for Courts Martial, United States
Jun. 30 Executive Order: Reforming Processes Related to Suitability for Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information
Jun. 26 Executive Order: Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea and North Korean Nationals
Jun. 9 Executive Order: Amending Executive Order 12989, as Amended
May 1 Executive Order: Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Burma
Apr. 18 Executive Order: Amending Executive Orders 13389 and 13390
Feb. 29 Executive Order: President's Intelligence Advisory Board and Intelligence Oversight Board
Feb. 15 Executive Order: Providing An Order of Succession Within the Department of Health and Human Services
Feb. 13 Executive Order: Blocking Property of Additional Persons in Connection with the National Emergency with Respect to Syria
Feb. 7 Executive Order: Improving the Coordination and Effectiveness of Youth Programs
Feb. 5 Executive Order: Implementation of the Protocol Additional to the Agreement Between the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Application of Safeguards in the United States of America
Jan. 29 Executive Order: Protecting American Taxpayers From Government Spending on Wasteful Earmarks
Jan. 23 Executive Order: Further Amendment of Executive Order 11858 Concerning Foreign Investment in the United States
Jan. 22 Executive Order: Establishing the President's Advisory Council on Financial Literacy
Jan. 4 Executive Order: Adjustments of Certain Rates of Pay
2007
Dec. 6 Executive Order: Closing of Executive Departments and Agencies of the Federal Government on Monday, December 24, 2007
Nov. 28 Executive Order: Establishing An Emergency Board to Investigate Disputes Between the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and Certain of Its Employees Represented by Certain Labor Organizations
Nov. 19 Executive Order: President Bush Designates The ITER International Fusion Energy Organization As a Public International Organization
Nov. 13 Executive Order: Improving Government Program Performance
Oct. 20 Executive Order: Protection of Striped Bass and Red Drum Fish Populations
Oct. 19 Executive Order: Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Burma
Sept. 28 Executive Order: Continuance of Certain Federal Advisory Committees and Amendments to and Revocation of Other Executive Orders
Sept. 28 Executive Order: Further 2007 Amendments to the Manual for Courts Martial, United States
Sept. 27 Executive Order: Strengthening Adult Education
Sept. 12 Executive Order: Extending Privileges and Immunities to the African Union Mission to the United States
Aug. 17 Executive Order: Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation
Aug. 13 Executive Order: Amending the Order of Succession in the Department of Homeland Security
Aug. 2 Executive Order: Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its Democratic Processes and Institutions
Jul. 20 Executive Order: Interpretation of the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 as Applied to a Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency
Jul. 18 Executive Order: Establishing An Interagency Working Group on Import Safety
Jul. 17 Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq
Jun. 29 Executive Order: Further Amending Executive Order 13381, as Amended, to Extend Its Duration by One Year
Jun. 29 Executive Order: Waiver Under the Trade Act of 1974 with Respect to Turkmenistan
Jun. 20 Executive Order: Expanding
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/orders/
for all presidents
Like my name says, REPUBLICANS suck ssa
Question: Can anyone edit this donation letter please!? Can anyone edit this donation letter please!?
Dear (NAME),
My name is __________ and I am writing to ask for your support to a great opportunity that has been presented to me by the South Shore YMCA. It is a chance to participate in a highly distinguished and honorable student-run government conference at Blue Ridge Assembly in North Carolina this summer.
For the past two years, I have participated in a state-wide program called Youth & Government. This unique program has allowed me to have a firsthand experience with the works of state government and given me the opportunity to meet many of the leaders that shape our world every day. The South Shore Mill Pond delegation, made up of Marshfield students, has met every Wednesday afternoon this school year to prepare for the annual 3-day Youth & Government conference. This conference is held at the Massachusetts State House. At the beginning of this school year, I was elected Vice-President of our delegation. This great opportunity not only gave me the chance to help others through the year, but also helped me develop my leadership skills.
At this year’s annual conference, I received the Outstanding Senate Bill Award and due to my hard work and dedication, was selected by my fellow delegates and advisors to represent Massachusetts at the annual Conference on National Affairs (CONA) this summer. The Conference on National Affairs is a 7-day conference held at Blue Ridge Assembly in North Carolina. It is aimed to further student awareness of national and international concerns, while teaching and upholding the Y Core Values of Caring, Honesty, Respect and Responsibility. At this conference, I will research a federal issue and must then write a proposal that addresses the problem and suggests a solution. I will then go through the legislative process, deferentially discussing and debating my proposal with the youth legislators of other states. This conference is a once in a lifetime opportunity and I am excited of the experiences that lie ahead.
As you may imagine, a trip like this requires financial support. I need to raise a total of $900 dollars by (WEEKDAY/MONTH/DAY) to be able to attend. This cost includes travel, lodging, food and other necessities. I hope you see the value in what will be accomplished and would be grateful if you could help sponsor my participation to CONA by making a contribution of any amount toward my goal.
Thank you for considering my request. If you would like to help through financial support, the following page contains all the information you will need.
Thank you,
_______________
Question: Could it be possible that the democrats/socialists are incapable of understanding the law of the land? and crafting laws consistent with these rules?
C&P:
Someone did read the entire House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care
Choices Act of 2009
From Michael Connelly - Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor,
Carrollton , Texas
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill
3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with
Particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law.. I was
Frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed
Might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard
Or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its
Implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are
Saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly
Where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free
Health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably
Forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of
Business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about
Personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and
Most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions,
Payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will
Be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In
Fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of
Providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover
For the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of
Government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law
Or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the
United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power
Between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S.
Government.. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration
Authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American
People and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't
Have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I
Defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any
Authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama
Administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your
Personal financial information, and the information of your employer,
Physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific
Provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against
Unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to
Privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what
The 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private
Insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices
Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is
Called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application
Of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.
However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that
Allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely
Depriving someone of property without the "due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so
Much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively
Nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that
Provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall
Not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;" The
10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by
The Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the
States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece
Of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to
Have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to
Control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get
The idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and
Limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members
of both Houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to support the
Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for
This legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that
Sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope t
Question: Do you believe this Health Care Bill is about Health care? The following comment is from a retired attorney and constitutional law instructor who states he has read the entire health care bill and has some comments, not about the bill, but about the impact upon our Constitution. It's a broader picture than just health care reform.
Looks like something to sit up and pay attention to; once this sort of thing happens, it will be irreversible.
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HEALTHCARE BILLS ?
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are
saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; " The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the
quier k : I deleted his name for obvious reasons but I left the site that all of this can be verified.
Liberals you can ignore this all you want as expected. But it is not a interpretation it is all factual. I know you hate the truth because it makes Obama look bad . This administration is the most corrupt ever in USA history!
Question: When his mouth is moving he is lying. Do you think that about 0bama? LAWYER TO LAWYER (Must read, if you want the truth)
Is Obama Telling the Truth?
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:44 AM
Read this, then decide if you think Obama is telling the truth in all his speeches.
Bryant Sewall
[email protected]
THIS IS SOME SERIOUS READING!!
The following comment is from Michael Connelly of Carrollton , Texas , a retired attorney and constitutional law instructor who states he has read the entire health care bill and has some comments, not about the bill, but about the impact upon our Constitution. It's a broader picture than just health care reform. Looks like something to sit up and pay attention to; once this sort of thing happens, it will be irreversible.
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HEALTHCARE BILLS
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed Bill that were being discussed, might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.
To begin with, much of what has been said about the Bill and its implications are in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The Bill does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of Government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this Bill or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government.
The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration, authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with.
I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures.
You can also forget about the right to privacy.
That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine, because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.
However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten, in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; "The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but
Question: why international community recongize somaliland republic? SOMALILAND
In Africa, an island of democracy asks: Where is US help?
Posted by: Khadar Mohamed Abdikare
Originally Posted by The Christian Science Monitor
Hargeisa, Somaliland - Under the Bush administration's theory of creating regional stability by supporting islands of democracy, leaders in Somaliland say it should be a shoo-in for official recognition as Africa's newest nation state.
Instead, this breakaway republic, which declared independence from Somalia in 1991, is marooned in diplomatic limbo. Having not yet achieved statehood, it is without access to formal trade agreements or international financial institutions such as the World Bank.
"The international community has abandoned us," says Hussein Ali Nur, editor of the weekly English-language Republican newspaper published here in Somaliland's capital, Hargeisa. "America talks about supporting democracy, but everything is distorted by the fight against terrorism. Our success is overshadowed by [US] strategic interests in Somalia."
During the last 16 years, as Somalia has torn itself apart, Somaliland's leaders have disbanded a guerrilla movement, drafted a constitution, and held multiparty elections.
Development consultant Mark Bradbury, who monitored parliamentary elections in 2005, says the republic performs as well as, if not better than, other countries in the region, such as Ethiopia and Eritrea, on public participation in the democratic process and freedom of speech. Said Noor, the foreign minister, goes one step further: "We have created a modern, African parliamentary system. It's a model for the region."
The house of representatives is directly elected and the upper house, the house of guurti, is composed of clan elders. Both houses are based on ethnic power-sharing quotas. Bradbury says the arrangement has helped to foster stability by accommodating traditional social structures.
While Somalia is fractured by tension between numerous clans, Somaliland is more homogenous – dominated by one single clan, the Isaq. This social cohesion has played a large part in defining Somaliland's sense of identity and promoting the notion of a separate future.
But not one country has endorsed its claims of sovereignty.
Political scientist Roland Marchal at the Center for International Studies and Research in Paris says the US – and the rest of the international community – may well support Somaliland to achieve independence in the long run, but "timing is everything. What's to be achieved by recognizing a breakaway region in the middle of a bloody and protracted civil war?"
For now, the US State Department seems content to follow the lead of the African Union, which says it's focused on resuscitating failed states such as Somalia – not breakaway republics.
Some African analysts believe Somaliland's independence could form part of a future peace deal within a solution for the whole of Somalia – but fulfilling Somaliland's ambition prematurely could undermine Somalia's fragile Transitional Federal government (TFG), still fighting to establish control over the capital, Mogadishu.
A former British protectorate, Somaliland achieved independence in 1960, but quickly joined with former Italian territories to form Somalia. "We jumped too soon," says Mr. Noor. "It was a mistake."
Key posts in the new unity government went to southerners from Mogadishu and Somalilanders rapidly felt excluded. Their mounting resentment gave birth to a rebel movement that Somalia's dictator, Said Barré, attempted to crush. His bombing raids of the main urban centers in 1988 killed 50,000 people and left Hargeisa in ruins.
Mr. Barré was ousted in 1991, starting the civil war in Somalia that is still raging – but Somalia's implosion was Somaliland's moment of opportunity. Now its population of 3 million Sunni Muslims wants nothing more to do with rule from Mogadishu.
Noor, a former guerrilla, says that memories of Barré's repression are still so bitter that "any political leaders who agreed to reunification would be killed one by one by our own people."
Bradbury thinks foreign diplomats could learn a lot from Somaliland's experience of reconciliation and reconstruction. He notes that Somaliland "has made huge strides with minimal outside interference, and that hasn't been allowed to happen in Somalia."
While the international community maintains a close interest in Mogadishu's future, Bradbury is concerned that Somaliland is not strategically important enough for foreign governments to invest the time and resources required in recognizing and sustaining independence. "Paradoxically," he says, "that may have contributed to its achievements to date."
|
|||||||
