Maryland

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan calls for army of new teachwers to fight for social justice in the class room.

On Cotober 9, 2009, Arne Duncan gave a speech at the The Rotunda at the University of Virginia.

http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10092009.html

"Put plain and simple, this country needs an army of great, new teachers...

-snip-

I believe that education is the civil rights issue of our generation. And if you care about promoting opportunity and reducing inequality, the classroom is the place to start. Great teaching is about so much more than education; it is a daily fight for social justice."

Social Justice is the Progressives code word for  'redistribution of wealth'. This is what the Department of Education wants the army of new teachers to fight for in the schools that your children go to. They will surreptitiously indoctrinate children into the mindset of mediocrity and that the 'rich' will take care of them by paying extra taxes. The days of teaching a work ethic are over, now it is a fight to take from the people who work extra, and give to the ones that don't work hardly at all!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXjXWbQ-0hA

The right has lost its way and a lot of people are starting to recognize this.  Books are being written (The Death of Conservatism, Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement that Shattered the Party, etc.)  Here are my thougths on what is wrong and what needs to be done about it.

Discredit those who are not helpful

Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, etc. have said a lot of downright crazy and dumb things (people with AIDS should be quarantined, etc.)  and are far too tied to Christianity.  They should be called out for that and pushed to the side so that true leaders on the right can rise to the top and give the right a real chance at regaining credibility and the minds of those who are undecided or in the center.  Those who espose hate, and anger should also be discredited and pushed to the side (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc.).  It is long past time for Conservative talk radio to become more academic, constructive, and hopeful sounding, and cater to the best in us (love, hope, unity, civics, etc.), rather than the worst (fear, anger, race, etc.).

Stop catering to the Christian right

Christianity has nothing to do with conservative ideas and theory on money, foreign policy, etc.  There is also supposed to be a strong seperation of church and state.  Our country was formed partially for freedom of religion, and if our government is run by someone who wants to impose their religion through laws and perspective, then we lose that.  In addition, America is not a Christian nation; though nearly 80% are Christian, there is still another 20% that are not.

Stop simply opposing every idea President Obama has and propose alternative solutions

The right has really been a thorn in our Presidents side instead of working with him to solve the problems in America.  The way to gain credibility and get some conservative ideas into law is to honestly work with the left to create good policy, and also proactively propose laws to solve some of our problems before the left takes up the problem.

Stop supporting causes that have nothing to do with Conservative ideology

The right should disassociate itself with such issues as abortion, and other things that are outside of the ideas of conservatism.  Abortion is an issue thats argument against it is primarily based in religion.  The same applies to marriage equality for gays; the argument against it can only be made from a religious standpoint.  Because of this, and because no party should be tied to any religion, just as our government should not be tied to any religion, the right as a whole and Republicans as a party should disassociate theirselves with abortion and start supporting equal rights for gays.  These two issues alone keep some of those in the center and on the left from ever supporting a Republican candidate.  It might cause a lot of those on the Christian right to be upset, but then they can choose the party that best conforms to what their idea of government should do on all other issues, or form a new 3rd party that is tightly tied to Christianity.

Stop being inconsistent

Right now many on the right are opposing government run health care on the idea that even though it may save a lot of lives, it isn't proper for the government or taxpayers to help others.  Yet, many of those same people are in support of the war in Iraq to give people in another country freedom and save their lives.  Why should we spend taxpayer dollars to police the world yet not spend taxpayer dollars to save those within our own borders?  Either we shouldn't spend money to help others, or we should and if we should then we should definitely want to help those within our own borders before those who are not within our borders.

Stop being hawks

The right has become a group of hawks and this is contrary to conservative ideas on foreign policy.  Conservative ideas on foreign policy are as spelled out by the Cato Institute:

Cato's foreign policy vision is guided by the idea of our national defense and security strategy being appropriate for a constitutional republic, not an empire. Cato's foreign policy scholars question the presumption that an interventionist foreign policy enhances the security of Americans in the post-Cold War world, and maintain instead that interventionism has consequences, including the formation of countervailing alliances, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and even terrorism. The use of U.S. military force should be limited to those occasions when the territorial integrity, national sovereignty, or liberty of the United States is at risk.

Conservatives need to re-embrace those ideas.  They are the ideas that our nations founders had in mind, and they are the ideas that are the most ethical and that might also allow some on the left to consider the rest of our ideas.

Have a well thought out income tax policy

There either should not be an income tax as Libertarians would like, or there should be an income tax that works to support Conservative values.  A tax that is progressive helps strengthen families at the lower incomes and therefore helps literacy rates, etc. which helps to preserve conservative values of strong families, an educated populace, etc.  Right now the government has taken on far too much responsibility and therefore spends too much and our national debt is growing because of it.  It is time to start cutting back on spending, but at the same time increasing revenue and the only realistic way to increase revenue is through a progressive income tax because those in the middle and lower class cannot support any higher tax burden.

Start supporting alternative energy and embrace that global warming is real and might be caused by us

The science is in, global warming is real and it is probably caused by our actions (and can we afford to gamble that it is not?).  Most of the oil that is easily available is in countries with citizens that do not like us.  Because of these two things, it is long past time to start looking into energy sources that do not emit CO2, and that do not require us to work with countries that are not friendly to us.

Stop catering to Israel

We give far too much money and support to Israel and it hurts our credibilty around the world and doesn't help to reduce the hatred towards us in the Muslim world.  It is time to treat Israel as we would any other country that is a friend and ally of ours.  We should work with them, and be friends with them, but we should point out when they are doing something that works against peace in the middle east and use our monetary aid as a tool to help control their actions rather than blindly supporting them at all times.

Start rethinking drug policy

The war on drugs does not work, and will never work so long as it is punitive rather than based in medicine.  It only makes organized crime stronger, and leads to a larger role of government and often leads to violations of our constitutional rights.  The punitive war on drugs was originally based on racism, and is now based in morality that is derived from religion.  For these reasons, it is time for the federal government to take a non punitive role and start considering policy that would put organized crime out of business, make drug use safer and less damaging to society, and help those who are ready to reform their lives through cessation of drug abuse.

Politicians have always been accused of flip flopping, but now, as is evidenced in the recent town-hall meetings, they have reached the point where they just plan ignore the voters wishes and desires and do whatever they want. They no longer claim to represent the voter, but represent themselves once elected.

Baron Hill (IN-09), refuses to allow his constituents to tell him how to run his office. I suppose being a Representative for him means ignoring the voters wishes.

'Let me repeat that one more time. This is my town hall meeting for you. And you're not going to tell me how to run my congressional office. Now the reasons why I don't allow filming, is because usually the films that are done end up on YouTube in a compromising position."

Of course, if he behaved like a Representative and didn't do anything compromising, he wouldn't be on YouTube so much in compromising positions.

Eric Massa (NY-29), also thinks he knows better than his voters.

"I will vote adamantly against the interests of my District, if I actually think what I am doing is going to help them... ...I will vote against their opinion."

"Every town-hall meeting, show of hands, 90% against and 10% for. Ok, got it, no problem. There comes a time when members of congress sometimes must vote against popular opinion because they know it is in the interest of their districts and the country..."

So Rep. Massa let's the cat out of the bag. Congress-persons think they know better, they are the parents and will vote what they think is best. The voters aren't grown up, or intelligent, or knowledgeable enough to know what is best for them. So the peoples representatives will vote their way, and not represent you and your needs. After being elected, they represent themselves, and their opinions and desires. The opinions and desires of the people aren't worthy of being represented.

You can do something about it. Fill out and mail them the Tax Expenditure Allowance (TEA) form. Tell them where you want your tax money spent, and on what. Put your congressperson on an allowance, they are behaving like children and spending your money any way they please. The real adults in this country have to put the spoiled spendthrifts in Congress on a shorter leash.

If your share of taxes for the Federal Department of Education is to high for what you want or desire from them. Then lower the allowance congress gets for it. Make your share of taxes paid to that Department lower, and spend that money on a Department you think is underfunded. Or tell congress to use it to pay down some of the National Debt and stop borrowing from your children and grandchildren to pay for congressional pork. Pork for their friends and  family, paid for by money borrowed from your children and grandchildren.

TEA form at : http://www.braindeadrepublican.com/tea/tax_expenditure_allowance.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJdsrByTV8U

Tax Expenditure Allowance

by Michael DeWeese

Permission is hereby given to reprint this article without permission according to the Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ . The article must be reprinted in its entirety including all links and be an exact copy of the original at: http://www.braindeadrepublican.com/Wordpress/economy/tax-expenditure-allowance/

The United States Congress seems to like to get voted into office and then spend the taxpayers money any way they see fit. Instead, the taxpayer should be sending a Tax Expenditure Allowance to congress directing them where each taxpayer wants their taxes they pay spent. A simple form to send in to Congress giving them an allowance to spend on each Department and Program according to your desires.

This is a paradigm shift. In the past, voters elected a legislator to represent them in congress to determine budgets and on what their taxes would be spent. It was to cumbersome with the technology available at the time this system was designed to run a large government any other way.

With today's technology, such outdated methods to determine what each individuals taxes need to be spent on is archaic. Each individual can represent themselves in their general desires for the expenditure of their taxes they pay. A form can be filled out and sent to the federal government to be processed that has an individuals desires for where they give an allowance to each government Department or Program.

The details of the expenditure can be determined by their elected representative since most taxpayers lack the time or desire to micro manage the government entities. Determining how many new aircraft should be built or which bridges should be repaired is a tedious chore and can be delegated to legislators and bureaucrats.

Providing an overall allowance for the government agencies and programs as determined by the taxpayer, will do more to guide the legislator in where the taxpayer wants their money spent. With this process, people determine where their money is spent, and if they want more of their share to go to a particular project and less to another, they can do that. It could even be conceivable that folks who really care about the funding of a particular project can pay extra taxes to be designated to fund their pet projects.

No longer will Legislators get into office and spend taxpayer money on their personal pet program or agency, but will have to spend it on what the taxpayer wants funded, and not spend it on projects of no worth to the taxpayer. Now the legislators will need to justify to the taxpayer the reasons they should put in an expenditure allowance for them to spend on programs.  Once again, the legislators will be working for the taxpayer, instead of the taxpayer working to fund the legislators frivolous wishes.

And legislators that don't support T.E.A. will do so because the people that vote for them, are people who pay no taxes and will be afraid they will not get any welfare from the ones that do pay taxes anymore.

Alexander Tyler - 17th century historian:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;From spiritual faith to great courage;From courage to liberty;From liberty to abundance;From abundance to complacency;From complacency to apathy;From apathy to dependence;From dependence back into bondage.

From Barack Obama, August 28, 2008:

"the change we need doesn't come from Washington. Change comes to Washington. Change happens because the American people demand it - because they rise up and insist on new ideas and new leadership, a new politics for a new time.

America, this is one of those moments.

I believe that as hard as it will be, the change we need is coming. Because I've seen it."

Demand change. You are the American people, bring change to Washington.

If you don't, more and more will be taken from you to pay for things that are frivolous and useless until you are taxed beyond your means. When America is taxed beyond her means.

John F. Kennedy understood the conundrum of high taxes. And that is where we will eventually go if we do not take a firm hand upon our employees in Congress and give them a strict allowance to spend where we want it spent. Legislators will simply continue to vote higher taxes, if not on income, then on consumption as a sales tax or a value added tax (vat). Let them know enough is enough. Tell them what you want your taxes spent on.

John F. Kennedy was at the Economic Club in New York in December of 1962.

He said:

"It is increasingly clear that...an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits. In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."

Another President understood more about the prospect of a government that looks after you than anyone. Letting the politicians take your money and spend it on what they think is good for you becomes truly frightening.

"The most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I am here to help."Ronald Reagan

Any Departments or Programs that do not get enough of an allowance from the taxpayers get shut down. Maybe not immediately, perhaps a 10% reduction in funds per year maximum until they reach the taxpayers allowance level or are completely shutdown after 10 years.

Taxpayers can put their money where their ideals are. Want more money for education, tell congress to put a larger expenditure of your taxes into the Department of Education. Want more of your taxes to go for Police, Firefighters, give congress a bigger allowance towards the Department of Justice.

 There are 138,394,754 taxpayers (latest figures available are 2006) per year. Each taxpayer has an average tax share of $122,951.19 for 2009. It is time to take back control of your money.

Stop letting Congress put you and your children and your grandchildren into monstrous debt.

Stop letting the non productive vote in legislators to steal your families hard earned wealth and put your family into debt for generations to give them benefits they have not earned.

Stop letting your legislator tell you where they will be spending your money, fill out and send them the T.E.A. Form and tell them where you want your money spent.

Click here for a PDF, or OpenOffice copy of a T.E.A. form ( 5 pages ) to fill out and send to your Congressperson(s):

References and Links:

There are 31 Departments / Agencies / Programs that are funded by the 2009 Federal Budget.

There are 32 Departments / Agencies / Programs that are funded by the 2010 Federal Budget.

The United States federal budget for fiscal year 2009 was a spending request by President George W. Bush to fund government operations for October 2008-September 2009.

The President's budget for 2009 totals $3.1 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2008. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures:

Mandatory spending: $1.89 trillion (+6.2%)$644 billion - Social Security$408 billion - Medicare

$224 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) 

$360 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending 

$260 billion - Interest on National Debt 

Discretionary spending: $1.21 trillion (+4.9%) 

$515.4 billion - United States Department of Defense 

$145.2 billion(2008*) - Global War on Terror 

$70.4 billion - United States Department of Health and Human Services 

$59.2 billion - United States Department of Education 

$44.8 billion - United States Department of Veterans Affairs 

$38.5 billion - United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 

$38.3 billion - State and Other International Programs 

$37.6 billion - United States Department of Homeland Security 

$25.0 billion - United States Department of Energy 

$20.8 billion - United States Department of Agriculture 

$20.3 billion - United States Department of Justice 

$17.6 billion - National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

$12.5 billion - United States Department of the Treasury 

$11.5 billion - United States Department of Transportation 

$10.6 billion - United States Department of the Interior 

$10.5 billion - United States Department of Labor 

$8.4 billion - Social Security Administration 

$7.1 billion - United States Environmental Protection Agency 

$6.9 billion - National Science Foundation 

$6.3 billion - Judicial branch (United States federal courts) 

$4.7 billion - Legislative branch (United States Congress) 

$4.7 billion - United States Army Corps of Engineers 

$0.4 billion - Executive Office of the President 

$0.7 billion - Small Business Administration 

$7.2 billion - Other agencies 

$39.0 billion(2008*) - Other Off-budget Discretionary Spending 

The financial cost of the Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan are not part of the defense budget; they are appropriations.

$75.8 billion - Supplemental and Emergency spending ($70 billion for Global War on Terror - and $5.8 billion for Gulf Coast Hurricane relief)

Along with this is a Debt. With projected receipts significantly less than projected outlays, the budget proposed by President Bush predicts a net deficit of approximately 407 billion dollars, adding to a United States governmental debt of about $10.2 trillion.

Details of the 2009 Federal Budget are at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/pdf/budget/tables.pdf .

 More budget information at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/budget.html .

The President's budget for 2010 totals $3.55 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2009. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures:

Mandatory spending: $2.184 trillion (-17.9%) 

$695 billion (+4.9%) - Social Security 

$453 billion (+6.6%) - Medicare 

$290 billion (+12.0%) - Medicaid 

$0 billion (-100%) - Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) 

$0 billion (-100%) - Financial stabilization efforts 

$11 billion (+275%) - Potential disaster costs 

$571 billion (-15.2%) - Other mandatory programs 

$164 billion (+18.0%) - Interest on National Debt 

Discretionary spending: $1.368 trillion (+7.0%) 

$663.7 billion (+12.7%) - Department of Defense (including Overseas

Contingency Operations) 

$78.7 billion (-1.7%) - Department of Health and Human Services 

$72.5 billion (+2.8%) - Department of Transportation 

$52.5 billion (+10.3%) - Department of Veterans Affairs 

$51.7 billion (+40.9%) - Department of State and Other International Programs 

$47.5 billion (+18.5%) - Department of Housing and Urban Development 

$46.7 billion (+12.8%) - Department of Education 

$42.7 billion (+1.2%) - Department of Homeland Security 

$26.3 billion (-0.4%) - Department of Energy 

$26.0 billion (+8.8%) - Department of Agriculture 

$23.9 billion (-6.3%) - Department of Justice 

$18.7 billion (+5.1%) - National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

$13.8 billion (+48.4%) - Department of Commerce 

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) - Department of Labor 

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) - Department of the Treasury 

$12.0 billion (+6.2%) - Department of the Interior 

$10.5 billion (+34.6%) - Environmental Protection Agency 

$9.7 billion (+10.2%) - Social Security Administration 

$7.0 billion (+1.4%) - National Science Foundation 

$5.1 billion (-3.8%) - Corps of Engineers 

$5.0 billion (+100%) - National Infrastructure Bank 

$1.1 billion (+22.2%) - Corporation for National and Community Service 

$0.7 billion (0.0%) - Small Business Administration 

$0.6 billion (-14.3%) - General Services Administration 

$19.8 billion (+3.7%) - Other Agencies 

$105 billion - Other

More details at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/A_New_Era_of_Responsibility2.pdf .

Detailed information can be found at http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=96981,00.html .

Congressional Budget Office Projections. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10014/Chapter1.5.1.shtml

In HR 3200, 'America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)', there is a section that is called 'HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.'. This is section 404. There are several problems with this section that would allow for minor and major indoctrination efforts of unknown child raising methods. States could enact legislation that requires enrollment in the federal home visitations to qualify for access to State programs of any kind. The type of education is not specified. If you don't do as the "well-trained and competent staff" require, you could be penalized. The funding increases by $50 million yearly, allowing for the growth of the number of  'home visitation child education experts', possibly until every family has their very own indoctrination specialist.

HR 3200. section 404, is a provision to finance grants to states to "(ii) employ well-trained and competent staff, maintain high quality supervision," and the "purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children."

Source - http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111wVbHWS:e989688:

States can apply for the grants so long as they meet the requirements, one of which is "the number, quality, and capacity of home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children in the State;" Once the states begin the programs, to renew their grants or to increase their program size, they will need to increase the number of families in the program. States can enact requirements in any other programs they have that would require enrollment in the home child rearing education to qualify for access to the other programs like food stamps, cash assistance, public housing, public schooling. This would keep enrollment in the 'voluntary' home child rearing education visit program growing so that the state can continue to apply for more and more of the grants and swell the numbers of 'experts' to visit homes.

The type of child rearing education these 'experts' will teach isn't specified. They could be teaching any number of methods. You may or may not agree with how they want you to raise your children. They can require how you punish a misbehaving child or how to reward a child who excels. They can indoctrinate your child with ideological points of view you do not agree with.

If you don't do as the "well-trained and competent staff" require, you could be penalized. Charges of child neglect could be brought if you do not agree with the methods or principles they are teaching. Then you have to try to defend your ability to parent in front of a judge. And if you fail to prove your case, your children are taken away by the state.

To start with, $50 million is available the first year, and an additional funding increases of $50 million yearly ($100 million second year, $150 million third year, on and on). This would  allow for the growth of the number of  'home visitation child education experts', possibly until every family has their very own indoctrination specialist. Imagine how many 'specialists' the program will have after 5 years and it is spending $250 million a year and growing and growing.

To keep those 'experts' employed and enough families being visited, the 'government option' for health care could one day require enrollment in 'home child rearing education visits'. This would be part of the long term strategy of the Progressives to control you and imbue your children into their ideology. One day, an Obamabot will be visiting you in your home to tell you how to raise your child, and teaching your child how to snitch on you, their parent if you don't do as the Obamabots require. Health Care Reform, a perfect program to sneak in some education indoctrination.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KY2nYf7pFs

Let me begin by pronouncing the agreements that I share with Democrats. Or rather: let me be clear. The Earth is a gift from God, and is, aside from perhaps the feminine form, the most stunning thing in existence. No man alive is so base as to devalue what we have. This vehicle, like the Hand that created it, yields beyond sustenance and gives inspiration.

Now with that caveat out of the way, I submit that the Liberals, the Greens, and the Radical Left’s feel-good ideas of castrating the industrial machine are reckless and downright dangerous for America. The Left (and by extension the Democratic Party), in what has become an international battle royale for energy, prefers to surrender our arms and engines.  They are gruelingly unable to comprehend nuclear and fossil energy as a game-changing tactical weapon like steel and gunpowder. Nor are they able to accept that environmental stewardship treaties ratified by international bodies actually hold deliberate, ulterior motives to tightly bind America in other ways. And a shrugging regard at such powers is one of the most imminent dangers of the new century.

And to temper this sentiment, I believe that America can and should reduce its negative impact on the environment; namely by shifting from coal to nuclear power as a staple like France did and John McCain suggested. It seems that Liberals only like the bad ideas from Europe, but none of the good ones. As a case in point, we would have already reached the Kyoto emissions goals through the nuclear option that Republicans have proposed for years.

If President Bush had not pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol that President Clinton signed in 1997, we would have shouldered the burden of what other nations turn and ignore. Sadly, many of the global shirkers were Kyoto's chief architects within the European Union! Aside from ignoring the pollution of China and India which clearly no longer deserve special exemption, it held America to an unreasonable standard.

Europe's Performance:       

The European Union has had mixed results since signing the Kyoto Accord. Spain failed abysmally at achieving its goals and Italy approached underdeveloped Russia to buy carbon credits. To contextualize Russia’s position, the fall of the Soviet Union led to "Perestroika" and an industrial collapse, and Kyoto’s lax standards on Russia were assessed on this collapse. Similarly, Germany claims to have decreased their overall emissions. Yet, the integration of East Germany and the other ex-Soviet states (whose outmoded production stood to be revamped anyway) has tilted this statistic grossly. The reunification of West Germany to East Germany made it much easier to restructure the rusting coal-fired production of the Cold War. This overhaul was slated to happen anyway, making such a benchmark much easier to reach. Now having lived in Spain, I saw the staggering unemployment that fluctuated between 12-18%, and that is one thing that haunts me with upcoming legislations in the pipeline. Spanish Economist Gabriel Calzada detailed the consequences of these legislations in his “Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources,” which demonstrates the damaging falsehoods of the “green job,” whatever that is. According to this perplexed academe, the subsidy of every 1 green job costs 2.2 regular jobs through inefficiencies, displacement, and re-allocation, and he expects the same results in the United States with President Obama’s Cap-and-Trade deal.

The liberal admonitionary chatchprase that “the debate is over” has battered many eardrums, not just yours. In the video below is an interview with Ex Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar of Spain. It’s not in English, but I can tell you that he treats the question of climate change as we do in America. His affiliates call climate change a religion, fettered with dogma, and state we have a “blue planet, not a green one.” Like many in the US, he claims not to be a “denier,” as that label presupposes something to deny. He concludes by stating that the debate is not over, because it has yet to even commence, and that there has been a marked decay in parliamentary spirit and democratic debate in Spain in years past, and that people should return to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MD_bDfFaeI

China’s Performance:    

    The People’s Republic of China had recently surpassed the United States in CO2 emission in mid-2008, debunking the notion that America is the #1 offender.  But according to the environmental lunatics on the Left, we, The United States of America, must lead by example through blind faith and hope without assurance, that a military despotism like China will get warm fuzzies and turn green long after we have sacrificed trillions in GDP, millions of jobs, and the strategic high grounds that come with robust productive capacity. Yep. After watching America sadomasochistically self-immolate for a decade, China will want to join the rip-roarin’ fun!

India’s Performance:

Recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited India, and India’s Environmental Minister laid out a stalwart launch pad from which to negotiate future accords with the West. In short, he was not willing to sell his nation down the postmodern drain. I wish I could say the same for our leaders. Take a look for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyfJKgIQPXQ

Hillary’s refuted olive branch in New Delhi will be a microcosm of times to come, as we become the poor little match girl, passing from door to door and selling our eco-wares at no avail to a world hurtling in the opposite direction towards Ayn Rand.

The Ghosts of Energy Present and Future:

In America, we are a nation of people, not “masses” as the planeteers tend to esteem us. Hence, Carl Sagan’s hint at microbes having rights superseding those of humans will not fly far amidst a people unable to subtract anthropocentrism from stargazing, and who care little to imagine the giant unknowable workings of space and time after humans. Politically, it would be madness for a politico to expand his constituencies to mother earth, time, and space (gerrymandering would have to be done in either 3D or parsecs). The only manner in which to mobilize the public, or massage them into becoming pliant, would be to create a false sense of crisis, fear, and to literally demonize opposition as paid off or "flat-earthers." So it comes as no surprise that both Cap-and-Trade and ObamaCare are to be rushed. Despite that, the pending Waxman-Markey Bill puts forth many of the directives of “Old Europe” that will scare away manufacturing to the hills of Asia and Latin America. And Washington DC is counting on your docility to pass it.

Now according to the CIA World Factbook, America produces 14 trillion dollars in GDP as a total of our economy while China produces over 4 trillion. We dump 5.9 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere while China chugs out a full 6 billion. Now comparing the GDP in ratio to national emissions, a revelation emerges: We produce .00042 tons of CO2 per dollar of production. China produces .0015 tons of CO2 per dollar of production. So if cleanliness is the utmost goal, then the United States should already serve as an example to China, given that with a smaller population we produce more goods for the world at cleaner levels. 

Two points highlight China’s energy strategy for the 21st century: a petroleum highway and an emissions-free nuclear grid to make up for it. They already foresaw that T. Boone Pickens would abandon windfarms (which he did) and all the takeout joints in Hong Kong cannot accumulate the biodiesel grease to power fleets of buses. To put it another way: they’re not screwing around.  

According to Westinghouse Electric International, China has made it a national priority to build 100 nuclear power plants by 2020 (more resemblant of the Space Race than ObamaCare). And this national mobilization utilizes United States technology! Lord knows that the EU is already jacked into the atomic grid as well. We are not.

What’s the matter?  Did I frazzle your hippiemojo-windpower vibe and shatter your image of the avuncular T. Boone, who you learned was so hip during the hopeandchange era? Too bad, undergrad. It gets worse.

Aside from holding our debt, China is leveraging its surpluses to purchase assets around the globe, opening up trade channels to fan out their empire. Africa has become the next battlefield for resources, and China is pulling no punches in applying the same colonial takeover methodology as the powers of Europe did a century past. Nearly one third of all of China’s petroleum imports come from the African continent, and they have begun courting nations like Angola, The Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and yes…Sudan. With an economy growing at 9% for the past two decades, they are jealously vying for control of new sources of timber, coal, copper, and oil, and doing so in side by side competition with the United States. Traditionally, China has taken a hands-off approach towards meddling in the affairs of another nations (since they themselves have no desire for scrutiny), but has recently scrapped this diplomatic dogma by cozying up to local oil-friendly African nations and their government officials. A crux of their tactic has been to lay “investments” into roads, fiber optics, technology training, bridges, and other infrastructures that would otherwise bollix African nations to quickly build for themselves. This colonial paradox for a once insular power demonstrates that the searing growth of their nation has alarmingly trumped old wisdoms, and is goading them to do what it takes to win…Confucius be damned and anyone else who stands in their way.

In this quest to outbid America in global energy sources, arms have become a desired currency for petty dictators and warlords, and China is in no short supply. While Western powers have done the same for some time in supporting unsavory regimes for regional interest, the rabbit hole goes much deeper in China’s case. Dangerous regions like Sudan receive their arms shipments from China (and military trainers), while 60% of Sudanese oil output heads in the other direction. This transcontinental circulation of arms-for-oil has been used to curry favor with African members of the United Nations, allowing for more votes to disregard China’s human rights violations and it even compells African nations to rebuff the ineffectual African Union in overseeing Sino-African commerce in its own continent.

Brazil, the fastest-growing economy in Latin America and by far its largest nation, has announced that China has surpassed the United States as a trade partner in an historic demand sweep for iron ore. In February of this year, Brasil’s state-run oil company accepted a $10 billion-dollar loan deal from the People’s Republic of China, and agreed to supply China’s national oil company, SINOPEC, with petroleum output. Through decades of cultural drift from North America, and socialist Brazilian President Lula da Silva at the helm, who blames American capitalism for the global meltdown, totalitarian wheels have been set in motion in our own, western hemisphere.

An Old Bear, still tired of American power, has bellowed out a roar to be heard across Eurasia. It is common knowledge that Russia has been buying up utility companies in Eastern Europe, and providing shelter in the United Nations for Iran, a country with its own untapped resources. The recent invasion of Georgia and South Ossetia impinged into their Caucasus pipeline—one of the few pipelines that flows into Europe independently of Russia. It is no small wonder that Vladimir Putin threatened to sever the pipeline into Europe to keep the west at bay. 

The Final Word:

With exploding demand, China, Russia, and other hostile powers will continue to buy, to seek, and to prod for more economic hegemony, and weave it into their mutual fatigue with America’s superpower status. And what do they all have in common? They purchase assets with government-run oil companies, treating utilities like defense commodities and branching out with the backing of infinite subsidy under the guise of corporate buyout. And to add insult to injury, they are all exempt from Waxman-Markey and Kyoto mandates. Here in the States, we own literally oceans of natural gas beneath our bedrock, and deluvian reserves offshore. We even have three times the reserves of Saudi Arabia in the Rocky Mountains. All of this is capable of being transported with modern technology that has come a long way since the Exxon-Valdez spill ages ago; yet drilling remains illegal in spite of marvelous precautionary advances and a clean record since. This vainglorious distaste for black crude serves as an object of haughty disdain for the Liberal elite, and from others it is merely a reckless childishness regarding the stern realities of this world. Tanks are not powered on corn oil, F-22 fighter jets do not run on solar power, and aircraft carriers do not use windmills. We fuel these battle weapons with fossil fuels and nuclear reactors—the twin strategic pillars of the Republican energy platform and still the beverage of choice for the grown-up world.  

Nothin’ like the real thing. 

As I exit stage right with reminiscence, I recall President Bill Clinton rejecting a Republican push in 1995 to drill in ANWR, a frozen desert, claiming that the project would not yield oil until 2005. This stance would then contort into blatant denial when in 2008, the Democratic Party would then accuse Republicans of short-sightedness for wanting to drill in Palin Country. Fittingly enough, either party has yet to accuse China, a 4,000 year-old kingdom, of being short-sighted.

America is under siege. I suggest we start guarding our aqueducts. >>

The Whitehouse has posted a request for their "brownshirts" to start snitching on their neighbors and friends. On August 4th 2009, the Whitehouse posted a request for information on anyone spreading opposition information on 'Government centric healthcare', meaning anyone opposed to government controlled healthcare.

From http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

They are calling on all of their Obamabots to become snitches and tattletales and informants on their neighbors and friends who simply oppose an Administration policy. This is what they called brownshirts in other administrations of the past.

Do you know an Obamabot? Be careful what you say around them, or you may end up on a Whitehouse list. If you spread the 2003 quote from Barack Obama regarding his ultimate plans for government control of health care :

“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”

You could be targeted by the 'brownshirts' amongst us for spreading 'disinformation'.

They don't say what they will do with the information gleaned from their Obamabots. You can picture it now, Obamabots lurking around groups of friends, neighbors or co-workers, listening and scurrilously writing down names. Gleefully slinking to their computer to email flag@whitehouse.gov with every sordid detail.

Dear Leader ZerO has been using the Marxist tutor Saul Alinsky method where overloading the welfare system was the surest way to bring down capitalism and bring about socialism. By adding more people to the all ready broke and broken government health care plans, the system would be overloaded and a pure socialist solution could be proposed. This is why he wants a plan that is deficit neutral and thus underfunded, to increase it's load and hasten it's implosion.

Now he calls forth another tactic of up and coming Dictators and asks his Obamabots to inform on his opposition. Well, let's use some Alinsky tactics. Overload flag@whitehouse.gov with the kind of information they deserve. Do your duty America. Send an email to flag@whitehouse.gov. Some sample content would be telling them about the pile of excrement your neighbors dog has deposited in opposition to the Health Care plan, or some simple ASCII art like :

Remember, Dear Leader ZerO has asked you to be a good citizen, email flag@whitehouse.gov with your report.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veAwjEaXWXs

In a town hall meeting on July 1st 2009, Dear Leader ZerO met Exhibit 'A' of how the government controls health-care costs. Debbie Smith is suffering from Renal failure and is allegedly unable to work. But the government no longer considers Renal failure a disability (cost cutting) and she can not get Medicaid assistance to pay for her medical needs. This is the result of government efforts to cut medical costs. Today the government denies disability and medical assistance to a woman with Renal failure, tomorrow they delay tests and biopsies for suspected tumors, and the day after tomorrow they deny procedures and drugs for people deemed non productive for society. This is what government health-care cost cutting means. A bureaucrat decides what is and isn't a medical disability, prudent preliminary test, or a necessary procedure.

Debbie Smith said: (from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-the-President-in-an-Online-Town-Hall-on-Health-Care-Reform/ )

"Good afternoon, Mr. President. I'll try not to cry. I'm trying to figure out what I can do currently. My situation is I had renal cell carcinoma in '98 that was radiated, because my dad was dying of colon cancer at the time, and I was his health care server on his living will, so I could not be tied up having my kidney removed. So they did radiation procedures to kill the tumor then. And I had insurance and everything was taken out.

But basically because of the damage that the radiation did in things, I'm no longer able to work and I have no health insurance. Now I have a new tumor. I have no way to pay for it. Doctors will not see you without paying $100 or $150 to come into their office. I can get checked into a hospital -- under their program, they will run tests and release me, but that costs a lot of money.

So currently I basically -- Social Security will not give me disability because renal failure is no longer a qualifying factor under Social Security currently. I cannot get Medicaid from the state of Virginia because you have to be considered disabled through Social Security to qualify for Medicaid in the state of Virginia because I have no dependent children at home -- it's just me. I get food stamps, but that's it. And I'm just trying to figure out how I'm going to make it in nine years until I'm qualified to get my regular Social Security -- now that I have a new tumor and I have nowhere to turn."

As Dear Leader ZerO has stated in the past. We need to control costs, why should we pay for extra tests when they aren't really needed. Tests and treatments that your doctor may need to eliminate a possible ailment origin as well as to determine the cause. Or a test that can lead to early discovery of a disease not even contemplated. They aren't really needed.

On June 15 2009: (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-to-the-Annual-Conference-of-the-American-Medical-Association/ )

Dear Leader Zero: "treatments that, in some cases, they don't really need"

Of course, government control of costs is all about finding what works.

Dear Leader ZerO: "identifying what works is not about dictating what kind of care should be provided."

Of course it isn't about 'control' or 'dictating' what is and is not allowed due to costs. It is about what 'works'. According to some bureaucrat.

Dear Leader ZerO does advocate better medical information sharing and computerization of medical records to help modernize the medical profession and cut costs through better efficiency. A program proposed by President Bush during his State of the Union address in February 2005, and signed into law by President Bush with full implementation by 2014. President Bush was following up on an idea begun by his father President George H. W. Bush which hit a lot of snags due to concerns about privacy of the electronic records. Although Dear Leader ZerO yearns to take credit for it. (from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-to-the-Annual-Conference-of-the-American-Medical-Association/ )

Dear Leader Zero: "First, we need to upgrade our medical records by switching from a paper to an electronic system of record keeping."

But his top priority is control. By government top down central control of the Medical delivery system. The operative phrase here is 'government control'.

On June 23 2009: (from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-Conference-by-the-President-6-23-09/ )

Dear Leader Zero: "What I've said is, our top priority has to be to control costs. And that means not just tinkering around the edges. It doesn't mean just lopping off reimbursements for doctors in any given year because we're trying to fix our budget."

It means control by eliminating options that the government does not have control over. Like private enterprise. Like freedom of choice. It means giving Americans an offer they can not refuse like the Public Health Program.

The Public Health Program option is a rigged game. Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, this Government agency will look on the surface to be an independent entity, but in fact will be a toy of the members of Congress that are on the oversight committee. They will appoint cronies to oversee it and manage it. Giving them bonuses and incentives to cut costs to look good on one hand, and subsidizing their revenue shortfalls from the cost cutting with tax money on the other. No private Insurance program of any kind will be able to compete with a company that can print it's own money to be profitable. In short order, the only option will be the Public Health Program option, and the controlled costs of any medical care you may need.

What we should have is less stifling of the Health Insurance industry in inter state commerce so that people in each state are not limited to only the local insurance companies where there may only be a few or even just one offering. The extra competition will lower costs of insurance and expand the diversity of products offered.

What we need is the addition of a tax exemption for Insurance costs on an individual level equal to the tax exemption businesses enjoy. That would allow individuals to purchase the insurance of their choosing while not eliminating the advantages business have in offering a health insurance benefit to attract employees.

Individuals should be allowed to partner with their employer to allow the business the tax advantage if they pay all or part of the insurance premium. At the same time allowing the individual mobility to carry the insurance to a new job when needed that may not offer any health insurance benefits.

Vouchers for insurance premiums for low income families to purchase a policy could be designed similar to the food stamp program model. Approved Insurance plans would be offered to anyone using the voucher system to prevent fraud and abuse. Some states already use a system of approved Insurance plans with premiums paid for by the Medicaid program instead of being a direct payer.

Everyone will have the freedom to choose their benefits they want, the doctor they like, and have the ability to switch plans if they are not being served adequately.

The best way to control medical costs would be if everyone paid out of pocket for medical care and by necessity had to shop for the best medical care for the purchase amount. Insurance and Government programs do not provide for consumer oversight of medical costs like individual direct payment would, but with medical costs as high as they are for even minor ailments, it would be beyond the means of most family budgets to be direct payers of medical costs. We have to rely on a common pool of funds. The proposition is if we rely on one government controlled fund, or on a choice of many Insurance funds.

Our future will be one Government controlled program when Dear Leader Zero implements his medical cost controls and Public Health Program 'option'. More and more people will be like Debbie Smith. When more ailments are added to the list of inadequate diseases to qualify for treatment, like renal failure no longer qualifies for disability, all to cut costs. We will all be unable to qualify for medical disability. Or we will be waiting for tests. Or we will be in line for approval for a review of a preliminary exam for the necessity of an operation for a life threatening ailment.

The Messiah calls them from all over. The hopeful, sick from diabetes, arthritis, cancer, and every other disease and ailment known to mankind. All of them seeking the Messiah that can divine what ails them and cure them. But like any good Faith Healer or Medicine Man, there is something going on behind the curtain.

On July 1st, 2009, Dear Leader ZerO held an 'open, on-line' town hall meeting to get honest unscripted questions from the public at large about his Health-care plan. His staff prescreened the questions posed online through Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter. No doubt to make sure they gave Dear Leader ZerO the hard insightful questions asked about his health-care plan. Questions about the costs in money and debt. The queries about procedures and tests that would be rationed, forbidden or delayed to cut costs.

In the town hall audience, three lucky people where given a chance to ask their questions. Exhibit 'A' was Debbie Smith, from Organizing for America. The second was Jason Rosenbaum, who works for Health Care for America Now. The third was an unnamed Service Employees International Union employee.

Debbie Smith may be "unemployed", but that hasn't stopped her from working for the Obama campaign as a volunteer at Organizing for America. Organizing for America is the Obama election machine that used to be called Obama for Change. They renamed themselves and moved under the auspices of the Democratic National Committee. Debbie Smith has also identified herself as a worker for the Virginia Organizing Project. Perhaps if she spent less time working her two jobs for Dear Leader ZerO, she would have the time to get a job for someone that actually paid wages and benefits. Instead of trying to help someone steal money from other hard working people to pay for her unemployment and health benefits.

Among Debbie Smith's unemployed accomplishments she moderated "a community discussion on health care issues" in Appalachia, Va. during December 2008. She told the local paper at the time the meeting "would be reported back to former Sen. Tom Daschle". Forming a committee to report to on health-care issues was a prime directive given Senator Tom Daschle by then President-elect Barack Obama. He is in constant contact with Dear Leader ZerO's team. Daschle told The Associated Press in a recent media meeting on health-care reform, "We interact with them daily." This despite his failed Health and Human Services Cabinet-nomination. Since he can't be a Cabinet member, he can be a secret Health Czar.

Jason Rosenbaum works for the George Soros linked lobbying project in Washington, D.C. called Health Care for America Now (HCAN). This is a K Street Lobby Group with a $40 million budget to lobby Congress for government-run health care. Debbie Smith's second job, Virginia Organizing Project has been coordinating trips and healthcare forums with Jason Rosenbaum's HCAN.

The unnamed questioner was from Service Employees International Union. A former SEIU health-care lobbyist by the name of Patrick Gaspard is now White House director of the Office of Political Affairs. The SEIU president is Andy Stern who boasted gleefully of spending nearly $61 million in dues money paid by SEIU members to elect Barack Obama. No doubt a wise investment. Spending money that isn't yours to help Dear Leader ZerO get elected so that SEIU employees could get free benefits paid for by taxpayers. Not having to pay them from Union dues, Andy Stern would have more SEIU money to support more political cronyism.

No doubt this audience was not stacked with plants and shills at all and represents Americans and the questions they have 100%. We all are either volunteers for Dear Leader ZerO, or we are lobbyists working on Dear Leader ZerO's agenda, or we are employees of a Union that spends our dues to support Dear Leader ZerO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kcTcR4Zs-4

Dear Leader ZerO said that he will not raise taxes for anyone making under $250,000. He has a way to do it through the back door. You will pay more for energy and anything that energy is needed to make (everything). He will tax the Energy companies and they will charge you more. The Energy company pays a tax, you just pay higher bills.

As Dear Leader ZerO said in an interview in January 2008 with the San Francisco Chronicle:

"When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal…under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket…even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas…you name it…whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations. That will cost money…they will pass that money on to the consumers."

Your electricity bill will go up by 90%. If you are paying $300 a month now, you will have to pay $570 a month after this "non tax" is signed into law.

The cost of gasoline will go up by 58%. A gallon of gas that now costs $2.64 will cost you $4.17 a gallon.

On average, every families energy costs will go up by $1,241 per year on average. That is an extra $103.42 per month you will have to pay. But mind you, it is not a new tax on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. Just a way for you to pay more to your gas station or more on your electric bill. The tax is being paid by them, not you.

Reference : http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2450.cfm

The House of Representatives bill is H.R. 2545, sponsored by Representatives Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA). On June 26, 2009 the United States House of Representatives passed H.R. 2545, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act". 219 Representatives voted for it, 212 against.

If your Representative voted for it, they should be fired.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/index.asp http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll477.xml

The United States Senate has to pass their version now. You can help stop this hidden back door tax by contacting your Senator now.

United States Senator Directory:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Call your Senator now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCde5haxalA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZrxuvyENJY