Understanding the primaries may be a bit difficult for some. The primaries used to be put on and paid for by the different parties and in some states that is still true. But now, most states pay for the primaries to be held.
You can't vote for the local Sheriff in the Democratic primary and the County Judge in the Republican primary. When you go to vote you are either registered as one party or the other . . . or Independent, Green, Libertarian or one of the many other parties or in some states, there is no party registration and they will ask you what ballot you want. Arkansas, where I live, is one of those states. In states where they have open Primaries you can vote in any political party and I'll explain how that may be good for everyone.
In an open primary, even though you may be a registered Republican you can vote in a Democratic primary. The Republicans did that in South Carolina in 2010 and a fellow the Republicans paid money to in order to run him against Jim DeMint was put on the ballot. His name was Alvin Greene. The Republicans voted, in mass, in the Democratic primary for Alvin Greene who defeated the guy that could have defeated DeMint. Greene became the nominee but he was retarded and couldn't even make a speech. So Jim DeMint beat Greene in the General election 63% to 19% with 8% going to another candidate and 10% undecided.
I'll attempt to fill you in on the upcoming Primaries state by state. This is Feb. 19, 2012 and the next GOP Primary will be on Feb. 28.
February 28, 2012:
1. Arizona has a closed primary system and to get a ballot you must be a registered party voter.
2. Michigan is an open primary state so that Democrats can vote in the Republican primary but then you have to vote only in the Republican primary, no cross voting.
March 3, 2012:
1. Washington has a system that is similar to the California system of "Top Two." The top two vote getters have to run against each other.
March 6, 2010, "Super Tuesday":
1. Alaska Republicans have a closed CAUCUS system and you must be a registered Republican for 30 days to participate.
2. Idaho Republicans have a closed CAUCUS system.
3. Georgia has a semi-closed PRIMARY system; you must be registered in the party to vote.
4. Massachusetts has a semi-closed PRIMARY system.
5. North Dakota has a closed CAUCUS system.
6. Ohio has a closed PRIMARY system but there is no party registration and a voter can be challenged as not being affiliated. (I'm not sure what this means. If you live in Ohio, let me know)
7. Oklahoma has a closed PRIMARY system.
8. Tennessee has a closed PRIMARY system but you can change parties on the day of election then back the next day.
9. Vermont has an open PRIMARY system.
10. Virginia has an open PRIMARY system but the Republicans in Vermont require you sign a "Loyalty Oath" to the Republicans.
March 6-10, 2012:
1. Wyoming has a closed CAUCUS system but you can change party affiliation any day.
March 10, 2012:
1. Kansas has a closed PRIMARY system but allows "unaffiliated" voters to participate.
March 13, 2012:
1. Alabama has an open PRIMARY system. Anyone can vote on any ballot.
2. Hawaii has an open CAUCUS system with not party affiliation.
3. Mississippi has an open PRIMARY system, but you must support the nominee? (Not sure how that is enforced)
I'll have information on the rest of the primaries in the next post.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Doing The Math, the GOP Primaries so far
I keep seeing the GOP primaries and the percentages for each of the contestants and wonder if anyone else notes the real problem.
For instance, in Iowa Santorum won with 24.6%. That means that 75.4% preferred someone else, and that was for the winner! Three quarters of those involved didn't like Santorum and he was the winner.
Now, let's go on to the next one, that would be New Hampshire. In N.H. Romney received 39.3% and won but that just means that 60.7% voted against him, and he was the winner.
How about South Carolina? Gingrich won S.C. with 40.4% of the vote which means that 59.6 preferred someone else.
Let's stop here for a second and observe that there have been no repeats in the winners and the average winner only received 34.8% of the votes, which again means that 65.2% of the voters didn't like the winner . . . on average.
Now we will be seeing what happens to the numbers when the list shortens to just 4 contestants.
At the end of January, everyone went to Florida, which seems like a good place to go on January 31. There we had a repeat, Romney. He got 46.4% of the votes and 53.6% went for someone else and this was without the dilution of having 7 people in the race.
Next, we went to the Nevada caucuses on February 4. There Romney won with the first ever 50.0% majority.
On Feb. 7, we had the three caucuses in Missouri, Colorado and Minnesota. Rick Santorum won all three by 55.2%, 40.3% and 44.8% respectively. That was the highest percentage(55.2%) so far and it was in Missouri where no delegates were at stake.
In Maine on February 11, Romney won again but by only 39.2%. Again, lots of folks voted another way.
So far, on average, the winner of the various GOP primaries have won with only 42.2% on average. That means the vast majority of participants voted for someone other than the winner.
What you have just seen is only a small part of the real story. The number of actual voters is the big story. Normally about 25% of the voters participating in the general election for President show up for the primaries/caucuses. But this time only 17.7% showed up in Iowa and NO PREFERENCE beat out two of the participants. In Maine, less than 2% of the normal number of voters from 2008 showed up to vote in the primaries.
I just don't see a lot of enthusiasm for any of the GOP roster.
Sources:
Associated Press via Google
http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/
For instance, in Iowa Santorum won with 24.6%. That means that 75.4% preferred someone else, and that was for the winner! Three quarters of those involved didn't like Santorum and he was the winner.
Now, let's go on to the next one, that would be New Hampshire. In N.H. Romney received 39.3% and won but that just means that 60.7% voted against him, and he was the winner.
How about South Carolina? Gingrich won S.C. with 40.4% of the vote which means that 59.6 preferred someone else.
Let's stop here for a second and observe that there have been no repeats in the winners and the average winner only received 34.8% of the votes, which again means that 65.2% of the voters didn't like the winner . . . on average.
Now we will be seeing what happens to the numbers when the list shortens to just 4 contestants.
At the end of January, everyone went to Florida, which seems like a good place to go on January 31. There we had a repeat, Romney. He got 46.4% of the votes and 53.6% went for someone else and this was without the dilution of having 7 people in the race.
Next, we went to the Nevada caucuses on February 4. There Romney won with the first ever 50.0% majority.
On Feb. 7, we had the three caucuses in Missouri, Colorado and Minnesota. Rick Santorum won all three by 55.2%, 40.3% and 44.8% respectively. That was the highest percentage(55.2%) so far and it was in Missouri where no delegates were at stake.
In Maine on February 11, Romney won again but by only 39.2%. Again, lots of folks voted another way.
So far, on average, the winner of the various GOP primaries have won with only 42.2% on average. That means the vast majority of participants voted for someone other than the winner.
What you have just seen is only a small part of the real story. The number of actual voters is the big story. Normally about 25% of the voters participating in the general election for President show up for the primaries/caucuses. But this time only 17.7% showed up in Iowa and NO PREFERENCE beat out two of the participants. In Maine, less than 2% of the normal number of voters from 2008 showed up to vote in the primaries.
I just don't see a lot of enthusiasm for any of the GOP roster.
Sources:
Associated Press via Google
http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/
Who Came Up With This?
The other day I saw a Pontiac Aztec going along the highway. It occurred to me that it was a really ugly car . . . in my opinion. Then I said to myself, being a salesman, "Someone had to sell that car." Not just to the final consumer but to the execs at General Motors. Someone had to convince his boss that that was the greatest thing on four wheels. Then the boss had to convince his boss and so on up to the top before they committed financial resources to build the Aztec. What SALESMEN/WOMEN these people must have been.
Now, here comes this years crop of Republicans. They seem to have recently adopted an anti-contraceptives platform. "Let's be against contraception" they have decided. Now I wonder, "Who sold that idea to them? Must have been one hell of a salesman."
The only ones that seem to really be against any form of contraception are the only ones that don't/shouldn't need it . . . the Catholic Clergy.
The way to really turn the people against you is to come out against the one thing that most of us enjoy . . . male/female SEX. Among the Catholics, 98% use some sort of contraception. That leaves the 2% that are either clergy or they lie about it, or clergy that lie about it.
The one thing that could really do-in the Republicans is being against contraception or an easy way to pay for it.
Let's see what happens to it in the near future. Then let's see what they can come up with next to be against, maybe some other form of recreation, Face Book, Twitter, Bridge? Who knows what the desperate will come up with next? And, yes . . . that is what the GOP is . . . DESPERATE!
You gotta read the next post to find out how desperate they really are.
Now, here comes this years crop of Republicans. They seem to have recently adopted an anti-contraceptives platform. "Let's be against contraception" they have decided. Now I wonder, "Who sold that idea to them? Must have been one hell of a salesman."
The only ones that seem to really be against any form of contraception are the only ones that don't/shouldn't need it . . . the Catholic Clergy.
The way to really turn the people against you is to come out against the one thing that most of us enjoy . . . male/female SEX. Among the Catholics, 98% use some sort of contraception. That leaves the 2% that are either clergy or they lie about it, or clergy that lie about it.
The one thing that could really do-in the Republicans is being against contraception or an easy way to pay for it.
Let's see what happens to it in the near future. Then let's see what they can come up with next to be against, maybe some other form of recreation, Face Book, Twitter, Bridge? Who knows what the desperate will come up with next? And, yes . . . that is what the GOP is . . . DESPERATE!
You gotta read the next post to find out how desperate they really are.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
On A Recent Recess Appointment
The first recess appointment by a President was made by President George Washington in 1795 and that practice has continued since.
More recently, President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, and as of January 5, 2012, President Barack Obama had made 32 recess appointments.
Sources:
Henry B. Hogue; Richard S. Beth. "Recess Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions" (pdf). Congressional Research Service.
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0DP%2BP%5CW%3B%20P%20%20%0A. Retrieved 4 January 2012
The question arises from the fact that the present “Do Nothing” Congress, with an approval rating in the single digits, had failed to approve a head for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after several months. Exposing the Republican’s desire to NOT have consumer’s finances protected from banks, loan associations or any other group out to cheat the public. The Republicans didn’t even want that bureau to exist so the best bet was for them to continue to filibuster any appointments to head it. To try to thwart any appointments, the Republicans did a pro forma opening of the Senate. They opened it and left it open with no business being done and no one there to perform any business or to give “Advise and Consent.” They had to do this every three days to make it work. President Obama appointed John Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau anyway. The Republicans have objected ever since but none have taken him to court on it. More “Sound and fury . . . signifying nothing.”
On January 6th, 2012, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion regarding recess appointments and pro forma sessions, stating that "The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a "Recess of the Senate" under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments."
Sources:
http://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html
http://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf
In case anyone is interested, President Barack Obama knows the Constitution, he was a Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago.
More recently, President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, and as of January 5, 2012, President Barack Obama had made 32 recess appointments.
Sources:
Henry B. Hogue; Richard S. Beth. "Recess Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions" (pdf). Congressional Research Service.
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0DP%2BP%5CW%3B%20P%20%20%0A. Retrieved 4 January 2012
The question arises from the fact that the present “Do Nothing” Congress, with an approval rating in the single digits, had failed to approve a head for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after several months. Exposing the Republican’s desire to NOT have consumer’s finances protected from banks, loan associations or any other group out to cheat the public. The Republicans didn’t even want that bureau to exist so the best bet was for them to continue to filibuster any appointments to head it. To try to thwart any appointments, the Republicans did a pro forma opening of the Senate. They opened it and left it open with no business being done and no one there to perform any business or to give “Advise and Consent.” They had to do this every three days to make it work. President Obama appointed John Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau anyway. The Republicans have objected ever since but none have taken him to court on it. More “Sound and fury . . . signifying nothing.”
On January 6th, 2012, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion regarding recess appointments and pro forma sessions, stating that "The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a "Recess of the Senate" under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments."
Sources:
http://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html
http://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf
In case anyone is interested, President Barack Obama knows the Constitution, he was a Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
"Hoppin' John" My New Year's Tradition
It has long been a tradition among many groups to serve Black Eyed Peas on New Year's Day for good luck in the coming year. My first thought was, "Why didn't they make Porter House Steak a good luck tradition for The New Year?"
The lowly blackeyed pea has too little taste . . . for MY taste. But, here I set, looking at a pot of black eyed peas wondering, "What to do, what to do?"
Well, here's what I did!
SNOWYOWL'S HOPPIN' JOHN
1½ cup-Chopped Red Onion
1½ cup-Chopped Ham
1½ cup-Chopped Poblano Pepper (Sweet not Hot)
2 Tbsp-Peanut Oil
2 15oz. cans of black eyed peas (Keep ¾ cup of liquid)
4 Tbsp or more to taste, of Salsa Snowyowl (Can be found at: http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2009/09/recipe-for-salsa.html) on my Sept. 18th, 2009 post! Or, you might want to use Pace's Medium or Hot Salsa as a substitute.
7 oz. Hominy, drained
2 oz. Pimientos, undrained
2½ oz. sliced, ripe Olives, drained
¾ cup sliced Mushrooms
In a large skillet, saute onion, pepper and ham in oil for 3 minutes. Drain Blackeyed Peas and retain ¾ cup of liquid. Add blackeyed peas and retained liquid, Salsa, hominy, mushrooms, pimientos and and olives to ham mixture. Stir to combine then heat over medium heat to a boil. Then simmer for an hour on low.
In my 'fridge, I have two special "Condiments" that I use other than the standard stuff. One is blueberries and the other is chopped onions. I have found that whatever I can't improve the flavor of with onions, I can with blueberries. In this instance, use those chopped onions on top of the finished product when served. Might want to sprinkle a little pepper jack cheese too. It's up to you.
As in most of this type of recipe, this is gonna taste much better tomorrow than it does today. If you can do it a day or so ahead of time and keep your hands off of it, then let it set for a day. As Grandma always said, "Let it Fester," it will taste even better.
The lowly blackeyed pea has too little taste . . . for MY taste. But, here I set, looking at a pot of black eyed peas wondering, "What to do, what to do?"
Well, here's what I did!
SNOWYOWL'S HOPPIN' JOHN
1½ cup-Chopped Red Onion
1½ cup-Chopped Ham
1½ cup-Chopped Poblano Pepper (Sweet not Hot)
2 Tbsp-Peanut Oil
2 15oz. cans of black eyed peas (Keep ¾ cup of liquid)
4 Tbsp or more to taste, of Salsa Snowyowl (Can be found at: http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2009/09/recipe-for-salsa.html) on my Sept. 18th, 2009 post! Or, you might want to use Pace's Medium or Hot Salsa as a substitute.
7 oz. Hominy, drained
2 oz. Pimientos, undrained
2½ oz. sliced, ripe Olives, drained
¾ cup sliced Mushrooms
In a large skillet, saute onion, pepper and ham in oil for 3 minutes. Drain Blackeyed Peas and retain ¾ cup of liquid. Add blackeyed peas and retained liquid, Salsa, hominy, mushrooms, pimientos and and olives to ham mixture. Stir to combine then heat over medium heat to a boil. Then simmer for an hour on low.
In my 'fridge, I have two special "Condiments" that I use other than the standard stuff. One is blueberries and the other is chopped onions. I have found that whatever I can't improve the flavor of with onions, I can with blueberries. In this instance, use those chopped onions on top of the finished product when served. Might want to sprinkle a little pepper jack cheese too. It's up to you.
As in most of this type of recipe, this is gonna taste much better tomorrow than it does today. If you can do it a day or so ahead of time and keep your hands off of it, then let it set for a day. As Grandma always said, "Let it Fester," it will taste even better.
Friday, December 17, 2010
A Poem Worth Reading!
A POEM WORTH READING
And sharing!
(Author unknown)
He was getting old and paunchy
And his hair was falling fast,
And he sat around the Legion,
Telling stories of the past.
Of a war that he once fought in
And the deeds that he had done,
In his exploits with his buddies;
They were heroes, every one.
And 'tho sometimes to his neighbors
His tales became a joke,
All his buddies listened quietly
For they knew whereof he spoke.
But we'll hear his tales no longer,
For old Bob has passed away,
And the world's a little poorer
For a Soldier died today.
He won t be mourned by many,
Just his children and his wife.
For he lived an ordinary,
Very quiet sort of life.
He held a job and raised a family,
Going quietly on his way;
And the world won't note his passing,
'Tho a Soldier died today.
When politicians leave this earth,
Their bodies lie in state,
While thousands note their passing,
And proclaim that they were great.
Papers tell of their life stories
From the time that they were young
But the passing of a Soldier
Goes unnoticed, and unsung.
Is the greatest contribution
To the welfare of our land,
Someone who breaks his promise
And cons his fellow man?
Or the ordinary fellow
Who in times of war and strife,
Goes off to serve his country
And offers up his life?
The politician's stipend
And the style in which he lives,
Are often disproportionate,
To the service that he gives.
While the ordinary Soldier,
Who offered up his all,
Is paid off with a medal
And perhaps a pension, small.
It is not the politicians
With their compromise and ploys,
Who won for us the freedom
That our country now enjoys.
Should you find yourself in danger,
With your enemies at hand,
Would you really want some cop-out,
With his ever waffling stand?
Or would you want a Soldier--
His home, his country, his kin,
Just a common Soldier,
Who would fight until the end?
He was just a common Soldier,
And his ranks are growing thin,
But his presence should remind us
We may need his like again.
For when countries are in conflict,
We find the Soldier's part
Is to clean up all the troubles
That the politicians start.
If we cannot do him honor
While he's here to hear the praise,
Then at least let's give him homage
At the ending of his days.
Perhaps just a simple headline
In the paper that might say:
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING,
A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."
And sharing!
(Author unknown)
He was getting old and paunchy
And his hair was falling fast,
And he sat around the Legion,
Telling stories of the past.
Of a war that he once fought in
And the deeds that he had done,
In his exploits with his buddies;
They were heroes, every one.
And 'tho sometimes to his neighbors
His tales became a joke,
All his buddies listened quietly
For they knew whereof he spoke.
But we'll hear his tales no longer,
For old Bob has passed away,
And the world's a little poorer
For a Soldier died today.
He won t be mourned by many,
Just his children and his wife.
For he lived an ordinary,
Very quiet sort of life.
He held a job and raised a family,
Going quietly on his way;
And the world won't note his passing,
'Tho a Soldier died today.
When politicians leave this earth,
Their bodies lie in state,
While thousands note their passing,
And proclaim that they were great.
Papers tell of their life stories
From the time that they were young
But the passing of a Soldier
Goes unnoticed, and unsung.
Is the greatest contribution
To the welfare of our land,
Someone who breaks his promise
And cons his fellow man?
Or the ordinary fellow
Who in times of war and strife,
Goes off to serve his country
And offers up his life?
The politician's stipend
And the style in which he lives,
Are often disproportionate,
To the service that he gives.
While the ordinary Soldier,
Who offered up his all,
Is paid off with a medal
And perhaps a pension, small.
It is not the politicians
With their compromise and ploys,
Who won for us the freedom
That our country now enjoys.
Should you find yourself in danger,
With your enemies at hand,
Would you really want some cop-out,
With his ever waffling stand?
Or would you want a Soldier--
His home, his country, his kin,
Just a common Soldier,
Who would fight until the end?
He was just a common Soldier,
And his ranks are growing thin,
But his presence should remind us
We may need his like again.
For when countries are in conflict,
We find the Soldier's part
Is to clean up all the troubles
That the politicians start.
If we cannot do him honor
While he's here to hear the praise,
Then at least let's give him homage
At the ending of his days.
Perhaps just a simple headline
In the paper that might say:
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING,
A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."
Friday, December 10, 2010
A Simple Song of Freedom
I am reminded constantly how much life is nothing but a circle! If you keep a tie long enough, it'll come back into style. Here's an old song by Bobby Darin that is so true now that it seems to defy logic.
Simple Song Of Freedom (True After All These Years)
By Bobby Darin
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Hey there, Mister Black Man can you hear me?
I don't want your diamonds or your game
I just want to be, someone known to you as me
and I will bet my life you want the same
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Seven hundred million are you listening?
Most of what you read is made of lies
But speaking one to one, ain't it everybody's sun
To wake to in the morning when we rise?
So come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Brother Yareshenko are you busy?
If not would you drop a friend a line?
Tell me if the man, who is plowing up your land
has got the war machine upon his mind
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we, the people here, don't want a war
Now no doubt some folks enjoy doin' battle
Like Presidents, Prime Ministers and Kings
So let's build them shelves where they can fight among themselves
and leave the people be who like to sing
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we the people here, don't want a war
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we the people here, don't want a war
Simple Song Of Freedom (True After All These Years)
By Bobby Darin
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Hey there, Mister Black Man can you hear me?
I don't want your diamonds or your game
I just want to be, someone known to you as me
and I will bet my life you want the same
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Seven hundred million are you listening?
Most of what you read is made of lies
But speaking one to one, ain't it everybody's sun
To wake to in the morning when we rise?
So come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
We, the people here, don't want a war
Brother Yareshenko are you busy?
If not would you drop a friend a line?
Tell me if the man, who is plowing up your land
has got the war machine upon his mind
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we, the people here, don't want a war
Now no doubt some folks enjoy doin' battle
Like Presidents, Prime Ministers and Kings
So let's build them shelves where they can fight among themselves
and leave the people be who like to sing
Come and sing a simple song of freedom
Sing it like you've never sung before
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we the people here, don't want a war
Let it fill the air
Tell the people everywhere
That we the people here, don't want a war
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Fact Free Politics
Ever since Obama chose to run for President, the U. S. has experienced fact free politics. A culture where UNTRUTH has triumphed over facts, references and sources. And, all this has been promoted by an enthusiastic, deliberate and systematic campaign to destroy Barack Obama's presidency before it even got started. The economic collapse was answered with emergency measures, a bank bailout, an auto bailout and the stimulus package.
While almost identical to Mitt Romney's health reform in Massachusetts, and far to the Right of the Clinton's in the '90s, Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will actually reduce the deficit. That while placing millions more within the program and providing insurance and drug companies with more customers. That was all turned into a Socialist Governmental take-over.
All of these moves could be held as detrimental in lots of ways but what you cannot do is say they portray Obama as an ultra Socialist anti-American who is taking the U. S. down a path to oblivion. Fox News, Rush, Sean, Michael, Glen and various others have put that in our heads day and night for so long, it almost seems true . . . ALMOST!
If a Republican President had stepped up and helped turn around our financial institutions, our auto industries and done that profitably while insuring millions within the private sector, cut Medicare fraud and misuse, overseen a decline in illegal immigration, started a pull out from Iraq, set up a debt commission to reduce future debt, and seen job growth within a deliberate recovery . . . I don't think that Republican President would be referred to as a Socialist. Yet, because the President is a Democrat, that is exactly what has happened.
The BIG LIE is nothing but a bunch of little lies--"Death panels, out of control spending, climate change is a myth, Obama will take your guns away, a tax on financial transactions, average Federal employees make $120,000 per year, $200,000,000 per day to travel to India, rationed health care, Obama was born in Kenya, Obama is a Muslim, Obama is a radical Christian, Obama is an atheist," and oh so many more. It is the onslaught of all the little stuff that makes the BIG LIE, the accumulated lie. This all got into the minds of the people and became, at first, plausible, then possible, then probable and later true because they never let up and never varied in their talking points. And, none of this was officially refuted. A lie told long enough becomes the truth, someone said.
Don't let them get away with it. Look things up, check it out for yourself and call them on it. Ask for references, as for sources, ask where they read it, heard it and who wrote it or said it.
You might ask me, "They are all lying, isn't there a law against that?" For the answer to that you really need to go to:
http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/06/isnt-there-law-against-that.html
While almost identical to Mitt Romney's health reform in Massachusetts, and far to the Right of the Clinton's in the '90s, Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will actually reduce the deficit. That while placing millions more within the program and providing insurance and drug companies with more customers. That was all turned into a Socialist Governmental take-over.
All of these moves could be held as detrimental in lots of ways but what you cannot do is say they portray Obama as an ultra Socialist anti-American who is taking the U. S. down a path to oblivion. Fox News, Rush, Sean, Michael, Glen and various others have put that in our heads day and night for so long, it almost seems true . . . ALMOST!
If a Republican President had stepped up and helped turn around our financial institutions, our auto industries and done that profitably while insuring millions within the private sector, cut Medicare fraud and misuse, overseen a decline in illegal immigration, started a pull out from Iraq, set up a debt commission to reduce future debt, and seen job growth within a deliberate recovery . . . I don't think that Republican President would be referred to as a Socialist. Yet, because the President is a Democrat, that is exactly what has happened.
The BIG LIE is nothing but a bunch of little lies--"Death panels, out of control spending, climate change is a myth, Obama will take your guns away, a tax on financial transactions, average Federal employees make $120,000 per year, $200,000,000 per day to travel to India, rationed health care, Obama was born in Kenya, Obama is a Muslim, Obama is a radical Christian, Obama is an atheist," and oh so many more. It is the onslaught of all the little stuff that makes the BIG LIE, the accumulated lie. This all got into the minds of the people and became, at first, plausible, then possible, then probable and later true because they never let up and never varied in their talking points. And, none of this was officially refuted. A lie told long enough becomes the truth, someone said.
Don't let them get away with it. Look things up, check it out for yourself and call them on it. Ask for references, as for sources, ask where they read it, heard it and who wrote it or said it.
You might ask me, "They are all lying, isn't there a law against that?" For the answer to that you really need to go to:
http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/06/isnt-there-law-against-that.html
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Breaking News From Canada!
CANADIANS SET TO BUILD HUGE FENCE TO KEEP LIBERALS OUT!
From The Manitoba Herald, Canada--by Clive Runnels
Manitoba -- The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the TEA Party are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck. Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.
"I went out to milk the cows the other day and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. "The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left before I even got a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"
In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them. He then installed loudspeakers that blared Rush Limbaugh across the fields. "Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through and Rush annoyed the cows so much that they wouldn't give any milk."
Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons and drive them across the border where they are simply left to fend for themselves. "A lot of those people are not prepared for our rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a single bottle of imported drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet, though."
When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about plans being made to build re-education camps where liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer, watch NASCAR races and learn to shoot guns.
In recent days, liberals have turned to ingenious way of crossing the border. Some have been disguised as senior citizens taking a bus trip to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half dozen young vegans in powdered wig disguises, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed seniors about Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney to prove they were alive in the '50s. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we become very suspicious about their age," an official said.
Canadian Citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and are renting all the Michael Moore movies. "I really feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?"
From The Manitoba Herald, Canada--by Clive Runnels
Manitoba -- The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the TEA Party are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck. Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.
"I went out to milk the cows the other day and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. "The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left before I even got a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"
In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them. He then installed loudspeakers that blared Rush Limbaugh across the fields. "Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through and Rush annoyed the cows so much that they wouldn't give any milk."
Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons and drive them across the border where they are simply left to fend for themselves. "A lot of those people are not prepared for our rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a single bottle of imported drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet, though."
When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about plans being made to build re-education camps where liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer, watch NASCAR races and learn to shoot guns.
In recent days, liberals have turned to ingenious way of crossing the border. Some have been disguised as senior citizens taking a bus trip to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half dozen young vegans in powdered wig disguises, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed seniors about Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney to prove they were alive in the '50s. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we become very suspicious about their age," an official said.
Canadian Citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and are renting all the Michael Moore movies. "I really feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?"
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Senate Election Analysis
Remember back on October 26, I gave an analysis of the upcoming Senate election and what I thought it might mean.
http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/10/senate-races-to-watch-on-november-2nd.html
Well, the election commission in Washington State can finally put their shoes and socks back on now that they have used all their fingers and toes to add up the result of their Senate race between Dino Rossi (R) and Patty Murray (D) the incumbent.
In that post I listed six races and I felt the Democrats needed to win at least half to take the Senate. Well, what happened is the Democrats won four of the six and did indeed hold the Senate . . . not by much but a good hold.
The winners were;
In Nevada, Harry Reid (D) over Sharron Angle (Mars). There were actually nine people in that race which diluted the votes down to where it might have been hard for one person to win a majority. But Harry finally pulled it out.
In Washington, Patty Murray (D) over Dino Rossi (R). It took several days to hand count the ballots which were, by all appearances, written in Sanskrit and being read by a visually impaired election commission.
In Colorado, Michael Bennet (D) over Ken Buck (R). Buck was ahead for several hours at the beginning but Bennet held the lead once he got it.
In West Virginia, Joe Manchin (D) over John Raese (R). This again was a nail biter in that Raese had a lead for a long time at the beginning.
The two Democrats that lost were Joe Sestak to Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania and Alan Giannoulias lost Barack Obama's old seat in Illinois to Mark Kirk.
Now, if the President wants anything done in the Senate, he'll have to do it with reconciliation from the get go. That is what "W" did most of his terms in office and that is how Obama will have to do it, too.
http://swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/10/senate-races-to-watch-on-november-2nd.html
Well, the election commission in Washington State can finally put their shoes and socks back on now that they have used all their fingers and toes to add up the result of their Senate race between Dino Rossi (R) and Patty Murray (D) the incumbent.
In that post I listed six races and I felt the Democrats needed to win at least half to take the Senate. Well, what happened is the Democrats won four of the six and did indeed hold the Senate . . . not by much but a good hold.
The winners were;
In Nevada, Harry Reid (D) over Sharron Angle (Mars). There were actually nine people in that race which diluted the votes down to where it might have been hard for one person to win a majority. But Harry finally pulled it out.
In Washington, Patty Murray (D) over Dino Rossi (R). It took several days to hand count the ballots which were, by all appearances, written in Sanskrit and being read by a visually impaired election commission.
In Colorado, Michael Bennet (D) over Ken Buck (R). Buck was ahead for several hours at the beginning but Bennet held the lead once he got it.
In West Virginia, Joe Manchin (D) over John Raese (R). This again was a nail biter in that Raese had a lead for a long time at the beginning.
The two Democrats that lost were Joe Sestak to Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania and Alan Giannoulias lost Barack Obama's old seat in Illinois to Mark Kirk.
Now, if the President wants anything done in the Senate, he'll have to do it with reconciliation from the get go. That is what "W" did most of his terms in office and that is how Obama will have to do it, too.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Strange News From Dallas
(From the Dallas Morning News)
Dallas, TX (AP) - A seven year old boy was at the center of a Dallas County courtroom drama yesterday when he challenged a court ruling over who should have custody of him. The boy, Joseph Luna, has a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge, Arthur Wingate, initially awarded custody to his aunt, Martha Luna, in keeping with child custody law and regulation requiring that family unity be maintained to the highest degree reasonably possible.
The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her. When the judge then suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried and said that they also beat him.
After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.
After two recesses to check legal references and confer with the child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Dallas Cowboys professional football team, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.
Dallas, TX (AP) - A seven year old boy was at the center of a Dallas County courtroom drama yesterday when he challenged a court ruling over who should have custody of him. The boy, Joseph Luna, has a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge, Arthur Wingate, initially awarded custody to his aunt, Martha Luna, in keeping with child custody law and regulation requiring that family unity be maintained to the highest degree reasonably possible.
The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her. When the judge then suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried and said that they also beat him.
After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.
After two recesses to check legal references and confer with the child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Dallas Cowboys professional football team, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Is a Gerrymander An Amphibian?
Way back in 1812, Elbridge Gerry, then the Governor of Massachusetts, was in charge of redividing the districts of his state after the census of 1810. Governor Gerry decided to reshape districts to gain political advantage. When he did, one came out with a strange shape that looked like a salamander. That was renamed by the local newspaper into a "Gerry" mander and has stuck for the past hundred and eighty eight years. So to "Gerrymander" is to redistrict for political advantage making strange shapes out of districts.
That is why electing a Governor from your party is important in the years after a census is taken. That Governor can dictate the way your state is represented for the next ten years. He/She can give his opposition a funny shaped district and confine all those against him into one district while giving his compatriots five districts or more. In some cases a Governor can put all his opposition into a minority in several districts.
In Arkansas, we have a strong Democrat as Governor, but in some other states the voters don't realize yet that the future of their state and their representation for the next ten years rests with who they elect Governor.
Only two states, Arkansas and New York, have strong Democrats that should be re-elected. The Republican in New York is Carl Paladino, the guy that Andrew Coumo should beat easily. Those two states plus seven holdovers will give the Democrats only nine states for sure.
The Republicans, on the other hand, have six holdovers and eleven solidly going to them. That will give the Republicans a solid seventeen states to redistrict. The leaning states are six for the Democrats and ten for the Republicans. If that stays accurate, that will give the Democrats fifteen states and the Republicans twenty seven states to redistrict to their advantage. The tossup states for Governor number eight. If the Democrats take all of them, and they won't, they can't catch the Republicans in number of states they can redistrict.
No one has really brought this to the attention of the voters this year and it is very important that people know. Unfortunately this blog is about a week late and reaches far too few to make a difference, but be aware, those Governors we elect this year are important, not only now but for the next ten years.
That's just another reason to be well informed.
(For more on this subject, go to;
www.redistrictingthenation.com/
That is why electing a Governor from your party is important in the years after a census is taken. That Governor can dictate the way your state is represented for the next ten years. He/She can give his opposition a funny shaped district and confine all those against him into one district while giving his compatriots five districts or more. In some cases a Governor can put all his opposition into a minority in several districts.
In Arkansas, we have a strong Democrat as Governor, but in some other states the voters don't realize yet that the future of their state and their representation for the next ten years rests with who they elect Governor.
Only two states, Arkansas and New York, have strong Democrats that should be re-elected. The Republican in New York is Carl Paladino, the guy that Andrew Coumo should beat easily. Those two states plus seven holdovers will give the Democrats only nine states for sure.
The Republicans, on the other hand, have six holdovers and eleven solidly going to them. That will give the Republicans a solid seventeen states to redistrict. The leaning states are six for the Democrats and ten for the Republicans. If that stays accurate, that will give the Democrats fifteen states and the Republicans twenty seven states to redistrict to their advantage. The tossup states for Governor number eight. If the Democrats take all of them, and they won't, they can't catch the Republicans in number of states they can redistrict.
No one has really brought this to the attention of the voters this year and it is very important that people know. Unfortunately this blog is about a week late and reaches far too few to make a difference, but be aware, those Governors we elect this year are important, not only now but for the next ten years.
That's just another reason to be well informed.
(For more on this subject, go to;
www.redistrictingthenation.com/
Monday, November 1, 2010
The Time Is Here
OK folks, the time has arrived and I've found that elections are really a conversation. They, the candidates, have been talking to us for a long time now and it is time for us to tell them where to go.
We need to tell some to get lost and some to take office. But first we need to find out about the candidates and their views on what is important to us. We need to find out as much about the various amendments and issues that are on the ballot as we can . . . then vote. We must know what we are going to say in that conversation and to be able to say it in an intelligent fashion. Remember, this is a conversation. Don't talk foolishly and don't say stupid things. All of our lives and all of our futures are depending on what we collectively say.
If you have decided to not vote this time, you will be conceding power to others. Those "Others" may not have your best interest at heart. The power you concede may very well hurt you, your family and your future.
I frequently support one side over the other on this blog. I won't be doing that today. If you read me much at all, you know what side I'm on. Today I want to encourage you to get educated and get involved. This is about you! This is about your family! This is about all of our futures and moving forward. Please do it but do it intelligently. Do it well informed.
The future depends on you and your well informed vote. Don't let others tell you where to go. Don't let others dictate you and your family's future.
We need to tell some to get lost and some to take office. But first we need to find out about the candidates and their views on what is important to us. We need to find out as much about the various amendments and issues that are on the ballot as we can . . . then vote. We must know what we are going to say in that conversation and to be able to say it in an intelligent fashion. Remember, this is a conversation. Don't talk foolishly and don't say stupid things. All of our lives and all of our futures are depending on what we collectively say.
If you have decided to not vote this time, you will be conceding power to others. Those "Others" may not have your best interest at heart. The power you concede may very well hurt you, your family and your future.
I frequently support one side over the other on this blog. I won't be doing that today. If you read me much at all, you know what side I'm on. Today I want to encourage you to get educated and get involved. This is about you! This is about your family! This is about all of our futures and moving forward. Please do it but do it intelligently. Do it well informed.
The future depends on you and your well informed vote. Don't let others tell you where to go. Don't let others dictate you and your family's future.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Senate Races To Watch on November 2nd
The big Mid-Term Elections are on November 2nd and here are the Senate Races you need to watch Tuesday night.
In Washington State:
Dino Rossi (R)
Patty Murray (D)
Patty Murray is the incumbent and hold a very slight lead over Dino Rossi. That lead is about 48% to 46% at this time but we have a week to go and this one could go either way.
In Nevada:
Sharron Angle (R)
Harry Reid (D)
Jerry Carter (I)
Jeffery Durbin (I)
Wil Stand (NONE)
Scott Ashjian (T) [Tea Party of Nevada]
Recently the polls have gone back and forth with Ms. Angle recently taking a small lead but still about 47% to 45%.
In Colorado:
Ken Buck (R)
Michael Bennet (D)
Bennet and Buck have been in a dead heat tied at 47% for the last 2 weeks. The decision will be made when it is decided who screwed up most/least.
In Illinois:
Mark Kirk (R)
Alan Giannoulias (D)
LeAlan Jones (G) [Green]
Michael Labno (L) [Libertarian]
Alyson Kennedy (S) [Socialist Workers] {Write-in}
Mark Kirk has been consistently ahead for the past month but still within each polls margin of error. So for all practical purposes it is still a tossup. The problem here is the Green/Libertarian/Socialist dilution of voters. That makes it very difficult for one person to get above 50%.
In West Virginia:
John Raese (R)
Joe Manchin (D)
Jesse Johnson (M) [Mountain Party]
Three weeks ago Raese had a 5 point lead. Two weeks ago Manchin had a 4 point lead. Two days ago Raese had a 2 point lead . . . who knows by November 2nd.
In Pennsylvania:
Pat Toomey (R)
Joe Sestak (D)
Osborn Hart (S) [Socialist] {Write-In}
This is a back and forth race. On the same day one pose shows an even tie at 46% while other polls show Toomey ahead by up to 8 points. No poll shows Sestak ahead. But it shall be interesting.
I feel that the Democrats need to take at least half of these races to keep a majority in the Senate. Keep this list and watch the fight come Tuesday night.
In Washington State:
Dino Rossi (R)
Patty Murray (D)
Patty Murray is the incumbent and hold a very slight lead over Dino Rossi. That lead is about 48% to 46% at this time but we have a week to go and this one could go either way.
In Nevada:
Sharron Angle (R)
Harry Reid (D)
Jerry Carter (I)
Jeffery Durbin (I)
Wil Stand (NONE)
Scott Ashjian (T) [Tea Party of Nevada]
Recently the polls have gone back and forth with Ms. Angle recently taking a small lead but still about 47% to 45%.
In Colorado:
Ken Buck (R)
Michael Bennet (D)
Bennet and Buck have been in a dead heat tied at 47% for the last 2 weeks. The decision will be made when it is decided who screwed up most/least.
In Illinois:
Mark Kirk (R)
Alan Giannoulias (D)
LeAlan Jones (G) [Green]
Michael Labno (L) [Libertarian]
Alyson Kennedy (S) [Socialist Workers] {Write-in}
Mark Kirk has been consistently ahead for the past month but still within each polls margin of error. So for all practical purposes it is still a tossup. The problem here is the Green/Libertarian/Socialist dilution of voters. That makes it very difficult for one person to get above 50%.
In West Virginia:
John Raese (R)
Joe Manchin (D)
Jesse Johnson (M) [Mountain Party]
Three weeks ago Raese had a 5 point lead. Two weeks ago Manchin had a 4 point lead. Two days ago Raese had a 2 point lead . . . who knows by November 2nd.
In Pennsylvania:
Pat Toomey (R)
Joe Sestak (D)
Osborn Hart (S) [Socialist] {Write-In}
This is a back and forth race. On the same day one pose shows an even tie at 46% while other polls show Toomey ahead by up to 8 points. No poll shows Sestak ahead. But it shall be interesting.
I feel that the Democrats need to take at least half of these races to keep a majority in the Senate. Keep this list and watch the fight come Tuesday night.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Getting The Word Out
Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that everybody is allowed to give as much money as they desire, to anybody they choose and absolutely nobody needs to know about it, we are finding ourselves up to our butts in crap passed down to us as truth.
First, I'd like you to read my blog post on the lies we endure during campaigns by clicking this URL:
www.swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/06/isnt-there-law-against-that.html
Now you will understand that all restraints are off when it comes to politics and political advertising. If that is the case, why doesn't more truth come out? Why is it that only the false stuff makes the headlines? Isn't the truth believable? Or, isn't there any truth out there to be believed?
I'm not sure I can answer any of these questions to the comfort of everyone, but here is my analysis on what has happened, is happening and will happen in the future.
You have to understand that a good part of politics is getting the word out. Letting people know what you are going to do and why, then actually doing it and again explaining why it is good for the country, then reinforcing what you did with again explaining it so that there will be few if any questions. Anticipating objections and overcoming those objections up front will help eliminate problems that might arise later.
The White House is not very good at this! Obama's advisers don't understand good salesmanship and that is what politics is all about. Winning an election is one thing, keeping the post to which you are elected, is another. In order to keep your position, you must explain your actions and why those actions were good for the country. If the White House doesn't do this then everyone that hears the lies, which will inevitably come from the other side, will only believe them to be true because no one has refuted them.
Here are some of those lies that have been recently passed around and need to be put to rest.
1. "Government spending takes money out of the economy." The REALITY is that Government is you and I, the "People" and the money it spends is on you and me. The citizens of the U. S. are a gathering of people who pool their money to do the good we need to have done for us because we can't afford to do them as individuals. Some consider this a Socialist leaning country and what would they do without those Socialist Roads, Socialist highways, Socialist airports, Socialist harbors, Socialist courts, Socialist schools, Socialist police, Socialist Firemen and Socialist Armed Forces. Government doesn't just spend on the unemployed, welfare recipients and foreign aid.
2. ""Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme that is going broke." The REALITY is that Social Security has run a surplus since it began and has Trillions in a trust fund. It is completely sound for at least 25 more years. It cannot borrow so it will never contribute to the deficit, unlike the military and most other agencies. Life expectancy is longer because infant mortality has improved over the years. Back in the 30s the average life expectancy was shorter because more children died of TB, Polio, Whooping Cough, Mumps, Measles, Chicken Pox, Scarlet Fever and various other diseases that don't kill people any more. If you reach the age of 60 your future life expectancy is about the same as it was back in the 30s.
3. "Health Care Reform costs $1 Trillion." The REALITY is that Health Care Reform will reduce government deficits by $138 Billion over the next 10 years.
4. "Small businesses will hire if they get Tax Cuts." The REALITY is that Small businesses hire according to DEMAND. Demand creates jobs. Having extra money on hand does not cause Small Businesses to hire. On the other hand, if there is demand for their product or service, a business will find the money to hire workers to create products to satisfy that demand.
5. "The Stimulus was a bust and didn't work at all." The REALITY is that the stimulus worked but was not enough by itself. The Congressional Budget Office says the stimulus raised employment by between 1.5 and 3.5 million jobs. The fact is that we were in a deeper depression than we had known about. We needed a larger stimulus to get us all the way out.
6. "Obama Bailed out the banks." The REALITY is that while most people confuse the "Stimulus" with the bank bailouts, the Bank Bailouts were requested by President George W. Bush and his Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. The bailouts passed and began before the 2008 election of President Obama.
7. "President Obama raised taxes, which hurt the economy." The REALITY is that President Obama actually cut taxes. 40% of the ""Stimulus" was wasted on tax cuts which only create debt. That is why the stimulus was so much less effective than it could have been.
8. "President Obama tripled the deficit." The REALITY is that President George W. Bush's last budget had a $1.416 Trillion deficit. Obama's first budget reduced that to $1.29 Trillion.
Until the White House learns how to communicate President Obama's programs and how to best do a quality PR job, they will continue to lose the information battle and it may cost Obama re-election in 2012.
Doing a good job is only half the battle, communicating it is the other half and some say the important half. Senior Obama advisor David Axelrod has to do a better job. Recently he stated, "Two years ago I could have told you this was going to be a tough year." He knew then and had plenty of time to work on PR and quality communication about Obama's plans. But, unlike the master Karl Rove, Axelrod has really done very little or nothing. Axelrod also stated, "Our mission is to get people energized and understanding there are real stakes in the election." But what he failed to understand is, that is an ongoing job, not something you only do a few months every two years. His job should be to stay out in front of those objections and anticipate those questions before they are asked.
First, I'd like you to read my blog post on the lies we endure during campaigns by clicking this URL:
www.swoopsfromsnowyowl.blogspot.com/2010/06/isnt-there-law-against-that.html
Now you will understand that all restraints are off when it comes to politics and political advertising. If that is the case, why doesn't more truth come out? Why is it that only the false stuff makes the headlines? Isn't the truth believable? Or, isn't there any truth out there to be believed?
I'm not sure I can answer any of these questions to the comfort of everyone, but here is my analysis on what has happened, is happening and will happen in the future.
You have to understand that a good part of politics is getting the word out. Letting people know what you are going to do and why, then actually doing it and again explaining why it is good for the country, then reinforcing what you did with again explaining it so that there will be few if any questions. Anticipating objections and overcoming those objections up front will help eliminate problems that might arise later.
The White House is not very good at this! Obama's advisers don't understand good salesmanship and that is what politics is all about. Winning an election is one thing, keeping the post to which you are elected, is another. In order to keep your position, you must explain your actions and why those actions were good for the country. If the White House doesn't do this then everyone that hears the lies, which will inevitably come from the other side, will only believe them to be true because no one has refuted them.
Here are some of those lies that have been recently passed around and need to be put to rest.
1. "Government spending takes money out of the economy." The REALITY is that Government is you and I, the "People" and the money it spends is on you and me. The citizens of the U. S. are a gathering of people who pool their money to do the good we need to have done for us because we can't afford to do them as individuals. Some consider this a Socialist leaning country and what would they do without those Socialist Roads, Socialist highways, Socialist airports, Socialist harbors, Socialist courts, Socialist schools, Socialist police, Socialist Firemen and Socialist Armed Forces. Government doesn't just spend on the unemployed, welfare recipients and foreign aid.
2. ""Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme that is going broke." The REALITY is that Social Security has run a surplus since it began and has Trillions in a trust fund. It is completely sound for at least 25 more years. It cannot borrow so it will never contribute to the deficit, unlike the military and most other agencies. Life expectancy is longer because infant mortality has improved over the years. Back in the 30s the average life expectancy was shorter because more children died of TB, Polio, Whooping Cough, Mumps, Measles, Chicken Pox, Scarlet Fever and various other diseases that don't kill people any more. If you reach the age of 60 your future life expectancy is about the same as it was back in the 30s.
3. "Health Care Reform costs $1 Trillion." The REALITY is that Health Care Reform will reduce government deficits by $138 Billion over the next 10 years.
4. "Small businesses will hire if they get Tax Cuts." The REALITY is that Small businesses hire according to DEMAND. Demand creates jobs. Having extra money on hand does not cause Small Businesses to hire. On the other hand, if there is demand for their product or service, a business will find the money to hire workers to create products to satisfy that demand.
5. "The Stimulus was a bust and didn't work at all." The REALITY is that the stimulus worked but was not enough by itself. The Congressional Budget Office says the stimulus raised employment by between 1.5 and 3.5 million jobs. The fact is that we were in a deeper depression than we had known about. We needed a larger stimulus to get us all the way out.
6. "Obama Bailed out the banks." The REALITY is that while most people confuse the "Stimulus" with the bank bailouts, the Bank Bailouts were requested by President George W. Bush and his Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. The bailouts passed and began before the 2008 election of President Obama.
7. "President Obama raised taxes, which hurt the economy." The REALITY is that President Obama actually cut taxes. 40% of the ""Stimulus" was wasted on tax cuts which only create debt. That is why the stimulus was so much less effective than it could have been.
8. "President Obama tripled the deficit." The REALITY is that President George W. Bush's last budget had a $1.416 Trillion deficit. Obama's first budget reduced that to $1.29 Trillion.
Until the White House learns how to communicate President Obama's programs and how to best do a quality PR job, they will continue to lose the information battle and it may cost Obama re-election in 2012.
Doing a good job is only half the battle, communicating it is the other half and some say the important half. Senior Obama advisor David Axelrod has to do a better job. Recently he stated, "Two years ago I could have told you this was going to be a tough year." He knew then and had plenty of time to work on PR and quality communication about Obama's plans. But, unlike the master Karl Rove, Axelrod has really done very little or nothing. Axelrod also stated, "Our mission is to get people energized and understanding there are real stakes in the election." But what he failed to understand is, that is an ongoing job, not something you only do a few months every two years. His job should be to stay out in front of those objections and anticipate those questions before they are asked.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
What The Republicans Are Against!
Recently, the Congressional Republicans stated that they are for the Small businesses in America, yet they have been consistently opposed to the Obama's administrations efforts to cut the taxes small business owners have to pay.
The President has already signed into law eight pieces of powerful legislation designed to help small business. They are:
1. A small business health care tax credit.
2. A tax credit for hiring the unemployed.
3. Bonus depreciation tax incentives to support new investment.
4. 75% exclusion of small business capital gains.
5. Expansion of limits of small business expenses.
6. A five year carryback of net operating losses.
7. To allow small businesses better flexibility in their investments, a reduction from 10 down to 7 years on built in gains holding period.
8. A temporary small business estimated tax payment relief so small business can keep more of their cash on hand.
Guess what, the Republicans voted against all of that. They are not pro-small businesses . . . they are ANTI-OBAMA! The high income taxpayers they are fighting to get tax relief for are hardly what most Americans think of as "Small Businesses." While Congressional Republicans' rhetoric would imply they are fighting for "Start-ups", mom-and-pop store owners and aspiring entrepreneurs, they count as "Small Businesses" making "Small Business income" any and all high income taxpayers with any type of partnership income, sole proprietor income, or "S" corporation income. Thus, under their definition, the following are all counted as small businesses:
>Each partner of a major corporate law firm
>Billionaire hedge fund Managers
>Over 50% of the top 400 taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income (according to the IRS--a group that averaged $344 million each in income in 2007)
And here is more;
While Republicans claim that their push for high income tax relief is motivated by concern for small business, almost 85% of the tax relief they want goes to those making over $1,000,000. Those are not small businesses.
Obama wants to lend support to creditworthy small businesses still struggling to access the credit they need to expand and hire.
Republicans are holding middle class tax cuts, your tax cuts, hostage so they can borrow $700,000,000,000 to pay for the tax cuts that the Republicans want to give to the richest 2% of earners, those are the people that contribute to the Republicans campaign.
The President has already signed into law eight pieces of powerful legislation designed to help small business. They are:
1. A small business health care tax credit.
2. A tax credit for hiring the unemployed.
3. Bonus depreciation tax incentives to support new investment.
4. 75% exclusion of small business capital gains.
5. Expansion of limits of small business expenses.
6. A five year carryback of net operating losses.
7. To allow small businesses better flexibility in their investments, a reduction from 10 down to 7 years on built in gains holding period.
8. A temporary small business estimated tax payment relief so small business can keep more of their cash on hand.
Guess what, the Republicans voted against all of that. They are not pro-small businesses . . . they are ANTI-OBAMA! The high income taxpayers they are fighting to get tax relief for are hardly what most Americans think of as "Small Businesses." While Congressional Republicans' rhetoric would imply they are fighting for "Start-ups", mom-and-pop store owners and aspiring entrepreneurs, they count as "Small Businesses" making "Small Business income" any and all high income taxpayers with any type of partnership income, sole proprietor income, or "S" corporation income. Thus, under their definition, the following are all counted as small businesses:
>Each partner of a major corporate law firm
>Billionaire hedge fund Managers
>Over 50% of the top 400 taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income (according to the IRS--a group that averaged $344 million each in income in 2007)
And here is more;
While Republicans claim that their push for high income tax relief is motivated by concern for small business, almost 85% of the tax relief they want goes to those making over $1,000,000. Those are not small businesses.
Obama wants to lend support to creditworthy small businesses still struggling to access the credit they need to expand and hire.
Republicans are holding middle class tax cuts, your tax cuts, hostage so they can borrow $700,000,000,000 to pay for the tax cuts that the Republicans want to give to the richest 2% of earners, those are the people that contribute to the Republicans campaign.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Next Year's COLA
This is a preliminary warning to Liberals everywhere. There are those around that are at this very moment preparing emails that will soon be coming your way about the subject of this blog post.
Approximately 35% of retired Americans rely on Social Security for up to 90% of their retirement income and over 60% of those retired depend on Social Security as their primary income. Most of them also rely on an annual COLA (cost of living allowance) increase in that income. Once again, next year, that will not happen. That's two years in a row without a COLA increase, and it still isn't Obama's fault. Nor is it the fault of the Democrats controlling Congress. In fact, the COLAs are automatically set each year by an inflation measure that was adopted by Congress back in the mid seventies. That COLA is based on inflation within the present year and according to that measure, there will be no COLA next year.
Once again; For those of you reading this, be aware . . . there will be emails coming your way accusing Obama or the Democrats in Congress for this lack of a COLA. They will say that Obama has refused to give the elderly a raise in their Social Security. Make sure you don't let them get away with it. Remember, the formula was set back in the 70s, not by anyone in power today and it is the law.
Also remember that the VA benefits are tied directly to the Social Security COLA as well as many other entitlements.
Approximately 35% of retired Americans rely on Social Security for up to 90% of their retirement income and over 60% of those retired depend on Social Security as their primary income. Most of them also rely on an annual COLA (cost of living allowance) increase in that income. Once again, next year, that will not happen. That's two years in a row without a COLA increase, and it still isn't Obama's fault. Nor is it the fault of the Democrats controlling Congress. In fact, the COLAs are automatically set each year by an inflation measure that was adopted by Congress back in the mid seventies. That COLA is based on inflation within the present year and according to that measure, there will be no COLA next year.
Once again; For those of you reading this, be aware . . . there will be emails coming your way accusing Obama or the Democrats in Congress for this lack of a COLA. They will say that Obama has refused to give the elderly a raise in their Social Security. Make sure you don't let them get away with it. Remember, the formula was set back in the 70s, not by anyone in power today and it is the law.
Also remember that the VA benefits are tied directly to the Social Security COLA as well as many other entitlements.
Friday, October 8, 2010
On Early Voting
We are about to enter the period of time, just prior to the mid-term elections, that most of the civilized world has "Early Voting." It used to be that this period was termed as "Absentee Voting." You had to know when you were going to be gone and then you had to document that you were going out of state, then you were mailed a ballot that may or may not have been counted because it had to be mailed back to the election commission hopefully with enough stamps.
Now, you don't have to have an excuse to vote early. In the past, I've had to stand in line for up to an hour to vote. Early voting has eliminated all that, if you play your cards correctly. If you vote early on your lunch hour remember, so will everyone else. If you put it off until the last couple of days remember, so will everyone else.
Vote on your day off, in the morning, about 9 till 11 or in the afternoon between 2 and 4, otherwise you are still going to be in a line. Don't wait till the last few days of early voting . . . again . . . you'll end up waiting in an even longer line.
About the only reason to not vote early is that you will miss out if your candidate is a sex offender or gets arrested for theft within the last few days before election day. Remember, if he/she gets caught lying, there is no law against that. (see my blog dated 6/20/2010 entitled "Isn't there a law against that?) Then you might have switched your vote, otherwise . . . you're vote is good.
I'll try to cover my readers by area in which they live.
In Arkansas, early voting begins October 18th and ends November 1st.
(If you live in Baxter County you can vote in either the new Library or at the court house. If you live in Marion County your early voting spot is at the County Court House. (Say hello to Amy for me . . . nice lady)
In California, early voting began on October 4th. You'll have to check on the spots for voting early.
In New Mexico, early voting will begin on October 16th and you too will have to check on where.
In Texas, early voting is as it is in Arkansas. You will start on October 18th.
In Maryland, you start early voting on October 22nd.
In Tennessee, you will start your early voting on October 13th.
In Oklahoma, you will have only a short period of early voting. There early voting starts on October 29th and ends on November 1st. And, I am not sure if the early voting polls there will be open on that Saturday, the 30th.
A few of my friends live in states where there is no early voting. In Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia and Minnesota you'll just have to wait until November 2nd.
If you can and if you want, please vote early and take the pressure off the polls on November 2nd. But, before you go vote, make sure you are informed about the issues and about the candidates.
Now, you don't have to have an excuse to vote early. In the past, I've had to stand in line for up to an hour to vote. Early voting has eliminated all that, if you play your cards correctly. If you vote early on your lunch hour remember, so will everyone else. If you put it off until the last couple of days remember, so will everyone else.
Vote on your day off, in the morning, about 9 till 11 or in the afternoon between 2 and 4, otherwise you are still going to be in a line. Don't wait till the last few days of early voting . . . again . . . you'll end up waiting in an even longer line.
About the only reason to not vote early is that you will miss out if your candidate is a sex offender or gets arrested for theft within the last few days before election day. Remember, if he/she gets caught lying, there is no law against that. (see my blog dated 6/20/2010 entitled "Isn't there a law against that?) Then you might have switched your vote, otherwise . . . you're vote is good.
I'll try to cover my readers by area in which they live.
In Arkansas, early voting begins October 18th and ends November 1st.
(If you live in Baxter County you can vote in either the new Library or at the court house. If you live in Marion County your early voting spot is at the County Court House. (Say hello to Amy for me . . . nice lady)
In California, early voting began on October 4th. You'll have to check on the spots for voting early.
In New Mexico, early voting will begin on October 16th and you too will have to check on where.
In Texas, early voting is as it is in Arkansas. You will start on October 18th.
In Maryland, you start early voting on October 22nd.
In Tennessee, you will start your early voting on October 13th.
In Oklahoma, you will have only a short period of early voting. There early voting starts on October 29th and ends on November 1st. And, I am not sure if the early voting polls there will be open on that Saturday, the 30th.
A few of my friends live in states where there is no early voting. In Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia and Minnesota you'll just have to wait until November 2nd.
If you can and if you want, please vote early and take the pressure off the polls on November 2nd. But, before you go vote, make sure you are informed about the issues and about the candidates.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
A Burnt Out Lamp
A light bulb burnt out this week in my bedroom. Actually, "Bulb" is an improper name for it. It was really a lamp. The word "Bulb" is meant to be the name of the glassware that surrounds the lighting filament/s. Lamp is the proper name for what most of us call a "Light Bulb." But enough for the trivia . . . there didn't seem much to write about on a lamp burning out. Not much except I bought this lamp in 1997 and it was the first Compact Florescent Lamp I ever bought, in fact I bought eight of them in a package. It is different from those curly ones we get now. It has three fingers sticking straight out. I bought it at Wal-Mart because it said I would use only 14 watts while getting 60 watts of light and I got eight lamps fro $12.96. That was the first time I ever saw them for under $2 each. I think they were trying to get rid of them because the next batch they received was the twisty/curly type.
There were no real instructions with those lamps, they just wanted you to replace your old incandescent lamps with the new CFLs. But, some uses don't fit the CFL. For instance;
--If you have a dimmer switch in the dinning room, those CFLs won't
work when dimmed, or in some cases they don't work at all.
Some new CFLs are usable with a dimmer and are so marked as
"Dimmable."
--If you turn a light on and off frequently, a CFL will not last as long
as when you put it where a light stays on for long periods and only
gets turned on and off once or twice a day.
--If you use a CFL outside during cold or even cool weather it will
not work as efficiently and it will take several minutes for it to
warm up to the point of sufficient lighting. It will also not last as
long.
All in all, the CFLs I've had have outlasted any incandescent bulb I've owned. Now don't get me wrong, some CFLs have lasted a shorter period of time than this 13 year lamp because they were put in one of my two bathrooms where lights were turned on and off several time a day or they were used outdoors in the cold weather. But this being of the original purchase and used in my bedroom where the light is on for several hours each day, make it very special.
The other two in that fixture are of the same original purchase and I assume that they will soon be gone, too. But they are still working and have more than paid for their purchase price in putting out light and saving me money on electricity.
If you want to know more about CFLs and have not yet decided to invest in them, go to http://www.cflfacts.com/ to get straight information on use and disposal of CFLs.
There were no real instructions with those lamps, they just wanted you to replace your old incandescent lamps with the new CFLs. But, some uses don't fit the CFL. For instance;
--If you have a dimmer switch in the dinning room, those CFLs won't
work when dimmed, or in some cases they don't work at all.
Some new CFLs are usable with a dimmer and are so marked as
"Dimmable."
--If you turn a light on and off frequently, a CFL will not last as long
as when you put it where a light stays on for long periods and only
gets turned on and off once or twice a day.
--If you use a CFL outside during cold or even cool weather it will
not work as efficiently and it will take several minutes for it to
warm up to the point of sufficient lighting. It will also not last as
long.
All in all, the CFLs I've had have outlasted any incandescent bulb I've owned. Now don't get me wrong, some CFLs have lasted a shorter period of time than this 13 year lamp because they were put in one of my two bathrooms where lights were turned on and off several time a day or they were used outdoors in the cold weather. But this being of the original purchase and used in my bedroom where the light is on for several hours each day, make it very special.
The other two in that fixture are of the same original purchase and I assume that they will soon be gone, too. But they are still working and have more than paid for their purchase price in putting out light and saving me money on electricity.
If you want to know more about CFLs and have not yet decided to invest in them, go to http://www.cflfacts.com/ to get straight information on use and disposal of CFLs.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Don't Take The Pledge! (Conclusion)
We have seen where the "Pledge to America" is a façade that has nothing, or next to nothing, as foundation. Of the 46 pages of "Pledge," only 17 have a message and even that is
Large Type
and w i d e l y s p a c e d.
Even though this year government employment has declined and private sector jobs increased by over 750,000, the "Pledge" states that the "Only parts of the economy expanding are government and the National Debt." That, of course, is FALSE!
Even though jobless claims are down 8%, the "Pledge" says, "Jobless claims continue to soar." That is obviously FALSE!
Even though it has been proven FALSE, it echoes the claims that the IRS may need to expand by over 16,000 employees.
Even though the CBO, a non-partisan group of experts, states that the stimulus bill will cost $814 billion over 10 years, about $81 billion a year, the "Pledge" claims it will cost $1 Trillion.
Even though tax cuts would not hurt any REAL "Small Business," the "Pledge" claims that half of the small businesses in America would have higher taxes. What they don't tell you is that the GOP has included as "Small Business" are businesses that make over $450 million a year. That's not a small business!
The "Pledge" is full of "Apple Pie" and "Motherhood" terms and Phrases like ". . . to those who yearn to be free" and "America is an idea."
Even though the will of the people is what put Obama in office and gave the Legislature to the Democrats, the "Pledge" states, ". . . an unchecked executive, a compliant legislature and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of 'the people.'" That, of course, is FALSE!
Even though the CBO estimates that "Defensive Medicine" or ordering extra tests as a defensive measure, would only raise the cost of medicine about ½ of 1%, the "Pledge" states "Skyrocketing medical liability insurance rates have distorted the practice of medicine, routinely forcing doctors to order costly and often unnecessary tests to protect themselves from lawsuits, often referred to as 'defensive medicine.'" So, that part of teh "pledge" is FALSE!
The "Pledge" is like Cotton Candy and Marshmallow Fluff. . . it kinda tastes good for a while but in the end you are gonna get lots of cavities and may even get diabetes. It sounds good but in the end it will only hurt you and cost you more.
Most of the really bad things that the GOP "Pledge" predicts will happen only if the Republicans get control of the legislature in the midterms and/or the Republicans continue to say NO to everything that would be good for the middle class.
The solution to all this is for you to get educated and to educate those around you. Then get out and vote in an intelligent manner. Offer your services on Election Day, to help other Liberals get to the polls.
Get informed and stay informed.
References:
www.data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ce
www.data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool-latest_numbers&series_id-LNS14000000
www.factcheck.org/2009/10/malpractice-savings-reconsidered/
www.factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/
www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/117xx/doc11706/08-24-ARRA/pdf
www.factcheck.org/2009/06/making-sense-of-stimulus-spending
www.jct.gov/publications.html?func-startdown&id-3691
www.factcheck.org/2010/09/2011-tax-increases/
Large Type
and w i d e l y s p a c e d.
Even though this year government employment has declined and private sector jobs increased by over 750,000, the "Pledge" states that the "Only parts of the economy expanding are government and the National Debt." That, of course, is FALSE!
Even though jobless claims are down 8%, the "Pledge" says, "Jobless claims continue to soar." That is obviously FALSE!
Even though it has been proven FALSE, it echoes the claims that the IRS may need to expand by over 16,000 employees.
Even though the CBO, a non-partisan group of experts, states that the stimulus bill will cost $814 billion over 10 years, about $81 billion a year, the "Pledge" claims it will cost $1 Trillion.
Even though tax cuts would not hurt any REAL "Small Business," the "Pledge" claims that half of the small businesses in America would have higher taxes. What they don't tell you is that the GOP has included as "Small Business" are businesses that make over $450 million a year. That's not a small business!
The "Pledge" is full of "Apple Pie" and "Motherhood" terms and Phrases like ". . . to those who yearn to be free" and "America is an idea."
Even though the will of the people is what put Obama in office and gave the Legislature to the Democrats, the "Pledge" states, ". . . an unchecked executive, a compliant legislature and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of 'the people.'" That, of course, is FALSE!
Even though the CBO estimates that "Defensive Medicine" or ordering extra tests as a defensive measure, would only raise the cost of medicine about ½ of 1%, the "Pledge" states "Skyrocketing medical liability insurance rates have distorted the practice of medicine, routinely forcing doctors to order costly and often unnecessary tests to protect themselves from lawsuits, often referred to as 'defensive medicine.'" So, that part of teh "pledge" is FALSE!
The "Pledge" is like Cotton Candy and Marshmallow Fluff. . . it kinda tastes good for a while but in the end you are gonna get lots of cavities and may even get diabetes. It sounds good but in the end it will only hurt you and cost you more.
Most of the really bad things that the GOP "Pledge" predicts will happen only if the Republicans get control of the legislature in the midterms and/or the Republicans continue to say NO to everything that would be good for the middle class.
The solution to all this is for you to get educated and to educate those around you. Then get out and vote in an intelligent manner. Offer your services on Election Day, to help other Liberals get to the polls.
Get informed and stay informed.
References:
www.data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ce
www.data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool-latest_numbers&series_id-LNS14000000
www.factcheck.org/2009/10/malpractice-savings-reconsidered/
www.factcheck.org/2010/03/irs-expansion/
www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/117xx/doc11706/08-24-ARRA/pdf
www.factcheck.org/2009/06/making-sense-of-stimulus-spending
www.jct.gov/publications.html?func-startdown&id-3691
www.factcheck.org/2010/09/2011-tax-increases/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)