In case you didn’t notice Harry Reid’s switch from the bi-partisan jobs bill to “his bill”, apparently he went with the Union’s Plan as outlined in the job’s bill letter dated 2-18-10.

Here are the highlighted points in the letter:

• We join the President’s call to Congress, and strongly urge the House and Senate to enact bold legislation that provides immediate relief to people who are out of work and employers that are unable to maintain their workforces. As included in the House legislation, it is critical that substantial fiscal relief be made available to help stabilize State and local governments, and to preserve essential services and safety net programs in our communities and the jobs of tens of thousands of workers around the country.

• Of equal importance…legislation must provide tools for ensuring that stimulus funds go to…those regions where homeowners were targeted by unscrupulous mortgage lenders.

• Appropriate $40 billion a year for two years to create employment opportunities for unemployed and underemployed residents of distressed communities.

• Funds Allocation:

5% for Indian tribes and discretionary grants,
30% allocated to states to be re-granted to small localities
65% to metropolitan cities and counties under the Community Block Grant formula.

• Invest $1 billion to hire workers to maintain and rehabilitate abandoned and foreclosed properties in neighborhoods by appropriating a second round of funds for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP).

• Provide a work sharing tax credit, as proposed by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI)- The tax credits would be used to pay firms to shorten the typical workweek or work year, while keeping pay constant.

• Extend through FY2011…existing TANF Emergency Contingency Funds, which can be used to create subsidized jobs, as well as to improve access to cash assistance and other one-time assistance for low-income families.

• Provide $20 billion for school maintenance and repair…this could generate 250,000 skilled maintenance and repair jobs.

• Provide $50 billion in capital funds for the lowest-income school districts.

• Prioritize investments in public transportation,

• One percent of all dollars for infrastructure investment should be dedicated to creating a pipeline of workers ready to step into apprenticeship programs and construction careers…ensure that public agencies and contractors receiving federal funds utilize Community Workforce Agreements.

• Prevention of foreclosures

• Allocate $10 billion of appropriated TARP funds to HUD to provide fixed-rate, low-interest loans to unemployed people facing foreclosure who don’t qualify for other assistance.

• Allow homeowners to rent back their homes at market rates for up to ten years following foreclosure…modeled after the Fannie Mae “Deed for Lease”

• Support “cram down” provisions to allow bankruptcy court judges to approve changes to mortgage contracts for homeowners in bankruptcy

Endored By:
AFL-CIO
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
Asian American Justice Center
American Association of People with Disabilities
Campaign for Community Change
Center for Responsible Lending
Coalition on Human Needs
Communications Workers of America
Demos
Economic Policy Institute
Half in Ten
Japanese American Citizens League
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
National Congress of American Indians
National Council of La Raza
National Partnership for Women and Families
Policy Link
Service Employees International Union
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
United Methodist Episcopal Churches
United States Student Association
United Steelworkers
USAction

Socialism Alert – Those that endorsed such a plan are complicit in bringing about a total socialistic makeover of America. The job creation that the unions have in mind are union jobs. Unions serve no purpose other than to enrich it’s leaders and develop large Democrat voting blocks. However, there’s a bigger threat from unions as they consolidate more power by their continued efforts to turn all public-service jobs into union jobs. The result will be an increased creation of inefficient government jobs that are a taxpayer liability. These jobs pay more than most equivalent private sector jobs, with very lavish benefits, including retirements and pensions (with minimal employee contribution) financed by the taxpayer. Then they can take that taxpayer financed salary to pay union dues and contribute to a socialist political party. When they feel the need for higher salaries, they demand it and strike if refused. Then there’s a good chance they will sue you (the taxpayers) when they don’t get their way.

Their answer: Not to cut back on publicly-financed jobs, or pay more of their insurance contributions, or furlough some workers, or take a pay cut. They want to add more government workers and raise property taxes, taxes on food, taxes on payroll, new user fees, new fines, etc..

They want to promote and support these socialistic goals for America:

AS LONG AS THEY DON’T HAVE TO PAY FOR IT!

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

Isn’t it interesting how the progressives have changed their tune, now that they are in the majority?

Could the current politicians in Washington be bigger hypocrites? I don’t think so…

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

Reconciliation is bad – that is if you are having the reconciliation process used against you in Congress. In a Sept. 2008 Cspan interview with Tom Daschle, Harry is clear about not using the Nuclear Option. No embedding allowed, so here’s the link: 195169&start=3006&end=3124

In specific reference to the Nuclear Option being used by Harry Reid in the future:

Daschle : Is there any likelihood that we’re going to face circumstances like that again.

Reid: As long as I’m the leader, NO!

Now fast forward to this week:

You’d think these crooks would cover their lies better than this.  What do you expect from crazy people. So, is Harry psychotic or just a liar. or both.

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

So, China is the world’s largest polluting country. More than likely, the U.S. and other developed countries have precipitated this by moving manufacturing overseas to reduce their cost of doing business. The policies of the U.S. Federal government have placed such a financial burden on the U.S. manufacturing sector that it remains difficult to operate profitably.  Even though China would have remained a super-third-world nation and employment in the U.S. would have suffered much less, the benefit of this manufacturing relocation, in the eyes of the Chinese government, is non-existent and they say we have caused them to become the largest polluting country in the world. What the heck did the Chinese expect when they opened up their doors to the manufacturing world in an attempt to lift their country from their third world status? They had to of known the implications of their decisions in this regard, yet they expect to remain fiscally unaccountable for remedying the problem they helped create.

So this week at the Copenhagen conference, China and other third-world (and developing) countries are declaring a boycott until developed nations, like the U.S. and Britain, pay for the proposed wealth distribution outlined in the IPCC mandate. An AP story today, gives some insight into what these developed countries expect from this agreement.

China, India and other developing nations boycotted U.N. climate talks Monday, bringing negotiations to a halt with their demand that rich countries discuss much deeper cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions.

The move disrupted the 192-nation conference and forced the cancellation of formal working groups, delaying the frantic work of negotiators trying to resolve technical issues before the arrival of more than 110 world leaders later this week.

and

The boycott was largely seen as a ploy to shift the agenda to the responsibilities of the industrial countries and make emissions reductions the first item for discussion.

While this is certainly mere posturing on the part of China and India, it stills shows the rift that lies between modernized and developing nations. These countries’ governments are not willing to commit themselves financially to a problem that they take no responsibility for. However, the bottom-line is -  they want to pollute while we pay for it. Confirmation of this comes from a quote from a participant at Copenhagen

Gustavo Silva-Chavez, a climate change specialist with the Environmental Defense Fund. “They want to make sure that developed countries are not left off the hook.”

Apparently, in an attempt to circumvent this dissent among developing nations, the White House announced an international effort to help these developing nations create greenhouse gas-free energy.

the White House announced a new program drawing funds from international partners to spend $350 million over five years to give developing nations clean energy technology to curb greenhouse gas emissions

The program will distribute solar power alternatives for homes, including sun-powered lanterns, supply cleaner equipment and appliances and work to develop renewable energy systems in the world’s poorer nations.

So the entire agenda of the developing countries is same as the overall goals of the unelected and unaccountable world government body, the U.N. Whether it’s wealth transference from country to country or individual to individual, it’s still socialism. So, if the socialists’ ploy in your own government is not well received by its citizens, it will get its “Big Brother”, the U.N,. to furthers its goals.

So, whether it’s coming from communist China or the Marxist-lite Obama administration, their end goals are the same:

Provide social and economic justice to those who have suffered from capitalism and wealth distribution to those who demonize capitalism.

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

Lou Dobbs, in an interview with Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), discusses Obama’s intentions of making commitments for the U.S. without American’s approval.

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

This 8-part video, while a year old, gives insight into the politicisation and propagandising of the global warming scare.

Yes, I agree there are global warming trends. I also agree there are global cooling trends. If you listen to the alarmist (including the majority of the comma-induced state-controlled media), we’re doomed. A great crisis on a world-wide scale.

So the answer is to have a U.N.- backed global monetary climate trading and financial system to allow for the punishment of energy users and producers without repercussion and accountability. Any global governance system that seeks to contractually bind a country to any agreement without that country’s citizen’s approval is merely a device designed  to strip sovereignty from that country in order to diminish/elimiate personal freedom and liberty of its citizens.

This flies in the face of of our Constitutional Republic and is a continuation of our federal government’s expansionism  policy that was re-defined under the traitorous Woodrow Wilson’s progressive administration. It’s merely about the money and power.

There is a need to treat the earth kinder, but it doesn’t get achieved through a mandate established by an unaccountable world governing body.

Here’s an alternate choice to the 8-part video below in one video.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Wake Up America and Cut Off Your TV

Click here to join our forum discussions - (2) Posts

Today the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) came out with their findings regarding the projected cost of the proposed health care bill(s) floating around Congress. As reported by the AP,

The Congressional Budget Office added that the measure would reduce federal deficits by $81 billion over a decade and probably lead to “continued reductions in federal budget deficits” in the years beyond.

The CBO must be smoking something wacky to think that this program will be, at a minimum, deficit neutral, must less an $81 billion surplus over ten years. The federal government can’t even accurately project a six-month budget, so how accurate do you think a 10-year projection will work. It won’t.

So how is this savings being accounted for. Well, the biggest portion of that, over $400 billion, will come from Medicare reductions. Good luck with that. Senior Citizens will be in the streets with pitchforks and tar and feathers if that becomes a reality. There will be a tax levied upon medical device makers and pharmaceutical companies. These industries will suck it up and not pass that cost along to its customers, including us and the federal government- yea when pigs can fly. Then we have the excise tax placed upon those who have comprehensive coverage with low deductibles (the Mercedes plans). How can they even guess the effect of this tax on the consumer’s choice of coverage when they are faced with a tax rate on these plans up to 40%. There is the possibility of consumers opting for a health plan with less comprehensive coverage to avoid or drastically reduce the tax and reduce their overall cost. However, the biggest winner of bright ideas for raising revenue is the penalty accessed to those who choose not to purchase health care coverage. I get such a big tingle up my spine knowing that the IRS would be involved in the health care business. I see an enormous benefit of this scam. First, since it would be cheaper for an employer to pay the “no coverage penalty”, they will start dumping their employees’ health insurance plans and, in turn, many of those employees will be left with little choice but to acquire health coverage from the fed. Then the unintended result to employees will be a reduction in pay. You don’t think an employer will look to compensate its employees for the loss of a health insurance benefit. The other unintended consequence for all Americans choosing not to buy health coverage will be the constant battle of keeping everything they own out of the hands of IRS auctioneers. I can hear it now. “Yea, ole Bob, just had his house sold by the IRS cause he didn’t pay the IRS no health insurance penalty”. Could these crafty, honest, and transparent congressmen have taken into account the potential proceeds from the sale of IRS confiscated party. I doubt it considering most of these congressional slugs have little or no true understanding of monetary policy or moral integrity. Then we have the illegal immigration shell game issue. Somehow, by virtue of progressive courts’ interpretation of the Constitution regarding individual rights(which now include illegal occupants of America) and twisting the meaning and classification of a basic right to include health insurance, the fed will offer free insurance to the lot of them. On top of that, the administrations of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama have disregarded their duty to defend the Constitution by not protecting our borders and not enforcing immigration laws. Free health insurance to illegal aliens will result in a tsunami of illegals looking to get a piece of the action. How many newly welcomed illegals and the cost to provide insurance for them is absolutely unknown.

So, while the CBO is supposed to be non-partisan, I’d say they were non-partisan crack smokers, paid partisan hacks, or just plain ignorant. There are too many unknown variables in their equation. Then you throw in free insurance for current and future illegal aliens, while threatening legal citizen with IRS penalties and interest for not subscribing to the compulsory health insurance coverage version of America.

While I don’t support this compulsory system, it has nothing to do with its primary Democrat authorship and support. The Republicans have offered no truly substantial compromise or alternative. There is no clear cut solution to this problem and a problem it is. Health care, other than basic GP visits, are prohibitively expensive. Catastrophic care/coverage is the area needing most attention. Whether it’s the insurance industry, medical industry, including big pharma, the legal system or all, some reforming has to occur. Perhaps some price controls could be put in place. These products and services, needed by many Americans to survive, should be affordable and if the aforementioned industries can’t find it in themselves to reform and become affordable, then maybe they all deserve to be taken over by the government.

Click here to join our forum discussions - (1) Posts

To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes.

H.R.45 – Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

We have already discussed this bill here on TLJ but I wanted to expand on the topic. Gun registration is always the first step toward a total ban of firearms. It is registration, then confiscation. This exact pattern has already occurred through the world. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe and in China. Remember, criminals do not turn in their weapons. They have no respect for the rule of law. Let me be clear, this bill has nothing to do with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, it is designed to keep guns out of the hands law abiding American citizens, period.

There is actually proof that arming the citizens will have the most dramatic effect on decreasing crime and criminal activity.

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city’s crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township’s crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted. link

Consider this..

If you were a criminal, would you choose a town where you knew everyone was well protected, or would you choose a town where you knew no one was protected?

It doesn’t take a genius to figure this out folks!!

Anyone who thinks gun control is a good idea, consider this..

In 1929, the Soviet Union established complete gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917 15 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were also rounded up and
exterminated.

HITLER established gun control Complete registration (followed by complete confiscation) in 1935 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. You saw the pictures and know the story!

China established gun control in 1935 too. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatamala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1970 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, who were now unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, One million “educated” people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

That places total number of victims who lost their lives because of “Gun Control” at about 56 million in the last century.

Gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent.
In the state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.

In Australia, law-abiding citizens turned in their guns, the criminals did not.

Click here to join our forum discussions - (3) Posts