In this AP story the IL gubernatorial candidates are asked two Second Amendment questions.
It is hard to believe some of these guys are smart enough to tie their shoes!
Didn't the US Supreme Court just give an opinion that stated the Second Amendment was an individual right?
Andy McKenna: "I believe in the Second Amendment and law abiding citizen's right to own firearms to protect their families and for sporting purposes.
Andy McKenna: "I am opposed to concealed-carry legislation."
He contradicts himself just a little. This guy was the Chairman of the Republican party! Wow, a RINO heading the party, that just makes me want to support them. I am glad he resigned to make this run for office. Now he can switch to the Democrat party like he should be in. Good riddance!
Wow, some are far left nobody but government should have weapons, some just take the I don't know what to say because I don't want to offend anyone road. Holy crap, these guys are spineless.
At least a couple of them had the backbone to speak their minds and stood for freedom.
Bill Brady: "I am opposed to any further restrictions to the ownership of firearms as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and would veto legislation banning the sale and possession of semiautomatic weapons."
Dan Proft: "I would veto such legislation. ... I believe arbitrary gun bans are unconstitutional and would oppose such bans."
Dec 13, 2009
Dec 7, 2009
Brady Gains Endorsements
These are the legislators who have given endorsement of Bill Brady for Governor:
- Senator Tim Bivins, Dixon
- Assistant Senate Republican Leader Brad Burzynski, Clare
- Assistant Senate Republican Leader John O. Jones, Mt. Vernon
- Assistant Senate Republican Leader David Luechtefeld, Okawville
- Senator Dale Risinger, Peoria
- Representative Mike Bost, Murphysboro
- Representative John Cavaletto, Salem
- Representative Shane Cultra, Onarga
- Representative Bill Mitchell, Forsyth
- Representative Donald Moffitt, Gilson
- Representative Rich Myers, Colchester
- Representative David Reis, Willow Hill
- Representative Keith Sommer, Morton
- Assistant House Republican Leader Ron Stephens, Greenville
Nov 29, 2009
Dan Hynes: Liberal for Governor
This is a post from David Ormsby on wordpress. The post has been linked and re-posted on Hynes' web site.
Yeah, tough stuff. Sounds like a rerun of the Obama run. Follows the same liberal idea that we must be protected from ourselves in our own homes. I also like how he follows the practice of conglomerating as much authority and power under one roof as possible.
Yes, the hopelessness and despair of poverty brought about by a government that will not allow growth of the economy.
In this post, Hynes talks about his plan to fix the budget by taxation.
That is always the problems liberals see, it could not possibly be that the government spends too much or has poor financial judgement. What government office could do without a $1,000,000 desk. The liberals always see it as a "we aren't taxing people enough" problem. I wonder if any of the $200,000 a year income earners will leave Illinois like they left New York when they raised taxes on expensive "luxury" items like planes and yachts?
Sure, raise taxes, that will help our economy. How about lowering taxes so businesses can grow and employ people.
That statement alone sums his liberal mindset. I haven't heard a liberal speak that doesn't want redistribution of wealth. You know, take from those who work and give to those that won't.
Dan Hynes is simply pandering to his far left base to get the nomination of a party that is predominantly liberal. If he gets the nomination, as soon as the campaign starts he will abandon the public profile of these views for a more middle of the road public view to try and pull votes of those a bit more conservative. Just remember what he says now, it is likely his true belief.
Hynes laid out three central planks to anti-crime plan
* Developing a statewide strategic plan to curb violence by using all available state resources, sharing more information across jurisdictions, and bringing various law enforcement agencies together.
* Ensuring law enforcement personnel are equipped with all of the resources at our disposal by rewarding good police work, encouraging better recruitment and early training, and modernizing reporting to reduce paperwork and increase information sharing.
* Keeping a laser-like focus on our youth, developing a comprehensive plan to:
1. Protect families in their own homes by cracking down on domestic abuse and serial offenders
2. End substance abuse before it starts by empowering our communities with the authority to shut down drug houses and evict dealers
3. Stop gun violence by encouraging anti-violence education, stopping the expansion of conceal-and-carry legislation, and partnering with community organizations that have proven successful at stopping violence
4. Attacking head-on the root cause of so much violence – the hopelessness and despair brought about by poverty – by providing better opportunities through a better education system, the ultimate long-term solution.
Attacking substance abuse more broadly the Hynes plan would also seek to: expand drugs in Illinois; institute coercive abstinence programs; require housing authorities to organize landlord training to spot drug abuse; prohibit plea bargaining that reduces alcohol-related offense to a non-alcohol related offense; consider lowering blood alcohol limit for repeat offenders.
Tough stuff.
Yeah, tough stuff. Sounds like a rerun of the Obama run. Follows the same liberal idea that we must be protected from ourselves in our own homes. I also like how he follows the practice of conglomerating as much authority and power under one roof as possible.
"....by empowering our communities with the authority to shut down drug houses and evict dealers"And why do we need to empower the community? Do most communities not already have police and laws that should shut down drug houses? Come on, what are we going to do, make drug dealing more illegal? That is working so good now isn't it?
"Attacking head-on the root cause of so much violence – the hopelessness and despair brought about by poverty"
Yes, the hopelessness and despair of poverty brought about by a government that will not allow growth of the economy.
On the education front, the Hynes plan notes:Now that definitely sounds like a liberal idea, let's get the kids in the government controlled school system sooner so we can start indoctrinating them at an earlier age.
“The state’s Center for Research in Law and Justice reported, “Striking empirical evidence from the Perry Preschool experiment in Michigan showed large differences between the arrest rates of students in the intensive preschool effort and a control group not in the program. Some have estimated that the preschool program generated $13 in benefits for every $1 spent, with most of the savings because of a reduction in the criminal behavior of boys.”
Pre-school as an anti-crime measure? Smart stuff.
In this post, Hynes talks about his plan to fix the budget by taxation.
Hynes admitted that some form of tax increase is needed to close a multi-billion dollar state budget deficit. But the comptroller also said his taxing plan is better for the bulk of Illinois families than the one proposed by incumbent Gov. Pat Quinn, Hynes’ main opponent in the Feb. 2 primary.
Hynes claims his plan would raise income taxes only on those families earning more than $200,000 per year, an estimated 3 percent of the population. He charged Quinn, on the other hand, with wanting to raise income taxes 50 percent on what Hynes calls “middle-class families.”
That is always the problems liberals see, it could not possibly be that the government spends too much or has poor financial judgement. What government office could do without a $1,000,000 desk. The liberals always see it as a "we aren't taxing people enough" problem. I wonder if any of the $200,000 a year income earners will leave Illinois like they left New York when they raised taxes on expensive "luxury" items like planes and yachts?
Sure, raise taxes, that will help our economy. How about lowering taxes so businesses can grow and employ people.
“Wealth is so concentrated in the upper tax brackets that we would generate more revenue from those taxpayers than the middle class,” Hynes said.
That statement alone sums his liberal mindset. I haven't heard a liberal speak that doesn't want redistribution of wealth. You know, take from those who work and give to those that won't.
Dan Hynes is simply pandering to his far left base to get the nomination of a party that is predominantly liberal. If he gets the nomination, as soon as the campaign starts he will abandon the public profile of these views for a more middle of the road public view to try and pull votes of those a bit more conservative. Just remember what he says now, it is likely his true belief.
Nov 27, 2009
Legislation from the bench?
Judge Erases $525G Mortgage for N.Y. Couple, Citing 'Repulsive' Acts by Bank - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Posted using ShareThis
I think that both parties are idiots. First the mortgage company for issuing "interest only" loans, second Horoski for signing the contract.
I guess you can agree to a contract, sign it, and then modify it by judge later?
Posted using ShareThis
"Yano-Horoski, a college professor of English and cognitive reason"Imagine a college professor, of cognitive reason no less, is dumb enough to take an interest only mortgage. If a person only pays interest on a debt, when will the principal of that debt be payed?
I think that both parties are idiots. First the mortgage company for issuing "interest only" loans, second Horoski for signing the contract.
I guess you can agree to a contract, sign it, and then modify it by judge later?
US Military sends troops message-Capture Most Wanted Terrorist get charged with assault!
Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist FOXNews.com
Posted using ShareThis
This has got to be the worst case of "Politically Correct" I can imagine. Image second guessing everything you do while trying to fight a war. Think about the implication this has. Every soldier in our military now has to hesitate before doing anything. How many lives will the liberals cost us with this one?
Posted using ShareThis
This has got to be the worst case of "Politically Correct" I can imagine. Image second guessing everything you do while trying to fight a war. Think about the implication this has. Every soldier in our military now has to hesitate before doing anything. How many lives will the liberals cost us with this one?
Nov 24, 2009
Democrats to Push Agenda Regardless of Desire of the People
Support for Health Care Plan Falls to New Low
Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That's the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% now oppose the plan.
Rasmussen shows lacking support, but Schumer thinks the Dems can go it alone?
Schumer: Dems ready to go-it-alone on health care
A leading Senate Democrat said Monday his party is determined to push through a health care overhaul bill with or without Republican support because the "system is broken." "We prefer to go at it with Republicans if we can reach compromises in some areas," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "But we're not going to not pass a bill."
Maybe the Democrats no longer desire the approval of the people, just what they want or are told to want. I wonder if they will pass a bill to keep them in office permanently?
The liberal agenda to override the will of the people is coming to light.
Nov 19, 2009
TV Ad Seeks to Recruit Arab-Americans to CIA - FOXNews.com
Here is an article from Foxnews.com on the CIA's efforts to recruit Arab-Americans.
TV Ad Seeks to Recruit Arab-Americans to CIA - FOXNews.com
Posted using ShareThis
I'm not sure if this is just poor timing or what, Ft. Hood must be putting a wrench in this.
Seriously, don't you think people are looking at the Ft. Hood terrorism and wondering if we really want to recruit Arab-Americans, who are likely Muslim.
Perhaps the CIA is recruiting this way in hopes of capturing sleepers. What true Muslim jihadist wouldn't love to infiltrate the CIA and really give the infidel a shakeup?
TV Ad Seeks to Recruit Arab-Americans to CIA - FOXNews.com
Posted using ShareThis
I'm not sure if this is just poor timing or what, Ft. Hood must be putting a wrench in this.
Seriously, don't you think people are looking at the Ft. Hood terrorism and wondering if we really want to recruit Arab-Americans, who are likely Muslim.
Perhaps the CIA is recruiting this way in hopes of capturing sleepers. What true Muslim jihadist wouldn't love to infiltrate the CIA and really give the infidel a shakeup?
Uhm, look in the mirror Mr. Obama
In this Foxnews.com article, Obama cautions that too much debt could cause a "double-dip" recession.
Ok, then why has Obama created the largest National debt in the history of the country?
Oh, sorry libs, I forgot that isn't debt the government just prints money they don't borrow it.
Yeah, right. That may be why Obama is in China, likely trying to get them to resume buying our national debt so he can work on his second spendulus bill. After China starts buying our debt again, Obama can spend us into more debt, create the second "dip"/crash, and herd more people into government programs so to allow him more control over the people.
For a guy who campaigned on bashing Bush about spending, Obama has created more spending than ever thought possible.
Ok, then why has Obama created the largest National debt in the history of the country?
Oh, sorry libs, I forgot that isn't debt the government just prints money they don't borrow it.
Yeah, right. That may be why Obama is in China, likely trying to get them to resume buying our national debt so he can work on his second spendulus bill. After China starts buying our debt again, Obama can spend us into more debt, create the second "dip"/crash, and herd more people into government programs so to allow him more control over the people.
For a guy who campaigned on bashing Bush about spending, Obama has created more spending than ever thought possible.
Nov 17, 2009
Obama admin. already trying to control health care decisions?
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government panel of doctors and scientists, recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The American Cancer Society does not agree.
Now we have two groups of doctors with conflicting opinions, not unheard of, but why do the two groups hold their respective opinion?
So is the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government group, already starting to decide who gets medical care and who doesn't? Is this a sign of the future of government run medicine, to decide at what age and who gets what proceedures?
"The American Cancer Society continues to recommend annual screening using mammography and clinical breast examination for all women beginning at age 40."-Otis W. Brawley, M.D., chief medical officer, American Cancer Society
Now we have two groups of doctors with conflicting opinions, not unheard of, but why do the two groups hold their respective opinion?
"The USPSTF says that screening 1,339 women in their 50s to save one life makes screening worthwhile in that age group. Yet USPSTF also says screening 1,904 women ages 40 to 49 in order to save one life is not worthwhile. The American Cancer Society feels that in both cases, the lifesaving benefits of screening outweigh any potential harms."-American Cancer Society
So is the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government group, already starting to decide who gets medical care and who doesn't? Is this a sign of the future of government run medicine, to decide at what age and who gets what proceedures?
Nov 16, 2009
2010 IL Senate Race Kirk vs. Hughes
The 2010 Senate race to fill the seat vacated by Obama is a hot one. The race will likely come down to a choice between Democrat Alexi Giannoulias, and the winner of the February 2, 2010 primary between Republicans Mark Kirk and Patrick Hughes.
Here are some links to the sites of these candidates:
Illinois Treasurer Giannoulias-Giannoulias IL. Treasurers page.
Giannoulias Issues-Giannoulias campaign site.
And the Republicans
U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk
Patrick Hughes
Read about them and decide for yourselves who is the best candidate. I have already decided for myself.
Here are some links to the sites of these candidates:
Illinois Treasurer Giannoulias-Giannoulias IL. Treasurers page.
Giannoulias Issues-Giannoulias campaign site.
And the Republicans
U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk
Patrick Hughes
Read about them and decide for yourselves who is the best candidate. I have already decided for myself.
Nov 10, 2009
Democrat tactic gone wrong?
Maybe the liberal democrats have tried a tactic that has backfired on them.
Did the libs put abortion limits into the bill to help gain support in the house knowing they would have the opportunity to remove them later? Of course, they can't just go on state run media and tell the "activist base" not to worry we plan on removing it later. They know if the senate passes a similar bill it will have to come back for an approval vote in the house. At that time they can modify it and send it back to the senate for approval.
I just thought it was nice of NPR to allude to this without putting it on "mainstream" media.
If this was the tactic, it has backfired terribly. They seem to have split there base and can't just tell them it's ok, we know what we are doing. Now, let's hope they stay split so true conservatives can take full advantage of it. The liberals have used the third party route to split conservative votes in the past elections by intentionally causing tension among republicans. Perhaps we can take advantage of the split they have created themselves in the democrats.
"There is growing outrage among the Democrats' own activist base over new and far-reaching abortion restrictions contained in the historic health care bill approved Saturday by the Democratic-controlled House."-NPR.org
Did the libs put abortion limits into the bill to help gain support in the house knowing they would have the opportunity to remove them later? Of course, they can't just go on state run media and tell the "activist base" not to worry we plan on removing it later. They know if the senate passes a similar bill it will have to come back for an approval vote in the house. At that time they can modify it and send it back to the senate for approval.
"When and if the Senate passes a health care bill, it will be melded with the House version and sent back to both chambers for a vote. Few are predicting that the abortion limits will survive."-NPR.org
I just thought it was nice of NPR to allude to this without putting it on "mainstream" media.
If this was the tactic, it has backfired terribly. They seem to have split there base and can't just tell them it's ok, we know what we are doing. Now, let's hope they stay split so true conservatives can take full advantage of it. The liberals have used the third party route to split conservative votes in the past elections by intentionally causing tension among republicans. Perhaps we can take advantage of the split they have created themselves in the democrats.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services wants you to support Obamacare or Don't Speak.
"Bringing Everyone to the Table: White House Health Care Stakeholder Discussions"
That is the title of a forum post on healthreform.gov. They just forgot to mention "everyone" only meant everyone who agrees with socialist health reform, but that would have been to long for a title.
I urge you to visit the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services page www.healthreform.gov. They want you to support Obamacare or they don't want to hear from you at all. On the "Contact Us" link you will see two options, neither of which gives an option of opposing Obamacare.
We want to hear what you think about health reform.
- Share your story and send in ideas about why we need health reform this year
- Show your support for President Obama’s commitment to health reform.
That certainly sums up Obama's view of how government works. Agree or shut up and go away.
It is so comforting to know Obama is using our tax dollars and the full intimidation of the federal government to further the socialist agenda. When did the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services become a campaign tool for a political entity?
"HealthReform.Gov
This is an official U.S. Government Web site managed by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services."
Above is the official statement on the bottom of healthreform.gov.
Nov 8, 2009
Liberals Exposed
Obama care passes the House 220-215.
Yea's - Possible Socialists or just to spineless to vote against Obama's wishes.
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Klein (FL)
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
No's
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Emerson
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hoekstra
Holden
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kissell
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Yea's - Possible Socialists or just to spineless to vote against Obama's wishes.
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cao
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Giffords
Gonzalez
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Klein (FL)
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
No's
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (TX)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (AL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Emerson
Fallin
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Griffith
Guthrie
Hall (TX)
Harper
Hastings (WA)
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hoekstra
Holden
Hunter
Inglis
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kissell
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Moran (KS)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Olson
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Posey
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reichert
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schmidt
Schock
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden
Wamp
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Numbers on Obamacare
In the last post it was pointed out that the Obamacare program will cost $1.2 trillion over the next 10yrs.
The US population is given at 307,887,008 by the US Census Bureau www.census.gov
According to the IRS, 250,379,000 income tax returns were filed in 2008. Leaving us with 57,508,008 people who did not file a return or are not required to.
Let’s see how much the Obamacare plan will cost per tax return..
$1,200,000,000,000 ÷ 250,379,000tax returns = $4792.73
So we have $4792.73 per tax return for the projected 10yr cost.
$479.27 per tax payer per year.
The current estimate is 40% file and receive a refund equal or greater than the amount paid in.
250,379,000 × 60% = 150,227,400 who actually pay a tax.
$1,200,000,000,000 ÷ 150,227,400 = $7987.89 for 10yr
So when it is all said and done, each person who is actually paying an income tax will pay an additional $798.79 per year.
The US population is given at 307,887,008 by the US Census Bureau www.census.gov
According to the IRS, 250,379,000 income tax returns were filed in 2008. Leaving us with 57,508,008 people who did not file a return or are not required to.
Let’s see how much the Obamacare plan will cost per tax return..
$1,200,000,000,000 ÷ 250,379,000tax returns = $4792.73
So we have $4792.73 per tax return for the projected 10yr cost.
$479.27 per tax payer per year.
The current estimate is 40% file and receive a refund equal or greater than the amount paid in.
250,379,000 × 60% = 150,227,400 who actually pay a tax.
$1,200,000,000,000 ÷ 150,227,400 = $7987.89 for 10yr
So when it is all said and done, each person who is actually paying an income tax will pay an additional $798.79 per year.
Nov 7, 2009
Obama, the messiah of the ignorant.
Obama speaks about Obamacare....
Fully paid for? By the US TAXPAYER!
Reduce our deficit? Yeah right! Because so many other programs make a profit for the government. Mr. Obama, do you understand the Constitution.......never mind, obvious answer. The government is not a business to take over health care for a profit. The only way it could lower the deficit is to tax Americans more than the program costs.
So how is requiring a business to "provide" coverage going to save them money?
I wonder how many employers will have to cut jobs to afford that?
"The bill that the House has produced will provide stability and security for Americans who have insurance; quality, affordable options for those who don't; and lower costs for American families and American businesses," Obama said. "And as I've insisted from the beginning, it is a bill that is fully paid for and will actually reduce our long-term federal deficit."
Fully paid for? By the US TAXPAYER!
Reduce our deficit? Yeah right! Because so many other programs make a profit for the government. Mr. Obama, do you understand the Constitution.......never mind, obvious answer. The government is not a business to take over health care for a profit. The only way it could lower the deficit is to tax Americans more than the program costs.
The bill would cost $1.2 trillion over the next decade. It would provide health coverage to tens of millions of Americans who don't have it now, require most employers to offer it to their workers and prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage based on a person's medical history
-FoxNews.com Nov. 7, 2009
So how is requiring a business to "provide" coverage going to save them money?
I wonder how many employers will have to cut jobs to afford that?
Just a thought
One would think that a lone gunman, even two or three, would have a hard time committing the horrible attack at Ft. Hood against trained soldiers. But, the federal government makes all of the military installations a "gun free zone" of sort. Outside of issued weapons, there are heavy restrictions on private or civilian weapons on a military post.
Hasan knew this when he decided to carry his weapons onto Ft. Hood. He knew he would have unarmed targets.
So my question to the anti-gunners is this:
If private ownership of firearms and firearms themselves are so dangerous, why have we not heard of massive "outbursts of violence" at gun shows?
Hasan knew this when he decided to carry his weapons onto Ft. Hood. He knew he would have unarmed targets.
So my question to the anti-gunners is this:
If private ownership of firearms and firearms themselves are so dangerous, why have we not heard of massive "outbursts of violence" at gun shows?
Nov 6, 2009
CAIR director on Ft. Hood Attack
"The motive of the attacker is not yet known," insisted CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad.
And we should care what this guy says about it why?
He is the director of an organization the FBI has cut off ties to. The group is suspected as a front group for financing Hamas.
A muslim opposed to our fight against muslim terrorists attacks our soldiers, in our country, and we are not supposed to come to the conclusion that the attack may have been motivated by that opposition?
Yeah, it is possible something else is going on, but with our current situation that should be the first thing looked into.
Who decided to transfer this guy to the largest post handling deployments of our troops anyway?
I'm not saying we need to go lynch him, but let's make sure everything is on par. If it is I am sure they feel bad about what happened. I am just saying we should take a look and see who is smiling about the results of this attack.
And we should care what this guy says about it why?
He is the director of an organization the FBI has cut off ties to. The group is suspected as a front group for financing Hamas.
A muslim opposed to our fight against muslim terrorists attacks our soldiers, in our country, and we are not supposed to come to the conclusion that the attack may have been motivated by that opposition?
Yeah, it is possible something else is going on, but with our current situation that should be the first thing looked into.
Who decided to transfer this guy to the largest post handling deployments of our troops anyway?
I'm not saying we need to go lynch him, but let's make sure everything is on par. If it is I am sure they feel bad about what happened. I am just saying we should take a look and see who is smiling about the results of this attack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
