“As I see it, the problem with the [act] is that it expands police powers generally, beyond the implicit limits of the Bill of Rights, and does not limit itself to nor require any measurable success against terrorism.” (source)
“This continuous evasion of judicial review by the administration is much more serious and disturbing than has been discussed and realized… The attribute which most singularly defines this administration is its insistence that our Government is based on unilateral and unreviewed Presidential Decree.” (source)
To me these sound like direct attacks on Team Obama. Expanding presidential powers without checks and balances, evading judicial review, and so on. Doing so is in direct conflict with our constitution and bill of rights. Sounds like the shoe fits, right?
Well, only if you are a liberal. The two quotes above are actually criticisms of the Bush Administration and the Patriot Act. They were screaming about the warrantless wiretapping of potential terrorists after the worst attack on our country ever. Now, as the Great Uniter continues to lie and to mislead Americans every day the left is suddenly eerily quiet about warrantless activities.
Back in January, during the drunken stupor following the election of the Messiah’s historic inauguration, Representative Bob Filner (D-CA) proposed H.R. 675. What is it’s goal?
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.
Furthermore,
Allows the Secretary of Defense to authorize a Department of Defense (DOD) law enforcement officer to:
(1) execute and serve a warrant or other process;
(2) make an arrest without a warrant for any offense committed in the presence of the officer, or for any felony if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person arrested has committed or is committing the felony; and
(3) carry firearms.“Sec. 1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms… for any offense against the United States.”
Hm. Are those “offenses against the United States” defined anywhere? Nope. Is it possible that police could use their subjective discretion to determine what is an offense against the United States? What about civilians?
Wake up America! This bill gives a variety of law enforcement officials the ability to generate a search warrant ON THE SPOT and then execute that search warrant. No judicial review. No checks and balances. For crying out loud, under George Bush we were not allowed to profile at airports for Muslim terrorists that want to kill us. Now, under the Great Communicator we are willing to give law enforcement officers the right to generate their own warrants? Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. There’s no chance that this power will be abused whatsoever, right?
Why isn’t the press talking about this? Why did they cover ad nauseum all of the strife and angst from the Left over warrantless wiretaps used to protect America from terrorists? Where is the ACLU on this obvious infringement of our privacy? My guess is that they are busy trying to find the next great scoop on our evil CIA and its varied interrogation techniques. Or maybe they are busy drooling over the new cast of “Dancing With The Stars.”
Hat tip to One Penny Sheet.
Glenn Beck was on fire this week. Here is his litmus test for politicians that run in 2010:
- I believe in a balanced budget and therefore will vote for a freeze in government spending until that goal is realized.
- I believe government should not increase the financial burden on its citizenry during difficult economic times therefore I will oppose all tax increases until our economy has rebounded.
- I believe more than four decades of U.S. dependence on foreign oil is a travesty therefore I will support an energy plan that calls for immediately increasing usage of all domestic resources including nuclear energy, natural gas, and coal as necessary.
- I believe in the sovereignty and security of our country and therefore will support measures to close our borders except for designated immigration points so we will know who is entering and why and I will vehemently oppose any measure giving another country, the United Nations, or any other entity, power over U.S. citizens.
- I believe the United States of America is the greatest country on earth and therefore will not apologize for policies or actions which have served to free more and feed more people around the world than any other nation on the planet.
I’m sure that everyone that fell for the $4500 cash for clunkers program was duly informed that the $4500 credit would be counted as taxable income. After all, Barack Obama is the Transparency President, right?
This reminds me of Oprah’s super awesome car giveaway where everyone screamed, then got mad when they had to pay taxes on their new gift.
- That $4500 counts as taxable income. Assuming you are a low income earner that needed the help to buy a car, here’s how much you may owe in taxes on your “free” money:
- 10% (your income is between $0 and $8,025)= $450 goes back to Uncle Sam next April 15
- 15% ($8,025 and $32,550) = $675
- 25% ($32,550 and $78,850) = $1,125
- You pay sales tax on the vehicle price, which includes the $4500 check from the government. So you are paying sales tax on top of the Income Tax. At 8% that’s $360.
- It is possible that states that have state income taxes may count this as income too. Insert your tax rate here. Each state has different rules though. I live in Texas, no state income tax here!
- Are you a car dealer? Welcome to the last-minute notification that these rebates will be taxed.
So, if you make $50k a year and you sold a clunker, your $4500 gift is now a $1,125 tax bill, plus sales tax on the $360 sales tax (at 8%), plus whatever state income tax you may need to pay. Therefore, $4,500 – $1,125 – $360 = $3,015 – sales tax = transparency? Don’t forget to put that $1,125 in the bank for next April. I’m sure you still have it in the bank, right?
I’m grumpy today, my show is a little more bitter and angst-ridden than usual. Some screaming, lots of frustration… no train wrecks. But, America needs our help, we need to fight the good fight and get people educated. Listen! Get Educated! Get LOUD!
I went to my first health care town hall meeting and had a great time. Congressman Lamar Smith (TX 21) is a man that gets it. He answers questions, he knows about most of the issues, and if he doesn’t know he tells you instead of trying to b.s. you. He is also using technology. Go to his site, scroll down and choose the social media of your choice.
I arrived too late to sit in the main hall, the backup room had a poor sound system so I couldn’t hear much. I spent most of my time outside talking to the dozen or so liberal supporters of the health care plan that held signs outside. I remained calm and professional, and ultimately ended up reaffirming my opinion that liberals, while well-intended, simply don’t think things through. They get all caught up in their emotions and just can’t provide a rational argument for how America will pay for the proposed system. Here are some of the responses I got:
- We are already in debt, this is too important to ignore.
- If we reduce profit of insurance companies (and other big companies) we can use that money to pay for it.
- George Bush spent a lot on that stupid war, this is a much better use of our money.
- We have to give people insurance, it falls under the “pursuit of happiness” concept.
- Public education is not a right, but we provide that for everyone, why not health care?
- Insurance companies already make life decisions, why not let the government do the same? We need more choices.
I could go on, but the main point is that nobody addresses the “how” part of the problem. HOW would this be paid for? We could take the top 5% of tax payers at 100%, and we still wouldn’t be able to pay for this system. Now, for the other side of the coin, here are the questions that I asked that couldn’t be answered:
- Why should we trust the government to run our health care if they can’t even make Medicare/Medicaid profitable? (the answer I got was that “its not supposed to be for profit. Wars aren’t for profit either.”) I countered by asking “at what point does America have to start paying its bill?” ::crickets::
- “Why are corporate profits bad, isn’t that part of the American Dream? And if they are why does the left ignore the profits of credit card companies, or Al Gore’s green companies?” ::more crickets::
- “Have you seen the CBO report that shows that the proposed legislation will possible net a total of 16 million new insured, not the supposed 47 million that Obama tells us it will cover?” At this point, one woman said she had not heard that report (imagine that), and one gentleman said we should double down to get everyone covered. Right.
I find it interesting that the only person I saw being disruptive was a man being very vocal when anyone dared to suggest that illegal aliens should not be covered. Any comment made about illegal aliens was met with shouts from this man. Everyone else that I saw were respectful and energetic, yet civil. Univision showed up outside to video tape the Obama supporters and they did their best to look like a group. One of the videos below shows the ratio of those for and against the bill. You be the judge.
Here are the first two videos that my wife shot (I’ve got two more to upload):
Update: All four videos now available.
