Archive for the ‘Cheats’ Category
It seems Right To Work states enjoy a ‘growth advantage.’ The U.S. Commerce Department just released its estimates for 2011 state personal income. It seems there’s a strong correlaion btween compulsory unionism and economic growth…or the lack thereof. From 2001 to 2011 twenty-two states had Right To Work laws, prohibiting forced union dues. Last month Indiana became the 23rd Right To Work state. During that ten year period real compensation in Right To Work states grew at 12.5% while union states grew at only 3.1%; and employment grew at 2.4% as opposed to a loss of 3.4% in union states.
Time changes all things, and it’s become join a union and make the union bosses fat and filthy rich, rather than join a union and get better working conditions. State and Federal laws have replaced unions in protecting the work place and workers. Unions are out of date, and like spoiled milk, should go down the drain. Among the worst things ever to happen to America was John Kennedy allowing public unions, and among their many other sins, they are breaking the country with excess perks and retirement.
Social Security Office In Milwaukee
I did not take this photo, it came to me via the web, represented to be as stated above. However, I’ve long said the problem with SS is not the program as originally designed, but the program as it’s become. WELFARE, not Social Security.
Do you see any gray hair in this room? There might be one or two that could qualify for Social Security by age. The rest are disability recipients of Social Security benefits. Do you think they paid into the program, and even if they did, do you think the amount they’ll receive is a “return on investment” as it should be, as it would have to be in order for the program to be anything other than what it’s become…WELFARE.
As I’ve said many times, I think a country as great as America should take care of those who can’t take care of themselves, however call it what it is…WELFARE. And it should has hell should go to those who CAN’T help themselves, not to those who WON’T help themselves.
IRS Intimidates Tea Parties
One of the reasons the states wanted a limited national government was to avert the tendency of governments to increase in power and authority. It’s no wonder that the Constitution is a very short document. The more it said on a subject, the more authority the government would have.
The national government only had powers that were listed in the document. To ensure the limited nature of these powers, the states insisted on a Bill of Rights. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are direct evidence that that states were fearful of their newly constructed national government.
Some founders did not want any more added to the Constitution. Their reasoning was sound. For example, in Federalist 84, Alexander Hamilton asked, “Why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?” In similar fashion James Madison explained to Thomas Jefferson, “I conceive that in a certain degree . . . the rights in question are reserved by the manner in which the federal powers are granted” by Article One, Section 8 of the Constitution which lists them.
We have come a long way from those days. Now we have “agencies,” like the IRS, that are independent of the Constitution’s limitations. While the Constitution gives no authority to any government official to pry into the political affairs of an individual or organization, now we’re learning that the Tea Parties are under scrutiny. Colleen Owens, spokeswoman for the Richmond (Va.) Tea Party, writing in Big Government gives the background:
In January and February of this year, the Internal Revenue Service began sending out letters to various local Tea Parties across the country. Mailed from the same Cincinnati, Ohio IRS office, these letters have reached Tea Parties in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio, and Texas (we are hearing of more daily). There are several common threads to these letters: all are requesting more information from these independent Tea Parties in regard to their nonprofit 501(c)(4) applications (for this type of nonprofit, donations are not deductible). While some of the requests are reasonable, much of them are strikingly onerous and, dare I say, Orwellian in nature.
Consider these requests: “Please identify your volunteers” and “are there board members or officers who have run or will run for office (including relatives)”? It’s none of the IRS’s business. To ask these questions, coming from the IRS, can make someone think twice of continuing as a Tea Party member. Everybody fears an audit.
Here’s the most blatantly tyrannical part of all of this. A letter was sent to IRS Commissioner Douglas H. Shulman. It was signed by six Senators. The letter “requests that the commissioner investigate 501(c)(4) groups to determine whether they are engaging in substantial campaign activity, including opposition to any candidate. Who signed this letter? Senators Schumer, Franken, Udall, Shaheen, Whitehouse, Merkley and Bennet — all Democrats.”
Black Panthers can intimidate voters and an organization like Acorn can use our money to influence elections, but ordinary citizens don’t you dare organize peacefully with your own money to bring our nation back to constitutional sanity.
The Root of Our Problem
by L. J. Martin
I happen to be back in Montana for a week, and had my kids and grandkids over for supper before we start back to Ventura. As is usual, while supper is cooking, we played a little pool.
My grandson, a junior in high school, and 16 years old, happened to mention to me all the reasons he wouldn’t vote for Romney. My grandson, for your information, lived with his mother, a Mormon, for the first six years of his life, until she passed a couple of years after his parents separated. I tell you that as he attended the Mormon church with her to illustrate that he certainly had no prejudice. If anything, he should favor Mitt.
His reasoning? His geography teacher gave his class a lecture about why they shouldn’t vote for Romney, and should vote for Obama. This, by the way, was on his educational time (geography) and on my dollar as a taxpayer. Why shouldn’t he support Romney? Because Romney made 22 million dollars last year and only paid 3 million in taxes.
Needless to say, he got another lecture from his grandfather.
Romney paid exactly what the fed said he should pay. Do you think my grandson’s geography teacher mentioned that Romney complied with the tax code, that he obeyed the law? Of course not. He is the evil 1%. Do you think she mentioned that she also complied with the code, and paid what the code said she should pay? Did she pay a dime more? Of course not, and neither did Romney, and neither did you.
In fact, he didn’t steal from my grandson by taking class time in the subject of geography to lecture on why not to vote for one candidate or another. He didn’t steal from me by taking my money as taxes to support the public schools by preaching politics in class time. She did.
To tell you the honest to God truth, I’m incensed. But the lectures weren’t over. My wife just gave me a lecture as to why I shouldn’t risk his grade by writing a letter to the editor, by calling the principal of the high school, by appearing at the school board and raising absolute billy-Jo-hell over the fact this teacher is cheating all the students in her class, all the taxpayers in the county, and worse, all those who believe in our public education system, and far worse, the republic which has given her the opportunity to teach the children of those who’ve benefited from the very system she lectures to destroy with half truths and outright lies.
And, no, I don’t mean anything in regards to an individual candidate, be it Obama, or Romney, or Gingrich, whom I support. I mean she cheats the system. She’s the root of the problem. She poisons the system by her biased action in a public venue which should be both unbiased and non-political. If she wants to stand on a soap box in the public square, more power to her. But not in the schools. A public employee who uses her platform and the taxpayer’s money to support either candidate is a cheat. A public employee who has the audacity to try and get my grandson to conform to her political beliefs while on my dollar and yours, is a cheat.
She’s the cheat, not Mitt Romney.
I wish I could challenge her to a debate in front of that class she’s cheated of their classroom time, but that won’t happen as that would only continue to cheat them more from learning what she’s supposed to be teaching—and of course risk my grandson’s grade as she’s already demonstrated that she can’t be fair and impartial. If my grandson wanted a lecture on the tax code he’d have taken accounting, or upon the political system, he’d have taken political science…and even then the instructor should stay out of partisan politics. Fat chance.
It’s time to jerk the chain of teachers K through 12, when children are so susceptible, and require them to take a course in ethics.
L. J. Martin is the author of 30 book length publications as we as dozens of articles in national periodicals. He writes the conservative blog http://fromthepeapatch.com . He’s married to an internationally published NYT bestselling author of women’s fiction. Learn more at www.ljmartin.com.